Vision Clearing with Ortho-K and a Plus Lens.

Dear Second-opinion friends,

Yves (name changed) contacted me about the plus.

He was about -2 diopters and 20/140. After several months
of using the plus he saw no progress and he suggested Ortho-K.

So he did Ortho-K and is planning to combine BOTH Ortho-K AND
the use of a +3 diopter lens for all computer and reading work.

As always, keep an open mind about scientific prevention
of a negative refractive STATE for the fundamental eye.
(Ref: the Wildsoet blue-tint dynamic eye concept.)

Here is his commentary for your interest.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


Dear Yves,

Subject: Question About Ortho-K and Plus Prevention

I think your reports are great.

The effect of strong Ortho-K is to make your refractive STATE
POSITIVE.

Or, you could read the Snellen through a plus 1 diopter lens.

I personally think is will take some time to "anchor" your
20/20 vision with heavy use of the plus 3 diopter lens.

So 20/20 is indeed wonderful. But be patient. I think it is
going to take about 3 months before you "hold" 20/20 with no
Ortho-K. (As an engineer and pilot I am always "cautious" -- as
you understand.)

But you are the "leader" so just do what you think is
necessary, and report to your fellow pilots on your efforts.

We are all (including me) learning from YOU.

More commentary:

====================

Yves wrote:

Yves> Today when driving back home from work it was unbelievable.
I have never been able to see so good at night before,
everything was as sharp as during the day if not sharper. I
came home and looked at my snellen and i could see the 20/15
line with both eyes. In the morning it was 20/20. All day
at work I wore the +3 lens in front of the computer...

Otis> You are doing it RIGHT!!

Yves> The interesting thing i noticed with the plus 3 is that if i
look at the screen and then take off the glasses and try to
focus my eyes on the monitor, i really feel how hard my eyes
are trying to see the screen in front of me. This really
must stress the eye muscles a lot.

Otis> I agree with you. We should be TAUGHT to use the plus as
soon as our refractive STATE moves from a positive value
(20/20) to slightly minus. This is my major objection to
Dr. Catman Grants incredible arrogance and associated
ignorance. But that is the majority-opinion for you.

Yves> I think i realize now why my vision has gotten so bad with
prolonged computer use. I can't believe OD's prescribe
minus glasses and let people wear them in front of the
computer... that's just plain horrible.

Otis> I always appreciate HONESTY. I TRUSTED a man like Catman
Grant. I AM RESPONSIBLE for my bad habits -- but he as a
PROFESSIONAL responsibility to DESCRIBE the preventive
second-opinion. And then send us to "myopiafree" to do our
own research on the issues. I WOULD GLADLY PAY HIM FOR HIS
PROFESSIONAL TIME!!!

Yves> My plan is to wear the ortho-k for about one or two more
weeks now, then i'll try to skip a day and see if I can keep
my eyes sharp.

Otis> Excellent idea. But be prepared for a "slip-back" towards
20/50. This will take about three months. So "steel"
yourself to that expectation.

Yves> Will keep you posted.

> P.S. If you are tired of your glasses and contacts, give
Ortho-k a try, the feeling of not needing anything during
the day and just seeing through your eyes is amazing, I
can't believe how much i have been missing. The routine is
simple: brush your teeth, put ortho-k lenses in, sleep,
wake up, get lenses out, brush teeth, go...

Yves

Dear Second-opinion friends,

Some more commentary on using Ortho-K to clear to 20/20, followed
by strong use of a +3 diopter to retain distant vision.

Otis

==============

Dear Yves,

The reason I make my "pitch" to would-be pilots is because I
know how difficult plus-prevention is.

To a certain extent you must believe it is possible to do it
-- before you do it successfully -- if that makes sense.

That is why my site has the "Eskimo" data on it, as well as
the "primate" data. By itself "facts" are not convincing, but
they do "point the way".

We both know that plus-prevention is an INTRUSION in your
life -- intended exclusively for your own personal benefit.

By that I mean that "I" do not tell you what to do, but
rather you explore the concept and then YOU determine what YOU
wish to do for your visual future.

