You lack of "concern" -- versus a pilot's "concern".

Discussion in 'Optometry Archives' started by otisbrown, Apr 30, 2005.

  1. otisbrown

    otisbrown Guest

    Dear William,

    You lack of statistical knowlege about the
    natural eye going "down" at a rate of -1/2 diopter
    per year does cause me concern.

    There are ODs (not like you) who express this
    concern -- with their own chilren.

    I gained this "concern" from Raphaelson and his
    statment of "The Printer's Son". In this
    statement it became clear that (baring any
    true-medical problem) the person himself
    would have to assume considerable responsibility
    to "protect" his long-term vision with the plus.

    Clearly this required intense motivation. If a
    person highly values his distant vision, then
    that transfer of techincal competence is
    possible. But the transefer is complete.
    He either does it with great force -- or
    he does not do it at all.

    Each person is different in this regard -- but
    a person whose life-time goal it to retain
    his 20/20 (through a four year college)
    has a good prospect of "clearing" his
    vision under this specific circumstance.

    That is why I suggest that this concept
    be presented to pilots entering a four
    year college where THEY review
    you "spin" on statistics, versus
    the real-world PUBLISHED statistics.

    At their age they could see the obvious
    bias in your statement -- as well as
    the lack of scientific rigor in the statement.

    But since you posed the question about my
    "obsession" with true-prevention here are some of
    the reasons.

    Best,

    Otis
    Engineer

    _________________


    William Stacy wrote:

    Stacy> I've also kind of wondered about his (Otis') obsession with
    desperate pilots **. As an optometrist in the USAF during
    Viet Nam, stationed at a pilot training base (lubbock, tx)
    I often would waiver a student who'd gone myopic. I always
    thought the AF used the uncorrected 20/20 just to cut down
    on the applicant pool. I also thought that they let way
    too many hyperopes in (who later in life couldn't see any
    instruments if their glasses got knocked off, unlike the
    myopes)...

    ** You can put my "obsession" to do this work to Jacob Raphaelson.
    The easy way is indeed the minus lens, and an OD will
    "cause" himself a great deal of difficulty -- if he
    attempts to get involved with it. So 99 percent of the ODs
    just go with the "flow" and use the minus. Given the fact
    that 99 percent of the public has no real interest in ANY
    work of prevention -- I must say that I can't blame them.
    Most of us lack the self-fortitude to do it -- under our
    own control.

    ** As for the "desparate pilot", I would say that my remarks are
    directed at the "intelligent" pilot who has a great deal to
    gain -- when he clears his distant vision to 20/20. This
    is a matter of rational, thoughtful review of a great
    amount of scientific data, and the fact that these ODs are
    profoundly biased "position". Anyone who is "desparate"
    should NEVER attempt to use a plus. I never attempt to do
    ANYTHING until I have exhaustively reviewed the scientific
    facts myself. I also ask that the person (or pilot) I talk
    too -- also go through a similar review. It takes a strong
    man to realize this -- and do it himself -- as Fred Deakins
    and other pilots have done it. These OD LOVE to imply
    something different that this -- for their own purposes.

    ** And lastly, I did this work to help my sister's chidren
    "protect" their distant vision -- for life -- which they
    did, no thanks to the likes of the biased ODs on
    sci.med.vision. This is a "living" tribute to Dr. Jacob
    Raphaeslon and his work on the preventive second-opinion.
     
    otisbrown, Apr 30, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. otisbrown

    A Lieberman Guest

    Otis,

    Before you judge others, please look at yourself. You lack the knowledge
    of pilot requirements which puts anything you say very suspect at best.
    The real-world is that pilots want 20/20 vision corrected or uncorrected.
    That's the real world Otis.

    Don't believe me, just go to your favorite airport and ask around.

    Allen
     
    A Lieberman, Apr 30, 2005
    #2
    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.