Gmail Calendar Documents Reader Web more »
Recently Visited Groups | Help | Sign in
Google Groups Home
sci.med.vision
+ new post
About this group
Subscribe to this group
This is a Usenet group - learn more
Message from discussion Dr. Bates: The Effect of the Minus on the Eye's Refractive STATE
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
p.clar...@gmail.com  
View profile  
 More options Mar 31 2008, 2:46 pm
Newsgroups: sci.med.vision
From: p.clar...@gmail.com
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 21:46:16 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Mon, Mar 31 2008 2:46 pm
Subject: Re: Dr. Bates: The Effect of the Minus on the Eye's Refractive STATE
Reply to author | Forward | Print | View thread | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
On Mar 30, 7:50 am, Zetsu <absolutelyinvinci...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> >Arguments are to be avoided.  They are always vulgar -- and
> >often convincing.

> Actually, debate often leads to intellectual progress.
> It's true that arguments can divide people, but arguments help people
> to know where they stand and to make an analysis of the scenario. If
> there were never any arguments, one may deduce that everyone has the
> same opinion on everything. What kind of a world would it be if
> everyone agreed on everything? Boring

> >This is Dr.  Bates' statement about his reason for his
> >opposing the use of a minus lens on an eye that is slightly
> >nearsighted.

> Actually, Dr. Bates opposed the use of a minus lens on ANY eyes.
> Slightly nearsighted or very nearsighted is not relevant.

> >From Chapter 8 by Dr. Bates
> >(Clarifying statement added -- minus lens)
> >That (minus-lens) glasses must injure the eye is evident

> Actually, Dr. Bates was describing the effect of ANY lenses. Minus
> lens, plus lens, astigmatic corrective lens, etc. He was impartial on
> what kind of lens is in use, but stated that they are ALL detrimental
> to the sight.

> You are twisting his words, Otis!

> Can't you just stick to Dr Raphaelson and leave poor Dr. Bates alone?
> Imagine how much he is suffering right now in his grave knowing how
> his statements have been corrupted with wrong interpretation! Gosh!

what a nice story.  is there any proof for this?  published reports,
independent verification, publication in peer-reviewed journals?  Or
is it just supposition?  it just SOUNDS like is has to be right.  Too
bad you have to prove it, and when various researchers have looked at
various aspects of this (intentionally using overminusing, using no
spectacles at all, etc.) there appears to be no detrimental effects of
using glasses-- they just help people see better.

    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2009 Google