(03-19-2014, 12:31 AM)Bifocal Wrote:

(03-16-2014, 03:39 AM)arocarty Wrote:

(03-16-2014, 01:34 AM)Bifocal Wrote:

(03-12-2014, 06:26 AM)Aethersky Wrote:

Some of the eye exam tests that they put her through at the university ophthalmologist center required her to read small print ,in low light,at eight inches for two hours with no break,and then immediately transition to read a 20/20 eye chart in low light.

Reading small print close to the eyes, in dim light - that sounds like doing Bates! You have to relax in order to read it properly, and if you strain, Bates demonstrated that it can cause a hyperopic shift - either way, sounds like a win-win for someone with myopic tendencies.

Is this all suppose to represent some kind of scientific study? Not by any stretch of the imagination does it represent any kind of radomized clinical trial, where there are very strict protocols and guidelines to follow. Any results would be meaningless to the scientific community, bias could not be ruled out, there's no control group vs. treatment group, etc. etc. As a study it would be a sham. But great for for the anecdotal journals.

That part of her test was apparently because she had previously been myopic,and had corrected it with anticorrective lenses.
All of the pilot training candidates were not given that test.
There was one young male that was subjected to some special testing that none of the others had too do.
If any of this group of fifty,and another group of fifty begin to show the slightest sign of myopia during flight training,the plan is that they will be fitted with the appropriate anticorrective lenses immediately.

(03-19-2014, 03:35 AM)arocarty Wrote:

(03-19-2014, 12:31 AM)Bifocal Wrote:

(03-16-2014, 03:39 AM)arocarty Wrote:

(03-16-2014, 01:34 AM)Bifocal Wrote:

(03-12-2014, 06:26 AM)Aethersky Wrote:

Some of the eye exam tests that they put her through at the university ophthalmologist center required her to read small print ,in low light,at eight inches for two hours with no break,and then immediately transition to read a 20/20 eye chart in low light.

Reading small print close to the eyes, in dim light - that sounds like doing Bates! You have to relax in order to read it properly, and if you strain, Bates demonstrated that it can cause a hyperopic shift - either way, sounds like a win-win for someone with myopic tendencies.

Is this all suppose to represent some kind of scientific study? Not by any stretch of the imagination does it represent any kind of radomized clinical trial, where there are very strict protocols and guidelines to follow. Any results would be meaningless to the scientific community, bias could not be ruled out, there's no control group vs. treatment group, etc. etc. As a study it would be a sham. But great for for the anecdotal journals.

That part of her test was apparently because she had previously been myopic,and had corrected it with anticorrective lenses.
All of the pilot training candidates were not given that test.
There was one young male that was subjected to some special testing that none of the others had too do.
If any of this group of fifty,and another group of fifty begin to show the slightest sign of myopia during flight training,the plan is that they will be fitted with the appropriate anticorrective lenses immediately.

Got it. As I said, not a scientific study by any stretch of the imagination. Completely biased selection. It was demonstrated decades ago that plus lens usage vs. a control group (an actual study) over a 4-year period in a military academy, showed NO difference in myopic progression between them. All progressed. Removing accommodation load did not help.

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/16493337_Plus_lens_prism_and_bifocal_effects_on_myopia_progression_in_military_students_Part_II

Several subsequent plus studies on high school students in the last decade verify, and actually show worse progression overall, a couple showing evidence that plus can actually accelerate myopic progression. The students have a right to know this, before subjected to such treatment, and the military has a responsibility and duty to inform them.

(03-19-2014, 03:35 AM)arocarty Wrote:

(03-19-2014, 12:31 AM)Bifocal Wrote:

(03-16-2014, 03:39 AM)arocarty Wrote:

(03-16-2014, 01:34 AM)Bifocal Wrote:

(03-12-2014, 06:26 AM)Aethersky Wrote:

Some of the eye exam tests that they put her through at the university ophthalmologist center required her to read small print ,in low light,at eight inches for two hours with no break,and then immediately transition to read a 20/20 eye chart in low light.

Reading small print close to the eyes, in dim light - that sounds like doing Bates! You have to relax in order to read it properly, and if you strain, Bates demonstrated that it can cause a hyperopic shift - either way, sounds like a win-win for someone with myopic tendencies.

Is this all suppose to represent some kind of scientific study? Not by any stretch of the imagination does it represent any kind of radomized clinical trial, where there are very strict protocols and guidelines to follow. Any results would be meaningless to the scientific community, bias could not be ruled out, there's no control group vs. treatment group, etc. etc. As a study it would be a sham. But great for for the anecdotal journals.

