The Second Opinion by Dr. C. Prentice -- FYI

Discussion in 'Optometry Archives' started by Otis Brown, Jun 2, 2004.

  1. Otis Brown

    Otis Brown Guest

    Chalm3.txt


    Dear Friends,


    This was written about 100 years ago.

    Chalmer Prentice, M.D. may have not got everything
    right (no one ever does) but he got this part right.

    The difficulty is not the statement of what is necessary. It
    is in helping the person develop the knowledge and
    force-of-character to successfully implement this advice.

    Today a great mass of explict DIRECT factual data spells out
    the true effect that both a "confined environment AMD a minus lens
    ultimately have on the refractive status of a dynamic eye."

    Please use the term "refractive status", not
    "refractive error" to describe this natural process.

    What have we learned about this in the last 100 years?

    In my opinion -- absolutly nothing.
    What do YOU think?

    Best,

    Otis


    ----------------


    The Eye in its Relation to Health

    =================================

    By Chalmer Prentice, M.D.

    Chicago, A.C. McClurg & Company, 1895

    Transcription (c) A. Wik, 2004

    Chapter IX



    ... The following are some very interesting experiments in myopia
    which can be verified by any operator, and which prove that
    refractive myopia depends on ciliary spasm, and that, even in
    axial myopia, considerable repression can sometimes be made at the
    near point. In either class of cases, repression must be made at
    the near point. In various lengths of time, we shall be able to
    reduce the myopia one or two dioptres, sometimes more. In most
    cases satisfactory results will require considerable time and
    patience; but a few experiments after the following example will
    suffice to show that in some very advanced stages of myopia, it is
    possible to suppress, or at least check, its onward course by
    repression at the near point.

    This fact renders the fitting of minus glasses to myopic eyes
    an open question.

    M. S., age thirty-five; has been wearing minus glasses since
    the age of twelve; obliged at various times to increase the power.
    When I saw the patient, she was wearing -5 D for all purposes.
    Vision with each eye, at twenty feet, was twenty-twentieths, or
    normal. The addition of half a dioptre increased the acuity of
    vision to twenty-fifteenths, or above normal.

    A reduction of the power of the -5 D glass to -4.75 reduced
    the distant vision to twenty one-hundredths. This glass was worn
    one week, and the vision, instead of having been improved, was
    reduced to twenty two-hundredths. A return to the -5 D restored
    the vision to twenty-twentieths. Vision was also normal at the
    near point.

    On removing the glasses she was able in a few minutes to read
    ordinary type at eight inches, but no farther. Repeated tests for
    half an hour resulted similarly. A +3 D was now put on the
    patient, necessitating the holding of the type somewhat nearer to
    the eyes. After twenty-five minutes, she was able to read with +3
    D at eight inches.

    After continuing them for an hour, and then removing them,
    the patient was able to read the same type at twelve inches; but
    this condition was of short duration, necessitating the gradual
    approach of the letters until, within five minutes, the type was
    again eight inches distant. Under the high fusion power of the
    near point, the ciliary spasm had become repressed or partially
    suspended while the +3 D glasses were before the eyes, and it did
    not return immediately on removal of the glasses; consequently the
    same print could be seen at twelve inches, but within five minutes
    the old innervation of the ciliary had re-restablished itself,
    necessitating the holding of the print to within eight inches
    again.

    At the far point, in this test, the fusion power was not
    sufficiently high to permit of a reduction of .25 D in the -5 D
    glasses. We see that it required fully twenty-twentieths of
    vision to bring about fusion power enough to prevent the ciliary
    spasm from increasing, for when it was reduced .25 D the myopia
    increased rapidly in one week.

    The patient was a constant reader, which it will be seen was
    a great aid to the results of my following effort.

    I prescribed a +3 D glass for all reading. This continued
    for thirty days during which time no concave glasses were worn for
    out-door or distant purposes. When I again tested the vision for
    the far point, the patient could with -4.25 D, bring out
    twenty-twentieths of vision, being a reduction of .75 D in one
    month. The same trial was continued for another month with a
    still further reduction of .25 D, making in all 1 D in two months.

