Eyeglasses and retail optometry are scams

[Dr. Keith]

When I first received glasses at the age of 15 or 16, I was told my myopia was genetic, and irreversible.

Do you have some record of this?

I have, at the very least, falsified that hypothesis.

Well, I have falsified a few things I was told as a teen, too.* But come on, is that any great achievement?

*Top three in order of importance:

-No, she wouldn't.
-No, I couldn't.
-No, we shouldn't.

 

[arthwollipot]

As far as Steiner, I haven’t given him a dime. You can learn all you need from his youtube videos and website.

YouTube? Then you have given him dimes. Assuming that his channel is monetised, and honestly why wouldn't it be, every time you watch one of his videos, he receives revenue. That's how YouTube works. That's how people can be professional YouTube content creators as their sole income.

 

[Tippit]

Into the bin with the alt-med and the quantum healing and the homeopathy and all the other pseudoscience communities you go. You haven't begun in this thread to demonstrate these scurrilous assertions except by personal anecdote. Your only references to peer reviewed science, presumably the best you have, is to studies in juvenile animals and children - not a single adult study.

You are the epitome of the type of person that Herbert Spencer was talking about in my signature. Enjoy the ignorance?

 

[Tippit]

Do you have some record of this?

Do I need a record of this? Are you accusing me of lying? How likely is it that I can produce a record of my first prescription? How would it even be relevant, since I have evidence of my last prescription, and numerous pairs of glasses, including normalized and differential lenses?

 

[Tippit]

YouTube? Then you have given him dimes. Assuming that his channel is monetised, and honestly why wouldn't it be, every time you watch one of his videos, he receives revenue. That's how YouTube works. That's how people can be professional YouTube content creators as their sole income.

Come to think of it, I don't recall ever seeing a single ad on his channel, so I don't believe it is monetized. And if it were, and if I had viewed one, then that would have been giving his non-existent sponsors time. You do understand the difference between time and money?

 

[arthwollipot]

Come to think of it, I don't recall ever seeing a single ad on his channel, so I don't believe it is monetized. And if it were, and if I had viewed one, then that would have been giving his non-existent sponsors time. You do understand the difference between time and money?

It doesn't matter whether you personally get an ad or not - If his channel is monetised, he receives income based on views.

If he also does direct sponsorships (Squarespace, Raycon, Blue Apron, etc), they give him money based on views too. They hope that by paying him, viewers will be inclined towards their products.

I understand the difference between time and money. YouTube is a machine that converts your time into his money.

 

[Tippit]

It doesn't matter whether you personally get an ad or not - If his channel is monetised, he receives income based on views.

If he also does direct sponsorships (Squarespace, Raycon, Blue Apron, etc), they give him money based on views too. They hope that by paying him, viewers will be inclined towards their products.

I understand the difference between time and money. YouTube is a machine that converts your time into his money.

I don't think you understand, since you directly claimed I gave him money, which I did not. And if he does get paid, somehow, without me having ever seen an ad, then good for him! I owe him a great deal. I should be donating/gifting money to him.

 

[arthwollipot]

I don't think you understand, since you directly claimed I gave him money, which I did not. And if he does get paid, somehow, without me having ever seen an ad, then good for him! I owe him a great deal. I should be donating/gifting money to him.

You are giving him money, by watching his videos. You may see that as a good use of your time. That's fine, but you can't claim that you're not giving him money.

 

[Tippit]

You are giving him money, by watching his videos. You may see that as a good use of your time. That's fine, but you can't claim that you're not giving him money.

I’m beginning to understand the “logic” behind some of your other arguments on this forum.

I haven’t given him any money.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Trebuchet]

Seeing this thread has reminded me we need to make an appointment to pick up my wife's glasses! Thanks, Tippit!

 

[Dr. Keith]

Do I need a record of this? Are you accusing me of lying? How likely is it that I can produce a record of my first prescription? How would it even be relevant, since I have evidence of my last prescription, and numerous pairs of glasses, including normalized and differential lenses?

I'm not questioning the prescription, although that record may impact any future study.

I'm wondering if you really recall exactly what the doctor said when you were a teen?

If so, I find that a bit odd. I went to tons of doctors as a teen for various issues and vaguely remember the gist of their advice but can't say I recall the exact words.

And my experience with doctors is that they tend to choose their words rather precisely. I mentioned an issue rom my youth to a doctor recently and he corrected some of what I recalled from those early visits, along the lines of "typically this is caused by" versus "we believe this is caused by" or "this is probably caused by" or "you have this because of". Minor differences to a teenager, major differences to a doctor.