I am VERY interested in your progress by working
interactively with Ortho-K and the plus, since I am not aware of
anyone who has done it they way you plan to do it.

You got it right! Use Ortho-K for a week or so, and then
stop and rely on the +3 diopter for all close work that is
convenient.

I expect that your corneas will spring back, and your Snellen
will start down towards 20/50. When that happens, just re-start
the Ortho-K again.

I think that at each iteration the amount that your Snellen
"comes down" will be less and less, until you will retain 20/40 or
better as required.

As Stirling Colgate said, with periods of LONG close work,
his Snellen would come "down" so he just re-started with the plus
and cleared it when necessary.

More commentary:

+++++++++++++++=

Yves wrote:

Yves> For the record, i'm not a pilot, lol Not sure how that
myth started Maybe someday i'll try...

Otis> I started the myth ... sorry! Most people will not "do
Ortho-K" unless they have pilot-motivation.

Yves> But i do finally believe now that Plus prevention works.

Otis> Good, but only you will know this when you can retain 20/20
with no further use of Orth-K. I would suspect it will take
from 3 to 5 months. But I can not predict it.

Yves> I'm starting to notice that by the end of the day after I
use the +3 for 8 hours at work, my vision actually improves
since I was just able to see half of the 20/10 line at night
more than 12 hours after taking the ortho-k off.

Otis> That is INCREDIBLE. The goal is official 20/20, and most of
the DMVs only require 20/50 to 20/40.


Yves> I think i'm starting to realize why plus prevention takes
much longer for people with higher Diopter, the main reason
is the dependence on minus at some point during the day,
which probably kills the whole plus prevention effort.

Otis> That is correct. A strong minus is impressive, and often
over-prescribed (i.e., strong enough to create 20/15
vision). That is impressive and "sells". Tragically the
majority-opinion ODs refuse to believe that their is a
"secondary" effect, in that:

1. The original issue (eye adapts to near) is NEVER addressed,
and,

2. The total belief that a minus has no effect on the natural
eye's refractive state.

Otis> They believe this AGAINST a massive body of scientific
evidence that says the exact opposite. Oh, well...

Yves> With ortho-k however there is no minus grudge to mess up
your vision, so you can understand and see the results much
clearer.

Otis> I am pleased you took that step with Ortho-K. That could be
a "selling point" for Ortho-K, and I would support it.
Getting to 20/20 very quickly is impressive to BOTH of us.
The only issue is to retain it, and slowly reduce and end
the use of Ortho-K. Or at least that is the "hope" for now.


Yves> That's my opinion... This weekend i'll try to skip a day
and see what happens. Will keep you posted.

Otis> All posting here are VERY INTERSTED. Keep up the good work
and commentary -- about any subject you wish.

Yves> Thanks Otis for everything you are trying to do to let the
people understand the second opinion.

Otis> Excellent! There is many a pilot who could learn from you!

Otis> Life is a journey. So let us travel this road together.


