Ortho-K, anyone here have experience or knowlege?

Discussion in 'Optometry Archives' started by acemanvx, Dec 18, 2005.

  1. acemanvx

    CatmanX Guest

    You don't know that, he had probably stopped already. What evidence do
    you have for this? A series of eye tests, reduction in esophoria,
    increase in accommodative skills? Why should we believe one word you
    say when everything else you say is a lie?

    Thanks for what, a few months? Doesn't prove anything. You actually
    need to get a proper eye test and get a baseline to compare against.
    Oh, that's right, daddy won't let you get an eye test.




    Basically lasik, prk is a surgury that
    97% are spectacle free. That's pretty good odds. Get your numbers
    right. Most RS patients I speak to (and I actually speak to a lot,
    unlike you) rave about how great their vision is, even with reduced CS,
    worse acuity and limitation in night vision. They would nearly all do
    it again.



    You really are full of shit " I checked them at home for myself"



    Topography does not assess aberrations you fool. You have not been
    assessed, yet you continue to ramble about crap you know nothing about.
    Oh, just so you know, glasses and CL's also induce aberrations. Should
    we ban these also? Should we stop wearing them because they will make
    our eyes see worse?



    Once again you show your total stupidity. Forme fruste KC can get 6/6
    with or even without glasses. It is sub-clinical KC that will often be
    overlooked by many optometrists and ophthalmologists. It can lead to
    6/9 or 6/12 acuity and poor quality of vision, yet not bad enough to
    warrant investigation by many OD's and MD's.

    Stop talking about crap you know nothing about, stop posting other
    people's opinions that are not valid, stop giving advice for what you
    are not qualified to assess.

    In short, stop being so stupid.

    dr grant
     
    CatmanX, Dec 27, 2005
    #61
    1. Advertisements

  2. acemanvx

    acemanvx Guest

    "Yeah, it's a conspiracy. Those MD ophthalmologists and PhD vision
    scientists
    are in on it too."


    Well have you seen anyone improve his vision? Theres anticedotal
    reports on that all over the internet. One guy claimed he went from -7
    something down to -3, another guy from 20/400 to 20/60! I have books on
    vision improvement and the testimonals show people improving 2 to 3
    diopters of myopia, some improving enough not to need glasses anymore!
    Even if you dont believe in it, its worth a try for people to experment
    on before they pluck down $5000 for lasik and potentionally ruining
    their eyes. I experienced a small improvement so far and will keep
    exercising and relaxing my eyes. Many people who get lasik end up
    hyperopic as they get older for various reasons. Dr. G can attest to
    this, he was -4.5 and is now -3. Had he gotten lasik, he would have
    been like a +1.5

    Of course people will just say they will get enhanced whenever.
    Multiple surguries is something you want to avoid. Your eyes arent
    something to play around with surgury after surgury, something is bound
    to go wrong for many people. Natural vision improvement on the other
    hand is harmless. If it doesnt work, you have lost NOTHING but a few
    dollars for the book and a little bit of your time. If it works at ALL
    and ANY improvement is realized, its a success! Me and my brother can
    attest to this. I am far from done improving.


    "You missed the study quoted recently here. A bunch of ophthalmologists
    went
    to mexico and found 44% of urban Mexican children were nearsighted. 80%
    of
    them never had glasses. How did their eyes get worse without glasses?"

    Lots of close work, holding material too close to your eyes so you
    accomodate strongly and put great stress on the eyes so they enlongate
    as a mechenism to facalite near work. Minus lenses excerbate myopia.

    "And I still don't have any elephants in my front yard. Clearly it's
    the
    repellent spray I bought."


    I bet you have some myopia repellent spray too <G> ;)

    "> I have gotten a topography. All laser surgury induces more
    aberrations


    False."

    While theres a few exceptions, its generally the rule. I did not
    believe this either but they have shown me proof. Its hard to believe
    and shocking too but sadly, its true. Wavefront laser surgury is more
    forgiving but your best quality(and in many cases accuracy) of vision
    is your virgin eyes with corrective lenses, *especially* RGP contacts.

    http://www.escrs.org/eurotimes/May2003/wavefront.asp


    "KC doesn't happen suddenly. Many people go for years with "adequate"
    vision
    despite having early cones."


