Ritalin Helps Beat Cancer Fatigue

Roger Schlafly wrote:
"mark" wrote

Then why is my final perscription different from that generated when I
gaze into the automated machine?


Check with your optometrist. He might be using your astrological
chart. g

I was responding to SumBuny who claimed that there is no
objective medical test for nearsightedness. She is wrong.



No she's not.
The test used to finally come up with a perscription is the one whereby
you have "which is better; 1 or 2; 1 or 2." That is the very essence of
objectivitiy. And the final outcome is SIGNIFICANTLY different from
what the automated device produces (Try going to an el cheepo
optometrist who relies on this and then try to walk around with a prism
in your right eye when you don't need it.)

"Roger Schlafly" wrote in message . net...
"SumBuny" wrote
Tests for nearsightedness and for eyeglass prescriptions *are*
objective.
Perhaps you think that eyecharts are not objective, but most
optometrists
do all their diagnosis and testing with objective tests that look
directly
at the lens in the eye. The eyechart is just a way of double-checking
the results.
Not necessarily...why is it that they have you read the same chart with
both
eyes? All it takes is someone with a good memory to screw that one
up...not
to mention that one can use closure to comprehend a letter that is still
very fuzzy...

You're not reading. You can foolishly try to trick the optometrist, but
it won't work because he really uses other objective tests that do not
involve the eyechart.

Roger is right. They can get a pretty good reading of your refractive
index is without asking you.



If this is the case, why is it that they still have you try so many
different lenses. "Ok, is this one better, or is that one?" If it is
only
a matter of reading charts, then there would be no need for that, right?

He's double-checking.


That and vision is a subjective experience. So they like to add the
subjective component to the evaluation.

--
CBI, MD

mark wrote in message ...

I was responding to SumBuny who claimed that there is no
objective medical test for nearsightedness. She is wrong.



No she's not.

Actually, she is.

The test used to finally come up with a perscription is the one whereby
you have "which is better; 1 or 2; 1 or 2." That is the very essence of
objectivitiy.

No! It is the very essence of subjectivity.


And the final outcome is SIGNIFICANTLY different from
what the automated device produces (Try going to an el cheepo
optometrist who relies on this and then try to walk around with a prism
in your right eye when you don't need it.)

Prisms etc are not part of the dx of nearsightedness. It is one
parameter that the doc plays with other than refractive index. If
everything else is normal (i.e no astigmatism requiring prisms etc)
then the newer machines are pretty accurate.

If she was saying that there is no accurate objective test to
precisely determien the refractive index I would still say she is
wrong but allow for some room to differ over what is sufficiently
accurate. However, as Roger has it stated - that there is an objective
test for myopia - he is absolutely correct.

--
CBI, MD

"jake" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 23:32:57 -0600, "SumBuny"
wrote:


"jake" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 16:38:12 -0600, "SumBuny"
wrote:
I am not aware that pointing out that diabetes is nothing like ADHD
is
telling you and family anything..or that I have ever suggested such
a
thing..


It was not your pointing out diabetes is "nothing like ADHD" that I
was
commenting on, but the comment of "there are no medical tests for
ADHD.

there are not..

It is not a medical condition"

I am by no means alone in holding this view as I am sure you are aware
this is what seems to make you angry..

Being told that I am "making up the condition of ADHD so I can score
drugs"
has a funny effect of making me angry...

you seem determined to take everything personally..

Hmmm...someone makes sweeping statments about people with ADHD, and then
complains that people with ADHD are "taking it personally"....

Why *did* you make these statments? Why are you trying to make me
"defensive" when I challenge you? Perhaps *you* are taking it personally
when I challenge your "logic"? You have refused to answer my questions
about SID, autism, and pain "Then tell me what "objective medical tests"
diagnose them--otherwise, your
logic of why ADHD is not a medical condition implies that these are not..."


that people do this is a fact of life well known to doctors
and nothing to do with you or your family..

Cites?


that I was...and you conveniently snipped both
that and my explanatory comments...your comment was "telling my
family"
that
our ADHD, autism, sid, pain issues are not "medical conditions"...

I said nothing as to whether autism,sid,or chronic pain were medical
conditions..