**********

On Jan 24, 4:20 pm, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote:
> Dear Second-opinion friends,
>
> Yves (name changed) contacted me about the plus.
>
> He was about -2 diopters and 20/140. After several months
> of using the plus he saw no progress and he suggested Ortho-K.
>
> So he did Ortho-K and is planning to combine BOTH Ortho-K AND
> the use of a +3 diopter lens for all computer and reading work.
>
> As always, keep an open mind about scientific prevention
> of a negative refractive STATE for the fundamental eye.
> (Ref: the Wildsoet blue-tint dynamic eye concept.)
>
> Here is his commentary for your interest.
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> Dear Yves,
>
> Subject: Question About Ortho-K and Plus Prevention
>
> I think your reports are great.
>
> The effect of strong Ortho-K is to make your refractive STATE
> POSITIVE.
>
> Or, you could read the Snellen through a plus 1 diopter lens.
>
> I personally think is will take some time to "anchor" your
> 20/20 vision with heavy use of the plus 3 diopter lens.
>
> So 20/20 is indeed wonderful. But be patient. I think it is
> going to take about 3 months before you "hold" 20/20 with no
> Ortho-K. (As an engineer and pilot I am always "cautious" -- as
> you understand.)
>
> But you are the "leader" so just do what you think is
> necessary, and report to your fellow pilots on your efforts.
>
> We are all (including me) learning from YOU.
>
> More commentary:
>
> ====================
>
> Yves wrote:Yves> Today when driving back home from work it was unbelievable.
> I have never been able to see so good at night before,
> everything was as sharp as during the day if not sharper. I
> came home and looked at my snellen and i could see the 20/15
> line with both eyes. In the morning it was 20/20. All day
> at work I wore the +3 lens in front of the computer...
>
> Otis> You are doing it RIGHT!!
>
> Yves> The interesting thing i noticed with the plus 3 is that if i
> look at the screen and then take off the glasses and try to
> focus my eyes on the monitor, i really feel how hard my eyes
> are trying to see the screen in front of me. This really
> must stress the eye muscles a lot.
>
> Otis> I agree with you. We should be TAUGHT to use the plus as
> soon as our refractive STATE moves from a positive value
> (20/20) to slightly minus. This is my major objection to
> Dr. Catman Grants incredible arrogance and associated
> ignorance. But that is the majority-opinion for you.
>
> Yves> I think i realize now why my vision has gotten so bad with
> prolonged computer use. I can't believe OD's prescribe
> minus glasses and let people wear them in front of the
> computer... that's just plain horrible.
>
> Otis> I always appreciate HONESTY. I TRUSTED a man like Catman
> Grant. I AM RESPONSIBLE for my bad habits -- but he as a
> PROFESSIONAL responsibility to DESCRIBE the preventive
> second-opinion. And then send us to "myopiafree" to do our
> own research on the issues. I WOULD GLADLY PAY HIM FOR HIS
> PROFESSIONAL TIME!!!
>
> Yves> My plan is to wear the ortho-k for about one or two more
> weeks now, then i'll try to skip a day and see if I can keep
> my eyes sharp.
>
> Otis> Excellent idea. But be prepared for a "slip-back" towards
> 20/50. This will take about three months. So "steel"
> yourself to that expectation.
>
> Yves> Will keep you posted.
>
> > P.S. If you are tired of your glasses and contacts, give Ortho-k a try, the feeling of not needing anything during
> the day and just seeing through your eyes is amazing, I
> can't believe how much i have been missing. The routine is
> simple: brush your teeth, put ortho-k lenses in, sleep,
> wake up, get lenses out, brush teeth, go...
>
> Yves

Thanks very much for your ongoing participation via single-person
dialogues and unsubstantiated and unverifiable third-hand anecdotes.

Dear Neil D. Brooks,

The truth is that ONLY Yves will
know the ture resuls of his efforts
with BOTH Ortho-K AND a plus 3 diopter
lens.

Ortho-K has been used for the
last 30 years for pilots because
it has that impressive result
described by Yeves.

But the "spring-back" of the
cornea means that if he
quits with Ortho-K, his
distant vision will return
to 20/140 and -2 diopters.

So the real issue FOR HIM is
his ability to transistion from
the "spring-back" mode
to the concept expressed
by C. Wildsoet as the blue-tint
dynamic behavior of the natural eye.

The amount of time it takes for
this long-term change in refactive
STATE is about 4 to 6 months.

The majority-opinion OD say
that this type of vision clearing
is IMPOSSIBLE. Perhaps.

But the ONLY person who can
jude the result will be Yves.

And we will not know that until
he "sticks" with this effort
for the next 4 to 6 months.

Not an effort for the faint of heart.

But if he is successful, only HE
will care. Because no one else
does.

Otis


On Jan 25, 3:03 pm, "Neil Brooks" <neil0...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Thanks very much for your ongoing participation via single-person
> dialogues and unsubstantiated and unverifiable third-hand anecdotes.

And also, Neil D. Brooks, the concept
is based on the dynamic-eye animation
provided byt Dr. C. Wildsoet as shown
below.


http://vision.berkeley.edu/wildsoet/myopiaprimer.html

If that concept is correct, then Yves will
be able to trade a change in corenal
radius, for a change in refractive power
(or length) induced by systematic
use of a plus for all close work.