    I was never corrected to 20/20 as far as I can remember. Ive been told
    I have inferior steepening in my left eye. As long as my BCVA remains
    good, I am not going to worry myself. 20/30 is decent despite what some
    say. If I get to the point I cant be corrected to 20/40 then its RGP
    contacts for me, if I cant tolerate those then its intacs. Many people
    can have some irregularity in their corneas without it being KC
     
    acemanvx, Dec 27, 2005
    #62
    1. Advertisements

  3. acemanvx

    CatmanX Guest

    You are still really stupid Ace.

    You spout anecdotal crap all the time, yet it does not make it true.

    For instance, I could say, "Ace is very clever", yet it would still be
    a lie as you are astoundinly stupid.

    People can say what they like on the net, it doesn't make it true and
    only fools like you believe it.

    Show us some science! Give us evidence.\

    dr grant
     
    CatmanX, Dec 27, 2005
    #63
  4. acemanvx

    otisbrown Guest

    Dear Catman Grant,

    Subject: The second-opinion doctor states
    that a negative refrfractive state is at least
    PREVENTABLE.


    http://www.optometrists.org/Boston/articles.html

    I am certain you BELIEVE in your majority-opinion
    bull s___. But why take out your intellecutal
    blindnerss on ace-man -- when BOTH of us
    know that doctors perhaps more qualified than
    yuu are successful at true-prevention.

    You don't like the idea? Fine. But you are
    not a "God" and you should not bad-mouth
    Ace the way that you have been doing it.

    It is true that Ace needs to learn more about
    the true "preventive" second opinion -- and I think
    he will.

    Perhaps Aceman will read Dr. Orfield's statement
    about her successful result and provide his
    commentary.

    Best,

    Otis
     
    otisbrown, Dec 27, 2005
    #64
  5. acemanvx

    CatmanX Guest

    Excellent point Mike. What Antonia has done is to give a case study. It
    is not verifiable and not scientific.

    Her technique is not able to be reproduced from her report, so there is
    not validity able to be applied to it whatsoever.

    For what it is worth, Otis, I have FCOVD certification as well, and
    know exactly what was done and how. In this case it is clear she is a
    pseudomyope, not a myope. There is a big difference.

    p.s. why would you want space ace's commentary? It has already been
    established he is a total dipshit with no credibility, no knowledge and
    no understanding of the process.

    Try another anecdotal cure Otis, this one didn't worl.

    dr grant
     
    CatmanX, Dec 27, 2005
    #65
  6. acemanvx

    CatmanX Guest

    Sorry but no can do.

    This guy is an imbecile trying to pass off some half-assed irrelevance
    that does not hold up to scrutiny. First he passes his crap off about
    Lasik as alt.lasik.eyes about how Lasik should be done with 5 sessions
    of laser, then he becomes an overnight expert on myopia and then
    proceeds to post garbage from other sites that is almost unrecognizable
    within his own posts.

    I can't let this rubbish go uncorrected.

    For what it is worth, I work every day to reduce/eliminate/prevent
    myopia but I won't allow the process to be reduced to stupid assertions
    that wearing plus lenses are going to cure the problem. It is much
    harder than that and significantly more complex.

    Cheers,

    grant
     
    CatmanX, Dec 27, 2005
    #66
  7. Agreed.

    First he passes his crap off about
    No argument there.
    Actually, it is possible to let it go. Sometimes ignoring the ignorant
    is a pretty effective tool. Fortunately, very few uninformed people are
    going to read, let alone follow, his advice. Those that do probably
    deserve it.
    We agree there too. Keep up the good fight and let the charlatans drive
    each other crazy. Ok, well maybe that should be "crazier".

    w.stacy, o.d.
     
    William Stacy, Dec 27, 2005
    #67
  8. acemanvx

    CatmanX Guest

    You are right there, I should have stated my ego won't let it go.

    Cheers,

    grant
     
    CatmanX, Dec 27, 2005
    #68
  9. acemanvx

    Neil Brooks Guest

    Further, I stand as a documented case study of a person whose
    accommodative spasm was so deeply 'embedded' as to need six months of
    nightly tropicamide, followed by four days of atropine, to elicit my
    true Rx (>2.5d more plus than had ever been elicited via any previous
    cycloplegic refraction).
     
