This Article  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on Web of Science (1)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Arthur H. Keeney, MD

Arch Ophthalmol. 1963;70(6):739.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

The thoughtful campaign message of England's Frederick Ridley, entitled "Scleral Contact Lenses," presented at the AMA meeting last June and appearing in this issue, illustrates the complexities of full understanding between nations—even those using the same language. This illustrated difference between England and the United States in evaluating the circumscribed ophthalmic field of contact lenses underscores how foreign service diplomats occasionally campaign for less desirable factions in the tangle of new and utterly foreign nations.

Ridley correctly states that we do not have 50 "special units for scleral lens fitting," which he postulates as necessary to serve the continental US population. The evolution of contact lenses in this country, however, has been such that every technician or fitter of more than 12 years experience was initially a scleral lens fitter. Incomplete satisfaction with moulded haptic lenses in the earlier decades of persistence and perspiration led to our changes. Mr. Ridley's . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?