An engineer helps his kids avoid entry into myopia.

Discussion in 'Optometry Archives' started by otisbrown, Mar 15, 2006.

  1. otisbrown

    otisbrown Guest

    Dear Ace,

    Subject: An engineer helps his children avoid entry in to

    Re: Here are some of the details.

    Re: The primate eye behaves as expected.

    Re: It seems the parents must FIRST figure out that
    there children MUST begin wearing the plus
    at "zero" diopters -- or else accept
    the consequences of NOT wearing the plus.


    Myopia Prevention: Theory and Practic

    By Denis Alarie, P. Eng.

    To: Mr. Howard C. Howland
    W201 Seeley G Mudd Hall
    Cornell University
    Ithaca NY 14853 USA

    Dear Sir:

    About your ongoing research on the development of the eye.

    It was with a great deal of interest that I read an article
    in Discover magazine in the October 1995 Issue concerning your
    ongoing work on the development of the eye and its relation to bio

    I come from a family of 7 where both the parents are with
    normal vision and where all 5 of the children were nearsigthed and
    read a lot. I graduated from Queen's University in 1977 with a
    first class degree in Civil engineering and also graduated with
    courses in Genetics. This interestingly enough, gave me a
    background in evolution, genetics, mechanics and physics.

    I had believed since I was about 15 that their was a causal
    link between eye development and Myopia and indeed was immensely
    interested when I read an article supporting that position.

    At first (around 1972) I had hopes that by carefully
    managing the use of my eyes I would be able to reverse the myopia
    about (- 1 dioptre ). This I theorized would be done by using
    reading glasses to simulate an at rest condition. I experimented
    with various lenses used while reading and studying ranging from
    +1.5 dioptre to + 2.5 dioptre, all the while thinking of and
    studying the structure of the eye to see if I could gain a better
    understanding of the process.

    Although my eyes never improved they did not get any worse
    from a refractory point of view. It was relatively easy to
    experiment since my eyes did not have any astigmatism. I could
    therefore purchase glasses at the drug store for reading. I also
    talked my eye doctor into prescribing glasses at -0.75 dioptre
    that I would wear while attending classes. This did not do
    anything even though I played around with this concept for years.

    One thing that it did do was make me more aware of the minor
    changes which seemed to occur with my eyes due to atmospheric
    pressure, influence of alcohol and marijuana use, reading,
    driving, smoking.

    After I graduated 1977, I married in 1978 and had a family.
    My wife was a graduate nurse at University of Toronto and was
    mildly myopic with -0.50 in the right eye and -0.75 in the left
    eye. She did not wear her glasses which probably helped to
    prevent her vision from changing further.

    We have two daughters aged 15 and 11 both of whom have eyes
    that are almost perfect as far as spherical corrections are
    concerned they are both at 0 dioptre +/- 0.25. From the time that
    they were young I have encouraged good eye habits in both of them,
    ie don't sit too close to the TV, Head up when they walk Etc.

    When we moved to Timmins in 1987 we went to see an eye doctor
    by the name of Al MacIvor. He was talked into prescribing reading
    glasses for both of the kids. My reasoning was that since my
    eyes had stabilized at about -1.00 to -1.25 dioptre that reading
    glasses of +1.25 dioptre would probably be about the right level
    for them. Al said that both of the girls had very little reserve
    in their eyes and would both be myopic by the time they were 15.
    He looked at me with a bit of a glazed look in his eyes when I
    started talking to him about my ideas and probably thought I was
    talking about pyramid glasses etc. I insisted that the
    prescription not contain any cylindrical corrections.

    This now 1995 and the girls are fine. Their eyes basically
    have not changed in 8 years. They both are avid readers and
    computer users and they both wear their reading glasses.

    In a further elaboration to the above I have noticed that in
    the workplace where I work there is a very high incidence of
    occupational myopia in office workers. Truck drivers never
    develop myopia. Similar to your observations about the pilots who
    have good vision prior to their studies and poor vision after.

    I am not looking for anything from this. Just trying to help
    where I can and enjoying the chance to finally be able to transmit
    my information to someone who takes it seriously and has the
    professional credentials and interest in pursuing it further .

    Sincerely Yours

    Denis Alarie, P. Eng.

    (Address supressed to protect
    him from a Neil Brooks attack.)
    otisbrown, Mar 15, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  2. otisbrown

    Simon Dean Guest

    Denis Alarie , P. Eng.
    229 Rosemary Crescent
    Timmins Ontario
    Canada, P4P-7C2

    "The following letter was sent to me by Denis Alarie, from Ontario. He
    originally sent it to Howard Howland, a vision researcher at Cornell who
    has done work on chicks, inducing myopia by applying minus lenses to
    their eyes."