    Neil Brooks, Dec 27, 2005
    #69
  10. acemanvx

    Dan Abel Guest

    [/QUOTE]
    You need to learn how to read, and about satire.

    As in "ignorant", "gullible", "wrong" and "misdirected". Not exactly a
    glowing recommendation.
     
    Dan Abel, Dec 27, 2005
    #70
  11. acemanvx

    Dan Abel Guest


    It is of course treatable. That's a lot of what ODs do. I used to have
    severe myopia. I wore glasses for decades. I could see really well.
    It was treated. I switched to contacts. They worked better. I got
    surgery. Now I don't have myopia. That's three treatments right
    there. I understand that there are other treatments. I have no
    personal experience with them.



    Are you saying that you gave yourself your eye tests? Not a good plan.



    Why should he get an eye test? He has ignored every piece of advice
    given to him on this group, some from professionals. Why do you think
    he would pay any attention to the results of an eye test, or what his
    doctor advises him?


    :-(
     
    Dan Abel, Dec 27, 2005
    #71
  12. acemanvx

    CatmanX Guest



    LSHINS (laughed so hard I nearly shat)

    He would not only not listen to the results, but then turn around and
    tell the OD how he should be fixed, in direct contradiction to what the
    OD saiad.

    dr grant
     
    CatmanX, Dec 28, 2005
    #72
  13. acemanvx

    acemanvx Guest

    I am nagging my dad to take me for an orthoK evaluation. Hopefully soon
    he will then the optometrist who specalizes in orthoK can answer all my
    questions, the list of them will be quite long too! I will put the list
    here when im done making the list!
     
    acemanvx, Jan 12, 2006
    #73
  14. acemanvx

    RT Guest

    Ace. Just for honesty and disclosure's sake, so when you do prescribe
    over the internet and give people directives and advice people can make
    an informed decision about whether or not to listen to you, could you
    please update us on your actual age? If you are truly 23, then daddy
    nagging days should be over. You'd be out of the house, living on your
    own, working or going to school, and making your own appointments. My
    guess is 14. Am I close?
     
    RT, Jan 12, 2006
    #74
  15. acemanvx

    CatmanX Guest

    If you walked into my practice with a long list of questions, I would
    tell you to get out. All it does is show how poor a candidate you are.

    dr grant
     
    CatmanX, Jan 12, 2006
    #75
  16. acemanvx

    acemanvx Guest

    No, it shows im an informative candidate who wants to know whats going
    on and not be left in the dark. Ok below is the list of questions I
    will ask my orthoK optometrist. If any of you think any questions
    should be reworded, let me know.



    I have some questions reguarding orthoK among other things.
    Here is the list of what I have so far.

    1. What is the difference between presbyopia and accomodative
    dysfunction? I tested myself at +2.5 diopters accomodative amplitude

    2. Is a cycloplegic refraction needed prior to orthoK?
    I have gotten Cyclogyl, also known as Cyclopentolate which
    didnt seem to do much except dilate my pupils for many hours.
    I still had +1.25 diopters accomodative amplitude. I may have -1
    to -1.5 diopters pseudomyopia if I get a complete cyclopegia.

    3. I wont mind and even want to be slightly undercorrected
    with orthoK to retain some of my ability to see from near
    without reading glasses. My distance vision will barely
    be affected with a -1 to -1.5 diopter undercorrection and
    its preferable to occasionally use distance glasses to using
    reading glasses everytime I read or use the computer which
    happens to be alot! Also orthoK may in fact not fully correct me
    anyway plus its easier to correct smaller amounts of myopia
    anyway and the results stick for longer too.

    4. What kinds of testing will I be getting to determine if
    im a candidate for orthoK?

    5. What other testing can I get to address any other concerns
    about my eyes and vision?

    6. How many "tries" do I get with orthoK? Its possible the lenses
    may not come out right the first few times and result in several
    issues such as induced astigmastim, decenteration, discomfort, way
    too much undercorrection, etc.

