Send us a letter or e-mail.
Other Letters this month
Flax Seed Oil:
Relief for Dry Eyes
Editor: The article “The Once and Future Treatment of Dry Eye” (February
2000) by Managing Editor Rob Murphy was excellent. However, it did not
include a discussion about oral therapy with flax seed oil capsules.
A patient suggested this to me a few years ago, and I’ve had a few patients
try it with impressive results. I recently received letters from three
of these patients, all of whom say their dry eye symptoms have all but
disappeared.
One possible negative: I found one report that states that flax seed
oil may be shown to increase the risk of cancer, but acknowledges that
results are inconclusive. I hope that someone will investigate this whole
subject of flax seed oil as a treatment for dry eyes and report the results.
—Roderic W. Gillilan, O.D., Eugene, Ore.
NRA Comment ‘Way Out of Line’
Editor: I take issue with your comment in your editorial, “AMA’s
Losing Battle” (April 2000) in which you compare the American Medical Association
to the National Rifle Association.
To compare the AMA, a self-serving, back-biting group of doctors, to
the NRA is way out of line. The NRA is one of the few organizations working
to preserve your constitutional rights. Your comment shows either your
great naiveté regarding political realities, or clearly places you
on the dangerous side of constitutional rights issues. Don’t believe everything
you hear on the evening news.
At the very least, such a clearly political statement has no place in
a health-care publication.
—Steven Bachinsky, O.D., Millville, N.J.
More on the NRA, Defender of Your
Rights
Editor: I’m sure you’re a staunch defender of your First Amendment
rights to write whatever you want, and so am I. I will fight to defend
your right to speak what you may. I take offense, however, at your snide
little remark in your April editorial about “the NRA’s hyperbolic ravings
against gun control.”
For one, 3 million members of the NRA do not believe that fighting to
protect your constitutional rights is “raving.” Just what do you think
protects your ability to keep your First Amendment rights? The Second Amendment
does. The NRA defends your right to bear arms. An armed citizenry is critical
for the continuance of democracy. The Second Amendment is the first amendment
in priority.
I don’t think an optometric journal is the place for controversial political
opinions. If you think you must, then I demand equal time for the opposing
viewpoint. In the future, please keep your political agenda to yourself
and not in a professional journal. I can hear that kind of diatribe in
Time or People.
—Tory W. Moore, O.D., Dumas, Texas, eyedoc@amaonline.com.
Editor-in-chief Rich Kirkner replies: To take my comments about
the NRA and conclude that I’m against the Second Amendment is like taking
my comments about the AMA and concluding that I’m against health care.
Neither is true.
top
|
| Tell
Us What You Think
E-mail us your thoughts
at reviewofoptometry@jobson.com.
Or, do it the old-fashioned
way: by fax at 610-492-1039.
Or, if you're really
nostalgic, snail mail us at
Review of Optometry
Letters & E-Mail
11 Campus Blvd., Suite
100
Newtown Square, PA 19073
Return
to July 2000 Highlights
© Review of Optometry OnLine
July 15, 2000 |