Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
Vitreous detachment - thousands of "Floaters"
Vitreous detachment - thousands of "Floaters"
Hi. I'm 60 and am in the middle of a vitreous detachment. It started
with a symmetrical, snowflake-like pattern in the middle of my vision.
That was in Dec. '07. That pattern has darkened some over time, making
it increasingly difficult to read or view a computer screen. In Jan.
'08, I noticed some distortion of vertical lines, and this has also
pregressed somewhat. Yesterday I experienced some flashes of lifht
during lunch, appearing like rings around the periphery of my field of
view. These continued for about 2 hours. Afterward, I noticed a couple
of large floaters in that eye, which had not been there before. I have
some understanding of all this, having visited a retinal specialist in
Dec. He mentioned the possibility of a macural hole developing and
thought it would happen within 1 month, giving it about a 50-50
chance. Well, so far, that hasn;t happened. But right after the
flashes and floaters, yesterday, there appears to be a veil of
thousands of little dots covering the vision in that eye. They move as
a unit, not floating individually, nor do they swirl or change
position relative to one another, but they generally follow the
direction of my sight like floaters do. They are fairly uniform and
comprise a blanket over the total field of vision. I notice them only
when I view the sky or a white background. Does anyone know what this
is, or has anyone experienced something like this? I've read about
blood getting into the eye, but it sounds like there is more movement.
Hi. I'm 60 and am in the middle of a vitreous detachment. It started
with a symmetrical, snowflake-like pattern in the middle of my vision.
That was in Dec. '07. That pattern has darkened some over time, making
it increasingly difficult to read or view a computer screen. In Jan.
'08, I noticed some distortion of vertical lines, and this has also
pregressed somewhat. Yesterday I experienced some flashes of lifht
during lunch, appearing like rings around the periphery of my field of
view. These continued for about 2 hours. Afterward, I noticed a couple
of large floaters in that eye, which had not been there before. I have
some understanding of all this, having visited a retinal specialist in
Dec. He mentioned the possibility of a macural hole developing and
thought it would happen within 1 month, giving it about a 50-50
chance. Well, so far, that hasn;t happened. But right after the
flashes and floaters, yesterday, there appears to be a veil of
thousands of little dots covering the vision in that eye. They move as
a unit, not floating individually, nor do they swirl or change
position relative to one another, but they generally follow the
direction of my sight like floaters do. They are fairly uniform and
comprise a blanket over the total field of vision. I notice them only
when I view the sky or a white background. Does anyone know what this
is, or has anyone experienced something like this? I've read about
blood getting into the eye, but it sounds like there is more movement.
Re: Vitreous detachment - thousands of "Floaters"
On Tue, 8 Apr 2008 12:47:55 -0700 (PDT), meade25@gmail,com wrote:
>...yesterday, there appears to be a veil of
>thousands of little dots covering the vision in that eye. They move as
>a unit, not floating individually, nor do they swirl or change
>position relative to one another
I'm not an eye doctor but this sounds scary to me. I agree with the
opinion that you should see an ophthalmologist ASAP about this if
you haven't done so already...
On Tue, 8 Apr 2008 12:47:55 -0700 (PDT), meade25@gmail,com wrote:
>...yesterday, there appears to be a veil of
>thousands of little dots covering the vision in that eye. They move as
>a unit, not floating individually, nor do they swirl or change
>position relative to one another
I'm not an eye doctor but this sounds scary to me. I agree with the
opinion that you should see an ophthalmologist ASAP about this if
you haven't done so already...
OT: Thanks for putting people like THIS OP at risk.
Mead: please forgive me for intruding on your topic. My sincere
wishes for a healthy outcome on your current situation.
This is just a short, off-topic note to Zetsu, Jason, Otis, and any
others in their category.
Who's going to help these people when -- as may well be your TRUE goal
-- all the eye docs stop participating on this site?
The only one left, really, is Mike Tyner. Nobody else does anything
more than occasionally drop by and chime in.
