Hi Alex,
Subject: Raphaelson had an intuitive insight into the behavior of all natural, or fundamental eyes.
Issue: That is, if you measure a refractive STATE, and not an "error" or failure.
The above statements are correct. It is equally correct to perceive, and test the above statements, for scientific accuracy. An OD will not make a "pure" statement like that - because he knows that in his office he can NEVER "prescribe" a plus lens for a child. So he remains silent. The ODs in their office, prefer to obfuscate any discussion of the natural eye, when I measure it at as refractive state. That is why you get a large number of studies that totally CONTRADICT EACH OTHER. If you stick with pure-science, and test the natural eye, you get this answer.
http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~wildsoet/images/neg_lens_induce_myopia.swfThis is a scientific check of why Raphaelson called the minus lens, "poison glasses for children". In an absolute sense - he was right. In a subtle way, he also identified a child's "nose on page" habit, as another type of "poison". It is that combination that creates high negative states - in the pure, or natural eye.
But I still do not blame the OD - because few people will understand the idea that you do not "fix" and eye at 20/40 with a minus lens. No, you just devote yourself to the "wearing of a strong plus", and thank your lucky stars that you can still read and pass the 20/40 line or better. The one EXCELLENT plus study (Young-Oakley) shows that if you can wear the plus for the "long-term" you can always pass the required DMV test. But very few people will face the above facts.
Because of the self-discipline involved, prevention is indeed difficult. Yes, indeed, Todd Becker did slowly change his refractive status from about -2 diopters to read the 20/40 line, and eventually most of the 20/20 line. If your question is about scientific proof, then the above is about prevention (before you go much below 20/50).
But the issue of truly whether a dedicated person can wear a strong plus - for the long-term. I pretty much agree that very few people will do that.
(I would have you read, "Hanky", on this site. He was excited to "start", but after one week, when he heard the "suggestion" to wear the plus - you never heard from him again. That is indeed the "general publics" mind-set.)
That is why an optometrist will not talk about it - or encourage you to take personal responsibility do make your own measurements - as I do it. I truly do not blame the OD, he does not know me and my scientific curiosity, and my ability to wear a strong plus, even though I can read and type this with no plus lens on my face.
I was interested in proving Raphaelson RIGHT - on a scientific basis.