|
Home > Archive > Lasik Eyes Surgery > July 2006 > Doctor Minarik Re-visits Convergence Insufficiency in Post-Op LASIK
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Doctor Minarik Re-visits Convergence Insufficiency in Post-Op LASIK
|
|
| doctor_my_eye@msn.com 2006-07-26, 9:28 pm |
| One of the most interesting complications of post-op LASIK patients is
the group of symptoms that come together to form a break down in their
binocular function. Here's a trip down memory lane where Doctor M uses
old interactions with SE patients to discuss convergence issues. This
thread comes from Lasikflap.com.
Great explanation of post-myopic convergence disorders (excerpts
below):
Quote:
Quoting Dr. Minarik
When a myopic individual wears glasses, the eyes turn down and in to
read, and the glasses act like little prisms to separate the words on
the page. When that prism suddenly goes away, patients can get vertigo
and asthenopia. Your wife needs a thorough evaluation, and if necessary
a functional optometrist will provide her with activities and exercises
that will help her co-ordinate to her new environment.
Quote:
Quoting Dr. Minarik
The good news about exotropia....
....is that its one of the easiest things to work on with exercises.
When your wife has exophoria, thay naturally want to "pull" outward all
by themselves, and her glasses were essentially "pulling them back in"
by acting like little prisms.
What vision exercises will do is make your wife aware of where her eyes
want to point when they are relaxed, and she'll practice pulling them
inward. We all can pull our eyes inward, its much harder to train
someone who is "cross-eyed" to pull them back outward.
It has been estimated that as many as 20% of myopic individuals have a
latent (or hidden) eye alignment problem that is masked by their
glasses.
If you read back over our threads about functional optometrists Vs. the
"medical model" of the eye, you can now understand why your bride got
so many clueless responses from ophthalmologists when she described her
problems.
A "medical model" eye doctor is trained that the eye is just like a
foot....fix it when its broken. The "functional model" optometrist is
taught that the eye is a gateway to a complex sensory system.
If that gateway is broken down by distortion, crossed eyes, exophoria
and the like...then the whole sensory integration breaks down. Your
wife is a walking/talking endorsement of the fact that the functional
model of vision MUST be taught more, ESPECIALLY to ophthalmology
residents who are going to go out there "flappin' and zappin'" without
understanding the consequences.
And an eye exercise...
Quote:
Quoting Dr. Minarik
Here's Another Exercise.......
The main problem with having eyes that want to turn outward is the we
often don't know where our eyes are turned at any given moment. So, one
of the basic ideas behind vision therapy is to give you
biofeedback...to actually tell you where your eyes are turning. So,
here's one of the all time best eye exercises for eyes that turn out.
To do this, you need either a piece of string that is about the length
of a shoelace, or you can actually use a shoelace. First, you tie a
knot in the string about three inches or so from the end. Then, you
take the string and hold the long end of the string (away from the
knot) up against the tip of your nose, then hold the knot end out at
arms length. Because you are holding the string on the midline of your
body, your eyes will see two strings...the eyes are "fooled" because
the string is between them and the brain cannot fuse the two images of
the string into one. So, as you look at the knot, you will see two
strings, one from each eye. If your eyes are aligned perfectly, the two
strings will appear to form a letter "V", where the two strings appear
to come together and meet at the knot. If you are cross-eyed, you will
see an "X", where the strings cross before they get out to the knot. If
you are exophoric ("wall-eyed") you will see the strings head towards
each other but never meet at the knot.
This is where biofeedback comes in. You are actually seeing how your
eyes are aligned. So, as you know, we all have an ability to
voluntarily cross our eyes. So, pull your eyes together slowly until
you see the letter "V" appear. Relax and repeat until you can readily
see the "V".
Through all of this, the string has been held out level from your nose
at arm's length. The next step is to raise the knotted end up high, and
try to see the "V" in that position. Then, once you are successful,
hold the knot lower, and try for the "V".
Now, once you have managed a "V" in the high, middle, and lower
position, the next step is to shorten the string a couple of inches by
pulling in some slack from the end by your nose. The shorter the
string, the harder it is to fuse to get your "V". If you can get the
letter "V" in the level position, then you try high and then low. Then
you shorten three more inches and start over.
What you have been mastering is called "Brock's String", and when you
are holding the string level, you are aligning your eyes in "primary
position of gaze," When you hold the string high, you are aligning your
eyes in "secondary position of gaze." Down low is "Tertiary position of
gaze."
So, when does on have a chance to "lay off" of exercising? When you can
pick up a piece of string, "Do Brock's String" at primary, secondary,
and tertiary position of gaze, all the way up the string until about 3
inches off the end of your nose.
O.K. you guys owe me a beer for that one
..
