Symposium on unidentified flying objects: hearings before the Committee on Science and Astronautics, U.S. House of Representatives, Ninetieth Congress, second session, July 29, 1968.

161
centrocecal scotomata
larger
for the
red object than
for the
white. There
is
a
superior
temporal quadrant defect bilaterally of approximately
30
0
with
the
red
object stimulus which
is
not
present
with
the
white object.
In
reduced
illumi-
nation the
subject
is
completely unable
to
see
any of
the test
objects.
7.
Ophthalmodynomometry
was
performed
with
a
Cuilbert-Routit
dynomometer
(using
1%
Pontocaine anesthetic) with direct
vision
of the
end
point
0.D.:
70/30 units; 0.S.:
65/30
units.
There were
no
carotid bruits
orthrills;
the
simultaneous systemic blood pressure
was 140/80
sitting and
130/80standing.
8.
Opticokinetics
(using
a
one meter
by ten
centimeter red
back-
ground
cloth with
a
10
cm
X
8
cm. white check) was
performed
at
a
distance
of
one
meter horizontally bilaterally
and vertically.
The nystagmus response
in
all
directions
was
normal.
D.
Summary of
Positive Findings
1.
A
history
of
6
- 8
weeks
of tearing, misty
vision, and
photophobia.
2.
A
pale
optic nerve with absent
cupping; sluggishly reacting
pupils; impaired
red
light
reflex.
3.
Confluent
retinal mottling,
obscured
macula,
mild
red-green
dyschromanopsia.
4. Bilateral centrocecal scotomata; bilateral superior temporal
quadrantanopeia
(for
red stimulus only. Vision
in
decreased
light
(10
foot-
candles):
grossly
impaired
to
absent.
E.
Discussion and Creditability Score
The
definite retinitis, field defects
for
red
vision, and red
-green
dyschromanopsia, along with
a
history of tearing, misty vision, and photophobia
are
all
consistent with
the
diagnosis
of
tobacco-alcohol amblyonia
(Ref. 1).
Thiscondition
is
also
supported
by the
findings
in
the General Medicine Evaluation,
where other effects
of
excessive smoking and alcoholism are evident.
The subject's retinal
pathology
is severe;
in
terms
of
the
specific
event he
claims
he saw,
it
is
extreme. His "sighting" is highly unlikely because
he attaches
both color and shape
to it
in
the face of
specific defiencies
in
each
of
these areas. His attestation
about
seeing
the
object best when looking
straight
at
it
(see
Psychiatric Anamnesis)
is
uncreditable because
his
central
macular vision has been
so
severely
compromised
by
retinitis.
It
is
conceivable
that what actually happened
is that he
1)
received
a
transient visual stimulus
(i.e.,
car
or
airplane
lights)
which
2)
set off
some abnormal receptor firing
in a
damaged retinal area
and
3)
in
turn
was
misperceived.
Creditability score 5%.
Ref.
1
Walsh, F.B.: Clinical Neuro-ophthalmologr Williams
&
Wilkins, Baltimore1957, p.
1182.