Could someone with free access to JAMA get me these two articles? x

Discussion in 'Optometry Archives' started by Shinigami Eyes, Aug 7, 2010.

  1. Shinigami Eyes

    Otis Guest

    Dear Mike Tyner,

    Subject: Don't question MS's background or intelligence.

    Dr. Bates had the courage to ATTEMPT a preventive program
    (Bates-1913). That took personal effort. There was indeed some
    "success" to that effort. But it was "shut-down" because the
    "majority-opinion" did not "like" the concept of threshold-prevention.

    That is NOT SCIENCE, that is intense "office bias" at work.

    The issue of a person understanding "Null Hypothesis" testing of the
    NATURAL EYE, must be a SCIENTIFIC ISSUE, not a "medical issue".

    But then, encourage Engineer/Scientists (like Colgate) to fully
    apprciate the POSSIBLITY of threshold-prevention.

    MS, whether "right" or "wrong" (or Bates for tha matter, or Colgate,
    or Francis Young, or Dr. Kaisu, or a host of others who judge the
    "need for change") still deserve or respect -- even if you, in your
    majority-opinion don't agree with the concept of prevention.

    Science and second-opinion (prevention) best,
    Otis, Aug 16, 2010
    1. Advertisements

  2. Shinigami Eyes

    Neil Brooks Guest

    There's no question.

    He/She/It is exhibiting no signs of either.

    And idiot ... like you.

    But you're also a pathological liar.
    Neil Brooks, Aug 16, 2010
    1. Advertisements

  3. Shinigami Eyes

    MS Guest

    Mr. Brooks why did you evade my question? What did these people tell
    you to do? Can't you remember?
    MS, Aug 16, 2010
  4. Shinigami Eyes

    Neil Brooks Guest

    I didn't evade your question.

    I'll answer it again.

    It was YEARS ago.

    If YOU want to find out who they are, and what their protocol was, YOU
    may attempt to find the Bates practitioners, located on 5th or 6th
    ave, in San Diego
    Neil Brooks, Aug 16, 2010
  5. Shinigami Eyes

    MS Guest

    Remember: You're the one who cited your "no improvement" having been
    treated by a random bunch of people who call themselves Bates method
    teachers as if that somehow negates its efficacy.
    MS, Aug 16, 2010
  6. Shinigami Eyes

    MS Guest

    So if it can't be disproven it must be true? Fallacy.
    MS, Aug 16, 2010
  7. Shinigami Eyes

    MS Guest

    "Nobody has ever cured refractive error using Bates and nobody is ever
    going to."

    So you say we should all accept that statement as true because it's a
    null hypothesis? Before we accept that statement as true shouldn't we
    properly investigate Bates' work and see whether we can test it? Or
    should we just not bother?
    MS, Aug 16, 2010
  8. Shinigami Eyes

    Otis Guest

    Dear MS,

    The Term "refractive ERROR" -- is an ASSUMPTION.

    The term "error" means any refractive STATE that is not EXACTLY ZERO.
    (That is indeed the Donders-Helmholtz concept -- that Mike Tyner was
    taught to BELIEVE).

    Thus the word "cure" has no meaing in the above context.

    But what Mike wants to say is that HE, in his office, will NEVER HELP

    This is the same un-justified "attitude" that shut-down Bates 1913
    study (partially successful).

    This is a matter of "status-quo" shutting down "future hope".

    You can't "cure" the refractive STATES of the natural eye.

    Enjoy the science of prevention,
    Otis, Aug 16, 2010
  9. Shinigami Eyes

    Otis Guest

    Dear MS and Mike Tyner,

    I got to give Bates credit for flagging an "issue".

    It would be nice if both you an Mike Tyner would review this study.

    So far, NEITHER of you has done that.

    I will not say that I "agree" with Bates, but I do believe that
    PREVENTING an negative STATE of the natural eye is possible.

    Mike Tyner tells you that PREVENTING ENTRY into a negative STATE for
    the natural eye -- IS IMPOSSIBLE.