---------------
I have never heard of the field of 'functional Optometry' but if one of
these specialists is available in your area ... likely worth a visit!
It may be unhealtful for Dr. Minarik to consume the amount of beer he
is owed.
--------------
DrMinarik
...nothing like the burp you get from a beer of gratitude.
All kidding aside, the field of functional vision has a wonderful
support organization called the OEP. The OEP (Optometric Extension
Program) provides information for optometrists who have an interest in
helping patients learn how to improve their binocularity.
The website for the OEP is a wonderful resource for anyone in the US to
find a functionally trained optometrist in their community. That
website is:
www.oep.org
_________________
For resources, check www.doctormyeye.com
| |
| serebel 2006-07-26, 9:28 pm |
|
More self serving garbage from Minarik. This time he's dredging up
ancient history. Of course a SE whiner comes up with this so called
complication. Yeah,yeah you've seen billions of these nuts in your
"practice". It's not a surgical complication, it's a mental disorder
invented by the SE whiner croud of a few.
| |
| Trulytelling@yahoo.com 2006-07-26, 9:28 pm |
| Dr. Minarik provided some of the most interesting and useful
information ever posted on this or any other newsgroup - it should get
as many repostings and links as possible so that the growing number of
patients with post-LASIK convergence disorders can understand what's
going on and know who to contact for some help.
| |
| serebel 2006-07-26, 9:28 pm |
|
Trulytelling@yahoo.com wrote:
> Dr. Minarik provided some of the most interesting and useful
> information ever posted on this or any other newsgroup - it should get
> as many repostings and links as possible so that the growing number of
> patients with post-LASIK convergence disorders can understand what's
> going on and know who to contact for some help.
Wah,wah,wah!!!!! He's as useless as tits on a bull and for that
matter so are you.
There are no "growing numbers" out there and you know it. Things must
be slow at flappie.
| |
| Ragnar 2006-07-26, 9:28 pm |
| I didn't bother reading this long-winded post below.. but I noticed it
is about the loss of binocular vision. Due to anisometropia...
glasses often result in a loss of binocular vision. Contact lenses
and LASIK are beneficial to binocular vision.. however.. most people
seem to prefer giviing up binocular vision for monovision.
Binocular vision is about as insignifican as stereo sound.
On 26 Jul 2006 14:47:19 -0700, "doctor_my_eye@msn.com"
<doctor_my_eye@msn.com> wrote:
>One of the most interesting complications of post-op LASIK patients is
>the group of symptoms that come together to form a break down in their
>binocular function. Here's a trip down memory lane where Doctor M uses
>old interactions with SE patients to discuss convergence issues. This
>thread comes from Lasikflap.com.
>
>
>Great explanation of post-myopic convergence disorders (excerpts
>below):
>
>Quote:
>Quoting Dr. Minarik
>
>When a myopic individual wears glasses, the eyes turn down and in to
>read, and the glasses act like little prisms to separate the words on
>the page. When that prism suddenly goes away, patients can get vertigo
>and asthenopia. Your wife needs a thorough evaluation, and if necessary
>a functional optometrist will provide her with activities and exercises
>that will help her co-ordinate to her new environment.
>
>
>Quote:
>Quoting Dr. Minarik
>
>The good news about exotropia....
>
>...is that its one of the easiest things to work on with exercises.
>When your wife has exophoria, thay naturally want to "pull" outward all
>by themselves, and her glasses were essentially "pulling them back in"
>by acting like little prisms.
>
>What vision exercises will do is make your wife aware of where her eyes
>want to point when they are relaxed, and she'll practice pulling them
>inward. We all can pull our eyes inward, its much harder to train
>someone who is "cross-eyed" to pull them back outward.
>
>It has been estimated that as many as 20% of myopic individuals have a
>latent (or hidden) eye alignment problem that is masked by their
>glasses.
>If you read back over our threads about functional optometrists Vs. the
>"medical model" of the eye, you can now understand why your bride got
>so many clueless responses from ophthalmologists when she described her
>problems.
>
>A "medical model" eye doctor is trained that the eye is just like a
>foot....fix it when its broken. The "functional model" optometrist is
>taught that the eye is a gateway to a complex sensory system.
>
>If that gateway is broken down by distortion, crossed eyes, exophoria
>and the like...then the whole sensory integration breaks down. Your
>wife is a walking/talking endorsement of the fact that the functional
>model of vision MUST be taught more, ESPECIALLY to ophthalmology
>residents who are going to go out there "flappin' and zappin'" without
>understanding the consequences.
>
>
>And an eye exercise...
>
>Quote:
>Quoting Dr. Minarik
>
>Here's Another Exercise.......
