Is this the British or Danish study cited by Fang?

送交者: Enlighten 于 2007-05-01, 09:33:52:

回答: Hammond的孪生子实验数据图在此由 wasguru 于 2007-05-01, 09:12:14:

It seems that the purpose of this study is not about myopia alone but about defractory error in general. If so, then the result should be interpreted as such, not as a research for myopia alone.

所有跟贴:

It's the British study - wasguru (207 bytes) 2007-05-01, 09:38:35 (138359)
- What do you mean by "binary"? Aren't the degree of myopia - Enlighten (51 bytes) 2007-05-01, 09:57:42 (138362)
  - binary means yes and no - wasguru (123 bytes) 2007-05-01, 10:06:24 (138366)
    - so they didnt directly use the data shown on the chart - Enlighten (193 bytes) 2007-05-01, 10:13:06 (138370)
      - wasguru, Does turning continuous data into binary data - Enlighten (324 bytes) 2007-05-01, 10:39:32 (138374)
        
        The point is... - wasguru (164 bytes) 2007-05-01, 10:43:57 (138376)
        
        when the pair（-9D/-10.5D) is transformed into binary - Enlighten (67 bytes) 2007-05-01, 10:43:21 (138375)
        
        I meant this pair doesn't 使同卵双胞胎的相关性高出很多 - Enlighten (28 bytes) 2007-05-01, 10:53:03 (138379)
        
        They did't do threshold when they analyzed the overall refractive error - wasguru (293 bytes) 2007-05-01, 10:59:06 (138383)
        
        I see. What a mess! (无内容) - Enlighten (0 bytes) 2007-05-01, 11:02:08 (138385)

加跟贴