Present Methods of Treatment Futile 9
lished,1 expresses the opinion that glasses and all methods now at our command are "of but little avail" in preventing either the progress of the error of refrac tion, or the development of the very serious complica tions with which it is often associated.
These conclusions are based on the study of thousands of cases in Dr. Huguenin's private practice and in the clinic of the University of Zurich, and regarding one group of patients, persons connected with the local edu cational institutions, he states that the failure took place in spite of the fact that they followed his instructions for years "with the greatest energy and pertinacity," some times even changing their professions.
I have been studying the refraction of the human eye for more than thirty years, and my observations fully confirm the foregoing conclusions as to the uselessness of all the methods heretofore employed for the preven tion and treatment of errors of refraction. I was very early led to suspect, however, that the problem was by no means an unsolvable one.
Every ophthalmologist of any experience knows that the theory of the incurability of errors of refraction does not fit the observed facts. Not infrequently such cases recover spontaneously, or change from one form to an other. It has long been the custom either to ignore these troublesome facts, or to explain them away, and fortu nately for those who consider it necessary to bolster up the old theories at all costs, the role attributed to the lens in accommodation offers, in the majority of cases, a plausible method of explanation. According to this
1 Archiv. f. Augenh, vol. Ixxix, 1915, translated in Arch. Ophth., vol. xlv, No. 6, Nov., 1916.