Then tell me what "objective medical tests" diagnose them--otherwise,
your
logic of why ADHD is not a medical condition implies that these are
not...

that ADHD is not an objective medical condition is just a plain fact
and no diversionary ranting about other conditions alters this..

Cites?







The snipping was not "convenient"..I simply focussed on where I was
being blatantly misinterpreted and traduced..

I was asked what I thought the difference was and IMO the difference
is that ADHD is not a disease or an identifiable medical condition..

I am entitled to hold this view without being accused of telling your
family that autism ..SID ..and chronic pain are not medical
conditions..am I not?

am I not?

You make an assertion and refuse to back it up with evidence....when I ask
you for such evidence, you cry that it is somehow *my* fault?

I have heard better arguing in playgrounds. If you wish to be taken
seriously, as an adult, why not act like one.




Tell me how these are medical conditions when your statement that ADHD is
not--based on its lack of objective medical tests--would say
otherwise....IOW, why is it that you can be prejudicial against ADHD and
then claim you are not with other conditions diagnosed the *same way*...

thses conditions you mention are certainy NOT diagnosed
by teachers complaining of kids wriggling in their seats for
example..or any of the other ethnocentric social judgements
on the list for this socalled diagnosis..

Do you know how autism is diagnosed? How sensory integration disorder is
diagnosed? Have you ever participated in are been shown how a Functional
Behaviral Assessment is done? All of these involve observations by
professionals and teachers--in much the same manner that ADHD is.

http://ani.autistics.org/dsm4-autism.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~sensoryint/

Of course, if you have *evidence/cites* that proves your assertion that this
is not so, please share them. Otherwise--like above--you are going to be
seen as the playground brat who insists he is right only because he thinks
he is and can shout louder than everyone else.



genuine medical conditions are not diagnosed by tick tests..

IOW, prove to me you are not a prejudical hypocrite.

sad you feel the need to resort to personal abuse..
oh well..

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary

prejudicial:
2 : leading to premature judgment or unwarranted opinion

hypocricy:
1 : a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not;
especially : the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion
2 : an act or instance of hypocrisy


Let's see...you insist that people with ADHD are making up their condition
in order to score drugs, you insist that this is so because there are no
"objective medical tests" for ADHD....yet when you are asked for cites, and
asked if other conditions that are diagnosed in the same manner are "made
up," you insist that is not what you meant and that the questioner is at
fault. You are asked for clarification and refuse--retreating behind a
screen of "You are taking it personally, I am not."

According to the above definitions, you are prejudiced and
hypocritical...prove me wrong.

Buny

"jake" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 23:34:11 -0600, "SumBuny"
wrote:


"Roger Schlafly" wrote in message
. net...
"mark" wrote
Then why is my final perscription different from that generated when
I
gaze into the automated machine?

Check with your optometrist. He might be using your astrological
chart. g

I was responding to SumBuny who claimed that there is no
objective medical test for nearsightedness. She is wrong.


You have yet to explain what they are...

here is an example

http://www.lpoproducts.com/Products/LPO231.asp

Topcon KR-8000 Supra Auto Kerato-Refractometer

The innovative design of the KR-8000 enables accurate, reliable
refraction and keratometric measurements within a pupil dilation as
narrow as 2.0mm. This means easier and more precise diagnostic results
when dealing with glaucoma, asymmetric pupils, or elderly patients.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

OK, so we can deal with glaucoma and asymetrical pupils....

.....hypo- or hyper-myopia? Nope...don't see it here.....

The *closest* thing I see to these (which is what the clinical term for
near- and far-sightedness is) can be found in only one paragraph--and it
deals with the Instrument, not the patient's diagnosis...


Scenic fixation chart
This scenic color chart is adjustable in two brightness levels for
optimal results with large or small pupils, making eye fixation
easier. The auto-fogging function reduces the effects of instrument
myopia and patient accommodation.
^^^^^^^^


This machine does not claim to diagnose either condition...try again,
Buny

"jake" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 23:33:47 -0600, "SumBuny"
wrote:


"Roger Schlafly" wrote in message
. net...
"SumBuny" wrote
Tests for nearsightedness and for eyeglass prescriptions *are*
objective.
Perhaps you think that eyecharts are not objective, but most
optometrists
do all their diagnosis and testing with objective tests that look
directly
at the lens in the eye. The eyechart is just a way of
double-checking
the results.
Not necessarily...why is it that they have you read the same chart
with
both
eyes? All it takes is someone with a good memory to screw that one
up...not
to mention that one can use closure to comprehend a letter that is
still
very fuzzy...