That part of her test was apparently because she had previously been myopic,and had corrected it with anticorrective lenses.
All of the pilot training candidates were not given that test.
There was one young male that was subjected to some special testing that none of the others had too do.
If any of this group of fifty,and another group of fifty begin to show the slightest sign of myopia during flight training,the plan is that they will be fitted with the appropriate anticorrective lenses immediately.

Got it. As I said, not a scientific study by any stretch of the imagination. Completely biased selection. It was demonstrated decades ago that plus lens usage vs. a control group (an actual study) over a 4-year period in a military academy, showed NO difference in myopic progression between them. All progressed. Removing accommodation load did not help.

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/16493337_Plus_lens_prism_and_bifocal_effects_on_myopia_progression_in_military_students_Part_II

Several subsequent plus studies on high school students in the last decade verify, and actually show worse progression overall, a couple showing evidence that plus can actually accelerate myopic progression. The students have a right to know this, before subjected to such treatment, and the military has a responsibility and duty to inform them.

(03-19-2014, 10:25 PM)Bifocal Wrote:

(03-19-2014, 03:35 AM)arocarty Wrote:

(03-19-2014, 12:31 AM)Bifocal Wrote:

(03-16-2014, 03:39 AM)arocarty Wrote:

(03-16-2014, 01:34 AM)Bifocal Wrote: Some of the eye exam tests that they put her through at the university ophthalmologist center required her to read small print ,in low light,at eight inches for two hours with no break,and then immediately transition to read a 20/20 eye chart in low light.

Reading small print close to the eyes, in dim light - that sounds like doing Bates! You have to relax in order to read it properly, and if you strain, Bates demonstrated that it can cause a hyperopic shift - either way, sounds like a win-win for someone with myopic tendencies.

Is this all suppose to represent some kind of scientific study? Not by any stretch of the imagination does it represent any kind of radomized clinical trial, where there are very strict protocols and guidelines to follow. Any results would be meaningless to the scientific community, bias could not be ruled out, there's no control group vs. treatment group, etc. etc. As a study it would be a sham. But great for for the anecdotal journals.

That part of her test was apparently because she had previously been myopic,and had corrected it with anticorrective lenses.
All of the pilot training candidates were not given that test.
There was one young male that was subjected to some special testing that none of the others had too do.
If any of this group of fifty,and another group of fifty begin to show the slightest sign of myopia during flight training,the plan is that they will be fitted with the appropriate anticorrective lenses immediately.

Got it. As I said, not a scientific study by any stretch of the imagination. Completely biased selection. It was demonstrated decades ago that plus lens usage vs. a control group (an actual study) over a 4-year period in a military academy, showed NO difference in myopic progression between them. All progressed. Removing accommodation load did not help.

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/16493337_Plus_lens_prism_and_bifocal_effects_on_myopia_progression_in_military_students_Part_II

Several subsequent plus studies on high school students in the last decade verify, and actually show worse progression overall, a couple showing evidence that plus can actually accelerate myopic progression. The students have a right to know this, before subjected to such treatment, and the military has a responsibility and duty to inform them.

i spoke with her today,and she said in no way is a study. The military has proven that it works,and will now be a part of pilot training.

(03-19-2014, 10:25 PM)Bifocal Wrote:

(03-19-2014, 03:35 AM)arocarty Wrote:

(03-19-2014, 12:31 AM)Bifocal Wrote:

(03-16-2014, 03:39 AM)arocarty Wrote:

(03-16-2014, 01:34 AM)Bifocal Wrote: Some of the eye exam tests that they put her through at the university ophthalmologist center required her to read small print ,in low light,at eight inches for two hours with no break,and then immediately transition to read a 20/20 eye chart in low light.

Reading small print close to the eyes, in dim light - that sounds like doing Bates! You have to relax in order to read it properly, and if you strain, Bates demonstrated that it can cause a hyperopic shift - either way, sounds like a win-win for someone with myopic tendencies.

Is this all suppose to represent some kind of scientific study? Not by any stretch of the imagination does it represent any kind of radomized clinical trial, where there are very strict protocols and guidelines to follow. Any results would be meaningless to the scientific community, bias could not be ruled out, there's no control group vs. treatment group, etc. etc. As a study it would be a sham. But great for for the anecdotal journals.