    7. From my reading, most people start with a series of lenses
    then at the end use a retainer lens. In what dioptric increments
    do they go? What diopter lenses do you start with? What if im happier
    with the previous lens thats a lower dioptric power, can I go
    back to that then get a retainer lens based on the weaker lens?

    8. How often will I need to sleep in those overnight orthoK
    lenses to maintain my desired refraction? I read around some people
    can do it as little as once a week!

    9. Do you have a pupilometer to measure my huge pupils? What
    effects can I experience in low light due to huge pupils
    after getting orthoK? How successful were your huge pupil
    patients with orthoK?

    10. My eyes sometimes get a little dry. I could use eyedrops before
    sleeping with those orthoK lenses, eyedrops if I wake up at night for
    any reason and eyedrops when I wake in the morning to moisen my eyes
    prior to removing the orthoK lenses.

    11. Some people have expressed concern why I am not correctable
    to 20/20. I have been tested for this and have no occular pathalogies
    and those who have seen my topography say my corneas are responsable
    for this. Glasses minification is to blame in part. I would have to
    be better than 20/20 in order to see 20/20 with minus glasses.
    My left eye gets around half of the 20/25 line and occasionally all
    of it. My right eye was tested at 20/30 and its the eye with
    some irregular astigmastim.

    12. This brings me to the next question. Theres adaptive optics
    and other methods to bypass the cornea and its aberrations and
    directly test the retinas capabilities. I read that some 98% of
    healthy, normal retinas are capable of 20/10!


    I will think of more questions.
     
    acemanvx, Jan 12, 2006
    #76
  17. I wish I had more time to help add to this list; perhaps others will
    add. But I will add one

    13. How much time do we have to chat today, doctor?

    (actually, you might want to renumber this one to 0.1, because his/her
    answer might affect how many of the other questions you ask and/or in
    what priority)
     
    William Stacy, Jan 12, 2006
    #77
  18. acemanvx

    RT Guest

    I suggest you throw all the questions away and ask these two.

    1. Hello, how are you today?

    2. I am interested in being fitted for ortho-k. How can I best assist in
    this process?

    Normally, I would suggest others pertaining to the doc's qualifications,
    experience, success rate, guarantees etc., but since you say all they
    are all the same and you are simply looking for the lowest price,
    there's no need to ask anything beyond these two questions above.
     
    RT, Jan 12, 2006
    #78
  19. acemanvx

    Quick Guest

    You know, a lot of docs these days are online in some way.
    Many around here use an umbrella service that provides
    web hosting along with form webpages that can be customized.
    Doc or shop fills in the sections (or not) with the particulars
    of their practice, adds additional sections, pics, etc. Most have
    contact information including email address they will respond
    to.

    -Quick
     
    Quick, Jan 12, 2006
    #79
  20. acemanvx

    acemanvx Guest

    Excellent idea, I will move this one to number 1 and depending how much
    time he has, he can answer the most important, revelent questions.

    I have been reading on corneaplasty where they use enzymes to soften
    your cornea to make the orthoK effects faster and last longer. Imagine
    only needing to do this once a month!
    My dad says wait till orthoK technology gets to that point so I dont
    have to deal with uncomfortable orthoK lenses everynight and instead,
    only once a month! I said I need to try regular orthoK first to make
    sure I like the vision I get with it, if not ill go back to glasses and
    if I do, ill use regular orthoK till the corneaplasty technology is
    ready for prime time. Ive read that this could kill off the lasik
    industry!


    A method and apparatus for correcting refractive errors of the eye are
    disclosed. Accelerated reshaping of the corneal tissue is accomplished
    by administering one or more enzymes and/or other agents to the eye
    which temporarily soften the cornea. The cornea is thereafter fitted
    with a rigid contact lens or a series of lenses which have a concave
    curvature that will correct a refractive error. The softened cornea
    then rapidly reshapes its convex curvature to the concave curvature of
    the contact lens or series of lenses, thereby rendering the eye
    emmetropic. The enzymes and/or other agents then dissipate from the
    cornea, and the cornea "hardens" to retain the new emmetropic shape.
    After "hardening" has occurred, the lens rendering the eye emmetropic
    is removed.
     
    acemanvx, Jan 12, 2006
    #80
    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.