But again, only Yves will be the
judge of this scientific model and
natural eye's behavior.



Otis




On Jan 25, 11:15 pm, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote:
> Dear Neil D. Brooks,
>
> The truth is that ONLY Yves will
> know the ture resuls of his efforts
> with BOTH Ortho-K AND a plus 3 diopter
> lens.
>
> Ortho-K has been used for the
> last 30 years for pilots because
> it has that impressive result
> described by Yeves.
>
> But the "spring-back" of the
> cornea means that if he
> quits with Ortho-K, his
> distant vision will return
> to 20/140 and -2 diopters.
>
> So the real issue FOR HIM is
> his ability to transistion from
> the "spring-back" mode
> to the concept expressed
> by C. Wildsoet as the blue-tint
> dynamic behavior of the natural eye.
>
> The amount of time it takes for
> this long-term change in refactive
> STATE is about 4 to 6 months.
>
> The majority-opinion OD say
> that this type of vision clearing
> is IMPOSSIBLE. Perhaps.
>
> But the ONLY person who can
> jude the result will be Yves.
>
> And we will not know that until
> he "sticks" with this effort
> for the next 4 to 6 months.
>
> Not an effort for the faint of heart.
>
> But if he is successful, only HE
> will care. Because no one else
> does.
>
> Otis
>
> On Jan 25, 3:03 pm, "Neil Brooks" <neil0...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Thanks very much for your ongoing participation via single-person
> > dialogues and unsubstantiated and unverifiable third-hand anecdotes.- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -

Dear Neil Dense Brooks,

Since you do not seem to understand
the concept of the dynamic eye, let me
reduce it to this analogy.

Let us say that you spend $1,600 for
major dental work.

Let us further sat that the Dentist suggets
brushing your teeth on a regular
basis so you do not incur a
bill for $1,600 on a regular basis.

Now you go home AND REFUSE TO
BRUST YOU TEETH.

It that smart?

For all practical purposes what Yves is
doing is protecting his $1,600 investment
so that he can PERSONALLY VERIFY
that he keeps his refractive state POSITIVE,
and his Snellen at 20/20.

And consistent use of a +3 diopter
simply protects his $1,600 investment.

Yves is considerably smarter than
you Neil on this issue.

And ONLY Yves "wins".

Otis


On Jan 25, 11:21 pm, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote:
> And also, Neil D. Brooks, the concept
> is based on the dynamic-eye animation
> provided byt Dr. C. Wildsoet as shown
> below.
>
> http://vision.berkeley.edu/wildsoet/myopiaprimer.html
>
> If that concept is correct, then Yves will
> be able to trade a change in corenal
> radius, for a change in refractive power
> (or length) induced by systematic
> use of a plus for all close work.
>
> But again, only Yves will be the
> judge of this scientific model and
> natural eye's behavior.
>
> Otis
>
> On Jan 25, 11:15 pm, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Dear Neil D. Brooks,
>
> > The truth is that ONLY Yves will
> > know the ture resuls of his efforts
> > with BOTH Ortho-K AND a plus 3 diopter
> > lens.
>
> > Ortho-K has been used for the
> > last 30 years for pilots because
> > it has that impressive result
> > described by Yeves.
>
> > But the "spring-back" of the
> > cornea means that if he
> > quits with Ortho-K, his
> > distant vision will return
> > to 20/140 and -2 diopters.
>
> > So the real issue FOR HIM is
> > his ability to transistion from
> > the "spring-back" mode
> > to the concept expressed
> > by C. Wildsoet as the blue-tint
> > dynamic behavior of the natural eye.
>
> > The amount of time it takes for
> > this long-term change in refactive
> > STATE is about 4 to 6 months.
>
> > The majority-opinion OD say
> > that this type of vision clearing
> > is IMPOSSIBLE. Perhaps.
>
> > But the ONLY person who can
> > jude the result will be Yves.
>
> > And we will not know that until
> > he "sticks" with this effort
> > for the next 4 to 6 months.
>
> > Not an effort for the faint of heart.
>
> > But if he is successful, only HE
> > will care. Because no one else
> > does.
>
> > Otis
>
> > On Jan 25, 3:03 pm, "Neil Brooks" <neil0...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > Thanks very much for your ongoing participation via single-person
> > > dialogues and unsubstantiated and unverifiable third-hand anecdotes.- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -

OMFG!!!!!