The list of names, of docs who've simply STOPPED participating, is
long and distinguished.
And they've all left because of the constant spewing of
unsubstantiated tripe by you and those of your ilk.
I genuinely think there's something deeply sociopathic about your
apparent lack of concern for people like this original poster --
people who come here out of fear, concern, anxiety, or alarm, and who
seek help.
You three -- and others like you -- know nothing about what's emergent
and what's non-emergent. Your presence here has very little
likelihood of helping anybody, but it has a very realistic probability
of hurting people.
I genuinely think you should seek help for this. It really does have
markers of antisocial, narcissistic, and/or sociopathic behavior.
Mead: please forgive me for intruding on your topic. My sincere
wishes for a healthy outcome on your current situation.
This is just a short, off-topic note to Zetsu, Jason, Otis, and any
others in their category.
Who's going to help these people when -- as may well be your TRUE goal
-- all the eye docs stop participating on this site?
The only one left, really, is Mike Tyner. Nobody else does anything
more than occasionally drop by and chime in.
The list of names, of docs who've simply STOPPED participating, is
long and distinguished.
And they've all left because of the constant spewing of
unsubstantiated tripe by you and those of your ilk.
I genuinely think there's something deeply sociopathic about your
apparent lack of concern for people like this original poster --
people who come here out of fear, concern, anxiety, or alarm, and who
seek help.
You three -- and others like you -- know nothing about what's emergent
and what's non-emergent. Your presence here has very little
likelihood of helping anybody, but it has a very realistic probability
of hurting people.
I genuinely think you should seek help for this. It really does have
markers of antisocial, narcissistic, and/or sociopathic behavior.
Re: OT: Thanks for putting people like THIS OP at risk.
Neil, I'm not telling Mike or any of them lot to stop posting. I think
Dr. Tyner is a very kind and dedicated person if he's spending all his
time on here trying to help people. The guy is after all just
spreading his knowledge of what he believes is true and right, what he
has learnt. And I'm not saying this guy shouldn't get professional
help from the orthodox. I'm not trying to control other people's
life.
But the irony is, all this vitreous detachment and so forth could have
been easily prevented if people did the rest methods in the first
place.
So like Tyner, I am just posting what I sincerely believe in and know
will be beneficial to others. I am just trying to help like you are.
We're all just humans and it's pointless for us to argue.
The larger matter at hand here is that many people in the world are
suffering and are not receiving adequate help from the conventional
treatment.
It is only reasonable then, that we should strive to change our
current methods and devote ourselves to helping all these people. We
need to stop working and team up, put an end to the human suffering
(which is after all, the original purpose for the field of medicine
isn't it?).
Coming here to a sci newsgroup, I would expect all the curiosity in
the world from its participants. But you guys just don't seem to show
any curiosity at all. No desire to even investigate Dr.Bates' work,
which potentially, for you and zillions of other people, could end a
whole lot of diseases and suffering.
Calling each other mentally retarded, narcissistic, antisocial or
whatever isn't helpful for anyone and doesn't change anything. It's
time we work together on this and stop wasting time bickering!
Neil, I'm not telling Mike or any of them lot to stop posting. I think
Dr. Tyner is a very kind and dedicated person if he's spending all his
time on here trying to help people. The guy is after all just
spreading his knowledge of what he believes is true and right, what he
has learnt. And I'm not saying this guy shouldn't get professional
help from the orthodox. I'm not trying to control other people's
life.
But the irony is, all this vitreous detachment and so forth could have
been easily prevented if people did the rest methods in the first
place.
So like Tyner, I am just posting what I sincerely believe in and know
will be beneficial to others. I am just trying to help like you are.
We're all just humans and it's pointless for us to argue.
The larger matter at hand here is that many people in the world are
suffering and are not receiving adequate help from the conventional
treatment.
