Mike T. -- you were right about the 99 percent

Discussion in 'Optometry Archives' started by otisbrown, Jan 13, 2005.

  1. otisbrown

    otisbrown Guest

    Dear MikeT,

    Subject: 99 percent nearsight go further "down" at West Point.

    MikeT> If you believe one percent survives four years without
    negative refractive change, then you believe 99% DID
    experience negative refractive change.

    Otis> Actually, among those wearing a minus lens it was 100%.
    Sorry for the error.

    MikeT> Is that how you arrived at 99%?

    Otis> By reading the scientific report.

    Otis> Mike -- Actually 100 percent nearsighed got worse. Thus
    your 99 percent was not accurate -- it was 100 percent. No
    one "imporoved" to 20/20.

    Otis> Here are the figures for those cadets who get worse
    at West Point -- who were nearsighed on entry
    and wore the minus lens all the time -- as recommended.


    __________________________________________________

    Gmelin: Myopia at West Point: Past and Present Military
    Medicine, 141 (8) 542 - 3 Aug 76

    2. The average increase in myopia was -1.37 diopters (the range
    being -1.12 diopters through -1.62 diopters (over four
    years).

    Otis> Always glad to "correct" your 99 percent got worse to 100
    percent at West Point.

    Best,

    Otis

    _______________________


    Otis> Are you just playing dumb? I stated that the POPULATION
    AVERAGE moves "down" at a rate of -1/3 diopter per year.

    MikeT> Yes, but you also "stated":
    at 20/25) that he will be the one-percent who survives four
    years with NO NEGATIVE REFRACTIVE CHANGE.

    [I was wrong! No one survives! Sorry! OSB]

    MikeT> If you believe one percent survives four years without
    negative refractive change, then you believe 99% DID
    experience negative refractive change.

    MikeT> Since it doesn't happen, we must assume you simply spout
    figures without understanding them.

    [I don't "spout figures". Here are the publishe values
    for those who "cleared" their vison from nearsighedness
    at West Point. OSB]

    Otis> Hell, even high school students can figure out the
    implications of that statement.

    MikeT> Is that how you arrived at 99%?

    Otis> Actually this Weat Point study is how I arrived at the
    percentage of myopis who went "down" at the college.
    How did YOU calculuate the percentage?


    Best,

    Otis Engineer


    ___________________________________


    Gmelin> The subject of progressive myopia among the cadets remaind
    dorment at the USMA for ten year. Renewed interest in among
    the cadets remained dorment and not further invdstigations
    were made the subject of myopia was generated by the study
    of MAJ McKinney mC, on the Cadet Class of 1956. In his
    unpublished report, "A Study of Refractive Trends at West
    Point", MAJ McKinney concluded:

    1. Pseudo-myopia during periods of stress associated with
    studying may result in blurred vision in cadets with little
    "hyperopic reserve".

    2. The average increase in myopia was -1.37 diopters (the range
    being -1.12 diopters through -1.62 diopters (over four
    years).

    3. 39 percent of the graduationg caets of the 1956 had less
    than 20/20 vision at graduation; and

    4. Recommendation that the visoin standards rmain unchanged --
    that hyeropia over +2 diopters and that myopia over -1.5
    diopters be cause for entrance disqualification.


    Best,

    Otis
     
    otisbrown, Jan 13, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. otisbrown

    g.gatti Guest

    Come on, you know that this is not true, and that people who wears
    seldom eyeglasses are less tense and more accustomed to theyr
    environments.

    Come on, don't teel lies so much!
     
    g.gatti, Jan 13, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. otisbrown

    RM Guest

    These are the accommodative myopes that your plus lens therapy has the
    possibility to help. It offers no help for all other myopes.
     
    RM, Jan 13, 2005
    #3
  4. otisbrown

    otisbrown Guest

    Dar Rishi,

    Mike is attempting to avold telling a pilot entering a
    four year college -- that his vision will go
    DOWN by about -1.3 diopters in for years.

    Why? Because telling the truth about this
    behavior of the natural eye would transfer
    "control" to the pilot -- in a manner that
    might enable that person to use the
    plus "correctly" and therefore successfully.

    I think that Mike OWES a person on the
    threshold that kind of DISCUSSION.
    He judges that he does not owe
    a person that kind of choice.

    This is EXACTLY the same kind of
    problem Dr. Bates had 80 years ago.

    Clearly, a person should be informed
    when true-prevention is possible.

    Clearly, these ODs insist that the
    concept of "prevention" must be
    destroyed.

    There is a true problem of "trust"
    in these discussions.

    Best,

    Otis
    Engineer
     
    otisbrown, Jan 13, 2005
    #4
  5. otisbrown

    otisbrown Guest

    Dear Mike,

    Please acknowledge that the NATURAL eye is dynamic.

    That when you place a minus lens on NATURAL eyes
    the refractive status changes in the direction of the
    applied minus lens.

    State that concepts in "medicine" change, and that
    (before you apply that minus lens) they should
    review information that suggets that true-prvention
    is a reasonable possiblity.

    Explain that it is an either-or choice, and they will
    have to review the issues -- under their own control
    and by their own wisdom.

    Send them to sites maintained by Doctors of Optometry
    who support prevention, i.e.,

    www.chinamyopia.com

    Give them time to "think it over". Now one at 20/40 should
    be in a "panic" to start wearing a minus lens all the time.

    And yes, explain the difficulties -- which we all acknowledge.

    Also send them to my site:

    www.myopiafree.com

    For more FREE information on prevention.

    And yes, state that many ODs are profoundly HOSTIL
    to this concept of prevention. (i.e., "the concept of
    prevention with the plus ... must be destroyed. JAN-OD)

    Help us institute (on an engineering-scientific -- not medical)
    a preventive effort at a four year aeronautical college where
    the pilots will be given full MEASUREMENT control of
    their own study.

    But I think Jan's statement will "rule" and control
    this situation.

    Best,

    Otis
    Engineer
     
    otisbrown, Jan 13, 2005
    #5
    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.