You are a total moron. You know nothing about nothing and yet make
conversations with yourself to make your stories seem real.

There is no end of crap you have espoused here. Because you are the
total wanker you are, I will not even bother to explain why your
made-up story is such total and utter bullshit. However needless to
say:

STOP THE CRAP AS THE SPATTER STINKS.

Dr Grant

thats great!. now you suggest orthoK, which physically pushes on the
cornea and manipulates it's curvature for a brief time but goes away
when you stop using it. and you also continue to recommend +3.00
readers despite the fact that they have been repeatedly shown to be
totally ineffective.

why don't you add a recommendation for using a special vitamin mixture
that only you sell, along with meditation tapes and bible-reading?
you're almost ready for advertising on Paul Harvey's radio show.

by the way, whatever happened to the State of Pennsylvania's
investigation of you for practicing medicine without a license?
obviously it hasn't curtailed you moronic posts on this newsgroup.

otis you are a zealot and an idiot. you must think people here really
care about your phony ideas. do you like trying to mislead people?

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


On Jan 24, 4:20 pm, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote:
> Dear Second-opinion friends,
>
> Yves (name changed) contacted me about the plus.
>
> He was about -2 diopters and 20/140. After several months
> of using the plus he saw no progress and he suggested Ortho-K.
>
> So he did Ortho-K and is planning to combine BOTH Ortho-K AND
> the use of a +3 diopter lens for all computer and reading work.
>
> As always, keep an open mind about scientific prevention
> of a negative refractive STATE for the fundamental eye.
> (Ref: the Wildsoet blue-tint dynamic eye concept.)
>
> Here is his commentary for your interest.
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> Dear Yves,
>
> Subject: Question About Ortho-K and Plus Prevention
>
> I think your reports are great.
>
> The effect of strong Ortho-K is to make your refractive STATE
> POSITIVE.
>
> Or, you could read the Snellen through a plus 1 diopter lens.
>
> I personally think is will take some time to "anchor" your
> 20/20 vision with heavy use of the plus 3 diopter lens.
>
> So 20/20 is indeed wonderful. But be patient. I think it is
> going to take about 3 months before you "hold" 20/20 with no
> Ortho-K. (As an engineer and pilot I am always "cautious" -- as
> you understand.)
>
> But you are the "leader" so just do what you think is
> necessary, and report to your fellow pilots on your efforts.
>
> We are all (including me) learning from YOU.
>
> More commentary:
>
> ====================
>
> Yves wrote:Yves> Today when driving back home from work it was unbelievable.
> I have never been able to see so good at night before,
> everything was as sharp as during the day if not sharper. I
> came home and looked at my snellen and i could see the 20/15
> line with both eyes. In the morning it was 20/20. All day
> at work I wore the +3 lens in front of the computer...
>
> Otis> You are doing it RIGHT!!
>
> Yves> The interesting thing i noticed with the plus 3 is that if i
> look at the screen and then take off the glasses and try to
> focus my eyes on the monitor, i really feel how hard my eyes
> are trying to see the screen in front of me. This really
> must stress the eye muscles a lot.
>
> Otis> I agree with you. We should be TAUGHT to use the plus as
> soon as our refractive STATE moves from a positive value
> (20/20) to slightly minus. This is my major objection to
> Dr. Catman Grants incredible arrogance and associated
> ignorance. But that is the majority-opinion for you.
>
> Yves> I think i realize now why my vision has gotten so bad with
> prolonged computer use. I can't believe OD's prescribe
> minus glasses and let people wear them in front of the
> computer... that's just plain horrible.
>
> Otis> I always appreciate HONESTY. I TRUSTED a man like Catman
> Grant. I AM RESPONSIBLE for my bad habits -- but he as a
> PROFESSIONAL responsibility to DESCRIBE the preventive
> second-opinion. And then send us to "myopiafree" to do our
> own research on the issues. I WOULD GLADLY PAY HIM FOR HIS
> PROFESSIONAL TIME!!!
>
> Yves> My plan is to wear the ortho-k for about one or two more
> weeks now, then i'll try to skip a day and see if I can keep
> my eyes sharp.
>
> Otis> Excellent idea. But be prepared for a "slip-back" towards
> 20/50. This will take about three months. So "steel"
> yourself to that expectation.
>
> Yves> Will keep you posted.
>
> > P.S. If you are tired of your glasses and contacts, give Ortho-k a try, the feeling of not needing anything during
> the day and just seeing through your eyes is amazing, I
> can't believe how much i have been missing. The routine is
> simple: brush your teeth, put ortho-k lenses in, sleep,
> wake up, get lenses out, brush teeth, go...
>
> Yves

