IndigoGhost Wrote:Neonatal eye antibiotics - JMartinC4 really hates them. That is all.
There is so much more to it than that! And it's not the unnecessary antibiotics themselves that I hate so much, it is more the way they are forced on all infants born in the USA and probably most industrialized countries, instilled unequally and with little if any thought about their side-effects, and with the parents being told either nothing or mistruths about them, and then no follow-ups to see if the infant's vision returns to normal, and no longitudinal or cross-cultural or double-blind studies to find out if there are latent effects on vision. It's stupid. And I fear it is gradually making us as a species nearpoint-fixated, or for those who manage to overcome the effects - presbyopic but antisocial, and overall we are becoming dumb. Help me spread the word or at least the doubt!
IndigoGhost Wrote: I really agree, I found it interesting that when i took my glasses off i became more then 60% less introverted. Its very stupid how people dont question it though.
'60%' - How'd you measure that?!
As for questioning the eye antibiotics, guess what - they aren't told anything! Since it is legislatively mandated, there is apparently no requirement for disclosure. Only if the mother/parents already know about them can they adamantly refuse them - and only after demanding it about three times will the medical person then disgustedly bring a waiver form for the mother/parents to sign. It is ridiculous. But I wish my wife and I had been aware of it back when our kids were born. Both our boys developed bad nearpoint-fixation. I'm not sure if they ever had normal distance vision.
I would never allow it now unless the mother was a known syphlitic/gonorrheac.
Here's another realization I came to a couple of days ago: If my theory is correct, and most people diagnosed with 'myopia' are actually suffering from nearpoint fixation as a result of the medical malpractice of incorrectly instilled eye antibiotics, and negligently ignoring follow-up procedures to prevent the disorder, then we may have a legal case against the hospitals. My only point in bringing such a suit would be to quickly bring the issue to the fore, present the facts, observations, insights and analyses, and make them stop doing it as a routine procedure. And they can pay the legal fees. Other people might want to also get back all the money they've had to spend on lenses and exams. Class action suit, anyone?