Dr. Craig Blackwell, 27:25 As a medical person, you must be careful. Your efforts are appreciated by me! BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE ABSOLUTE PREVENTION OF MYOPIA. True prevention, is by two Ophthalmologists, in Hawaii, for their 3 children. Looking at the ATOM and LAMP studies, they concluded, that absolute prevention must start, before the children ACTUALLY ENTER MYOPIA. This anticipating what is certain to happen. A true scientific perspective. This is also off label, so it can never be prescribed.
31:08 Study ATOM2 from 2012 found that the progression of eye lenghtening is not reduced by Atropin drops. I attribute the risks of high myopia (like retinal detachment) to the elongation of the eye bulb. Does this mean, that although they reduce the number of required dioptres in myopes, Atropin drops do not reduce the risks of high myopia? 32:10 LAMP 2020 found a reduction in eye length with Atropin drops.
Recovery works. It is possible to change your refractive STATE, from -0.5 Diopters, or 20/50, to +0.5 Diopters, or 20/20. I have done this myself, because I know that any OD will help me do it.
Of course , scientific prevention is always possible, if the engineer will take science seriously. To be Go from 20/50, to 20/20. This includes making your own refractive state measurements. I did it.
@@matmaifizyka6001 Correct. Equally I did not "cure it". Further, to prevent myself from getting back into myopia, I continue to wear the plus, when I judge it necessary.
My son just turned 8 and has slight myopia (20/40). I'm committed to getting his near work down to 2 hours a day, and ensuring he's outdoors in sunshine for 2 hours. I hope that might help or possibly even reverse. Aren't kids still growing so isn't it possible?
I find it odd that undercorrection would worsen myopia when in the Smith 2013 study from video 3 in your series showed a recovery (the monkeys technically became undercorrected when their minus lenses got removed). The monkeys were more undercorrected as they started at around -2.00D so their undercorrection was +2.00D (no lenses) and recovered while in the Chung 2002 study it was only +0.75D undercorrection but got worse. i.e if full correction is -2.00D then the undercorrection is -1.25D. The monkeys' myopia would have continued to get worse due to undercorrection but they didn't so this is a contradiction. I believe myopic defocus would encourage the eye to shorten just as hyperopic defocus encourages the eye to elongate.
Hi Ty, Great observation, and analysis. All primate eyes, are like that. They control, IN BOTH DIRECTIONS!. That is the scientific point that Blackwell does not understand. That is the failure of Kepler's theory.
Of course you totally ignore Frank Young's plus prevention study. A correctly worn plus lens, can be completely effective in engineering science for prevention, of myopia, when the pilot is at 20/50. It is indeed the Second Opinion.
12:00 You never talk to the person, Engineer. You never offer him a prevention choice, while he still confirm passing the DMV, at 20/60, and 20/40. You never teach him to measure his own refractive STATE. The plus worn at that point, can get you back to 20/20, refraction of +0.5 Diopters. But that means giving the person educated control of hid life time refractive State. This is an Engineering, scientific proposal, not a medical proposal.
Very good videos to document some mainstream beliefs on myopia in the last decade. Things have changed dramatically in the last few years. For a current, much better interpretation and flaws of the papers referenced in these videos and many more see: Medina A. The cause of myopia development and progression: Theory, evidence, and treatment. Surv Ophthalmol. 2022 Mar-Apr;67(2):488-509. doi: 10.1016/j.survophthal.2021.06.005. Epub 2021 Jun 25. PMID: 34181975.
Hi Antonio, Excellent commentary. Equally, I believe that only motivated parents can help their own children, with life time prevention. This is clearly beyond the scope of this man's understanding of the problem. Your 1980 paper, is the beginning of the correct scientific answer. Again, beyond the scope of "conventional medicine" - tragically!
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
Dr. Craig Blackwell,
27:25
As a medical person, you must be careful. Your efforts are appreciated by me!
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE ABSOLUTE PREVENTION OF MYOPIA.
True prevention, is by two Ophthalmologists, in Hawaii, for their 3 children.
Looking at the ATOM and LAMP studies, they concluded, that absolute prevention must start, before the children ACTUALLY ENTER MYOPIA.
This anticipating what is certain to happen.
A true scientific perspective.
This is also off label, so it can never be prescribed.
31:08 Study ATOM2 from 2012 found that the progression of eye lenghtening is not reduced by Atropin drops.
I attribute the risks of high myopia (like retinal detachment) to the elongation of the eye bulb.
Does this mean, that although they reduce the number of required dioptres in myopes, Atropin drops do not reduce the risks of high myopia?
32:10 LAMP 2020 found a reduction in eye length with Atropin drops.
No agreement.
You now use Atropine to help a kid AVOID ENTRY INTO MYOPIA.
BOTH PARENTS AGREE.
A wonderful help.
Recovery works.
It is possible to change your refractive STATE, from -0.5 Diopters, or 20/50, to +0.5 Diopters, or 20/20.
I have done this myself, because I know that any OD will help me do it.
Of course , scientific prevention is always possible, if the engineer will take science seriously.
To be Go from 20/50, to 20/20.
This includes making your own refractive state measurements.
I did it.
if you went from 20/50 to 20/20, it means you reversed myopia not prevented it
@@matmaifizyka6001 Correct. Equally I did not "cure it".
Further, to prevent myself from getting back into myopia, I continue to wear the plus, when I judge it necessary.
My son just turned 8 and has slight myopia (20/40). I'm committed to getting his near work down to 2 hours a day, and ensuring he's outdoors in sunshine for 2 hours. I hope that might help or possibly even reverse. Aren't kids still growing so isn't it possible?
It is possible, but you might not like prevention.
Great Study review! Very helpful to ECPs in deciding which mode treatment would be best!
I find it odd that undercorrection would worsen myopia when in the Smith 2013 study from video 3 in your series showed a recovery (the monkeys technically became undercorrected when their minus lenses got removed). The monkeys were more undercorrected as they started at around -2.00D so their undercorrection was +2.00D (no lenses) and recovered while in the Chung 2002 study it was only +0.75D undercorrection but got worse. i.e if full correction is -2.00D then the undercorrection is -1.25D. The monkeys' myopia would have continued to get worse due to undercorrection but they didn't so this is a contradiction.
I believe myopic defocus would encourage the eye to shorten just as hyperopic defocus encourages the eye to elongate.
100% Correct.
All eyes are dynamic control system.
Smith III is final proof, on a scientific level.
Yes, I agree with u, Looks like doctor didn't open theme with undercorrection....
Hi Ty,
Great observation, and analysis.
All primate eyes, are like that.
They control, IN BOTH DIRECTIONS!.
That is the scientific point that Blackwell does not understand.
That is the failure of Kepler's theory.
In final which atropine is better 1% or 0.01%?
Choice of the parents, for PREVENTION, EXCLUSIVELY.
Of course you totally ignore Frank Young's plus prevention study.
A correctly worn plus lens, can be completely effective in engineering science for prevention, of myopia, when the pilot is at 20/50.
It is indeed the Second Opinion.
12:00
You never talk to the person, Engineer.
You never offer him a prevention choice, while he still confirm passing the DMV, at 20/60, and 20/40.
You never teach him to measure his own refractive STATE.
The plus worn at that point, can get you back to 20/20, refraction of +0.5 Diopters.
But that means giving the person educated control of hid life time refractive State.
This is an Engineering, scientific proposal, not a medical proposal.
Very good videos to document some mainstream beliefs on myopia in the last decade. Things have changed dramatically in the last few years. For a current, much better interpretation and flaws of the papers referenced in these videos and many more see: Medina A. The cause of myopia development and progression: Theory, evidence, and treatment. Surv Ophthalmol. 2022 Mar-Apr;67(2):488-509. doi: 10.1016/j.survophthal.2021.06.005. Epub 2021 Jun 25. PMID: 34181975.
Hi Antonio,
Excellent commentary.
Equally, I believe that only motivated parents can help their own children, with life time prevention.
This is clearly beyond the scope of this man's understanding of the problem.
Your 1980 paper, is the beginning of the correct scientific answer.
Again, beyond the scope of "conventional medicine" - tragically!