In article <(E-Mail Removed) .com>,
(E-Mail Removed) wrote:

> thats great!. now you suggest orthoK, which physically pushes on the
> cornea and manipulates it's curvature for a brief time but goes away
> when you stop using it. and you also continue to recommend +3.00
> readers despite the fact that they have been repeatedly shown to be
> totally ineffective.


For most myopes. My wife is +1.0 for distance and an add of +2.0. +3.0
for readers would be just right. But she wears progressives.


> > He was about -2 diopters and 20/140. After several months

Dear Ortho-K PREVENTION friends,

Second-opinion science is about alternative methods to clear your
vision to 20/20 -- and keep it there.

Ortho-K has the capability to clear vision from about -2 to
-3 diopters to zero diopters in a few nights.

The real difficulty is that the cornea "springs back" when
the "retainer" lens is removed for several nights.

Yves has used Ortho-K to clear his vision from 20/140 (about
-2 diopters) to 20/20 (Refractive state zero or positive)
with Ortho-K.

(The total power of the eye is changed from approximately 60
diopters to 58 diopters -- relatively speaking.)

We also know that when you place a minus 3 diopter lens
on the eye, its refractive STATE will "follow" that minus
lens as a natural process.

For an animation of this see Wildsoet blue-tint eye
changing its refractive STATE from the applied minus.

The converse is also shown in this conceptual model
of the natural eye's behavior.

The issue is to get the initial change with Ortho-K,
to allow time for the +3 to have the same effect
it does on the blue-tint model.

>From the best information we have, this
will probably take from 5 to 8 months.

This is of course difficult.

Here is a status report:

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Dear Yves,

Subject: Question About Ortho-K and Plus Prevention

I am VERY PLEASED that you keep yourself in that plus 3
diopter lens.

I think it is very important to understand that "blue-tint"
concept of Wildsoet.

It is also important to understand that in school our eyes go
DOWN at a rate of -1/2 dioper per year. You were at -2 diopters,
and it took at least 2 year to get "down" that far.

To get the eye's to go "up" will take a serious amount of
time. So hang in there my friend.

If you are successful (after six to nine months), then the
success will be yours EXCLUSIVELY.

You will have an impossible job convincing anyone of your
success -- including your OD!

Some more commentary:

========================

Yves wrote:

Yves> Update: > I skipped a night today. (Wearing the
"retainer" to sleep in). Woke up in the morning and ...
still 20/20. We'll see how it goes towards the end of the
day. I have been using the plus +3 at work all the time
and my vision has remained sharp all day long.

Otis> I suspect that even with aggressive use of the +3 dioper
lens, your Snellen will start "down" in about 3 to 5 days.
The issue is to see how long it takes until your Snellen
comes down to 20/40 to 20/50. I would be VERY interested in
how long that takes! So skip another night or so.

Yves> It is funny since my doctor was saying that after about 3-6
months some of his patients can skip a night.

Otis> It is obvious that he does not insist that they wear a +3
diopter lens for ALL close work. You are truly unique in
this effort.

