Wow poor kid and his thick myodisc glasses!

http://recollectionbooks.com/bleed/images/BB/10010.jpg


He must have started wearing glasses from birth, inducing a very high
negetive refractive state! He could have real problems as a teen with
such high myopia. Scary!

http://airto.bmap.ucla.edu/BMCweb/BM...ickGlasses.jpg


OMG! NO, NO, NOOOOOOOO! Hes doing everything wrong! Lots of near work
with extremely high minus myodisc glasses! Hes gonna make himself
blind! *shudder*

Dear AceMan,

That is what is going to happen to that 20/50 kid -- who was
put into a -10 diopters -- for no good reason.

I truly pity these poor kids -- and the consequence of that
over-prescribed minus lens.

Just one man's opinion.

Otis




(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> http://airto.bmap.ucla.edu/BMCweb/BM...ickGlasses.jpg
>
>
> OMG! NO, NO, NOOOOOOOO! Hes doing everything wrong! Lots of near work
> with extremely high minus myodisc glasses! Hes gonna make himself
> blind! *shudder*

(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> http://recollectionbooks.com/bleed/images/BB/10010.jpg
>
>
> He must have started wearing glasses from birth, inducing
> a very high negetive refractive state! He could have real
> problems as a teen with such high myopia. Scary!

Or he could end up doing halucinogenics, living in his room,
looking for attention on the internet. Even SCARIER!

-Quick

Or, you might consider the biconvex "gag" glasses sold at Spencer
Gifts, that look like that photo but have a net refractive power of
Plano.
Dr Judy wrote:
> (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> > http://recollectionbooks.com/bleed/images/BB/10010.jpg
> >
> >
> > He must have started wearing glasses from birth, inducing a very high
> > negetive refractive state! He could have real problems as a teen with
> > such high myopia. Scary!
>
> Or maybe he was born with a syndrome that includes congenital, not
> induces, high myopia and his parents are very happy that their child is
> able to have near normal vision with the glasses.
>
> Dr Judy

Dr Judy wrote:
> (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> > http://recollectionbooks.com/bleed/images/BB/10010.jpg
> >
> >
> > He must have started wearing glasses from birth, inducing a very high
> > negetive refractive state! He could have real problems as a teen with
> > such high myopia. Scary!
>
> Or maybe he was born with a syndrome that includes congenital, not
> induces, high myopia and his parents are very happy that their child is
> able to have near normal vision with the glasses.
>
> Dr Judy



That is a possibily, albet very rare. Such people are born with
unusually thick crystaline lenses, steep corneas and/or egg shaped
eyes. What needs to be done is slow down the progression of myopia or
pathalogies may occur in the retina and other parts.


"Take a closer look. This child is wearing telescopic lenses, likely
he
has a congenital vision problem resulting in poor best corrected
vision. These glasse allow him to read normal sized print instead of
using braille."



How does one differnate between very high minus myodiscs/lenticular and
telescopic? If the glasses intent was to magnify, youd have to read
very close and only see one word at a time.


"Dear AceMan,


That is what is going to happen to that 20/50 kid -- who was
put into a -10 diopters -- for no good reason.


I truly pity these poor kids -- and the consequence of that
over-prescribed minus lens.


Just one man's opinion."


I extend my condolences too. Theres nothing sadder than seeing a poor
kid in strong glasses with his head buried in a book. If anyone can see
well enough to read without minus glasses, take them off! Those with so
much myopia that its too inconvinent can either wear weaker glasses for
near work or bifocals to controll myopia.

Dear AceMan,

Just remember this:

When you see your own child, with his nose 4 inches off the page -- you
are going to have to do eveything in your power to STOP that
very bad HABIT.

This becomes and EDUCATED parent's responsibility.

If your kid's refractive STATE is zero at age five, you can
almost guarantee that the child's refractive STATE will
go down by about -1 diopter in two years.

It is essential that you be aware of this fact (as the second-opinion)
and be prepared to help your child in the use of the plus for
prevention.

