Vision clearing from -1.5 diopters (20/70)

Dear Prevention minded friends

Subject: Correct use of the "second opinion"

As you know the "traditional method" of the
minus lens works instantly. Most, perhaps,
prefer nothing else -- as will become
"hostile" if offered the "correct use"
of a plus lens.

This person contacted me, and stated she
was -10 diopters, and was deeply concerned
about her child. The recent OD exam
showed a refractive state of -1.5 diopters
and about 20/70 vision.

I explained that I was an engineer -- but
I had done extensive research to establish
that the natural eye was "dynamic" and she
should understand that a percentage
of ODs and MDs supported the concept
of prevention -- at the threshold -- only.

She decided to proceed, and obtained a
+3 diopter lens for her daughter about
3 months ago.

This is her statement of current progress.


As always, enjoy our pleasant conversations
about "alternative methods".

As always -- I changed the names.

Best,

Otis
Engineer

_______________

Current vision clearing progress:

Subject: can see a little bit of 20/20

Date: Thursday, February 10, 2005 4:51 PM

Dear Otis,

With the persistent wearing of +3 lenses, my daughter can now
see a few letters along the 20/20 line (must be with both eyes
open though). She can read her blackboard with the plus 3 lenses
on now so she doesn't even take them off for looking at teacher's
writings.

It is interesting to see that most of the kids in her class
(7-8 yr olds) are already in need of glasses. (Some already have
glasses while others need eye exams). The teacher just moved the
entire class' seats closer to the front so they can see better.

Even with this change, some children are still squinting to read
while sitting in first row.

I will let you know of my daughter's progress.

best wishes,

Y. Wright

 

wrote:

[usual bulls*it snipped]

That's pronounced "Yeah, right...."

BTW: I literally added him to my killfile, but for some reason, he cannot be
killed. I'll keep working on it.

 

Dear Neil,
As usual your "closed mind" wins the day.
Because OTHER ODs are more "wise" than
you are -- they SUPPORT this woman's use
of a plus on her daughter.
In the final analysis, it will be mother-and-daughter
(with the support of prevention-minded ODs) who
finally win this difficult struggle.

And yes, effective prevention, that will be achieved
by this woman's child is the "Holy Grail" of
science (and not optometry).

Soving problems by accuratly reproting fact as
they concern the dynamic behavior of the natural
eye as sophisticated control-system.

The alternative is to continue the minus-lens method
put is place 400 years ago because it worked
instantly if 15 minutes. Superficial, of course,
but it is impressive. But is it science?

Think about it.

Best,

Otis

 

you are so stupid.

 

***** OTIS WARNING *****


This posting is an automatic reply to any sci.med.vision newsgroup thread
that is receiving comments from a person named "Otis", "Otis Brown",
"" or "Otis, Engineer".

Otis is not an expert in any field of vision. His medical and eyecare
training is nil. He is a proponent of a myopia prevention technique that is
unproven.

Otis continually misquotes people in his posts. He drops the names of
doctors whom he falsely claims to be associated with. He has been caught in
out-and-out lies. He has given people incorrect medical advise. Sadly, his
behavior suggests he may have psychological problems that compel him to
argue against people just for the sake of causing an argument.

Otis is what is known in internet newsgroup lingo as a "troll". Do not
reply to his postings-- it just takes up bandwidth and storage space that
should be reserved for meaningful topics. It also just fulfils his sick
psychological needs.

No one means to suppress the honest opinions of others. This message is
only meant to forewarn newcomers who might misconstrue Otis as a trained
eyecare expert. Those of us who have been here for awhile know Otis oh too
well!

For anyone who is interested in understanding the true state of
scientific/medical research on myopia prevention, I offer the following
link: http://annals.edu.sg/pdf200401/V33N1p4.pdf. If you are truly
interested in Otis' theories of myopia prevention then visit his favorite
websites www.i-see.org and www.chinamyopia.com. If you have other topics you
wish to discuss, there are experts here who will usually help you. Don't
waste your time with Otis.

Please see the weekly posting "welcome to sci.med.vision", which usually
appears on Mondays, for a guide regarding this newsgroup and for information
on how to filter out Otis' posts so that you may be able to participate in
worthwhile discussions in this forum.

 

Dear Mike,

The work is published in various forums, and is available
to an educated person who wishes to make a
choice ON HER JUDGEMENT -- NOT YOURS.

She KNOWs what your opinion is -- that perevention
with the plus -- must be destoryed.

She read the scientific reports by Dr. Francis Young
that demonstrated that a properly fitted plus lens
will STOP the eye's movement into nearsighedness.

She is also aware that other ODs, specifically

www.chinamyopia.org

express the second-opinion, and that
none of these issues are resolved.

In the face of advice by experts that is profoundly
contradictory -- you might well decide that
there are no real "experts".

She has a right to judge YOUR opinion, that
the eye is "frozen", and can not change at all,
versus the second-opinion that the natural eye
controls its refractive status to its average
visual enviroment.

Clearly HER CHOICE will have life-time
consequences for her child. She
was not willing to let your opinion dictate
HER course of action.

Indeed, I SUPPORT ODs, who support this
second opinion -- with the person involved making
the final choise. That is both right and ethical.

Best,

Otis

 

Dear Friends,

RM is "full of himself".

I would look for ODs and MDs who are more open minded -- and
will offer you and honest choice for prevention.

They do exist -- and they will support you if you ask.

Be careful -- and be wise.

The mother cited above read RM's crap and relized what
the long-term effect of that minus lens would be
on he daughter's eyes.

She chose to become part of the solution -- rather
than part of the problem.

But YOU decide -- and enjoy!

Best,

Otis
Engineer

 

SNIP more Otis lies and misrepresentation

Sir-- There is no evidence for an effective prevention method for
myopia. Please show us the reference for human studies which
demonstrate it.

You, sir, are a smooth talking bullshitter with some kind of axe to
grind. You can't prove anything you say.

Attention prevention-minded friends. Do a newgroup search on all
threads Otis has participated in. He cannot prove anything he says.
He avoids questions that eye doctors ask him because he knows they
prove his claims are invalid. He gives incorrect medical advise. He
is probably in violation of laws regarding the practice of medicine
without a license. Avoid Otis Engineer like the plaque!