    During this time, some favorable changes took place in the
    condition of the nervous system. Just how far we could have
    succeeded in time in reducing this case of myopia, we do not know.
    Impatience and the inconvenience necessary to this procedure,
    influenced the patient at this point to abandon the effort.
    Neither is it possible to state just how much of this myopia was
    axial, which amount, of course, would not have been influenced by
    the repression process.

    Age forty-three; myopia; had been wearing over the right eye
    -1.25 D, left eye -1 D, with little or no change for the space of
    two years; eyes in use more or less at the near point. I
    recommended the removal of the concave glasses for distant vision
    and prescribed +3.50 D for reading, writing and other office work.

    After reading in these glasses for several days, the patient
    was able to read print twelve inches from the eyes. This patient
    was of more than ordinary intelligence and understood the aim of
    the effort. In six months I changed the glasses for reading and
    writing to a +4 D without seeing the patient. After using the +4
    D glasses for several months he again came under my care for an
    examination, when the left eye gave twenty-twentieths of vision,
    while the right eye was very nearly the same, but the acuity was
    just perceptibly less.

    During this time the general health had improved somewhat,
    including considerable gain in the nervous condition. Similar
    results have been attained in thirty-four like cases; but the
    process is very tedious for the patients, and unless their
    understanding is clear on the subject, it is almost impossible to
    induce them to undergo the trial.

    The foregoing in connection with limited tests of more than
    two hundred similar cases suggests an answer to that most
    important question, 'What shall we do to prevent myopia in school
    children and students?'

    In a nomad, who is reared out of doors, who follows such
    pursuits that his vision is mostly used at twenty feet and greater
    distances, the nerve-impulses to the ciliary muscle become
    established so that the easiest vision is for the far point, and
    in many years of such use, these impulses become more or less
    fixed; while the child of a higher civilization spends its life
    within doors, amuses itself with toys, picture books, kindergarten
    amusements and learning to read.

    We will assume that such a child generally holds its book or
    toy ten inches from the eyes, in which case the crystalline lens
    requires a much greater convexity, or higher state of refraction
    to bring about perfect vision; and this is brought about by an
    increase in the ciliary nerve-impulse which contracts the ciliary
    muscle. Through long continued use, this excessive impulse
    becomes comparatively fixed, and in some instances refuses to
    suspend itself sufficiently to bring about distant vision again,
    and so myopia has set in.

    The regular work of the student and those other pursuits
    which require the use of the eye at the near point, tend to
    perpetuate this disease and make it progressive.

    Again, the important question, 'How are the advantages of a
    high civilization to be attained wihout the foregoing
    disadvantages?' If the eyes are to be used at a distance of ten
    inches, aid them artificially by a ten inch magnifying glass; then
    the nerve-impulses to the ciliary muscle will be no more than if
    the patient were leading an outdoor life and viewing objects at
    twenty feet or more. The nerve-centers are not called upon for so
    excessive an impulse, and they become habituated to sending the
    same amount of nerve-force as if an outdoor life were led.

    In conjunction with this artificial aid to the ciliary
    centers, it may be found advantageous to suspend, in a measure,
    the excessive nerve-impulses to the interni, by the use of prisms,
    base in. Under these artificial conditions, the eyes may be used
    in the attainment of all the advantages of the highest
    civilization while the nerve-centers are no more taxed than if out
    of door pursuits were being followed.

    If the little student at school or any other person using the
    eyes at the near point, were to be supplied with such glasses
    during the hours of study, on leaving the school room they could
    be taken off and the natural use of the eye at all other times
    would be quite sufficient to cultivate and establish the habit of
    accommodation. At least the danger of disturbing the
    accommodation would be much less than the dangers resulting to the
    eyes and nerve-centers without such aid.

    I simply suggest the above as a possible answer to one of the
    most important questions of the day.


    _______________________________


    Astigmatism, or that condition in which the refraction of the
    eye is different in various meridians.

    Illustration: In the horizontal meridian, +2 D is required
    to correct the irregularity of refraction, while in the opposite
    or vertical meridian, +4 D is needed. Astigmatism is generally
    due to an irregularity of the spherical contour of the cornea, its
    curvatures being different in vari- ous meridians, requiring a
    stronger lens to correct it in one direction than the other.

    Corneal astigmatism is almost always due to the fact that
    some of the muscles of the eye ball are exerting greater tension
    in one meridian than another. For instance: A shortness of the
    internal or external muscle, inducing considerably more stress
    laterally than the superior and inferior muscles exert in a
    vertical direction, would cause the cornea to be distorted
    horizontally, and vice versa. The many possible varying
    conditions of tension in the muscles produce corresponding
    deformities in the contour of the cornea, resulting in various
    forms of astigmatism.

    Wherever corneal astigmatism exists, it is fairly safe to
    conclude that is is due to some muscular strain. After correction
    of muscular defects, it is quite common for large amounts of
    astigmatism to disappear, and leave the eye in perfect, spherical
    shape. In the foregoing remarks, I refer to corneal astigmatism
    only.
     
    Otis Brown, Jun 2, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Otis Brown

    Jan Guest

    Otis,

    As far as I understood the word "status" it tells you something about one
    subject itself.
    As for instance the total optical power of an eye or the length of it but
    each time one subject at a time.

    An "error" however tells you more about the relationship between several
    subjects with there according own "status"
    For instance the "error" in refraction of the optical system in the eye
    tells us something about the extra needed optical power (plus or minus) to
    the "status" of the existing power related to the axial length of the
    according eye, which also is to be named a "status".

    BTW, you are using again anecdoticals instead of showing proof that your
    ideas should work on humans eyes.
    Yes, I have to admit, you are not beating the retread but instead of this
    you are walking around in circles Otis, very very boring.

    Jan (normally Dutch spoken)
     
    Jan, Jun 2, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Otis Brown

    Dr. Leukoma Guest

    Some of us have indeed learned a great deal since then. Apparently, some
    have not.

    DrG

    (Otis Brown) wrote in
     
    Dr. Leukoma, Jun 3, 2004
    #3
  4. Otis Brown

    Otis Brown Guest

    Dear Jan,

    Any act of "reconceptualization" of the "problems" takes
    work.

    The fact that the plus lens has been CONSISTENTLY advocated
    by some very sincere MEDICAL and OPTOMETRY people should
    be told to the general public.

    The fact that some parents (on this site) are
    beginning to get the common-sense and
    scientifically correct idea of the
    eye as a "dynamic" device is the first
    step.

    If there concern for their own child's welfare is
    "boring" to you -- then they should know that
    truth.

    You are not going to learn anything at all
    from these honest discussions. If
    the "bore" you, then just do not
    read them.

    That is the best approach for you.

    Best,

    Otis

    Enginer

    ****
     
    Otis Brown, Jun 3, 2004
    #4
  5. Otis Brown

    Jan Guest

    Yes Otis and the majority who have other ideas are not very sincere or at
    least sincere eyecareprofessionals?
    Open your door and look outside man, it is the year 2004.
    How many Otis, you have a great problem in showing proof!
    Again one of your lazy tricks Otis, you put words in ones mouth they never
    have spoken.
    Your idea's and your avoiding to show proof in these matters are
    boooooooring and parents who are concerned about the wellfare may notice
    that.
    I want to learn more Otis, so deliver the proof of your ideas working and I
    am happy instead of bored by your "walking around in circles"
    Maybe boring to you but where is your proof?

    I will keep asking this Otis until you deliver.
    I think that's the best approach.

    BTW Otis, how is your friend and companion Donald Rehm (The Myopia Myth)
    doing ?
    Did he already explained to you that the girl on his site shown uses plus
    glasses instead of minus ?
    I will think you want to forget this kind of 'proof' but did you learned
    from it ?




    Jan (normally Dutch spoken)
     
    Jan, Jun 3, 2004
    #5
  6. This seems to be one of the most interesting posts on the subject of
    progressive myopia that I have seen. Unfortunately, I do not have enough
    background to fully appreciate it.

    In particular, I do not understand the significance of different outocmes
    between Macaca arctoides and M. mulatta. Morever, what is the physiological
    difference between having eyelids fused and being raised in the dark? Is it
    the light penetrating the closed lids even though it does not form images?

    Interesting as this abstract is, it certainly raises more questions than it
    answers.

