Advice for 9-year old newly in glasses.

Discussion in 'Glasses' started by Ed, Jan 28, 2008.

  1. Ed

    Dr. Leukoma Guest

    I believe that research has/is attempting to address these issues.
    The exact mechanism has yet to be determined, although the lines of
    enquiry have become somewhat more defined.

    Wildsoet has recently published an interesting article on children,
    accommodation, and bifocal contact lenses. I think we are not too far
    from arriving at a consensus on at least a partial mechanism.
    Dr. Leukoma, Jan 30, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  2. Ed

    otisbrown Guest

    Dear Szczepan,

    OD> Of course. They do it for several reasons. Preventing myopia isn't
    a good

    Otis> The goal of science is to prevent entry into a negative
    refractive STATE.
    That was Bates' goal, and always the second-opinion.

    Otis> I would agree that wearing a strong minus lens is not the
    way you prevent entry into myopia.

    Second-opinion best,

    otisbrown, Jan 30, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  3. Ed

    Neil Brooks Guest

    Ah, Otis?

    You appear to be interested in engaging ... again.

    Have a go at these questions, then, would you??

    Thanks, Otis. I know that ... as a self-professed "scientist ..."
    you'll WANT to address these questions (not having Alex Eulenberg
    answer them FOR you might help....)
    Neil Brooks, Jan 31, 2008
  4. Ed

    Dan Abel Guest

    There is a lot of discussion on this group about correlation versus
    causation. There is a correlation between myopia and close work.
    Studies have been done showing that use of glasses does not affect the
    progression of myopia. My personal belief is that myopia causes
    reading. When I was a kid, my myopia was not corrected until fourth
    grade. I could not see distance very well. In fact, it was downright
    bad. When I played ball with my friends, I got very little satisfaction
    from it. I couldn't see the damn ball. I couldn't catch it or hit it.
    If I went inside and read a book, that was satisfying. I could see the
    book. I read faster and better than most kids my age. It worked.
    Dan Abel, Jan 31, 2008
  5. You are talking about mainstreem science. They neglected Copernicus theory
    for 250 years.

    I have my own observations and conclusions. In Web sites I check if my
    conclusions have support in western research. My main conclusion is that
    myopia is caused by the lower salt consuption. Of course in Web is the
    "Myopia, iodine deficiency and rickets are on the rise among Australian
    children. Judy Skatssoon reports.
    Eastman believes the re-emergence of iodine deficiency is linked to diet,
    with people using less salt, and a reduction in the availability of iodised

    It is from:

    I have accepted textbooks and there are that healtthy people should eat 15g
    salt per day plus 3g per each litre of sweat. It should be salt similar to
    that in the ocean water. Tell as why todays doctors recommend a few grams?
    Not all reading is necessary.
    In textbooks knowledge is presented. Reader can conclude own conclusions. We
    must wait for explanation of "myopia epidemy".
    Here is a third group. Which who do not use at all. An experiment is not the
    best way . Investigation should work better. I am sure that such was done
    many times.

    Each eye doctor should have his own deductions.

    Szczepan Bia³ek, Jan 31, 2008
  6. Ed

    otisbrown Guest

    Dear Ed,

    Subject: The nature of the second-opinion -- in science.

    Majority-opinion> First, ignore anything written by Otis. Actually,
    read what he
    writes, and discount any advice that seems to fit in with what he

    Ed, the optometic second-opinion says that great care should
    be taken with the minus. To prove this read:

    Mike has his belief-system. It is on shakey ground at this point.
    If he wishes to believe that the fundamental eye is
    not dynamic (science) and tells you that the a strong
    minus lens has NO EFFECT on the refractive STATE of
    all eyes -- then go ahead and enter his belief-system.

    But it is always wise to review the fact that the minus lens
    is considered a "risk factor" for inducing an even more
    negative refractive STATE in the normal eye.

    Do your own review of this second-opinion.

    otisbrown, Jan 31, 2008
  7. Ed

    Neil Brooks Guest


    Science would seek to answer these questions:
    It is? Why?
    Presuming anybody knows what you're talking about -- for argument's
    sake -- nobody around here EVER says that an eye is not dynamic.

    So you're just lying.
    It's a belief system based on numerous clinical trials.