It is only reasonable then, that we should strive to change our
current methods and devote ourselves to helping all these people. We
need to stop working and team up, put an end to the human suffering
(which is after all, the original purpose for the field of medicine
isn't it?).
Coming here to a sci newsgroup, I would expect all the curiosity in
the world from its participants. But you guys just don't seem to show
any curiosity at all. No desire to even investigate Dr.Bates' work,
which potentially, for you and zillions of other people, could end a
whole lot of diseases and suffering.
Calling each other mentally retarded, narcissistic, antisocial or
whatever isn't helpful for anyone and doesn't change anything. It's
time we work together on this and stop wasting time bickering!
Re: OT: Thanks for putting people like THIS OP at risk.
On Apr 9, 8:32 am, Zetsu <absolutelyinvinci...@hotmail,com > wrote:
> Neil, I'm not telling Mike or any of them lot to stop posting.
More naive and wishful thinking. The posts of you and your cohorts
ARE leading eye doctors to leave.
If you weren't so zealous about your agenda, you'd see that.
> I think
> Dr. Tyner is a very kind and dedicated person if he's spending all his
> time on here trying to help people. The guy is after all just
> spreading his knowledge of what he believes is true and right, what he
> has learnt. And I'm not saying this guy shouldn't get professional
> help from the orthodox. I'm not trying to control other people's
> life.
But you're limiting the help they will receive, and you're getting
awfully close to ELIMINATING it.
> But the irony is, all this vitreous detachment and so forth could have
> been easily prevented if people did the rest methods in the first
> place.
No. The IRONY is that you believe this, absent any evidence
whatsoever EXCEPT FOR your belief.
> So like Tyner, I am just posting what I sincerely believe in
and know
> will be beneficial to others. I am just trying to help like you are.
> We're all just humans and it's pointless for us to argue.
No. You're posting based on nothing whatsoever EXCEPT FOR your
belief. What Mike (and the former others) post is based on years of
clinical practice, evidence, and the outcomes of RCCTs.
You have an old book.
> The larger matter at hand here is that many people in the world are
> suffering and are not receiving adequate help from the conventional
> treatment.
Then form a religion ... on another site. There are LOTS of venues
where people seek the alternative perspective. Avail yourself of
them.
> It is only reasonable then, that we should strive to change our
> current methods and devote ourselves to helping all these people. We
> need to stop working and team up, put an end to the human suffering
> (which is after all, the original purpose for the field of medicine
> isn't it?).
>
> Coming here to a sci newsgroup, I would expect all the curiosity in
> the world from its participants. But you guys just don't seem to show
> any curiosity at all. No desire to even investigate Dr.Bates' work,
> which potentially, for you and zillions of other people, could end a
> whole lot of diseases and suffering.
>
> Calling each other mentally retarded, narcissistic, antisocial or
> whatever isn't helpful for anyone and doesn't change anything. It's
> time we work together on this and stop wasting time bickering!
Nothing you have just said, or EVER said, changes the basic fact that
-- given ANY evidence that ANYTHING you proffer is (to a statistically-
significant degree) more effective than placebo -- others will be
convinced.
Meanwhile, I'm awfully accurate: your blind faith in your methodology
IS having an insidious affect on this newsgroup. People WITH A LONG
HISTORY of helping people with eye issues ARE leaving.
The fact that you don't care is ... at the least ... antisocial.
And reprehensible.
You're like a rabid Evangelical Christian who spends all of his free
time trying to shout his gospels in a Jewish Synagogue.
It is, at the very least, a horribly disrespectful thing to do, and
yet .... you could make the exact same case FOR THAT as you do for
this.
IF, that is, you didn't actually give a shit about other people.
And that, it seems, IS exactly where we are.
On Apr 9, 8:32 am, Zetsu <absolutelyinvinci...@hotmail,com > wrote:
> Neil, I'm not telling Mike or any of them lot to stop posting.
More naive and wishful thinking. The posts of you and your cohorts
ARE leading eye doctors to leave.
If you weren't so zealous about your agenda, you'd see that.
