Re: Child needs glasses?

From: "Dr. Leukoma" <drg@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 30 Oct 2005 18:11:26 -0800

Ha! Sorry about that. I was referring to the post to which you were
responding. My remarks were not meant for you. I was agreeing with
you.

I do believe that there is a place for +0.50 spectacles as I have
stated in previous posts.

DrG

.

References:
- Child needs glasses?
  - From: EmmettPower
- Re: Child needs glasses?
  - From: David Robins, MD
- Re: Child needs glasses?
  - From: p . clarkii
- Re: Child needs glasses?
  - From: Dr. Leukoma
- Re: Child needs glasses?
  - From: p . clarkii

Prev by Date: Re: Child needs glasses?
Next by Date: Re: Child needs glasses?
Previous by thread: Re: Child needs glasses?
Next by thread: Re: Child needs glasses?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Relevant Pages

Re: Belts are the accepted norm
... >>> this is what you were referring to, ... >>> this is what I am responding to ... Meaning you still have no proof. ... Prev by Date: ...
(rec.audio.opinion)
Re: Is there any "middle ground"?
... PLEASE kill file me and stop responding and referring to my ... posts. ... Prev by Date: ...
(rec.gambling.craps)
Re: Tribute to Pool Death Teenager
... >> Sorry Tony, I was responding to and referring to the case Todal ... Prev by Date: ...
(uk.legal)
Re: Who is the Rabbi with the Highest authority of the USA?
... Without including part of what you are responding ... we have no idea what you are referring to. ... Susie ... Prev by Date: ...
(soc.culture.jewish.moderated)
Re: Why A Coyote Revolution?
... in order for your remarks to have a meaningful ... you're responding to. ... might briefly be worth my while. ... when replying to a post: ...
(rec.arts.sf.written)