The Basic Vision

[sandeepgoodbole]

Detecting Undetected Correctable Vision seems a matter of concern for everybody who earns out of those detections.
1.Why should "detectable" things remain undetected for the Masses at their own?
2.Should we call prescriptions with mere 0.25 sph or cyl as "Achivement " after follow up of simple mass vision screening programme ?
3.Though clinically established,should any thing that does not hamper an Individual's normal daily activities be considered as a type or level of Blindness?
4.Some people say, it's because you start using a spect, you need it more as your body becomes sort of "addict" and Luxury seeking.
Is this 100 % wrong, with out any exceptions ? IS some study to rule this out has been done some where?

[chip anderson]

4) Yes it is 100% wrong except to Mariette Hartley and company.
People get used to interpreting blurred images without glasses. Then if they get glasses the images are no longer blurred and the brain will no longer accept the blurred image unless the patient goes without glasses long enough to re-adapt to the inferior image. This is why things look fuzzier when you first take your glasses off.

Rx's of a quarter or with a+.50 -.50 x whatever are usually called making money off an unsuspecting public.

Chip


Happy Birthday Sandeep!

I don't know how to do all those large colorful messages yet.