(This text is translated into English from the original Finnish exchange)

Finnish Medical Journal’s discussion policy: “Public discussion refers to open discussion about material appearing in this magazine. Its purpose is to give fresh feedback to the editors and to provide our readers with an opportunity for
criticism. The letters will not be published elsewhere without the express consent of the writer. On behalf of the Finnish Medical Journal, the Editors-in chief and Managing Editor will reply to comments sent in as necessary.”

1) This letter was originally sent in February 12th 2009, by three patients of
mine  which I have now read – to COMMENT on Olavi Pärssinen’s review “Pilaako lukeminen silmät?” (Will reading spoil your eyes?) (The Finnish Medical Journal
6/2009):

Ophthalmologist, DM Kaisu Viikari has been speaking for the prevention of myopia for more than thirty years.

As we have personal experiences of getting rid of the minus lenses, we have been actively following the progress of myopia prevention in the world at large.

We are thoroughly familiar with all of Viikari’s three works; for example, in her most recent book “jotta totuus ei unohtuisi” (2004, 2006) she refers to an article that appeared in Duodecim (2003;119:2475) “Likitaittoisuuden esto
kanoilla ja ihmisillä” (Prevention of myopia in hens and humans).

In this article, Professors of Ophthalmology T. Tervo and L. Laatikainen from Helsinki state that slowing down of myopia development with plus lenses, which the article that they were discussing referred to (Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2003:44:2818) was not a new idea. These are the very problems that Kaisu Viikari has been concerned about for more than three decades.

This is why we were surprised to find that among the 55 references of Olavi Pärssinen’s review that appeared in the Finnish Medical Journal 6/2009, (Pilaako lukeminen silmät?) he does not mention this Finnish article that essentially
touches on the prevention of myopia.

It is difficult to think of a problem that would have such in-depth consequences for the wellbeing of mankind as increasing myopia – and in a wider sense, accommodation strain – in front of which, however, we do not need to throw our towel in and put our hands up.

Names withheld.

============

What we MUST do — if we want a BETTER preventive future, is to identify those selfless persons who will PUSH us to learn how to prevent.

The purpose of i-see is to supply the critical preventive information (both Bates and Prentice) before that first minus is applied an in innocence — begin to wear it ALL THE TIME.

This is why Dr. Bates objected to. This is what I object to. The restraint of scientific information about prevention — and the need, indeed the legal requirement to supply it to you — before you have the first minus placed on your face.

We are all “victims” of this attitude.

Just my second-opinion.

JUDICAL MURDER IN FINNISH MEDICINE is a post from: I Dont Need Glasses

1. The tendency of the eye to go DOWN when you place a minus lens on it. This was probably the spur that drove Dr. Bates to conduct his successful 1913 study. I call this the recognization of a problem. I think we all agree on this issue.

2. Once you recognize the problem, then you can propose a “method” of prevention. It is at this point that there are many problems.

a. Would the method “work” if it were done properly?

b. Who should be involved in a SCIENTIFIC preventive method?

c. Who defines and CONTROLS the method?

d. Are there any posting on i-see who could do any “method” consistently — for even four weeks?

As I recall, about two months ago, Alex asked us (on i-see) to see if we could practice our method (defined by you and I) for 20 minutes a day for one month.

The response — was basically no response.

In fact, I think only Alex and I posted:

1. Our Snellen (in good light conditions), and

2. I posted my refractive STATE (using a basic trial lens kit).

For the record, my Snellen is 20/20 (with 75 watt bulb), and my refractive STATE is +1/2 diopter. (The +1/2 diopter is NOT AN OPTICAL FAILURE.) It is necessary to have that value in order to have excellent night vision.

So perhaps the above will encourage a re-start of Alex’s challenge — to follow the his method for the next month — recording your Snellen in excellent light at the start, and the improvement in visual-acuity after one month.

Here are Dr. Bates remarks about teaching the use of the Snellen for your reference:

===========================

The Snellen Test Card is placed permanently upon the wall of the classroom, and every day the children silently read the smallest letters they can see from their seats with each eye separately, the other being covered with the palm of the hand in such a way as to avoid pressure on the eyeball. This takes no appreciable amount of time, and is sufficient to improve the sight of all children in one week and to cure all errors of refraction after some months, a year, or longer.

Children with markedly defective vision should be encouraged to read the card more frequently.

Records may be kept as follows:

John Smith, 10, Sept. 15, 1918.
R.V. (vision of the right eye) 20/40
L.V. (vision of the left eye) 20/20

John Smith, 11, Jan. 1, 1919.
R.V. 20/30
L.V. 20/15

The numerator of the fraction indicates the distance of the test card from the pupil; the denominator denotes the line read, as designated by the figures printed above the middle of each line of the Snellen Test Card.

A certain amount of supervision is absolutely necessary. At least oncea year some one who understands the method should visit each classroom for the purpose of answering questions, encouraging the teachers to continue the use of the method, and making a report to the proper authorities.

It is not necessary that either the inspector, the teachers, or the children, should understand anything about the physiology of the eye.

==================

I think this is good advice. But I do think that the person (if interested) should understand the “new science”supporting these Bates/Prentice methods

The Bates “Method” — What Works? is a post from: I Dont Need Glasses