That part of her test was apparently because she had previously been myopic,and had corrected it with anticorrective lenses.
All of the pilot training candidates were not given that test.
There was one young male that was subjected to some special testing that none of the others had too do.
If any of this group of fifty,and another group of fifty begin to show the slightest sign of myopia during flight training,the plan is that they will be fitted with the appropriate anticorrective lenses immediately.

Got it. As I said, not a scientific study by any stretch of the imagination. Completely biased selection. It was demonstrated decades ago that plus lens usage vs. a control group (an actual study) over a 4-year period in a military academy, showed NO difference in myopic progression between them. All progressed. Removing accommodation load did not help.

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/16493337_Plus_lens_prism_and_bifocal_effects_on_myopia_progression_in_military_students_Part_II

Several subsequent plus studies on high school students in the last decade verify, and actually show worse progression overall, a couple showing evidence that plus can actually accelerate myopic progression. The students have a right to know this, before subjected to such treatment, and the military has a responsibility and duty to inform them.

i spoke with her today,and she said in no way is a study. The military has proven that it works,and will now be a part of pilot training.

(03-20-2014, 05:05 AM)centertime Wrote:

(03-19-2014, 10:25 PM)Bifocal Wrote:

(03-19-2014, 03:35 AM)arocarty Wrote:

(03-19-2014, 12:31 AM)Bifocal Wrote:

(03-16-2014, 03:39 AM)arocarty Wrote: Reading small print close to the eyes, in dim light - that sounds like doing Bates! You have to relax in order to read it properly, and if you strain, Bates demonstrated that it can cause a hyperopic shift - either way, sounds like a win-win for someone with myopic tendencies.

Is this all suppose to represent some kind of scientific study? Not by any stretch of the imagination does it represent any kind of radomized clinical trial, where there are very strict protocols and guidelines to follow. Any results would be meaningless to the scientific community, bias could not be ruled out, there's no control group vs. treatment group, etc. etc. As a study it would be a sham. But great for for the anecdotal journals.

That part of her test was apparently because she had previously been myopic,and had corrected it with anticorrective lenses.
All of the pilot training candidates were not given that test.
There was one young male that was subjected to some special testing that none of the others had too do.
If any of this group of fifty,and another group of fifty begin to show the slightest sign of myopia during flight training,the plan is that they will be fitted with the appropriate anticorrective lenses immediately.

Got it. As I said, not a scientific study by any stretch of the imagination. Completely biased selection. It was demonstrated decades ago that plus lens usage vs. a control group (an actual study) over a 4-year period in a military academy, showed NO difference in myopic progression between them. All progressed. Removing accommodation load did not help.

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/16493337_Plus_lens_prism_and_bifocal_effects_on_myopia_progression_in_military_students_Part_II

Several subsequent plus studies on high school students in the last decade verify, and actually show worse progression overall, a couple showing evidence that plus can actually accelerate myopic progression. The students have a right to know this, before subjected to such treatment, and the military has a responsibility and duty to inform them.

i spoke with her today,and she said in no way is a study. The military has proven that it works,and will now be a part of pilot training.

Sorry what works exactly?

(03-20-2014, 03:01 PM)Bifocal Wrote:

(03-20-2014, 05:05 AM)centertime Wrote:

(03-19-2014, 10:25 PM)Bifocal Wrote:

(03-19-2014, 03:35 AM)arocarty Wrote:

(03-19-2014, 12:31 AM)Bifocal Wrote: That part of her test was apparently because she had previously been myopic,and had corrected it with anticorrective lenses.
All of the pilot training candidates were not given that test.
There was one young male that was subjected to some special testing that none of the others had too do.
If any of this group of fifty,and another group of fifty begin to show the slightest sign of myopia during flight training,the plan is that they will be fitted with the appropriate anticorrective lenses immediately.

Got it. As I said, not a scientific study by any stretch of the imagination. Completely biased selection. It was demonstrated decades ago that plus lens usage vs. a control group (an actual study) over a 4-year period in a military academy, showed NO difference in myopic progression between them. All progressed. Removing accommodation load did not help.

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/16493337_Plus_lens_prism_and_bifocal_effects_on_myopia_progression_in_military_students_Part_II

Several subsequent plus studies on high school students in the last decade verify, and actually show worse progression overall, a couple showing evidence that plus can actually accelerate myopic progression. The students have a right to know this, before subjected to such treatment, and the military has a responsibility and duty to inform them.

i spoke with her today,and she said in no way is a study. The military has proven that it works,and will now be a part of pilot training.

Sorry what works exactly?

The Anticorrective Lense method.