You're not reading. You can foolishly try to trick the optometrist, but
it won't work because he really uses other objective tests that do not
involve the eyechart.

....such as....

such as

http://www.lpoproducts.com/Products/LPO231.asp



Please indicate the part of that page where the machine is claimed to be
able to diagnose hypo- and hyper-myopia...

Buny

jake wrote:

bull****..
you provide ME with the objective tests !
you know damn wel there are none ..thats why all the drool about
eyetests and dragging in all theses unrelated problems..

Connor's computerized test of attention and reaction time
California Computerized Assessment Package
Vigil
Trail Making Tests
Wisconsin Card Sorting Test
Rey Ostereith Complex Figure
Digit Span
Letter Number Sequencing
Delis Kaplan tests of executive functioning
go - no go
Tower of London

The list goes on. Most are directly assessing the construct in question.
Just because you might not like the test does not mean that they are not
objective, standardized and well normed.

"jake" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Dec 2003 18:03:31 -0600, "SumBuny"
wrote:


"jake" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 23:32:57 -0600, "SumBuny"
wrote:


"jake" wrote in message
.. .

you seem determined to take everything personally..

Hmmm...someone makes sweeping statments about people with ADHD, and then
complains that people with ADHD are "taking it personally"....

Why *did* you make these statments? Why are you trying to make me
"defensive" when I challenge you? Perhaps *you* are taking it personally
when I challenge your "logic"? You have refused to answer my questions
about SID, autism, and pain "Then tell me what "objective medical tests"
diagnose them--otherwise, your
logic of why ADHD is not a medical condition implies that these are
not..."


that people do this is a fact of life well known to doctors
and nothing to do with you or your family..

Cites?

LOL..
you guys wave the word around like some magic wand..

you really need some peer reviewed academic study to know that
people feign symptoms to get controlled drugs prescribed by doctors..?

Because anyone can say anything...doesn't make it true. However, having a
peer reviewed article does lend credence, doesn't it? Otherwise, it is as
credible as saying, "People drink water to get high."







that I was...and you conveniently snipped both
that and my explanatory comments...your comment was "telling my
family"
that
our ADHD, autism, sid, pain issues are not "medical conditions"...

I said nothing as to whether autism,sid,or chronic pain were medical
conditions..

Then tell me what "objective medical tests" diagnose them--otherwise,
your
logic of why ADHD is not a medical condition implies that these are
not...

that ADHD is not an objective medical condition is just a plain fact
and no diversionary ranting about other conditions alters this..

Cites?

bull****..
you provide ME with the objective tests !
you know damn wel there are none ..thats why all the drool about
eyetests and dragging in all theses unrelated problems..


OK...then tell me what your belief is...are autism, sensory integration
disorder, and pain all "made up disorders"? If they are not, then why not?
They are diagnosed the same way as ADHD...

If you believe that they are, then quit the sanctimonious act of "Buny is
taking all this personally because I did not say that these are made up."

IOW, back up your "opinions" that ADHD is a "made up disorder because there
are no objective medical tests."




The snipping was not "convenient"..I simply focussed on where I was
being blatantly misinterpreted and traduced..

I was asked what I thought the difference was and IMO the difference
is that ADHD is not a disease or an identifiable medical condition..

I am entitled to hold this view without being accused of telling
your
family that autism ..SID ..and chronic pain are not medical
conditions..am I not?

am I not?

You make an assertion and refuse to back it up with evidence....when I
ask
you for such evidence, you cry that it is somehow *my* fault?

I have heard better arguing in playgrounds. If you wish to be taken
seriously, as an adult, why not act like one.

am I not?

No....you make assertions and insist that others prove them.










Tell me how these are medical conditions when your statement that ADHD
is
not--based on its lack of objective medical tests--would say
otherwise....IOW, why is it that you can be prejudicial against ADHD
and
then claim you are not with other conditions diagnosed the *same
way*...

thses conditions you mention are certainy NOT diagnosed
by teachers complaining of kids wriggling in their seats for
example..or any of the other ethnocentric social judgements
on the list for this socalled diagnosis..