If you take anything "away" from these discussions -- then that
should become a large part of the "solution".

So if a second-opinion OD says to you, "AceMan", I checked
your child's refractive state. He has 20/20, but a +1/4 diopter
lens "blurs" to 20/30."

>From the primate studies, and the Oakley-Young study, it
is clear that the un-protected eye will go down by
about -1 diopter in two years.

If you agree, then we can START your child in the
preventive plus at this time. My professional
charges will reflect in the time I spend with you.

But the true "control" must rest with you and your
child.

Let me know what your choice is to be.

I hope these discussions prepare you for that day -- and choice.

Best,

Otis



(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> http://airto.bmap.ucla.edu/BMCweb/BM...ickGlasses.jpg
>
>
> OMG! NO, NO, NOOOOOOOO! Hes doing everything wrong! Lots of near work
> with extremely high minus myodisc glasses! Hes gonna make himself
> blind! *shudder*

On 23 Jul 2006 11:03:16 -0700, "(E-Mail Removed)" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>
>Dear AceMan,
>
>Just remember this:
>
>When you see your own child, with his nose 4 inches off the page -- you
>are going to have to do eveything in your power to STOP that
>very bad HABIT.

Ace is unable to get a job.. do you really think he's going to have a
family? I certainly hope not.

Ann


>This becomes and EDUCATED parent's responsibility.
>
>If your kid's refractive STATE is zero at age five, you can
>almost guarantee that the child's refractive STATE will
>go down by about -1 diopter in two years.
>
>It is essential that you be aware of this fact (as the second-opinion)
>and be prepared to help your child in the use of the plus for
>prevention.
>
>If you take anything "away" from these discussions -- then that
>should become a large part of the "solution".
>
>So if a second-opinion OD says to you, "AceMan", I checked
>your child's refractive state. He has 20/20, but a +1/4 diopter
>lens "blurs" to 20/30."
>
>>From the primate studies, and the Oakley-Young study, it
>is clear that the un-protected eye will go down by
>about -1 diopter in two years.
>
>If you agree, then we can START your child in the
>preventive plus at this time. My professional
>charges will reflect in the time I spend with you.
>
>But the true "control" must rest with you and your
>child.
>
>Let me know what your choice is to be.
>
>I hope these discussions prepare you for that day -- and choice.
>
>Best,
>
>Otis
>
>
>
>(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>> http://airto.bmap.ucla.edu/BMCweb/BM...ickGlasses.jpg
>>
>>
>> OMG! NO, NO, NOOOOOOOO! Hes doing everything wrong! Lots of near work
>> with extremely high minus myodisc glasses! Hes gonna make himself
>> blind! *shudder*

Dr Judy wrote:
> (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> > Dr Judy wrote:
> >
>
> snip
>
> >
> > "Take a closer look. This child is wearing telescopic lenses, likely
> > he
> > has a congenital vision problem resulting in poor best corrected
> > vision. These glasse allow him to read normal sized print instead of
> > using braille."
> >
> >
> >
> > How does one differnate between very high minus myodiscs/lenticular and
> > telescopic? If the glasses intent was to magnify, youd have to read
> > very close and only see one word at a time.
> >
>
> You can see the telescopes mounted in the centre of the lens in the
> second photo you posted.
>
> For a discusssion see:
>
> http://www.biopticdriving.org/reposi...d%20Telescopes'
>
> Dr Judy


I cant tell if its myodisc/lenticular or a low power small embedded
telescope. They look alike to the causal observer.

Or he could be a 3 year-old child with 20/50 vision (which is
functional)
who was put into a -10 diopter lens -- and told to wear it all the
time.

Best,

Otis



Quick wrote:
> (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> > http://recollectionbooks.com/bleed/images/BB/10010.jpg
> >
> >
> > He must have started wearing glasses from birth, inducing
> > a very high negetive refractive state! He could have real
> > problems as a teen with such high myopia. Scary!
>
> Or he could end up doing halucinogenics, living in his room,
> looking for attention on the internet. Even SCARIER!
>
> -Quick