Re: Stay away from "vision educators"

On 30 Mar, 13:35, LarryDoc <lite...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <MPG.199ecb5f8066fe68989...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,

Kevin <sevenths...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
It is well known that in general all myopes have a deterioration at the
very edges of the retina as compared to people who have not worn
glasses.
An optometrist assumes that the deterioration is a result of being
myopic. I would suggest that the fact that the person is trained into
using a smaller area of the retina should not be ignored.
Kevin

BatesCultist:

Your statements are absolutely scientifically false.

1. ALL myopes DO NOT have deterioration of the retina. Some do, some
don't. For that matter, so do hyperopes. Some do, some don't. For that
matter, so do people with no optical correction. Some do, some don't.
And some people are born with a predisposition, and some people are
simply born that way.

2. Lattice degeneration, peripheral holes and tears have nothing to do
with whether a person has worn glasses or not, and hardly to do with
whether or not there is a refractive error. The only FACT we know for
certain is that SOME people with enlongated axial length or who have a
physical growth anomolgy thining the peripheral retina, or those who
have had head trauma are at higher risk for "deterioration". Wearing
glasses has nothing to with it. Hitting your head on the windshield
because some loonatic crashed into you because s/he was Bate-d into
not using optical correction is a definate potential cause.

3. We don't ASSUME anything, We examine, we observe, we report.

4. It is not a fact that a myope wearing glasses is trained into using
a smaller area of the retina. The perihperal retina gets plently of
stimulation----and whatever, it has nothing to do with peripheral
retina anomolies.

SO....

Your statements are absolutely scientifically false. Like most
everything Bates. But, your a zealot, a fanatic and nothing contrary
to your position means a damn thing to you.

--LB

Heavens, Your points are interesting and I've noted them, but what an
astonishing reaction!

I did not say 'degeneration at the edge of the retina is due to the
wearing of glasses', I merely suggested that it not be ignored as a
possible contributing factor in the causation of this condition.
That's a line of enquiry, not a scientific proclamation.

But your reaction is to me the very opposite of unassuming.

3. We don't ASSUME anything, We examine, we observe, we report.

Try responding to me again in a much less assumptive manner , then
maybe your words won't sound so hollow.

Kevin
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Stay away from "vision educators"
    ... MORE formation instead off less compared to myoops without glasses. ... Minus spectacle lenses can increase the field of vision. ... frames are no longer perceived as useful. ... The retina thus becomes ...
    (sci.med.vision)
  • Re: update on eye floaters
    ... week to make sure the retina is OK. ... When you were talking about the first time you got glasses, ... she didn't do well on her eye exam. ... And "Mom, I can see leaves ...
    (sci.med.transcription)
  • Re: Stay away from "vision educators"
    ... MORE formation instead off less compared to myoops without glasses. ... Minus spectacle lenses can increase the field of vision. ... The retina thus becomes ... I do understand that more visual information is available in the casw ...
    (sci.med.vision)
  • Re: Stay away from "vision educators"
    ... very edges of the retina as compared to people who have not worn ... using a smaller area of the retina should not be ignored. ... with whether a person has worn glasses or not, ... It is not a fact that a myope wearing glasses is trained into using ...
    (sci.med.vision)
  • Re: REC.HUMOR to be decommissioned
    ... I really thought that the trauma would have worn ... >>Haven't you ever heard of retina burn..... ... I never got rug burn from munching carpet. ...
    (rec.humor)