In reply
I am grateful for the commentary and for the opportunity to respond. The writers have taken issue with my opinion that "(tonometry) . . . has not caught on," and that the technique is "cumbersome." In refutation, they observe that tonometry has been the subject of more than 700 published articles, which thus is a priori evidence of its acceptance. Lest we succumb to the temptation to weigh evidence by the pound, an examination of the limitations of tonometry is provided.