>
>The main problem with having eyes that want to turn outward is the we
>often don't know where our eyes are turned at any given moment. So, one
>of the basic ideas behind vision therapy is to give you
>biofeedback...to actually tell you where your eyes are turning. So,
>here's one of the all time best eye exercises for eyes that turn out.
>
>To do this, you need either a piece of string that is about the length
>of a shoelace, or you can actually use a shoelace. First, you tie a
>knot in the string about three inches or so from the end. Then, you
>take the string and hold the long end of the string (away from the
>knot) up against the tip of your nose, then hold the knot end out at
>arms length. Because you are holding the string on the midline of your
>body, your eyes will see two strings...the eyes are "fooled" because
>the string is between them and the brain cannot fuse the two images of
>the string into one. So, as you look at the knot, you will see two
>strings, one from each eye. If your eyes are aligned perfectly, the two
>strings will appear to form a letter "V", where the two strings appear
>to come together and meet at the knot. If you are cross-eyed, you will
>see an "X", where the strings cross before they get out to the knot. If
>you are exophoric ("wall-eyed") you will see the strings head towards
>each other but never meet at the knot.
>
>This is where biofeedback comes in. You are actually seeing how your
>eyes are aligned. So, as you know, we all have an ability to
>voluntarily cross our eyes. So, pull your eyes together slowly until
>you see the letter "V" appear. Relax and repeat until you can readily
>see the "V".
>
>Through all of this, the string has been held out level from your nose
>at arm's length. The next step is to raise the knotted end up high, and
>try to see the "V" in that position. Then, once you are successful,
>hold the knot lower, and try for the "V".
>
>Now, once you have managed a "V" in the high, middle, and lower
>position, the next step is to shorten the string a couple of inches by
>pulling in some slack from the end by your nose. The shorter the
>string, the harder it is to fuse to get your "V". If you can get the
>letter "V" in the level position, then you try high and then low. Then
>you shorten three more inches and start over.
>
>What you have been mastering is called "Brock's String", and when you
>are holding the string level, you are aligning your eyes in "primary
>position of gaze," When you hold the string high, you are aligning your
>eyes in "secondary position of gaze." Down low is "Tertiary position of
>gaze."
>
>So, when does on have a chance to "lay off" of exercising? When you can
>pick up a piece of string, "Do Brock's String" at primary, secondary,
>and tertiary position of gaze, all the way up the string until about 3
>inches off the end of your nose.
>
>O.K. you guys owe me a beer for that one
>.
>---------------
>I have never heard of the field of 'functional Optometry' but if one of
>these specialists is available in your area ... likely worth a visit!
>
>It may be unhealtful for Dr. Minarik to consume the amount of beer he
>is owed.
>
>--------------
>
>
>DrMinarik
>
> ...nothing like the burp you get from a beer of gratitude.
>
>All kidding aside, the field of functional vision has a wonderful
>support organization called the OEP. The OEP (Optometric Extension
>Program) provides information for optometrists who have an interest in
>helping patients learn how to improve their binocularity.
>
>The website for the OEP is a wonderful resource for anyone in the US to
>find a functionally trained optometrist in their community. That
>website is:
>
>www.oep.org
>
>
>_________________
>For resources, check www.doctormyeye.com
| |
| lasikrollette 2006-07-26, 9:28 pm |
|
Ragnar wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> I didn't bother reading this long-winded post below.. but I noticed it
> is about the loss of binocular vision. Due to anisometropia...
> glasses often result in a loss of binocular vision. Contact lenses
> and LASIK are beneficial to binocular vision.. however.. most people
> seem to prefer giviing up binocular vision for monovision.
>
> Binocular vision is about as insignifican as stereo sound.
>
>
> On 26 Jul 2006 14:47:19 -0700, "doctor_my_eye@msn.com"
> <doctor_my_eye@msn.com> wrote:
>
| |
| lasikrollette 2006-07-26, 9:28 pm |
|
Ragnar wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> I didn't bother reading this long-winded post below.. but I noticed it
> is about the loss of binocular vision. Due to anisometropia...
> glasses often result in a loss of binocular vision. Contact lenses
> and LASIK are beneficial to binocular vision.. however.. most people
> seem to prefer giviing up binocular vision for monovision.
>
> Binocular vision is about as insignifican as stereo sound.
>
>
> On 26 Jul 2006 14:47:19 -0700, "doctor_my_eye@msn.com"
> <doctor_my_eye@msn.com> wrote:
>
The very complication I have been dealing with.Vertigo is not pleasent.
The two resident idiots on here are going to continue to deny deny
deny.
Like to stir shit do we.What a couple of pro lasik morons.You deserve
aniseikonia,shitheads.
[vbcol=seagreen]
| |
| Ragnar 2006-07-26, 9:28 pm |
| What makes you think that Dr. Minarik needs you to kiss his XXX? If
I were Dr. Minarik, I would ask a known idiot such as yourself to NOT
associate yourself with me at all.
You endorsing Dr. Minarik is like a candidate for public office
getting the endorsment of Osama Bin Laden.
On 26 Jul 2006 17:36:52 -0700, Trulytelling@yahoo.com wrote:
>Dr. Minarik provided some of the most interesting and useful
>information ever posted on this or any other newsgroup - it should get
>as many repostings and links as possible so that the growing number of
>patients with post-LASIK convergence disorders can understand what's
>going on and know who to contact for some help.
| |
| serebel 2006-07-26, 9:28 pm |
|
lasikrollette wrote:
> The very complication I have been dealing with.Vertigo is not pleasent.
> The two resident idiots on here are going to continue to deny deny
> deny.
> Like to stir shit do we.What a couple of pro lasik morons.You deserve
> aniseikonia,shitheads.
Oh, go lean over a balcony railing you big baby.
| |
| doctor_my_eye@msn.com 2006-07-27, 8:26 am |
| Ragnar and SERebel are pitiful excuses for human beings. They are now
and always have been total rectal scum. They are the classic example
of the class bully that constantly spits in the eye of everyone that is
smarter than them or more popular than they are. When you listen to
their flaming and respond, you only feed their pathology. I remind you
that neither of these two assholes has any medical credentials
whatsoever.
They are the Beavis and Butthead of Google. Don't feed them, just pity
them.
serebel wrote:
> lasikrollette wrote:
>
>
>
> Oh, go lean over a balcony railing you big baby.
| |
| Ragnar 2006-07-27, 9:26 pm |
| I can't believe that Dr. Minarik nor any doctor would post this crap
below. Someone must be spoofing Dr. Minarik.. or he has gone off his
meds again.
On 27 Jul 2006 06:21:59 -0700, "doctor_my_eye@msn.com"
<doctor_my_eye@msn.com> wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
>Ragnar and SERebel are pitiful excuses for human beings. They are now
>and always have been total rectal scum. They are the classic example
>of the class bully that constantly spits in the eye of everyone that is
>smarter than them or more popular than they are. When you listen to
>their flaming and respond, you only feed their pathology. I remind you
>that neither of these two assholes has any medical credentials
>whatsoever.
>They are the Beavis and Butthead of Google. Don't feed them, just pity
>them.
>serebel wrote:
| |
| serebel 2006-07-27, 9:26 pm |
|
doctor_my_eye@msn.com wrote:
> Ragnar and SERebel are pitiful excuses for human beings. They are now
> and always have been total rectal scum. They are the classic example
> of the class bully that constantly spits in the eye of everyone that is
> smarter than them or more popular than they are. When you listen to
> their flaming and respond, you only feed their pathology. I remind you
> that neither of these two assholes has any medical credentials
> whatsoever.
> They are the Beavis and Butthead of Google. Don't feed them, just pity
> them.
Minarik's practice is slow again, so he'll try to reel in
hypocondriacs for that extra gas money. He'll try the psycho crap
(RSSSSSSSSSSS) again soon.
Speaking of credentials, how many times are you going to lose your
license?
| |
| doctor_my_eye@msn.com 2006-07-27, 9:26 pm |
| The only risk to my license would be if I attempted to put a bullet
through your head. If I aim right, I'd probably get Ragnar's crotch
with the same shot.
serebel wrote:
> doctor_my_eye@msn.com wrote:
>
>
> Minarik's practice is slow again, so he'll try to reel in
> hypocondriacs for that extra gas money. He'll try the psycho crap
> (RSSSSSSSSSSS) again soon.
> Speaking of credentials, how many times are you going to lose your
> license?
| |
| serebel 2006-07-27, 9:26 pm |
|
doctor_my_eye@msn.com wrote:
> The only risk to my license would be if I attempted to put a bullet
> through your head. If I aim right, I'd probably get Ragnar's crotch
> with the same shot.
No, really Minarik, how many times are you going to have your licence
pulled?
If you're gonna put a bullet somewhere, use a gun, it's easier that way.
| |
| Ragnar 2006-07-28, 8:29 am |
| I still have my doubts that he is posting these last few mesages...
If it is him.. he is genuinely mentally ill.
On 27 Jul 2006 16:50:37 -0700, "doctor_my_eye@msn.com"
<doctor_my_eye@msn.com> wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
>The only risk to my license would be if I attempted to put a bullet
>through your head. If I aim right, I'd probably get Ragnar's crotch
>with the same shot.
>serebel wrote:
|
| |
|
|