Experimenting with reading glasses?

What are the risks of experimentation with various lenses for
reading or computer glasses?

How about correcting one eye and removing the lens from in front of
the other?

Can using a too powerful lens only for reading potentially damage
your eye? I am enjoying the clarity of vision.

All that can be viewed as generally speaking.

Thanks in advance.







--
I am fully responsible for my own eyesight and health, regardless of
any advice given here. I am also very much aware of how opinions
vary on Usenet, coming from many different sources.

Dear Gerry,

The standard theory of the eye, Donders-Helmholtz
maintains that a lens has NO EFFECT on the
eyes refractive STATE -- ever.

This is the majority-opinion of the optometrists
posting on sci.med.vision.

For that reason, using a simple magnifing
glass for reading should not be a problem.

Otis



gerry.acheman wrote:
> What are the risks of experimentation with various lenses for
> reading or computer glasses?
>
> How about correcting one eye and removing the lens from in front of
> the other?
>
> Can using a too powerful lens only for reading potentially damage
> your eye? I am enjoying the clarity of vision.
>
> All that can be viewed as generally speaking.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> I am fully responsible for my own eyesight and health, regardless of
> any advice given here. I am also very much aware of how opinions
> vary on Usenet, coming from many different sources.

So I can effectively upgrade the size of my monitor for the cost of
reading glasses. Wow.


"(E-Mail Removed)" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
> Dear Gerry,
>
> The standard theory of the eye, Donders-Helmholtz
> maintains that a lens has NO EFFECT on the
> eyes refractive STATE -- ever.
>
> This is the majority-opinion of the optometrists
> posting on sci.med.vision.
>
> For that reason, using a simple magnifing
> glass for reading should not be a problem.
>
> Otis

Dear Mike,

I believe that the NATURAL EYE, with NATURAL REFRACTIVE
STATES, will either respond to an applied -3 diopter lens -- or
it will not.

But please use the term "refractive STATE", and use
the standard OBJECTIVE measurement of retionoscope
and supporting technique.

So we place a -3 diopter lens on the natural eye, and
look for a time-constant response -- indication
that the natural eye is a sophisticated, and
dynamic system.

Or look for your verification, that no change in
refractive STATE will occur for the eye with
a -3 diopter lens on it.

That is how you determime if a population of
natural eyes are dynamic or not.

Reference:


Mike> Of course, it's only the ODs. The ophthalmologists, vision
researchers, and
neurophysiologists all believe that the eye changes by 63% toward the
new
step-input within 100 days. Right?

No, Mike, you do NOT believe or expect that the natural
eye will respond to this type of step-input. Just you
and a percentage of majority-opinion ODs refuse to
believe that the natural eye will show this type of
response.

But this issue IS NOT MEDICAL.

It is rather work to determine if the predictions
of the Donders-Helmholtz theory are accurate
in a pure-scientific sense -- or not.

Best,

Otis





Mike Tyner wrote:
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote
>
> > The standard theory of the eye, Donders-Helmholtz
> > maintains that a lens has NO EFFECT on the
> > eyes refractive STATE -- ever.
>
> I don't recall that Donders or Helmholtz ever said that.
>
> > This is the majority-opinion of the optometrists
> > posting on sci.med.vision.
>
> We're so glad you've been appointed to speak for us.
>
> Of course, it's only the ODs. The ophthalmologists, vision researchers, and
> neurophysiologists all believe that the eye changes by 63% toward the new
> step-input within 100 days. Right?
>
> > For that reason, using a simple magnifing
> > glass for reading should not be a problem.
>
> A shocking reversal on your part, Horatiotis. So you DO agree? There is a
> point in human development when eyes stop responding to a "step-change in
> input?"
>
> -MT

Mike Tyner wrote:

>
> So, if I never wear glasses, my eyes will not change.
>

Not unless you study religion in israel my young mike!

You have so much to learn.

:-p

Cya
Simon