> I think
> Dr. Tyner is a very kind and dedicated person if he's spending all his
> time on here trying to help people. The guy is after all just
> spreading his knowledge of what he believes is true and right, what he
> has learnt. And I'm not saying this guy shouldn't get professional
> help from the orthodox. I'm not trying to control other people's
> life.
But you're limiting the help they will receive, and you're getting
awfully close to ELIMINATING it.
> But the irony is, all this vitreous detachment and so forth could have
> been easily prevented if people did the rest methods in the first
> place.
No. The IRONY is that you believe this, absent any evidence
whatsoever EXCEPT FOR your belief.
> So like Tyner, I am just posting what I sincerely believe in
and know
> will be beneficial to others. I am just trying to help like you are.
> We're all just humans and it's pointless for us to argue.
No. You're posting based on nothing whatsoever EXCEPT FOR your
belief. What Mike (and the former others) post is based on years of
clinical practice, evidence, and the outcomes of RCCTs.
You have an old book.
> The larger matter at hand here is that many people in the world are
> suffering and are not receiving adequate help from the conventional
> treatment.
Then form a religion ... on another site. There are LOTS of venues
where people seek the alternative perspective. Avail yourself of
them.
> It is only reasonable then, that we should strive to change our
> current methods and devote ourselves to helping all these people. We
> need to stop working and team up, put an end to the human suffering
> (which is after all, the original purpose for the field of medicine
> isn't it?).
>
> Coming here to a sci newsgroup, I would expect all the curiosity in
> the world from its participants. But you guys just don't seem to show
> any curiosity at all. No desire to even investigate Dr.Bates' work,
> which potentially, for you and zillions of other people, could end a
> whole lot of diseases and suffering.
>
> Calling each other mentally retarded, narcissistic, antisocial or
> whatever isn't helpful for anyone and doesn't change anything. It's
> time we work together on this and stop wasting time bickering!
Nothing you have just said, or EVER said, changes the basic fact that
-- given ANY evidence that ANYTHING you proffer is (to a statistically-
significant degree) more effective than placebo -- others will be
convinced.
Meanwhile, I'm awfully accurate: your blind faith in your methodology
IS having an insidious affect on this newsgroup. People WITH A LONG
HISTORY of helping people with eye issues ARE leaving.
The fact that you don't care is ... at the least ... antisocial.
And reprehensible.
You're like a rabid Evangelical Christian who spends all of his free
time trying to shout his gospels in a Jewish Synagogue.
It is, at the very least, a horribly disrespectful thing to do, and
yet .... you could make the exact same case FOR THAT as you do for
this.
IF, that is, you didn't actually give a shit about other people.
And that, it seems, IS exactly where we are.
Re: OT: Thanks for putting people like THIS OP at risk.
I am sorry you feel this way towards me.
However, if indeed I have induced any eye doctors on this forum to
leave, then I certainly do not feel I am responsible for their choice
in life. If you don't like what I have to say, then kill file me and
be done with it. If my posts are have such a great influence on highly
respected, professional doctors then I feel that is rather strange.
It's very immature on their behalf.
Eye doctors are grown ups. Surely they can think and act for
themselves? If they want to leave, then go ahead, but don't be so
immature as to put the blame on me. It is similar to the behavior of a
toddler, when it doesn't like something it gets upset and stomps off.
It is also interesting to note that this newsgroup was actually not
formed for the general public to post their vision complaints. When
this newsgroup was originally created, back in 1994, the intent of the
creator was that it should be a place where everyone from around the
globe could gather and discuss the latest theories and discuss, in
general, the systematic side of vision.
This group was not intended as a "clinic" for patients to seek advice,
but it has become so over the years. Anyway, I have to have lunch now,
so I can't write more. I would like to say then, briefly and bluntly,
that I have no intention of continuing this little and pointless
bickering with you, Neil, nor with anyone else on the group. If we
disagree, then so be it. And let us leave it at that, and go our
separate ways.
