Re: Minus lens for 20/40 child?
- From: "otisbrown@xxxxxx" <otisbrown@xxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2007 21:25:59 -0700
Dear Me,
Subject: The effect of a -3 diopter lens on the refractive
STATE of the eye.
Re: The natural eye will change its refractive STATE by
about -2 diopters in six months when a -3 diopter lens is worn
16/7.
Me> Logic dictates full time close work using minus lenses would
further
promote nearsightedness.
Otis> Correct from this scientific experiment to confirm the
dynamic behavior of the natural eye.
Otis> The "minus" can be used as an emergency, but only
at distance when you son might need it.
Otis> The idea of avoiding the minus (with in reason)
is the second-opinion. The majority-opinion person
will tell you that a -3 dioper lens has no effect on
the refractive STATE of the natural eye. You
will have to draw your own conclusions. I
prefer the scientific answer to this question.
Otis> If you wish the second-opinion about avoiding
the minus, I would suggest reading Professor David
Guyton's (JHU) remarks on the subject. He personally
avoids wearing the minus as much as possible.
Second-opinion best,
Otis
On Sep 14, 11:26 pm, "Me" <m...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Just a couple of questions. Last winter, my 9 yr old was told to see an eye
doctor after a visual screening test at school. The doc said he was about
20/40 and perscribed minus lens and told him and his mom he should wear them
all the time. He began to develop serious headaches and I noticed that he
was wearing his glasses and playing a handheld video game holding it about 8
inches from his eyes. My first reaction was forcing the eyes to focus that
close with minus lenes was not a good thing and was probably causing
his headache. We tested this and there was a direct correlation between
him wearning the minus lens and focusing at 8" for hours was causing his
headache.
When I questioned the doctor about his recommendation of "full time use" he
made up a couple of reasons I didn't see as valid. He said "so he doesn't
lose them", "he will want to see clearly all the time", and "they make him
look smarter". Based on our discussion, I dismissed him as a total
quack, and told my son he didn't have to wear them at all.
This summer he tried playing baseball once with the glasses and had a
difficult time hitting the ball and catching the ball. He decided he was
better off not wearing them and didn't wear them the entire summer.
His vision has improved to 20/30 slighly over the summer, which I
attribute to him using his eye for more distance, than close up work
durning the warmer months.
Given the facts:
A. the AOA states "nearsightedness may be caused by the stress of
too much close vision work" AND
B. that minus lenses change the focal point of the eye, increasing the
stress of close work
Logic dictates full time close work using minus lenses would further
promote nearsightedness.
Have there been any studies to disprove this logic?
Is it common for a optomologist to reccomend full time use for a
case such as my son?
.
- References:
- Minus lens for 20/40 child?
- From: Me
- Minus lens for 20/40 child?
- Prev by Date: Re: Minus lens for 20/40 child?
- Next by Date: Re: Minus lens for 20/40 child?
- Previous by thread: Re: Minus lens for 20/40 child?
- Next by thread: Re: Minus lens for 20/40 child?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading