MikeHist.txt


Dear Prevention minded friends,

Subject:  Mike's work on effective prevention.  (Teen to 20/25)

Re:  The over-prescription by a -2.0 diopter lens.  (Passed 20/40 line.)

Re:  Information for people currently working with the plus for
     prevention -- to clear to the 20/40 level.

     For a long time I suspected that the minus was
"over-prescribed" -- but I did not know how much -- or why.


	 MIKE'S DECISION TO GO "COLD TURKEY" AT AGE 15

    From reports of Mike who contacted me, I found that:

1.  When he decided to go "cold turkey", he discovered that

    a.	His prescription was for -2.75 diopters.  (a 1 diopter
	lens =~ 20/70, this would mean a visual-acuity of 20/200 --
	approximately, or close to legal blindness).  But Mike could
	function without the minus lens.

    b.	When I asked him to read a standard eye-chart, he reported
	a "blurry" 20/70.  The Florida DMV standard is 20/70 --
	believe it or not.

2.  Since he was already working without the minus lens, I
    stated that he had to "clear" to 20/40 (1.8 cm at 6 meters) to
    truly reject the legal requirement for a minus lens.  How and
    why was Mike so serious over-prescribed?

    a.	The public "loves" over-prescription, so the ODs prescribe
	for 20/20.  However, adolescent and children's eyes can "do
	better" that 20/20.  According to Stacy OD, he will keep on
	"cranking" until he gets to 20/10.  This probably adds 1
	diopter to a prescription.

    b.	Thus a child that has 20/30 vision and has no rational
	need for that minus -- gets a -1.5 to -2 diopter lens, and
	worse, is told to "wear it all the time".

3.  It was a lot of work (following Colgate's method) but Mike
    gradually cleared to 20/40 and slightly better, i.e., passes
    the legal standard for driving a care.  At his mother's
    requiest he went back to the OD.

    a.	The OD puts him in a darkened room, with a
	low-illumination Snellen, and "cranked" on that minus lens, and
	insists that Mike's prescription is -2.0 diopters.  Why this
	conflict?

    b.	As far as I am concerned, a person who PASSES all legal
	visual-acuity standards that apply to him, is over-prescribed
	by the prescription -- which is not necessary, i.e., -2
	diopters.

4.  I believe that a -2 diopter lens will totally PREVENT
    vision-restoration -- if it is worn all the time -- and
    particularly when there is no legal need for it.

5.  I appreciate the idea that the OD believes that he is doing
    wonderful work when he "prescribes" this -2 diopter lens, but
    I think he has fallen in "love" with practice, and really has
    no idea of the long-term effect the minus lens has
    on the refractive state of the fundamental eye.
    In my opinion, it is tragic that NO ONE raises this issue.


     Fortunately, Mike has understood these issues.  Currently he
reports 20/30 to 20/25, which is incredible considering his
prescription of -2.75 dioters.	I have no idea if Mike can reach
20/20, but I do know that that "last" step seems to be the most
difficult.  There is nothing "easy" about any of this.  Further,
Mike knows that facts of the eye's behavior at West Point, that
the natural "unprotected" eye will go "down" by about -1.3 diopters
while working in a four-year college.


	     READING THE PASSING THE SNELLEN EYE CHART

     Eye-chart measurements requirements.  Based on the current
standard, you must read 1/2 the letters on the Snellen to pass a
specific line.