SCIENCE: The proven effect of environment-change on the eye's refractive STATE

Discussion in 'Eye-Care' started by otisbrown, Oct 16, 2006.

  1. otisbrown

    otisbrown Guest

    Subject: Change of refractive STATE -- wild monkeys
    compared with laboratory monkeys.

    Data collected and published by Dr. Francis Young.

    All measurements were OBJECTIVE -- using a retinoscope.

    1. Wild Monkeys (The control group)

    N = 598 eyes (of wild monkeys) had their refractive state
    measured. The refractive state (average) was +0.63. The standard
    deviation was 0.72

    2. Laboratory Monkeys (The test group)

    N = 646 eyes (of inside) monkeys had their refractive state
    measured. The refractive state (average) was -0.09. The Standard
    deviation was 1.32

    In statistical testing you look for confidence levels (that
    the natural eye is dynamic.

    Levels greater-than 3.9 spell virtual certainty -- that the
    fundamental eye is dynamic with respect to a change in its average
    visual environment.

    Here are the calculations.

    The large-scale statistics are:


    z = [ Xc - Xt ] / Sqrt [ Sigma(c) ^2 / Nc + Sigma(t) ^2 / Nt ]

    z = [0.63 - ( 0.09)] / Sqrt [ (0.72 ^2 / 598) + (1.32 ^2 / 646)]

    z = 9.05


    The one-tailed "Z" value for 99.8 percent confidence
    is 2.88.

    This calculated value profoundly exceeds this level of confidence.
    Anything above 3.9 is considered a virtual certainty that the
    refractive STATE changes as a dynamic and natural process.

    Enjoy,


    Otis
     
    otisbrown, Oct 16, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. otisbrown

    A Lieberma Guest

    Gee....

    Maybe alt.animals.kooks may get some use out of this dribble?

    I live in a human world *smile*

    Allen
     
    A Lieberma, Oct 17, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. otisbrown

    LarryDoc Guest

    Clearly, the domestic monkeys watch way too much TV and hold their
    reading material too close, compared to the wild monkeys.

    Gee.....how about one, just one HUMAN study that validates one, just ONE
    of your ridiculous beliefs. Nope, can't do that because it doesn't
    exist.

    LB
     
    LarryDoc, Oct 17, 2006
    #3
  4. otisbrown

    Scott Guest

    I think you meant to post this in the sci.med.vision.monkey newsgroup.
     
    Scott, Oct 18, 2006
    #4
  5. otisbrown

    p.clarkii Guest

    I wonder what the statistics show for a third group, i.e. monkeys who
    have their visual space restricted SOMETIMES but then spend a portion
    of their day in the wild? you know, kind of like PEOPLE who are
    sometimes inside but sometimes outside. I wonder what kind of
    "profound" and "virtually certain" changes in their refractive state
    would occur?

    anyway, given the below data, what did axial length measurements on
    these two groups of monkeys show?

    did the laboratory monkeys have a night-light in the lab when they
    slept? ;)

    ==========================
     
    p.clarkii, Oct 18, 2006
    #5
  6. otisbrown

    BD Guest

    All measurements were OBJECTIVE -- using a retinoscope.
    All you can do at this point is chuckle.
     
    BD, Oct 19, 2006
    #6
  7. otisbrown

    Dr. Leukoma Guest


    Runnin' to and fro, hard
    Workin at the mill
    Never fail, get the mail
    He comes a rotton bill

    Too much monkey business
    Too much monkey business
    Too much monkey business for me to be involved in

    Say me
    Talkin to me
    Tryin' to run me up a creek
    Say you can buy ????
    You can pay me next week

    Too much monkey business
    Too much monkey business
    Too much monkey business for me to be involved in

    Long-haried, good lookin'
    Tryin' to get me hooked
    Want me to marry, buy a home
    Settle down, write a book

    Too much monkey business
    Too much monkey business
    Too much monkey business for me to be involved in

    Same thing every day
    Gettin' up, going to school
    No need to be complainin'
    My objection's overruled

    Too much monkey business
    Too much monkey business
    Too much monkey business for me to be involved in
     
    Dr. Leukoma, Oct 22, 2006
    #7
  8. otisbrown

    otisbrown Guest

    Title: "Visual Acuity and Refractive Errors in Primates"

    Francis Young, Primate Research Center, Washington State
    University, Pullman, Washington

    Reprinted from the Proceedings, 77th Annual Convention, APA
    1969

    Extracts:

    %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

    Subject: Visual Acuity and measured Refractive STATES.

    It is possible to have 20/20 and a refractive STATE of -1/2
    diopters -- as per this discussion.

    (Refractive STATE measured with a retinoscope and supporting
    technique.)


    "... Animals less than 12 of age with refractive errors*
    between 2.00 and -0.5 diopters, normal retina and no obvious
    visual difficulties are likely to have 20/20 acuity at near and
    far at better than the 5% level of confidence.

    Of some 26 rhesus monkeys within this range of refractive
    errors* all had 20/15 or 20/20 visual acuity.

    Animals with refractive errors* greater than 2.00 diopters
    may have 20/20 acuity at far but not at near.

    Animals with refractive errors* which are more minus than
    -0.5 diopters will not have 20/20 acuity at far but may have it at
    near."


    %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%


    * Errors

    The term "error" comes from traditional practice, where all
    refractive STATES that were not exactly zero -- were called
    "errors".

    This implies something about these monkeys that is simply not
    true.

    That their eyes were "defective" in some manner. In fact,
    Dr. Young states that (with good retinas and no medical problems)
    eyes with refractive STATES in the range of -1/2 diopter to +2
    diopters have excellent vision.

    The term "error", while traditional, leads to false ideas
    about the visual acuity of primates in the wild.

    In fact the distribution of refractive STATES of wild monkeys
    have an average of about 0.7 diopters, with a standard deviation of
    +0.7 diopters.

    With the knowledge that you can have 20/20 and a refractive
    STATE of -1/2 diopters, and further 20/20 with a refractive STATE
    of +2.5 diopters, it means that, in the wild, about 98 percent of
    the primates had excellent vision.

    This is also true of the Eskimos -- who could not read, and
    had no written language.

    Best,


    Otis

    ++++++++++++++

     
    otisbrown, Oct 22, 2006
    #8
  9. otisbrown

    BD Guest

    Put your therapist on danger pay.
     
    BD, Oct 22, 2006
    #9
  10. otisbrown

    CatmanX Guest

    Funny, when I ask Cletis to provide documentation from someone other
    than Young, we get more Young thrown at us.

    Cletis is one smart guy.

    dr grant
     
    CatmanX, Oct 22, 2006
    #10
  11. otisbrown

    BD Guest

    That's because he's Special. As in "Special Needs" special.

    Only explanation at this point.
     
    BD, Oct 23, 2006
    #11
    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.