    Given the PROVEN behavior of the natural eye -- it is hard to see how
    he has proven this sweeping statement of his.

    Here is Bates study.

    A preventve study would have to involve the intellectual judgment of
    the PERSON HIMSELF -- to include the person also measuring his
    refractive STATE.

    This indeed would require that the person keep his "eyes" and his
    "mind" open to the possbility of changing his refractive STATE from
    -1/2 diopter to +1/2 diotper, and CONFIRMING that result with his own

    This could be conducted with people who SEE GREAT VALUE IN CHANGING

    I have done it myself -- from +1/2 to +1.0 diopter -- using basic
    measurement equipment (Trial-lens kit).

    Indeed, one professional optometrist changed her refractive STATE from
    a negative value to normal -- but it took strong personal resolve to
    do it.

    That truly is the second opinion.

    Enjoy the science and motivation of prevention,
    Otis, Aug 16, 2010
  10. Shinigami Eyes

    Otis Guest

    Dear MS,

    Mike Tyner stated that is it IMPOSSIBLE to change the refractive STATE
    of the natural eye from a negative value (he calls it an "error"). He
    is talking though his hat. But let us just call that his OPINION, and
    not science.

    In fact other optometrists have changed their refractive STATE from a
    negative value towards a postive value -- exactly the opposite of what
    Mike said.

    Here is the statement for your examination and review.

    No this is not "Bates" or "exactly Bates" but no FUTURE study ever
    will be like Bates.

    But is does show that preventing ENTRY has some hope.

    But never with Tyner involved. NEVER.


    Dr. Orfield’s Success
    Subject: Even ODs are successful with systematic prevention.

    There is a tendency to insist that even prevention is impossible. It
    is necessary to listen to ODs who, with dedication and effort, have
    managed to get their refractive STATE to change from a negative value
    of -3 diotpers (about 20/200) to normal under THEIR dedicated
    control. A refractive STATE of zero is essentially 20/20.

    Here are some comments by Dr. Orfield on the subject:

    By Dr. Orfield
    Note: The author underwent myopia reduction from a spectacle
    prescription of -3.87 DS and -3.37 DS to -.50 DS and -.25 DS
    over a period of seven years.
    Whenever I am considering a minus lens increase for a progressing
    myope I
    think of Ray Bradbury’s story, “The Man in the Rorschach Shirt,” about
    psychologist who got new glasses and suddenly saw only “pores.” Losing
    his more
    holistic insights, he said: “Have you ever thought, did you know, that
    are for the most part pores..Pores. A million, ten billion .. pores.
    and everyone. People crowding buses, theaters, telephone booths, all
    pore and
    little substance. Small pores on tiny women. Big pores on monster
    men ..”31

    The experience of giving up myopia has made me very conservative
    in lens
    prescribing, especially in new myopes. I see that our instruments and
    rooms and the myope’s tendency to accommodative spasm lead us to
    over-dosing with minus. This then unfortunately determines forever
    after that
    person’s brain program for seeing space.

    Arnold Sherman describes myopic progression as the process of the
    visual system transforming itself so that it is suited fornear, if
    is not possible. Then:

    When an adaptation is decompensated (by stronger minus lenses), a
    readaptation will occur in order to achieve steady state performance
    at near
    tasks, resulting in a further increase of myopia.32

    He calls the continual prescribing of more minus without any
    the “iatrogenic” cause of myopia.
    Otis, Aug 16, 2010
  11. Shinigami Eyes

    Dan Abel Guest

    But wouldn't it be nice if we could take everything in the universe and
    put it in two buckets, one marked "true' and one marked "false"? And
    they never moved?
    But I don't think you understand what that means. MS means to find
    testing methods that prove that Bates had it right. Anything that
    doesn't show that gets tossed out the window, because, obviously, it's
    wrong. And then you just keep testing until you "prove" it true.
    Dan Abel, Aug 16, 2010
  12. Shinigami Eyes

    MS Guest

    Is that a null hypothesis or do you state that as fact? Make it clear.
    MS, Aug 16, 2010
  13. Shinigami Eyes

    Otis Guest

    Dear Mike Tyner,

    Subject: What "I" measure as my refractive STATE.