    Cluck cluck cluck
    Simon Dean, Mar 15, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  3. otisbrown

    otisbrown Guest

    Dear Simon,

    Very nice of you to point that out.

    Now Neil can post "Denis" warnings
    on, and send
    threatening emails to Denis about
    how he was wrong, wrong, wrong,
    to help his kids avoid entry into

    Too bad that Ace's parents did
    not have that insight into protecting
    his distant vision -- as the second-opinion.

    I do not think that Ace would be
    saying, what you say.

    But, that is the nature of the
    preventive second opinion, isn't it?


    otisbrown, Mar 15, 2006
  4. otisbrown

    acemanvx Guest

    Thanks for sharing the story! He prevented his own children from any
    myopia by giving them the plus lens. An ounce of prevention(plus lens)
    is worth a pound of "cure"(glasses, contacts, lasik, etc) But on the
    bright side, the guy who became -1 is not at a disadvantage if he does
    alot of work because what this will mean is a reduced dependancy on
    reading glasses and probably wont need any glasses for intermediate
    such as using the computer or talking to someone at arm's length or
    waking up to clearly see the alarm clock. Bate's book(and supporters)
    even says keep a little myopia for it will help you immensely in your
    2nd half of your life and allow you to see clear from near and
    intermediate without much compromise on distance vision.

    We live in a near work society so its only natural our eyes get myopic
    to adapt to the near work. Using the minus lens tricks the eye into
    thinking it needs to get more myopic for near work. If you must wear
    glasses, keep them OFF for near work or use bifocals/progressives!

    My brother has the same story. He never got worse than -2 and is now
    -1.25 to this day because he rejected the minus lens. He does tons of
    near work so it was only natural his eyes get myopic in response to his
    environment. As long as he takes breaks and doesnt read very close,
    such at the 6" point, his eyes shouldnt get any worse.

    My sister on the other hand is a full time contact wearer and does lots
    of near work. As a response, her eyes have gotten worse. We might go to
    the optometrist tomorrow to get her stronger contacts. She is not
    interested in 2nd opinion nor vision improvement. She likes the instant
    gratification of very clear 20/20 vision that her contacts provide and
    she tolerates contacts fine. She doesnt care about her eyes as long as
    she corrects to 20/20 and can deal with contacts fine. She will
    probably get lasik or whatever surgury is out 10, 15 or 20 years from
    now when she can no longer tolerate contacts. She may want to consider
    monovision or slightly undercorrecting her eyes so they are focused at
    near to avoid reading glasses and further axial myopia.

    I am not getting any surgury any time soon, if ever. I do want to get
    orthoK which will reduce my myopia. I dont know if orthoK can eliminate
    all my myopia nor do I care to be plano because of all the near work I
    do. I will be happy to be in the -1.25 to -2 range with as little
    astigmastim as possible. This will have the greatest effect of nearly
    eliminating my dependence on glasses.
    acemanvx, Mar 15, 2006
  5. otisbrown

    Simon Dean Guest

    Prove they would have had myopia without the plus?
    Simon Dean, Mar 15, 2006
  6. otisbrown

    Neil Brooks Guest

    The degree to which you are an idiot is utterly astounding, Cletis (I
    like that!).
    Neil Brooks, Mar 15, 2006
  7. otisbrown

    Neil Brooks Guest

    Uncle Otie: all you've accomplished here is to prove that there are
    *other* morons besides yourself who understand neither logic nor
    reason, and are unable to differentiate between correlation and
    causation. In your case, I imagine these challenges extend to tying
    one's own shoelaces ... but I digress.

    Isn't it just as likely--if not more so--that myopics don't become
    truck drivers??

    God, you're dumb. Never ceases to astound me ... or most people on
    this forum.

    Glad to see you and your illegitimate offspring, AceMan are getting on
    so well here.
    Neil Brooks, Mar 15, 2006
  8. otisbrown

    Neil Brooks Guest

    Uncle Otie:

    What ELSE did your parents force you to do as a child that has so
    horribly scarred you ... and have you sought some sort of psychological
    therapy in order to come to some resolution with it?


    Neil Brooks, Mar 16, 2006
  9. otisbrown

    Neil Brooks Guest

    Actually, that's a very interesting point, Uncle Otie. I mean ... this
    little assertion of this fictitious friend of yours could hardly be
    considered science without a control group, now could it??