Do you know how autism is diagnosed? How sensory integration disorder is
diagnosed? Have you ever participated in are been shown how a Functional
Behaviral Assessment is done? All of these involve observations by
professionals and teachers--in much the same manner that ADHD is.

http://ani.autistics.org/dsm4-autism.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~sensoryint/

Of course, if you have *evidence/cites* that proves your assertion that
this
is not so, please share them. Otherwise--like above--you are going to be
seen as the playground brat who insists he is right only because he
thinks
he is and can shout louder than everyone else.


they are not diagnosed by teachers complaining that kids wriggle in
their seats..

Neither is ADHD....
http://www.healthsystem.virginia.edu.../ADHDDSMIV.cfm







genuine medical conditions are not diagnosed by tick tests..

IOW, prove to me you are not a prejudical hypocrite.

sad you feel the need to resort to personal abuse..
oh well..

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary

prejudicial:
2 : leading to premature judgment or unwarranted opinion

hypocricy:
1 : a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not;
especially : the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion
2 : an act or instance of hypocrisy


Let's see...you insist that people with ADHD are making up their
condition
in order to score drugs,

really?

I said no such thing ..you have the cart before the horse presumeably
quite deliberately..
I said people present the symptoms of ADHD in order to be Dxed and
prescribed stimulants ..

And I asked you how you got that assertion--IOW, the burden of proof is
yours to prove that we are fraudulently getting drugs...




and it is not unusual for them to seek advice in these forums on how
to be Dxed nor for them to be coached on how to do so..

Ditto...the burden of proof is yours to show that we are doing so...and not
asking for help in coping techniques and in knowing we are not alone.
Y'know, asking for *support*?

Nah, we couldn't be doing something as innocuous as that, could we? That is
not sinister enough, not exciting enough--it is far too boring...

I did see where you claimed to be "agnostic" about the concept of ADHD...you
sound positively *atheistic*...You do not sound like someone who believes
that there is a possibility of ADHD, you deny its existance...that is
atheistic, not agnostic.




you insist that this is so because there are no
"objective medical tests" for ADHD....yet when you are asked for cites,
and
asked if other conditions that are diagnosed in the same manner are "made
up," you insist that is not what you meant and that the questioner is at
fault. You are asked for clarification and refuse--retreating behind a
screen of "You are taking it personally, I am not."

According to the above definitions, you are prejudiced and
hypocritical...prove me wrong.

what for?


Because I do not think you can...

Buny

jake wrote:
On Tue, 23 Dec 2003 20:03:53 -0500, mark wrote:


jake wrote:


bull****..
you provide ME with the objective tests !
you know damn wel there are none ..thats why all the drool about
eyetests and dragging in all theses unrelated problems..

Connor's computerized test of attention and reaction time
California Computerized Assessment Package
Vigil
Trail Making Tests
Wisconsin Card Sorting Test
Rey Ostereith Complex Figure
Digit Span
Letter Number Sequencing
Delis Kaplan tests of executive functioning
go - no go
Tower of London

The list goes on. Most are directly assessing the construct in question.
Just because you might not like the test does not mean that they are not
objective, standardized and well normed.


correct me if I am wrong but these appear to be batteries of
psychological tests..

You are wrong.
You can check with insurance companies (in the US)--they are reimbursed
as MEDICAL procedures.

"jake" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 23 Dec 2003 20:03:53 -0500, mark wrote:

jake wrote:

bull****..
you provide ME with the objective tests !
you know damn wel there are none ..thats why all the drool about
eyetests and dragging in all theses unrelated problems..

Connor's computerized test of attention and reaction time
California Computerized Assessment Package
Vigil
Trail Making Tests
Wisconsin Card Sorting Test
Rey Ostereith Complex Figure
Digit Span
Letter Number Sequencing
Delis Kaplan tests of executive functioning
go - no go
Tower of London

The list goes on. Most are directly assessing the construct in question.
Just because you might not like the test does not mean that they are not
objective, standardized and well normed.

correct me if I am wrong but these appear to be batteries of
psychological tests..


Um, did you think that ADHD involved the organ of the heart? We do not give
liver panels to test the lungs, we do not use blood pressue cuffs to test
the liver, why would we not give mental tests to deal with a mental health
issue?

Buny