    Bill
     
    Repeating Rifle, Jun 3, 2004
    #6
  7. Otis Brown

    Otis Brown Guest

    Re:> Interesting as this abstract is, it certainly raises more
    questions than it answers. Bill

    That is because the questions are not "focused". No pun intended.

    Part of the "trick" in science it to learn to ask
    the right questions in the first place.

    Best,

    Otis
    Engineer


    ******
     
    Otis Brown, Jun 4, 2004
    #7
  8. Otis Brown

    Otis Brown Guest

    Dear Mike,

    Are you practicing law? Are you a "God" as you
    love to infer. Are you "perfect".

    That is what you love to imply.

    Fortunately, even the opthalmoligists
    I talke to exhibit more honesty
    and humility than you do.

    Best,

    Otis

    Engineer
     
    Otis Brown, Jun 4, 2004
    #8
  9. Otis Brown

    Otis Brown Guest

    Mike, do the following.

    Do not patronize me. Engineers know the meaning of
    "statistically significant", although you at times
    seem to not know the meaning.

    I will post a question to you that requires
    that you know the meaning.

    Indeed I have no argument with you. Only a
    discussion about the behavior of the evolution-designed
    eye, as to whether is changes its refractive status
    (no defect implied) as the visual enviroment is
    changed in a negative direction. These are DIRECT SCIENTIFIC
    MEASUREMENTS made with out ANY interpertation.

    Therefore ANY competent engineer or scientiest could make
    them.

    The are ALWAYS REPEATABLE, and the same result will
    be obtained. No defect (your line of work) is implied
    in this statement -- only a reporting of DIRECT MEASUREMENTS.

    Some of these studies used adolescent primates (i.e., not
    neo-natal and) and the result was the same.

    I will revised the questions concerning this issue
    and post them to you. If you had any guts you
    would provide an answer to them. But I am certain
    you will provide endless rationalizations for
    avoiding answering the questions. To emberasing
    to face facts concerning ONLY the behavior of the
    native or natural eye.
    I did not say " ... on myopia", I said the refractive status
    of the eye.
    Please read the statement by Dr. Stirling Colgate on my
    site about his use of the plus. I am certain that
    he is correct about the dynamic behavior of the
    natural eye.

    If it can not be prevented in the first place (with a plus)
    then we should make that determination. Until that
    work is done, there is no point in arguing about
    stair-case nearsightedness produced by both
    a confined visual enviroment, and an environment
    moved EVEN CLOSER by a strong minus lens.

    You miss the need for an exact mathematical model
    for the behavior of the natural eye.

    But you profession has never been about prevention,
    because that would REQUIRE considerable amount
    of "smarts" in the person who desires it.

    And since the pilot who resolves to "take control",
    and use the plus with great force (from 20/50) can
    become successful by his own measurements, I fail
    to see how you could become involved, since all
    you wish to do is to prevent him from doing it.

    That is a MOUTHFULL! But a very intersting statement indeed.
    I will forward that statement to my nephew Keith,
    and I am certain he will disagree with you on that point.

    I will also post my comments to him about the necessity
    that he "take over control" and keep his distant vision
    clear.

    I would suggest using the term "second opinion" so we
    do not insult each other.


    What Chalmers DID SAY is that the he use a strong plus (3.5 D)
    on a person at -1.25 diopters (about 20/70). He further
    stated that the persons vision came up to 20/20 (better
    than the required Snellen-DMV level of today.

    He then suggested a follow-up. There wan none.

    I think there should have been, and you do not.
    We disagree on that point.

    Since there is not follow-up we all shouild know why.

    I got tired of waiting, and informed my nephew of
    this "intellectually frozen" situation, and said
    that he had a choice -- and would have to keep
    his distant vision clear for life -- by following
    the recommendations of Dr. Paul Romano, Dr. Francis Young,
    Dr. Stirling Colgate, Dr. Luglam, and many others.

    It is easy the make the resommendation. It takes
    a person of considerable wisdom and fortitude to
    keep is vision clear with the plus lens -- in
    any event it must be a decision of the individual -- and
    not of you.


    I do not "contradict" studies demonstrating that
    the natural eye is a cybernetic system that will
    always move down (test group relative to control group)
    when a minus lens is placed on a homogeneous group.