    Perhaps you haven't heard of the scientific method. Here's a link for
    you. Perhaps you can learn something about it:

    Here's an interesting quote from that site that seems *particularly*
    applicable to you:

    "Another common mistake is to ignore or rule out data which do not
    support the hypothesis. Ideally, the experimenter is open to the
    possibility that the hypothesis is correct or incorrect. Sometimes,
    however, a scientist may have a strong belief that the hypothesis is
    true (or false), or feels internal or external pressure to get a
    specific result. In that case, there may be a psychological tendency to
    find "something wrong", such as systematic effects, with data which do
    not support the scientist's expectations, while data which do agree
    with those expectations may not be checked as carefully. The lesson is
    that all data must be handled in the same way."
    Neil Brooks, Mar 16, 2006
  10. otisbrown

    otisbrown Guest

    Thanks for sharing the story! He prevented his own children from any

    Prove they would have had myopia without the plus?

    Otis> Prove to whom? The father? The daughters?
    It is clear from the primate studies, and
    the avian studies that the refractive state
    of these natural eyes "follow" as a dynamic
    sytem, a change in their average visual environment.

    Otis> The engineer was wise to understand this
    issue, and implement the prevetive method for
    his own faimly.

    Otis> No one will EVER ask you to develop
    wisdom (and engineering smarts) of this nature.

    Otis> This is why prevention (as the second-oipinion)
    is for the people who value their distant vision and
    will take this "first step" towards prevention.

    Otis> The "easy" way is indeed the minus,
    and the effect is immediate and obvious.
    I can not argue with that kind of "success"
    can I? If you like it -- wear it -- but
    do not complain about your stair-case
    myopia after it is too late to do anything
    about it.


    otisbrown, Mar 16, 2006
  11. otisbrown

    Neil Brooks Guest

    Neil> Is there any proof that minus lenses increase the rate at which
    one becomes myopic?

    Neil> or are you just vocalizing from your posterior again?

    Neil> Because the research I've seen seems to indicate that just the
    opposite is true.

    Neil> Otis??

    Neil> Are you off your meds?
    Neil Brooks, Mar 16, 2006
  12. otisbrown

    p.clarkii Guest

    between tokes on his bong, Acemanvx farted out the following remark:
    "because of all the near work I

    what kind of WORK do you do? or are you referring to your endless
    hours of surfing the internet using daddy's computer and daddy's
    internet connection in daddy's house?

    you and otis are quite a pair. get a life!
    p.clarkii, Mar 16, 2006
  13. otisbrown

    Simon Dean Guest

    Good. Im glad you said that.

    Im a computer programmer, where's my myopia? Im hyperopic. Your theory
    of prevention obviously doesn't work in all cases. Maybe your theory is
    flawed? Maybe theres another factor you're ignoring?

    The guy in the story who wore plus glasses didn't have his myopia
    reversed. It obviously doesn't reverse myopia in all cases. Maybe it's
    just a placebo and you're ignorant and you should be looking for some
    other preventative method?
    Simon Dean, Mar 16, 2006
  14. otisbrown

    Simon Dean Guest

    Grow up Otis.

    Anyone with five seconds could have done a Google Search and found the
    "article" linked from your own website.
    Simon Dean, Mar 16, 2006
  15. otisbrown

    acemanvx Guest

    "Prove they would have had myopia without the plus?"

    "Please tell us how you know this works. Anecdotes aren't enough."

    "I recently heard a (very respected) lasik surgeon advertising:
    "lasik fixes the damage caused by years of wearing glasses"

    It made me wonder how this group would respond
    to a claim like that..."

    I would consider lasik a treatment rather than a cure. It does not
    address the underlaying causes for your myopia. natural vision
    improvement does and teaches you how to use your eyes correctly to
    reduce your myopia. If your myopia is low, less than -3 then vision
    improvement can improve you to the point of 20/40, meeting the DMV or
    even achieve plano!
    Higher amounts of myopia can be reduced. People like lasik because its
    quick, instant gratification(if things dont go amiss) your eyes can
    still get worse after lasik just like they can get worse for glasses
    and contact wearers. From what ive seen, about half of the lasik people
    are no longer 20/20 UCVA at the 5 year period with a typical
    pescription of -.5 to -1.25 I can tell you all the stories of people
    back in glasses years after lasik. Some people end up under/over
    corrected or regress shortly after lasik. Theres enhancements but its
    more risk. Lasik will NOT gurantee 20/20 or whatever your BCVA is, it
    will probably get you closer to plano and reduce or make you less
    dependant on glasses. Many people still wear glasses after lasik for
    reading, driving, watching movies, etc.

