It'll all be published in due course.
In strab there are occasions when eyes process visual information at different speeds - synchronise them - and guess what happens - immediately. It's difficult to fuse images / control eye movement when eyes work at different speeds. And it is so easy to synchronise them. The rest you will have to wait - or come and visit!
How would you go about measuring such differences in processing information? It is measurable to be sure, and is much, much slower than the speed of light, but how do YOU measure or evaluate it?Originally Posted by jarralad2
Strabismus is a misalignment of the visual axes of the two eyes, a simple physical defect that is well understood, and does not depend on the speed of visual information processing. Its existence depends on a defect in the extraocular muscles and/or their innervation, or in the case of accommodative strabismus, a significant uncorrected hyperopic refractive state. All this is established science and really very easily understandable. Now you come saying that somehow a tinted lens can speed up or slow down the processing of one side or the other by a significant amount to "synchronise" them.
The speed of light is about 186 thousand miles per second. Visual signal processing by the human vision system can be measured in feet per second from retina to brain and back. Rotational eye movement can be measured in degrees of arc per second or on the surface of the eye in millimeters per second. The latter 2 are in completely different realms than the speed of light.
Easy to measure - but not for post. For example in cases of divergent strab (untreatable using conventional theory) - you can see the eyes straighten - and you can disassociate them to order. (strab theory assumes the problem is essentially in the muscle innervation - perhaps there may be something in an inability to match images being causative in some cases eg anisometropc strab being reduced with a contact lens but not with spectacles) In amblyopia we see immediate increases in acuity, in convergent insufficiency - results are amazing. Motility is affected, visual fields can be restored - and yes I know what I am saying - the whole of optometric practice is missing the elephant in the house! The Rx is not even safe - but there again most professionals are aware of myopic shift - and ignore it. Problems under flourescent lights are addressed empirically - when they are much better individually prescribed. Those on the autistic spectrum have long known that they are better in some lights than others, in fact they cannot see faces in some lights - but the research has not been undertaken by professionals (I have a paper on this going into review). Irlen (often derided) has realized some of the effects - why haven't the optometric professions looked properly at it - is it because they have so little knowledge of tint theory? Yet the basic principals have been known for a hundred years - but ignored. But this needs a course - not a post.
Last edited by jarralad2; 08-13-2015 at 03:53 AM.
I too would be very interested in the course.
Divergent strabismus, commonly known and exotropia is perhaps the most easily treated of all strabismus. Ordinary vision therapy (eye exercises) often do the job. Simple muscle surgery for very large angles or for those unwilling to do the training. Of course there's also prism, over minusing the spectacle Rx, or a combination of all these.
And of course in moderate to large angle intermittent exotropia it is very easy to watch the eyes go from aligned to tropic and back to aligned during a simple cover/uncover test and requires no tints to do. Been doing that test on every single patient I examine for many years. Takes no more than 5 seconds to do.
So what's with all the secrecy? Your first sentence alludes to how easy it is to measure (and it is) but "not for post" smacks of the secret knowledge that only you have or are willing to share for a price. If jargon is the hallmark of a scoundrel, then secrecy is the hallmark of a charlatan.
No secrecy and techniques have been known for years - but a lot of work to explain - you can easily look old fashioned techniques up. Happy to show you if you travel.
You are such a cynic - and happy to throw insults without knowledge. I don't intend to let this develop any further.
PS I understand the Latin - and could reply in kind from my schoolboy memories - but don't need to be pretentious
res ipsa loquitur
We need you to write a good book on this important issue.
I recall how many doctors derided the use of IRLEN filters when she first published her discovery about 25 years ago. The correct filter would produce fantastic results for children with learning disabilities. Many thanks for offering to share your expertise in this area.
I to look forward to your future publications. I also know that, the more I know, the more I know how little I know! I think this really belongs as MakeOptics says in the hands of doctors. At least here in the US given the state of education. While the chance to do harm to a patient seems slim the possibility of abuse of a vulnerable population is more than insignificant.
I've said it before that this reminds me of Chiropractics in the not too distant past.
To the OP- I do so hope you stay with us Optiboard as I know we lost you for a few years when the naysayers won out over those of us with a more open mind. Please keep posting!!!
(It's obvious Dr. Stacy you're really smart but please- no more making me google Latin!!!)
Last edited by Uncle Fester; 08-15-2015 at 09:43 PM.
ok I'll knock that off, but can't guarantee I'll never use a non-english word or 2 when it seems appropriate or fun...
hasta luego
Oy vey ist mir!!!
Goodnight!
touche' monsieur
ah, the good old days....glass beakers with hot Rit Dye and boiling alcohol or acetone to bleach the lenses out.....we bought a tint machine brand new about a year and a half ago....and there it sits, over in the corner...collecting dust. My Boss had this brilliant idea that we could charge Medicaid patients (the only people we do plastic lenses) $25 to UV and tint their MCD glasses.......we have done 3 pair........
"Coimhéad fearg fhear na foighde"
The only problem with tiniting lenses is it stinks up the lab. One needs a commercial grade hood if the lab is in the office .
Yo no comprendo gaelic, but I looked it up, and yeah a good one, kind of like beware of the quiet guys.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks