Thread: LCD vs. e-ink: The eyestrain debate
View Single Post
Old 11-11-2011, 03:08 AM   #53
Prestidigitweeze
Fledgling Demagogue
Prestidigitweeze ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Prestidigitweeze ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Prestidigitweeze ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Prestidigitweeze ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Prestidigitweeze ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Prestidigitweeze ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Prestidigitweeze ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Prestidigitweeze ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Prestidigitweeze ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Prestidigitweeze ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Prestidigitweeze ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Prestidigitweeze's Avatar
 
Posts: 2,384
Karma: 31132263
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: White Plains
Device: Clara HD; Oasis 2; Aura HD; iPad Air; PRS-350; Galaxy S7.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjk View Post
Nothing like a doctor advertising with zero scientific evidence or published studies to back up his claims. :roll eyes:
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/0...se-eye-strain/
Though it quotes people in labs, I'm not sure your NYT blog entry qualifies as comprehensively scientific. Then again, I'm not sure that "Dr. Benjamin Sokoloffski, MD, Certified Board Ophthalmologist" actually exists. The photoshop artist should have spelled the name Sokolovsky to make searches more convincing. That ff is an (ahem) red flag to anyone remotely familiar with Russian names.

Speaking of scientific evidence, I notice that no one has commented on this post, which quotes Russ Wilcox on the benefits of eInk vs. LCD.

What say you? Does the evidence support Wilcox's points or not?
Prestidigitweeze is offline   Reply With Quote