I am sorry you feel this way towards me.
However, if indeed I have induced any eye doctors on this forum to
leave, then I certainly do not feel I am responsible for their choice
in life. If you don't like what I have to say, then kill file me and
be done with it. If my posts are have such a great influence on highly
respected, professional doctors then I feel that is rather strange.
It's very immature on their behalf.
Eye doctors are grown ups. Surely they can think and act for
themselves? If they want to leave, then go ahead, but don't be so
immature as to put the blame on me. It is similar to the behavior of a
toddler, when it doesn't like something it gets upset and stomps off.
It is also interesting to note that this newsgroup was actually not
formed for the general public to post their vision complaints. When
this newsgroup was originally created, back in 1994, the intent of the
creator was that it should be a place where everyone from around the
globe could gather and discuss the latest theories and discuss, in
general, the systematic side of vision.
This group was not intended as a "clinic" for patients to seek advice,
but it has become so over the years. Anyway, I have to have lunch now,
so I can't write more. I would like to say then, briefly and bluntly,
that I have no intention of continuing this little and pointless
bickering with you, Neil, nor with anyone else on the group. If we
disagree, then so be it. And let us leave it at that, and go our
separate ways.
Re: OT: Thanks for putting people like THIS OP at risk.
On Apr 9, 10:46 am, Zetsu <absolutelyinvinci...@hotmail,com > wrote:
> And let us leave it at that, and go our separate ways.
s.m.v. gets you.
In return, it loses most of its doctors.
Great deal.
On Apr 9, 10:46 am, Zetsu <absolutelyinvinci...@hotmail,com > wrote:
> And let us leave it at that, and go our separate ways.
s.m.v. gets you.
In return, it loses most of its doctors.
Great deal.
Re: OT: Thanks for putting people like THIS OP at risk.
> Anyway, I have to have lunch now,
> so I can't write more.
Are they bringing it?
> Anyway, I have to have lunch now,
> so I can't write more.
Are they bringing it?
Re: OT: Thanks for putting people like THIS OP at risk.
Dear Zetsu,
Well written.
Most professionals have their opinion -- and will respect
yours if honestly stated.
If truly professional, they should never attack you for
expressing your opinion on any subject.
Or as the late W. F. Buckley said -- it is possible
to disagree, without being disagreeable.
Pease,
On Apr 9, 1:46 pm, Zetsu <absolutelyinvinci...@hotmail,com > wrote:
> I am sorry you feel this way towards me.
>
> However, if indeed I have induced any eye doctors on this forum to
> leave, then I certainly do not feel I am responsible for their choice
> in life. If you don't like what I have to say, then kill file me and
> be done with it. If my posts are have such a great influence on highly
> respected, professional doctors then I feel that is rather strange.
> It's very immature on their behalf.
>
> Eye doctors are grown ups. Surely they can think and act for
> themselves? If they want to leave, then go ahead, but don't be so
> immature as to put the blame on me. It is similar to the behavior of a
> toddler, when it doesn't like something it gets upset and stomps off.
>
> It is also interesting to note that this newsgroup was actually not
> formed for the general public to post their vision complaints. When
> this newsgroup was originally created, back in 1994, the intent of the
> creator was that it should be a place where everyone from around the
> globe could gather and discuss the latest theories and discuss, in
> general, the systematic side of vision.
>
> This group was not intended as a "clinic" for patients to seek advice,
> but it has become so over the years. Anyway, I have to have lunch now,
> so I can't write more. I would like to say then, briefly and bluntly,
> that I have no intention of continuing this little and pointless
> bickering with you, Neil, nor with anyone else on the group. If we
> disagree, then so be it. And let us leave it at that, and go our
> separate ways.
Dear Zetsu,
Well written.
Most professionals have their opinion -- and will respect
yours if honestly stated.
If truly professional, they should never attack you for
expressing your opinion on any subject.
Or as the late W. F. Buckley said -- it is possible
to disagree, without being disagreeable.
Pease,
On Apr 9, 1:46 pm, Zetsu <absolutelyinvinci...@hotmail,com > wrote:
> I am sorry you feel this way towards me.
>
> However, if indeed I have induced any eye doctors on this forum to
> leave, then I certainly do not feel I am responsible for their choice
> in life. If you don't like what I have to say, then kill file me and
> be done with it. If my posts are have such a great influence on highly
> respected, professional doctors then I feel that is rather strange.
> It's very immature on their behalf.
>
> Eye doctors are grown ups. Surely they can think and act for
> themselves? If they want to leave, then go ahead, but don't be so
> immature as to put the blame on me. It is similar to the behavior of a
> toddler, when it doesn't like something it gets upset and stomps off.
>
> It is also interesting to note that this newsgroup was actually not
> formed for the general public to post their vision complaints. When
> this newsgroup was originally created, back in 1994, the intent of the
> creator was that it should be a place where everyone from around the
> globe could gather and discuss the latest theories and discuss, in
> general, the systematic side of vision.
>
> This group was not intended as a "clinic" for patients to seek advice,
> but it has become so over the years. Anyway, I have to have lunch now,
> so I can't write more. I would like to say then, briefly and bluntly,
> that I have no intention of continuing this little and pointless
> bickering with you, Neil, nor with anyone else on the group. If we
> disagree, then so be it. And let us leave it at that, and go our
> separate ways.
Re: OT: Thanks for putting people like THIS OP at risk.
Now you like him again, huh?
Schizophrenia among your DSM-IV Dx's, Otis? That's QUITE an
impressive list you represent!
Now you like him again, huh?
Schizophrenia among your DSM-IV Dx's, Otis? That's QUITE an
impressive list you represent!
Re: OT: Thanks for putting people like THIS OP at risk.
Neil, another thing I forgot to ask you in my earlier post (I know I
said I'd stop arguing, but this is a significant point) is: Where
precisely are you founding the claim that eye doctors "are leaving"
this group at all?
When I first joined this group, I noted the following as frequent
posters: Dr Tyner, Dr Judy, Dr Gemoules and Dr Pclarkii. (That's FOUR
doctors in all! How many more do you need than that?)
As of yet I have seen no indication or evidence that any of these
people have left the group, nor any suggestion to the effect that they
are contemplating it. Since beginning my own participation, I have
seen no real increase or reduction in their rate of posting.
So what do you base your statement on? It seems you have a somewhat
unfounded fabrication made up in your head, and now you've decided to
'point the finger' at me because, well, I honestly don't know why.
See ya.
Neil, another thing I forgot to ask you in my earlier post (I know I
said I'd stop arguing, but this is a significant point) is: Where
precisely are you founding the claim that eye doctors "are leaving"
this group at all?
When I first joined this group, I noted the following as frequent
posters: Dr Tyner, Dr Judy, Dr Gemoules and Dr Pclarkii. (That's FOUR
doctors in all! How many more do you need than that?)
As of yet I have seen no indication or evidence that any of these
people have left the group, nor any suggestion to the effect that they
are contemplating it. Since beginning my own participation, I have
seen no real increase or reduction in their rate of posting.
So what do you base your statement on? It seems you have a somewhat
unfounded fabrication made up in your head, and now you've decided to
'point the finger' at me because, well, I honestly don't know why.
See ya.
Re: OT: Thanks for putting people like THIS OP at risk.
Dear Zetsu,
Wise and correct analysis.
The people who are optometrists use the title "Doctor", as
in OD. There is one Dr. Robins who is an ophthalmologist.
This is a public forum, dedicated to the PUBLIC.
As such, each person reading these discussions must
take that into considerations.
It think Bev publishes a "disclaimer" -- for anyone who
has ANY doubts on that subject.
So keep on posting what you wish.
It is a matter of "Freedom of Speech", so beloved
by the Founding Fathers, and written bold into
the First Admedment.
