article in Review of Optometry

Or was in Vision Monday?..hmm..I'll have to check on Monday, but if you read the article by the "Harvard" students (who won an award BTW) on trying to produce optics and frames cheaply?
Am I the only one who saw some very flawed results in the article? As an example they stated in the paper about the wanted to "stack" lens when they needed a new RX and the example they gave was "if someone was a -2.00 and now was a -5.00 just stack a -3.00 into the frame":rolleyes: am I that much smarter than those award winning Harvard group or have I been missing out on a lot of optics somewhere when you know it is not that simple to "add" in a stack like that ?:finger: (those pesky small things like vertex, spectacle magnification, reflection, dispersion, scattering of light, etc., etc..)
After that erroneous statement on how they would "stack" those two I got to wondering about the rest of their project and how they could not have used anyone in the actual optical field for helping in the dynamics of optics.. and I was hoping they would explain how they would come up with the problem of adding compounds and crossing cylinders?
Anyone else read that article? Have any thoughts on it?

Jeff "wonder who the "judge" was who gave the award" Trail

Jeff I'm interested in reading the article, can you let us know where it can be found?

I read the article too and it must have been vision monday because I don't read 20-20.Check the last one!
best from Monterey today from Harry J

Harry is right, I'm at the office and the Aug. 27th edition and on page 26.. (Vision Monday)

BTW Harry why don't you get Review of Optometry? Here I am a lowly lab rat and I get that and Review of Ophth. as well... both of those mags have some pretty great articles usually for med stuff and the latest things going on in the pathology side of optics..I found the articles on the new procedure of C.K. as something that was very interesting.
I think in todays market, especially if you are an independent, than you should want to have a strong background on the pathology side of optics to be able to give people that extra bit of custom help that chains do NOT want to waste time on.
I know the majority of my accounts are OD's and MD's but a few of the independants I have I have worked hard with helping them get involved in the pathology side of optics and they now are eager to learn because the MD's are eating it up that they get referrals from these opticians and they have really got a good network going and since they are all working on a level above the usual opticians they have really grown in sales.. Knowing the basics are great but knowing the next steps are even better :-)
I'm kind of the pivot guy in this network and I get tons of calls from my accounts about optical problems and I can now refer these guys back and forth on who has the strong points in certain area's (low vision etc., etc.)
I know that in the local area we have grown a strong following of even the chains and other OD's and MD's that are not accounts but we have become friends with over the years that actually refer patients to me and my accounts.. If you want to survive and do it in a thriving way and you don't have the purchasing power and advertising budget of a chain than you find a "place" and make it grow.

Jeff "trying to do my best on all levels of the optical food chain" Trail