    "Im a computer programmer, where's my myopia? Im hyperopic. Your theory

    of prevention obviously doesn't work in all cases. Maybe your theory is

    flawed? Maybe theres another factor you're ignoring?"

    You did not do much near work when you were younger and therefore kept
    your eye in a positive refractive state.

    "The guy in the story who wore plus glasses didn't have his myopia
    reversed. It obviously doesn't reverse myopia in all cases."

    probably because his eyeball already enlongated into -1 axial myopia.
    All he could do was prevent further myopia progression which he
    successfully did. Otis emphasizes preventing myopia at the treshold and
    rejecting the minus lens. Once you accept it, axial myopia occurs and
    this becomes permaent.
    acemanvx, Mar 16, 2006
  16. otisbrown

    Simon Dean Guest

    snip garbage which didn't relate to my question...
    Ahh... so without even knowing my childhood, you bend the fact and
    create an fictional environment to prove your theory?

    I would be interested to know what "much near work" means. Enough to get
    myopia I guess is your yard stick, and anyone who does "much near work"
    and doesn't get myopia can therefore be disregarded as not doing "much
    near work".

    Would schooling and TV from the age of 4 do it? With computing from the
    age of 8?
    Can't help but saying, whatever.
    Simon Dean, Mar 16, 2006
  17. otisbrown

    RY Guest

    Ummm, bad assumption.

    I'm another hyperope (+4, +2.5) who had his "nose in the book" my
    entire youth AND have done nothing but close work my entire carrer. A
    little "stair-case myopia" would have been good for me...;-)
    RY, Mar 16, 2006
  18. otisbrown

    RM Guest


    We have asked Otis to explain why hyperops, who strain to see at near their
    entire live, do not change and become less hyperopic or even myopic over
    time. If they did then that would support his "eyestrain at near"
    hypothesis. But he just ignors that question. In general he just ignors
    any question that he can't answer. Otis has a repetoire of about a dozen
    "arguments" that he keeps repeating time after time. They range from a
    romantic story about "Raphaelson and the Printers Son" to anecdotal stories
    about engineer/pilots who he helped regain their eyesight.

    Otis has been in this newsgroup a long time and despite being repeatedly
    proven wrong he keeps on blurting out the same tired old stuff year after
    year. Whats amazing is he keeps trying to act like a "man of science".
    Actually its kind of pathetic. Now Aceman on the other hand is a
    sociopathic adolescent who doesn't have a real life-- he just seems to like
    to "live" some artificial life posting and surfing on the internet.

    Its probably best to just killfile both of them.

    RM, Mar 17, 2006
  19. otisbrown

    otisbrown Guest

    Dear RM,

    Subject: Refractive states of primates in the wild.

    Primates in the whild have refractive states running from
    zero to +2 diopters. These are objective scientific
    facts. That is just the way it is. Under NO CIRCUMSTANCE

    That is a results of your false notion of the behavior of
    the natural eye.

    To further respond:

    RM> We have asked Otis to explain why hyperops, who strain to see at
    near their
    entire live,

    Otis> This is your false understanding of the behavior of the
    natural eye. Sorry you do not understand these basic

    RM> do not change and become less hyperopic or even myopic over

    RM> If they did then that would support his "eyestrain at near"

    Otis> I never said anything like this -- at all. And I never
    use your term "eye-strain" to describe the natural process
    were the eye changes it refractive state, with a
    change in its average visual environment.

    Otis> This change is as a funtioning auto-focused camera,
    and is part of the behavior of the natural primate eye.

    Otis> The natural eyes refractive state (plus or minus) is
    established by its average visual environment.
    (Primate studies which you do not understand -- so
    you totally reject them.)


    otisbrown, Mar 17, 2006
  20. otisbrown

    otisbrown Guest

    Dear Simon,

    Subject: Refractive behavior of the natural primate eye.

    (Use NEUTRAL WORDS to describe what you measure.)

    The "holy grail" of measurement is atropine -- and REFRACTIVE

    If you take a population of primtes that have
    a refractive state of -1/2 diopter (MYOPIC),
    and place a plus lens on them, then there
    refractive state will "more positive" to
    a refractive state of +1/2 diopter, and
    suddenly you have a bunch of HYPEROPIC

    But just say refractive state is either
    positive or negative -- and do not
    bother with biased words based
    on a fractured theory of practice.


    otisbrown, Mar 17, 2006
    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.