    What's yours based on?
    Considered? Where's the evidence.

    People seem to experience runaway hair growth after their first
    haircut. Some people see their feet getting larger after wearing
    their first pair of shoes.

    Where's your evidence of causality??
    Neil Brooks, Jan 31, 2008
  8. "Ed"
    To considering:
    Szczepan Bialek, Jan 31, 2008
  9. Ed

    otisbrown Guest

    Dear S*,

    Subject: Prevention is WISE at the threshold.

    If you study the statistics of the "mondern" eye in a
    long-term "near" environmet, you will find that
    it goes "down" at a rate of -1/2 diopter per year -- consistently.
    With more intensive study (by the young student) the
    rate can increase to -8/10 dipoter per year -- Singapore report by

    Since we know this rate (or you or the parent should know it) it
    would be WISE to institute the PREVENTIVE methods
    at the -3/4 diopter level (about 20/30 to 20/40 on the Snellen).

    So my commentary is this:

    Almost all research in all science were made mainly in Western. Such
    had been done. For this reason rich were using monocle (only when
    necessary). Reading through monocle do not have sense. Like reading
    with the
    strongest lenses.

    Otis> Agreed. The "minus" should only be used when necessary, and
    NOT USED for any close work. It DOES make a difference.

    S*>I agree with like this:


    Otis> Since we KNOW that a child at -1 diopter will go DOWN (say from
    age 10 years) is
    they start with the minus -- then it would be wise to start with the
    plus at that
    point, to avoid that steady -1/2 dipoter per year, and "advance cases
    of myopia".
    The person who does not STOP is at -1/2 diopter, will be at -5
    diopters (advanced
    case) if he does not stop it at 10 years old. And that first minus is
    a "problems".

    S*> A. Yes. First have minimum - or less - prescription glasses for
    use only, such as driving, or for whatever might be important. Then
    wear the
    glasses as little as possible otherwise. Stop all unnecessary close
    What close work one thinks he has to do, should be done without
    glasses if
    possible, under good incandescent light, looking up and away often. If
    ease is so severe that one cannot do close work without glasses, he
    have special half-power glasses for close work, or bifocals.

    Otis> Some people have recognized this problem -- and resolved
    it under THEIR control. You know the two methods, Bates and/or the

    Otis> If they are willing to monitor their Snellen, and work with the
    plus, and number of people have been able to clear
    their Snellens from 20/70 back to normal -- but never
    under majority-opinion control.

    From then on,
    do not change the glasses, unless the power of the lenses can be
    reduced. Be
    checked for that every one or two years. "

    Otis> I strongly advocate prevention as a choice at the -1 diopter
    I you do not stop it then, your distant does indeed become a
    permanet situation.

    Just my second-opinion.
    otisbrown, Jan 31, 2008
  10. Ed

    Neil Brooks Guest

    Since you've been shown to be factually incorrect on this one, many
    times, you're simply lying again.

    Myopes in the US Air Force Academy were studied.

    - some got more myopic
    - some got less myopic
    - some stayed the same

    With no interventions at all. Some simply got better. Maybe it's

    To your way of thinking, an emmetrope would become

    - a -6.00d myope (like you!) after a K-12 education
    - an 8.00d myope after a four-year degree
    - 9.00d myope after a Master's, and
    - a 10.00d myope after a PhD

    Is that what happens, Uncle Otie?

    So ... what you're doing is lying by false use of average. You could
    AVERAGE the birth rate across all Americans, but I highly doubt any
    man is going to get pregnant.

    I knew a man who slept with his feet in the oven and his head in the
    freezer. "On average," he remarked, "it's quite comfortable."

    It's only one of the MANY ways that you lie, but it's still a lie.

    Why do you do that? Why do you feel the need to lie constantly??
    Neil Brooks, Jan 31, 2008
  11. Ed

    Dr. Leukoma Guest

    Dr. Leukoma, Jan 31, 2008
  12. Ed

    Neil Brooks Guest

    But his parents (heredity) MAY have made him stupid.
    Neil Brooks, Feb 1, 2008
  13. Ed

    Ed Guest

    Wow! What an amazing (and spirited) response to my question!