(04-29-2014, 04:53 PM)Bifocal Wrote: My friend's daughter was home on leave from her military flight training,during the Easter weekend,and gave me an update on her vision,and that of her fellow classmates.
They have been testing her vision with an autorefractor weekly,and only one time did her vision drop below 20/20. At that point they checked it daily,and it came in at 20/20,so she went back to the one time a week.
Two of her classmates have already,( within a month ) dropped to 20/50,and have been fitted with anticorrective lenses,and are being checked on the autorefractor daily. One of them seems to be improving,and the other is becoming more myopic.The more myopc guy told the others that during college that he thought he was becoming myopic,but was able to recover during the summer breaks,but this training is so much more demanding on his eyes that he wonders if the anticorrective lenses will help him. The other guy states that his vision is definitely helped by the anticorrective lenses.
She reported that the reading,and study has been so intense that all of the students wonder who will wash out even though they are only one month into the program.

(04-30-2014, 02:48 AM)arocarty Wrote:

(04-29-2014, 04:53 PM)Bifocal Wrote: My friend's daughter was home on leave from her military flight training,during the Easter weekend,and gave me an update on her vision,and that of her fellow classmates.
They have been testing her vision with an autorefractor weekly,and only one time did her vision drop below 20/20. At that point they checked it daily,and it came in at 20/20,so she went back to the one time a week.
Two of her classmates have already,( within a month ) dropped to 20/50,and have been fitted with anticorrective lenses,and are being checked on the autorefractor daily. One of them seems to be improving,and the other is becoming more myopic.The more myopc guy told the others that during college that he thought he was becoming myopic,but was able to recover during the summer breaks,but this training is so much more demanding on his eyes that he wonders if the anticorrective lenses will help him. The other guy states that his vision is definitely helped by the anticorrective lenses.
She reported that the reading,and study has been so intense that all of the students wonder who will wash out even though they are only one month into the program.

Use of plus lenses could ACCELERATE their progression of myopia; but no way they'll ever be let on to that fact, it would just be all blamed on the program. Law suites could ensue, if they were aware of that fact. Someone would actually have to be accountable. The military is quite good at, and experienced at, covering up and protecting themselves as has been seen countless times. Cheating on certification exams, sexual abuse, contract fraud, gambling scandals, recruiting referral kickbacks, you name it, they've done it and tried to hide it for countless years. The lack of accountability in the military is mind numbing.

(04-30-2014, 08:21 AM)clarknight Wrote: Two of many complaints people experience from the plus lens method is;

Eye floaters and development of presbyopia.
http://www.amazon.it/product-reviews/887507920X/ref=cm_cr_pr_hist_3?ie=UTF8&filterBy=addThreeStar&showViewpoints=0&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending

Translation;
Mr. Gallo-see all my reviews


Amazon verified purchase (what's this?)

This review is on: how I healed myself from myopia. Without glasses, contact lenses and surgery (soft cover)

A little repetitive, interesting explanation of the theory, biology of the eye and worsening dynamics of sight for bad habits. After hundreds of pages, of course then the wait is reduced to a single page with a single table for the exercises.

I expected a more in-depth description of the route to improvement of symptoms to watch for benefits with passion and hope, a guide to corrective lens power in use, etc.

Certainly the book helped me to become aware of how much I pointlessly also glasses to read the mail on your mobile phone and how when I read without for about half an hour and then I put the glasses feel some discomfort as if they were too strong. So it's true that doing exercise is known as the eye is lazy by corrective lenses.

For now, the effect is an increased annoyance during the reading of newspapers with glasses. May be a symptom of improvement or an advance of presbyopia?????

http://www.amazon.com/The-Secret-Perfect-Vision-Nearsightedness/product-reviews/1556436777/ref=cm_cr_pr_hist_1?ie=UTF8&filterBy=addOneStar&showViewpoints=0&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending

The plus forums block posts by people that report the damage it has done to their eyes health and vision. They pay for book reviewers, 'their gang' to state the plus is safe but they can't stop the public from posting the truth, that is not safe; search Amazon book reviews in various countries, including Italy.

As use of the plus is continued, cataract and impaired retina health occur.
Presbyopia, tension in the recti and oblique eye muscles caused by any type of eyeglass prescription also cause myopia and astigmatism.

The plus glasses and minus freeze up the lens and its ciliary muscle; no movement; no circulation, no nourishment, no hydration=cataract and blur at all distances.

The ciliary works with the iris muscles. All eye muscles can effect eachohther, their function and the clarity of vision.