    You confuse engineering-science with pure medical issues my friend.
    Before we even ENTERTAIN any idea of "defect" we assume that
    the natural eye is dynamic (or not -- your thesis(.

    In the "pure" experiment, we do not classify refractive
    states as "defects". We simple report what we measure,
    not what you conjecture. Talk about intellectual
    honesty!

    I must run now -- I will finish later


    cc: To Keith, and other ODs and pilots with
    intellectual honesty built into them.

    Otis
    Engineer

    ****
     
    Otis Brown, Jun 5, 2004
    #9
  10. Mike Tyner wrote:



    Nonetheless, any poor myopic person knows well that he had to change
    twice or more his glasses after his first prescription.

    What kind of proof do you need more???


    Really this is difficult to understand in the eyes of the poor of spirit
    (Jesus meaning here)




    --
    If you are interested in learning more about vision and the cure of
    imperfect sight by treatment without glasses, contacts or surgery,
    please visit http://TheCentralFixation.com or write to me privately.
    You can also subscribe to
    http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/PerfectSight/ where you can
    download for free the VOLUME ONE of the greatest BETTER EYESIGHT
    MAGAZINE, published in 1919 by THE CENTRAL FIXATION PUBLISHING COMPANY.
     
    Rishi Giovanni Gatti, Jun 5, 2004
    #10
  11. --
    Please explain how a strong minus minus lens correctly prescribed would
    bring the visual environment closer.
    I asked this question before but you decided not to answere. Otis, if you
    make statements like the one above, you must be able to back it up. Show us
    proof.

    Roland J. Izaac
     
    Roland J. Izaac, Jun 6, 2004
    #11
  12. The feet that grow do not impair any mental nor physical faculty in men.
    In fact it is a necessity of the human body to grow to full power at age
    28 (average).

    The eyes that "grow" myopic are a great losso for the human body because
    destroy distance vision. Hence it is not a "growing" thing but quite the
    contrary, it is an un-growing, you are injured by it.

    I hope the intelligent people on this list will wake up soon and discard
    your stupid theories about vision.


    --
    If you are interested in learning more about vision and the cure of
    imperfect sight by treatment without glasses, contacts or surgery,
    please visit http://TheCentralFixation.com or write to me privately.
    You can also subscribe to
    http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/PerfectSight/ where you can
    download for free the VOLUME ONE of the greatest BETTER EYESIGHT
    MAGAZINE, published in 1919 by THE CENTRAL FIXATION PUBLISHING COMPANY.
     
    Rishi Giovanni Gatti, Jun 6, 2004
    #12
  13. Roland J. Izaac


    Hallo Roland, I have to warn you against a propblem: one man declaring
    to be you had made application to join my PerfectSight group on Yahoo
    (http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/PerfectSight/).

    I have stopped it.

    You should enquire to see who this fellow is.

    If you need his email, please ask in private.

    --
    If you are interested in learning more about vision and the cure of
    imperfect sight by treatment without glasses, contacts or surgery,
    please visit http://TheCentralFixation.com or write to me privately.
    You can also subscribe to
    http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/PerfectSight/ where you can
    download for free the VOLUME ONE of the greatest BETTER EYESIGHT
    MAGAZINE, published in 1919 by THE CENTRAL FIXATION PUBLISHING COMPANY.
     
    Rishi Giovanni Gatti, Jun 6, 2004
    #13
  14. I define intelligence as the capacity and will of curing myopia (and
    imperfect sight in general by means of rest treatments.

    People who have not this capacity and will, are just idiots.





    --
    If you are interested in learning more about vision and the cure of
    imperfect sight by treatment without glasses, contacts or surgery,
    please visit http://TheCentralFixation.com or write to me privately.
    You can also subscribe to
    http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/PerfectSight/ where you can
    download for free the VOLUME ONE of the greatest BETTER EYESIGHT
    MAGAZINE, published in 1919 by THE CENTRAL FIXATION PUBLISHING COMPANY.
     
    Rishi Giovanni Gatti, Jun 6, 2004
    #14
  15. It truly does.
    What happens to YOUR brain prower, it is not known, since you are almost
    a complete idiot and perhaps the brain power you speak about has gone
    down the drain since eons of time.