Otis
On Apr 10, 2:23 am, Zetsu <absolutelyinvinci...@hotmail,com > wrote:
> Neil, another thing I forgot to ask you in my earlier post (I know I
> said I'd stop arguing, but this is a significant point) is: Where
> precisely are you founding the claim that eye doctors "are leaving"
> this group at all?
>
> When I first joined this group, I noted the following as frequent
> posters: Dr Tyner, Dr Judy, Dr Gemoules and Dr Pclarkii. (That's FOUR
> doctors in all! How many more do you need than that?)
>
> As of yet I have seen no indication or evidence that any of these
> people have left the group, nor any suggestion to the effect that they
> are contemplating it. Since beginning my own participation, I have
> seen no real increase or reduction in their rate of posting.
>
> So what do you base your statement on? It seems you have a somewhat
> unfounded fabrication made up in your head, and now you've decided to
> 'point the finger' at me because, well, I honestly don't know why.
>
> See ya.
Dear Zetsu,
Wise and correct analysis.
The people who are optometrists use the title "Doctor", as
in OD. There is one Dr. Robins who is an ophthalmologist.
This is a public forum, dedicated to the PUBLIC.
As such, each person reading these discussions must
take that into considerations.
It think Bev publishes a "disclaimer" -- for anyone who
has ANY doubts on that subject.
So keep on posting what you wish.
It is a matter of "Freedom of Speech", so beloved
by the Founding Fathers, and written bold into
the First Admedment.
Otis
On Apr 10, 2:23 am, Zetsu <absolutelyinvinci...@hotmail,com > wrote:
> Neil, another thing I forgot to ask you in my earlier post (I know I
> said I'd stop arguing, but this is a significant point) is: Where
> precisely are you founding the claim that eye doctors "are leaving"
> this group at all?
>
> When I first joined this group, I noted the following as frequent
> posters: Dr Tyner, Dr Judy, Dr Gemoules and Dr Pclarkii. (That's FOUR
> doctors in all! How many more do you need than that?)
>
> As of yet I have seen no indication or evidence that any of these
> people have left the group, nor any suggestion to the effect that they
> are contemplating it. Since beginning my own participation, I have
> seen no real increase or reduction in their rate of posting.
>
> So what do you base your statement on? It seems you have a somewhat
> unfounded fabrication made up in your head, and now you've decided to
> 'point the finger' at me because, well, I honestly don't know why.
>
> See ya.
Re: OT: Thanks for putting people like THIS OP at risk.
On Wed, 9 Apr 2008 20:10:16 -0700 (PDT), Neil Brooks <neil0502@yahoo,com >
wrote in
<news:1ebb5ab6-d26b-44e8-8528-f52500bda163@w8g2000prd.googlegroups,com >:
> Now you like him again, huh?
>
> Schizophrenia among your DSM-IV Dx's, Otis? That's QUITE an
> impressive list you represent!
Couldn't re-present a cheque.
--
- Nic.
On Wed, 9 Apr 2008 20:10:16 -0700 (PDT), Neil Brooks <neil0502@yahoo,com >
wrote in
<news:1ebb5ab6-d26b-44e8-8528-f52500bda163@w8g2000prd.googlegroups,com >:
> Now you like him again, huh?
>
> Schizophrenia among your DSM-IV Dx's, Otis? That's QUITE an
> impressive list you represent!
Couldn't re-present a cheque.
--
- Nic.
Re: OT: Thanks for putting people like THIS OP at risk.
LOL Neil Brooks you are a crazy man.
You do not know me.
BTW, I actually have a life, just to let you know.
Go away and read Bates or something.
Gosh.
LOL Neil Brooks you are a crazy man.
You do not know me.
BTW, I actually have a life, just to let you know.
Go away and read Bates or something.
Gosh.
Next: Need to know specific name of computerized phoropter
Previous: Read the Original Book! - by Oleg Krupnov