Yves> I wonder what he'll say when I tell him that it took me a
week.

Otis> As your friend I say -- SLOW DOWN. I know this is exciting
but remember what I said the eye going down at -1/2 dioper
per year. Try to avoid challenging your OD in any way!

Otis> The final success is when you go with no Ortho-K for a MONTH
minimum and you stay at 20/20.

Otis> This success will be EXCLUSIVELY YOUR JUDGMENT, AND OF
COURSE READING 20/20.

Yves> So good news so far. I'll keep you posted.

Otis> I think it is wonderful. And the 20/20 is great! But that
blue-tint model (Wildsoet) shows a response on the order of
MONTHS.

Otis> Try "no night" retainer contact for a week.
And let me know when
your Snellen goes down to 20/40 or less.

Otis> Keep up the excellent work. This could be a profound
break-through for you.

Best,

Otis


On Jan 26, 8:48 am, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote:
> Dear Neil Dense Brooks,
>
> Since you do not seem to understand
> the concept of the dynamic eye, let me
> reduce it to this analogy.
>
> Let us say that you spend $1,600 for
> major dental work.
>
> Let us further sat that the Dentist suggets
> brushing your teeth on a regular
> basis so you do not incur a
> bill for $1,600 on a regular basis.
>
> Now you go home AND REFUSE TO
> BRUST YOU TEETH.
>
> It that smart?
>
> For all practical purposes what Yves is
> doing is protecting his $1,600 investment
> so that he can PERSONALLY VERIFY
> that he keeps his refractive state POSITIVE,
> and his Snellen at 20/20.
>
> And consistent use of a +3 diopter
> simply protects his $1,600 investment.
>
> Yves is considerably smarter than
> you Neil on this issue.
>
> And ONLY Yves "wins".
>
> Otis
>
> On Jan 25, 11:21 pm, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > And also, Neil D. Brooks, the concept
> > is based on the dynamic-eye animation
> > provided byt Dr. C. Wildsoet as shown
> > below.
>
> >http://vision.berkeley.edu/wildsoet/myopiaprimer.html
>
> > If that concept is correct, then Yves will
> > be able to trade a change in corenal
> > radius, for a change in refractive power
> > (or length) induced by systematic
> > use of a plus for all close work.
>
> > But again, only Yves will be the
> > judge of this scientific model and
> > natural eye's behavior.
>
> > Otis
>
> > On Jan 25, 11:15 pm, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote:
>
> > > Dear Neil D. Brooks,
>
> > > The truth is that ONLY Yves will
> > > know the ture resuls of his efforts
> > > with BOTH Ortho-K AND a plus 3 diopter
> > > lens.
>
> > > Ortho-K has been used for the
> > > last 30 years for pilots because
> > > it has that impressive result
> > > described by Yeves.
>
> > > But the "spring-back" of the
> > > cornea means that if he
> > > quits with Ortho-K, his
> > > distant vision will return
> > > to 20/140 and -2 diopters.
>
> > > So the real issue FOR HIM is
> > > his ability to transistion from
> > > the "spring-back" mode
> > > to the concept expressed
> > > by C. Wildsoet as the blue-tint
> > > dynamic behavior of the natural eye.
>
> > > The amount of time it takes for
> > > this long-term change in refactive
> > > STATE is about 4 to 6 months.
>
> > > The majority-opinion OD say
> > > that this type of vision clearing
> > > is IMPOSSIBLE. Perhaps.
>
> > > But the ONLY person who can
> > > jude the result will be Yves.
>
> > > And we will not know that until
> > > he "sticks" with this effort
> > > for the next 4 to 6 months.
>
> > > Not an effort for the faint of heart.
>
> > > But if he is successful, only HE
> > > will care. Because no one else
> > > does.
>
> > > Otis
>
> > > On Jan 25, 3:03 pm, "Neil Brooks" <neil0...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Thanks very much for your ongoing participation via single-person
> > > > dialogues and unsubstantiated and unverifiable third-hand anecdotes.- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -