Subject: In order to understand the problem of myopia – it is necessary to understand its history.
“Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it” – George Santayana
Issue: The minus lens, used by Kepler on himself – is a simple “default”. It works, but with adverse “secondary effects”. We need to challenge the idea that this simple “default” method, is not the solution, but a “part of the problem”
Kepler, J., (1571-1630) “Dioptice: Seu demonstration eorum quae visui et visibilibus propter conspicilla non ita pridem inventa accidunt”, Augsburg, 1611
J. Kepler: Dioptice : A demonstration of the things that happen to the sight and the visible was found not so long ago for the sake of conspicilla “, Augsburg , 1611
Item: In doing my own research, I found it difficult to get a consistent history of preventive efforts.
Item: The Development of Alex Eulengerg’s site
First, I will thank Alex for his extensive library, and insights.
One issue that I think needs to be improved, is the history of various research efforts, and their consequences.
This history should not be exclusively “medical”, but must included “objectors”, to the traditional minus lens.
I would start this process by a review of Johannes Kepler, who in about 16 years, un-intentionally induced negative status in his natural eyes, by intensive close work. This was his great challenge, and he did very well with his research.
He also knew the character of a lens, (minus and plus), and when he noticed his refractive state was mildly negative, he used a minus lens to ‘clear’ the stars he viewed.
That basic practice, and the effectiveness of the minus, has not changed at all in the last 400 years. In the pressure of the “moment”, the default minus will always be used in that manner.
In 1865, two men, Helmholtz and Donders, simply “formalized” what Kepler had discovered. This became the Helmholtz “theory” of the eye. He just took the eye to be a “box camera”, and all refractive states (plus or minus) were all called errors.
In 1900, Dr. Bates took this absolute theory to task, as being an “error” itself. He judged that the minus was a “poor idea” at best, and was probably making the eye even more “negative” than is would be – if the person did not wear a strong minus all the time.
His published efforts, in 1912, achieved a degree of success. But there was no “follow up” on his concept, or the need for the person to be intellectually involved in the preventive process.
I would be willing to further enhance this history, and maybe Alex can help – because I judge that those who fail to learn the lessons of history, are doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past.
Please feel free to add your own commentary and knowledge to this interesting subject.
Efforts at Prevention.
MILITARY HISTORY – AT THE NAVAL ACADEMY AND WEST POINT.
Details can be found under, “PAPERS” on this site.