    --
    If you are interested in learning more about vision and the cure of
    imperfect sight by treatment without glasses, contacts or surgery,
    please visit http://TheCentralFixation.com or write to me privately.
    You can also subscribe to
    http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/PerfectSight/ where you can
    download for free the VOLUME ONE of the greatest BETTER EYESIGHT
    MAGAZINE, published in 1919 by THE CENTRAL FIXATION PUBLISHING COMPANY.
     
    Rishi Giovanni Gatti, Jun 6, 2004
    #15
  16. What about driving?
    In fact a population is not built on individuals...



    --
    If you are interested in learning more about vision and the cure of
    imperfect sight by treatment without glasses, contacts or surgery,
    please visit http://TheCentralFixation.com or write to me privately.
    You can also subscribe to
    http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/PerfectSight/ where you can
    download for free the VOLUME ONE of the greatest BETTER EYESIGHT
    MAGAZINE, published in 1919 by THE CENTRAL FIXATION PUBLISHING COMPANY.
     
    Rishi Giovanni Gatti, Jun 6, 2004
    #16
  17. Otis Brown

    Otis Brown Guest

    Dear DrG,

    Re:> Some of us have indeed learned a great deal since then.
    Apparently, some have not. DrG

    It is obvious you have not.

    I have learned a great deal from the ODs in their office.

    What their strengths are. The nature of "the public" that
    walks in off the street.

    The "intellectually honest" ones explained the
    limits of their profession. And I deeply respect
    thoes limits.

    Indeed, implementing the methods of C. Prentics, Dr.
    Stirling Colgate, Dr. Francis Young, Dr. Steve Leung,
    are indeed difficult. But these difficulties
    must be understood by the engineer or scientists
    who wishes to implement them.

    You are in your office, with your mind sealed in that
    office. You spin the dials on a phoropter, and
    send a person on his way with "prescription".

    Any serious discussion with an engineer
    about these detials must involve a considerable
    review of the proven effect the minus lens
    has on THE NATURAL EYE, since that is the
    major issue.

    Further, successful prevention (by engineers)
    can NEVER be reduced to a "quick fix" business
    for the population of people that enter your
    shop.

    That issue defines the difference between
    an engineering-scientific approach, and
    your methods that have not chaanged
    from their inception 400 years ago.

    Best,

    Otis

    Engineer
     
    Otis Brown, Jun 6, 2004
    #17

  18. Good said Otis.
    Tell them that they are pre-scientific.

    --
    If you are interested in learning more about vision and the cure of
    imperfect sight by treatment without glasses, contacts or surgery,
    please visit http://TheCentralFixation.com or write to me privately.
    You can also subscribe to
    http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/PerfectSight/ where you can
    download for free the VOLUME ONE of the greatest BETTER EYESIGHT
    MAGAZINE, published in 1919 by THE CENTRAL FIXATION PUBLISHING COMPANY.
     
    Rishi Giovanni Gatti, Jun 6, 2004
    #18
  19. Otis Brown

    Dr. Leukoma Guest

    Otis,

    Apparently nobody in this newsgroup takes you seriously. A chip on your
    shoulder regarding optometry apparently explains much of your internet
    ruminations. You haven't produced a fig-leaf of credibility. The studies
    have been done, the verdict is in: the use of plus lenses in the manner you
    suggest doesn't work for axial myopia. People can waste their time on such
    useless endeavors. In fact, people waste time in many ways.

    DrG

    (Otis Brown) wrote in
     
    Dr. Leukoma, Jun 7, 2004
    #19

  20. I don't take you seriously EITHER!


    --
    If you are interested in learning more about vision and the cure of
    imperfect sight by treatment without glasses, contacts or surgery,
    please visit http://TheCentralFixation.com or write to me privately.
    You can also subscribe to
    http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/PerfectSight/ where you can
    download for free the VOLUME ONE of the greatest BETTER EYESIGHT
    MAGAZINE, published in 1919 by THE CENTRAL FIXATION PUBLISHING COMPANY.
     
    Rishi Giovanni Gatti, Jun 8, 2004
    #20
    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.