    To the novices on board, thank you for your advice and info. But I've
    decided to take the advice of the experts here and allow my son to
    wear his glasses all the time. He likes them and is doing well in
    school since he's been wearing them (as per one of his teachers). I
    am hoping my son's myopia doesn't progress much. My wife and I are
    mild myopics (she's about -1.75 and I'm a -1.00), but neither of us
    required vision correction until adulthood. So, I'm hoping my son's
    vision changes for the better as he matures.

    Ed, Feb 1, 2008
  14. Ed

    Neil Brooks Guest

    .... it's not so much the issue. It's just Otis.

    Absent Otis (and his occasional dilettantes) -- as I always say --
    there's a chance that the other participants on this forum COULD,
    somehow, move this issue forward.

    Nah. It's Otis.

    Good luck, Ed. Hope all turns out well.
    Neil Brooks, Feb 1, 2008
  15. Ed

    otisbrown Guest

    Dear Ed,

    Subject: A reasonable judgment.

    Prevention is indeed difficult -- no doubt about it.

    The minus works instantly and is very impressive and we
    all know.

    It is indeed easy.

    I hope everything turns out fine for your son.
    otisbrown, Feb 1, 2008
  16. Ed

    Neil Brooks Guest

    Yet another one of your many, and profound, problems.

    You think failure means a lack of intelligence/effort on the part of
    the subject.

    Yet .... time and time again .... I've shown you that:

    - some myopes stay stable
    - some get better
    - some get worse

    over time.

    What you've never demonstrated is that you have ANY method that has
    ANY impact whatsoever on this distribution.

    What it ALMOST CERTAINLY means is that:

    - where you see success, it was a normal age-based reduction in
    - where you see failure, it was a normal age-based increase in myopia

    That's one of the myriad reasons that you're an idiot and a charlatan.
    Neil Brooks, Feb 1, 2008
  17. Ed

    p.clarkii Guest

    not if the connective tissue in the sclera is rigid enough, and the
    actual amount of tension generated by the ciliary muscle is relatively

    your whole train of thought that the shape of the eye is affected by
    accommodation has been experimentally-tested in real-time ultrasound
    experiments and found to be invalid.
    p.clarkii, Feb 1, 2008
  18. Your childhood was in time when " (Decades ago), all foods seemed heavily
    salted. Then, a link between sodium intake and high blood pressure was
    discovered. Suddenly, "sodium - free" or "low sodium" products began
    flooding the consumer market. Certainly, to a degree, this is justified.
    Many diseases are worsened by excess sodium intake, and millions of
    Americans must closely watch the amount of sodium in their diet.
    However, sodium is a required element for normal body functions. It is lost
    in sweat and urine and is replaced in the diet. The body has a remarkable
    ability to maintain sodium and water balance throughout a variety of
    conditions, thus ensuring our survival. Ultraendurance events challenge this
    survival mechanism."

    It is from:
    Children like outdoors and indors activities. Low salt diet can cause "low
    salt syndrome" which cause the muscle weakness and lack of interest for the
    activities . Such children are only able to contract the small ciliary
    muscles and read, read, read (Dan Abel wrote: "My personal belief is that
    myopia causes reading").

    Could you tell us about the salt consumption inYour family?
    Szczepan Bialek, Feb 1, 2008
  19. Ed

    Ed Guest

    Yes, I see that. I read this newsgroup often. I have a high interest
    in vision care.
    Actually, I did (briefly) wear correction when I was 14. My eye
    doctor made me wear plus lenses for about 2 years, even though I could
    see well without them. I suspect he was a believer in the Bates
    method. I rarely wore those glasses because... I couldn't SEE
    anything more than 2 feet from my face with them! I was only able to
    see up-close... really close! When my parents took me to a different
    eye doc when I was 16, I was told my vision was perfect. It remained
    that way until I was 24, and that's when I began wearing -.25 in both
    eyes. Now, aged 44, I wear a -1.00 in my right eye and a -.50 in my
    left (and +1.25 add for that lovely presbyopia). Even though I have
    bifocals, I rarely wear my glasses, except for very close work and
    night driving, where my right eye is just too blurry to see well in
    the dark.
    Ed, Feb 1, 2008
  20. Ed

    Neil Brooks Guest

    Obviously, your eyes haven't been fully informed of Otis's "down

    Neil Brooks, Feb 1, 2008
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.