That is all I am saying. If you think I wrote something different you may want to get your . . . never mind.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Here I was thinking that this thread was going to be about the vertical integration and price gouging of the prescription eyeglass market, but it turned out to be much more interesting.

 

[Dr. Keith]

Here I was thinking that this thread was going to be about the vertical integration and price gouging of the prescription eyeglass market, but it turned out to be much more interesting.

I'd say "less" where you went with "more", but OK.

 

[theprestige]

You are giving him money, by watching his videos. You may see that as a good use of your time. That's fine, but you can't claim that you're not giving him money.

I think it would be more accurate to say Tippit is earning money for the guy, by watching his channel. The money in question is being given by someone else.

 

[arthwollipot]

I just looked up Jake Steiner on YouTube, and the channel is absolutely monetised. It has 32.8k subscribers, and the "start here" video has 174,207 views. I counted over 300 videos, each with thousands of views. There is no way that channel is not monetised. This guy's raking in quite a decent income just from his channel, even if he doesn't openly sell stuff or take sponsorships. If he did, he'd be absolutely loaded.

 

[Tippit]

I'm not questioning the prescription, although that record may impact any future study.

I'm wondering if you really recall exactly what the doctor said when you were a teen?

If so, I find that a bit odd. I went to tons of doctors as a teen for various issues and vaguely remember the gist of their advice but can't say I recall the exact words.

And my experience with doctors is that they tend to choose their words rather precisely. I mentioned an issue rom my youth to a doctor recently and he corrected some of what I recalled from those early visits, along the lines of "typically this is caused by" versus "we believe this is caused by" or "this is probably caused by" or "you have this because of". Minor differences to a teenager, major differences to a doctor.

That is all I am saying. If you think I wrote something different you may want to get your . . . never mind.

When I protested wearing glasses, I was told the cause was genetic, that it was irreversible, and that it could be slowed by wearing glasses.

In fact, I got pseudo-myopia from staring at my computer monitor all day which caused chronic ciliary muscle spasm, and then when I begrudgingly began to wear eyeglasses the hyperopic defocus (as documented in the peer reviewed studies I linked, and referenced in the video above) began to cause progressive myopia (elongation of the eyeball itself). Predictably, my prescriptions got stronger over the years, but not as strong as they could have been if I had worn the glasses even more than I did.

 

[Tippit]

I just looked up Jake Steiner on YouTube, and the channel is absolutely monetised. It has 32.8k subscribers, and the "start here" video has 174,207 views. I counted over 300 videos, each with thousands of views. There is no way that channel is not monetised. This guy's raking in quite a decent income just from his channel, even if he doesn't openly sell stuff or take sponsorships. If he did, he'd be absolutely loaded.

Fantastic. He deserves every penny and more. Try taking the time to watch the channels of some of his subscribers, and their progress.

 

[Tippit]

Here I was thinking that this thread was going to be about the vertical integration and price gouging of the prescription eyeglass market, but it turned out to be much more interesting.

Luxottica and Essilor are the largest manufactures of frames and lenses respectively, and you can be certain that the executives are aware of the studies on hyperopic defocus.

They are probably behind the political movement to prevent people from ordering frames and lenses online with custom prescriptions. As I recall there was a bill introduced to require online eyewear companies to only accept authentic prescriptions from board certified optometrists - essentially they want to regulate the pieces of plastic people wear in front of their eyes. I am pretty sure it didn't pass.

I asked a Wal-Mart optometrist once if she would fabricate some custom lenses for me for some frames I already had, without a prescription, and she flatly declined.

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

I just looked up Jake Steiner on YouTube, and the channel is absolutely monetised. It has 32.8k subscribers, and the "start here" video has 174,207 views. I counted over 300 videos, each with thousands of views. There is no way that channel is not monetised. This guy's raking in quite a decent income just from his channel, even if he doesn't openly sell stuff or take sponsorships. If he did, he'd be absolutely loaded.

You seem to be misunderstanding. No one is disputing the guy isn't making money off a views. But the people viewing him are not necessarily the ones paying him. I say not necessarily because I don't know how youtube paid subscriptions work yet. The average non subscribes gives nothing to this guy.

 

[arthwollipot]

You seem to be misunderstanding. No one is disputing the guy isn't making money off a views. But the people viewing him are not necessarily the ones paying him. I say not necessarily because I don't know how youtube paid subscriptions work yet. The average non subscribes gives nothing to this guy.

Except their time, which as I said YouTube converts into revenue for him.