    What I expect an ENGINEER on the threshold to measure (who has a
    chance to clear his Snellen -- and change his refractive STATE under
    HIS -- not your) control.

    As some people have pointed out, these were "kids" who could not
    measure their refractive STATE.

    This is why I suggest that, the person (Engieer/Pilot) go through and
    "educational" phase where he is taught (or teaches himself) how ot
    measure his refractive STATE.

    Then, it would be HIS measurement (as a collective "group") that would
    establish the results of the study -- NEVER YOU.

    That is one of the issues of the 1913 study -- the child could not be
    part of the study.

    But where a person is OLD ENOUGH, and RESPONSIBLE ENOUGH (say 18 years
    old) as a freshman in an ENGINEERING COLLEGE, and has the internal
    "insight" to be A leader OF THIS TYPE OF STUDY, THEN I THINK HE WOULD

    But each man should read Dr. Colgate's experience -- to start

    No PREVENTIVE study (where the educated and MOTIVATED person is

    This truly is an "open" scientific question.

    Enjoy analytic science and prevetion.
    Otis, Aug 17, 2010
  14. Shinigami Eyes

    Otis Guest

    "Nobody has ever cured refractive error using Bates and nobody is
    going to."

    Would Mike Tyner clarify that statement?

    Otis, Aug 17, 2010
  15. Shinigami Eyes

    Otis Guest

    Dear MS,

    As always, Mike Tyner "invents" things -- for his "majority-opinion"
    to be "perfect".

    It is rather clear from the statements made by Dr. Bates, that these

    I have my own Snellen, and check my visual acuity on a monthly basis.

    Even so, I have no memorized it.

    But to make this situation VERY CLEAR -- there is a "randomized'
    Snellen that could be used IN THE FUTURE so the ENGINEER could verify
    his Visual Acuity, and that issue WOULD BE RESOLVED.

    Here is the "Electronic Snellen" -- for scientfic work:

    Click on "Display" and read at 20 feet -- adjusting the "scale" of the
    chart as described.

    I doubt that anyone would want to "cheat" himself on this personal
    verification work.

    Each Engineer could cross check by use of this Snellen.

    MS -- would you agree with this test?

    Science and verification best,
    Otis, Aug 17, 2010
  16. Shinigami Eyes

    Otis Guest

    Dear Mike,

    Subject: It matters, not what you meaure, but what a highly qualified
    expert measures (to include Engineer/Scientists - who CARE.

    Yes, any report of ANY AND ALL SUCCESS -- will be ignored by you, and
    your belief that ALL REFRACTIVE STATES ARE "RANDOM".

    Thus you can "explain away anything and everything".

    You have a right to "think" that way, but SCIENCE IS NOT LIKE THAT.

    But let us just call your "vision" of a "random universe" -- the

    Orderly Science best,
    Otis, Aug 17, 2010
  17. Shinigami Eyes

    Neil Brooks Guest

    You're an idiot, Otis.

    A liar and an idiot.
    Neil Brooks, Aug 17, 2010
  18. Shinigami Eyes

    Neil Brooks Guest

    WHERE did you go, and WHY did you come back, Otis ... you pathological
    liar ... and ... idiot ?
    Neil Brooks, Aug 17, 2010
  19. Shinigami Eyes

    Otis Guest

    Dear MS,

    While Mike Tyner believes that PREVENTION IS IMOSSIBLE, and you can
    NEVER clear your Snellen under YOUR CONTROL, other ODs believe just
    the opposite.

    Here is one of them. Orfield.pdf

    Why "bother" arguing with Mike Tyner?

    Please explain.

    Science (and exclusively prevention) best,
    Otis, Aug 17, 2010
  20. Shinigami Eyes

    Neil Brooks Guest


    Absolute idiot and PATHOLOGICAL liar.

    How can you live with yourself ?
    Neil Brooks, Aug 17, 2010
    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.