Author Topic: The optometrist's office lie, versus scientific truth. (A tough choice.)  (Read 1492 times)

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Subject: So what do you trust?  Who do you trust?

There are extreme and inconsistent "stories", in optometry.  I found that some optometrists recognized both
the necessity and wisdom of wearing the plus for prevention (when at 20/40, and -1 diopter) and SLOWLY,
getting back to 20/20, by objectively reading their own Snellen.  Here is the basis of that statement:

http://myopiafree.i-see.org/prent.txt

What I did was to search for the optometrist who made this statement.  Then I searched for scientific proof,
that it would be very wise to take prevention seriously.  But prevention is up to me and you - the OD
will proclaim that you are "wrong" to ask questions about what the OD is doing in his office.

For example:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rona5mjzd-I

When a person is selling strong minus lenses (or plus lens), and is defending HER PRACTICE, the
she will never be defending YOUR long-term visual welfare.

I hope you can understand the difference.

« Last Edit: July 08, 2015, 03:55:19 PM by OtisBrown »

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
There is time, but precious little time, to make your choice about Dr. Prentice's advice, and
the recommendation of an optometrist that, all lenses, have NO EFFECT on the
eyes refraction.

I learned a long time ago, to be very skeptical of an optometrist who insists that "all scientists",
support the optometrist's statements IN HER OFFICE.

This is why I truly learned from the optometrist - in his home - where he was
under NO PRESSURE, to state the "party line".

I hope you never become victim of the optometrist, that does not respect YOUR
right to a choice.  That is what these posts are all about.
« Last Edit: July 08, 2015, 05:04:58 PM by OtisBrown »

Offline HansK

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 52
There is time, but precious little time, to make your choice about Dr. Prentice's advice, and
the recommendation of an optometrist that, all lenses, have NO EFFECT on the
eyes refraction.

I learned a long time ago, to be very skeptical of an optometrist who insists that "all scientists",
support the optometrist's statements IN HER OFFICE.

This is why I truly learned from the optometrist - in his home - where is was
under NO PRESSURE, to state the "party line".

I hope you never become victim of the optometrist, that does not respect YOUR
right to a choice.  That is what these posts are all about.


I think (almost) nobody matches your statement (bold text), especially here (unfortunately). When people hear of the possibility to reverse myopia, they already wore a minus lens and probably had an increase of their prescription. As you say, the optometrist will offer just one solution: a minus lens. And when they realize the increasing prescriptions and get tired of it, they want to change something.

So the real question is how you can spread the "second-opinion" (i.e. prevention) to people who have never worn a minus lens. This is called "pseudomyopia" (no real change of the physiology of the eye) and is much easier to handle than "real myopia": stretching/growth of the eyeball.

Kind regards,
Hans

Offline gekonus

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 84
Well I barery barerly wore any glasses and I cant seem to reverse my myopia so according to the theory I have axial myopia even tho Ive never done anything with a minus (or at least very seldom)