Hi, I got new drivers licence without vision restriction.
It is about 11 months after I started natural vision training after 33 years of wearing glasses/contact lenses for myipia and astigmatism.
What is interesting (or not so interesting) is that I had doctors exam the day before and she registered my vision as 6/15 with about 50% of 6/12 line. Later, when I came back to her with a great news, she admited her room being a bit longer then 6m and also there is less light. she actually uses darkened room and letters are not in much contrast with the background.
Anyway, on the exam, afetr I read about half of the 6/12 line (this is enough for driving) my doctor measured the same prescription. initially I was dissapointed, but she was reasuring me as I really am seeing better. then I renewed the driving licence.
what happened next is real revelation for me: i took LIberman's book and red there that he had the same when his vision improved he still measured the same prescription for nearsighted and astigmatic eyes.
So, if you let me I would conclude here that there is something wrong with the current measurement, and the way they decide on diagnosis based on the shape of the eye, or we strain in the moment of measurement.
But, this is for me good reason not to put glasses on my child, or anyone's child, or anyone....
I'm just thinking, this is soooo goood feeling of using yoru own eyes, effortless!!!
What would be next milestone, I know reading 6/6 and then 6/4 but something more realistic from real life??? Any ideas?
Good luck to everyone, and wishing you much faster and easier recovery and good vision prevention!!!
Wow! It's really amazing! Me, for the moment, I will still wait a little bit that my visual acuity stablize at 10/15 to DMV. It's quite ofen better than that, but just to be sure!
It's always good to see an improvement!
-Alexandre
I have done a lot of checking on this issue. When I have my Snellen in the corner, I may read 20/30 at times.
But the office Snellen is very crisp -- and I read 20/20 on it.
So I put a bright light on my Snellen -- an duplicate the requirement in an office.
If you wish an ACCURATE judgment (for the DMV) use a good Snellen with bright light. If you are at 20/30, now, with work you should be able to get to 20/25.
For all practical purposes -- that is GOOD VISION.
I also check signs as I drive, and can judge when I have 20/20.
that's great! congrats!!!! I hope someday that I can do the same. Thanks for posting your story here!
I think you are right that something is wrong with the way the optometrists measure our visual accuity. When I started the Bates method, I could see only 5/200 on the chart and my prescription was -8 in both eyes and -0.5 astigmatism. One year later I could read 20/50 on my chart without glasses, a huge improvement, and she said my eyes had only improved 0.5 diopter. The thing to remember is that optometry is not medicine, it is a consumer business. People want to see everything all at once, and they offer that with prescriptions that are higher than necessary. There haven't been enough eye doctors since Dr. Bates to object to this destructive practice!
Good luck reaching your next goal of 6/6!!! It is very inspiring to read about your progress, thank you!
Sorrisi
Doctors often try to sell the stronger than 20/20 prescription stating it will bring clearer vision through the lenses and the lenses will last longer before a new stronger prescriptiion is needed.
Truth is: the stronger lenses increase vision impairment and the patient returns for a stronger prescription sooner than if the lense was prescriped for 20/30-20/40 reduced, weaker.
Reduced, weaker lenses allow the eye muscles to relax, brain, visual systen to function more toward normal and vison to improve.
Subject: Telling "fibs" to scare a person into putting his child into a strong minus.
I think that if you have 20/50, and will avoid the minus (as Bates intimated), you can gradually clear to get to 20/25.
But what some ODs (and MDs) do, or "intone", is that unless your child gets, and wears "best visual acuity", you will CAUSE amblyopia for your child.
That is simply NOT TRUE.
But you hear it all the time. The parents, not hearing anything else will BELIEVE IT, and then insist that their child wear a -2 diotper lens, when the child has 20/50 to 20/40 on this Snellen.
If he wears that -2 all the time, his vision will then go down to 20/100 or so.
There need to be more honesty about this subject. Dr. Bates described "functional" myopia of up to 2.5 diotpers. He said that with effort, you could get out of functional myopia.
I support that concept -- totally. Let us end this specific "scare tactic. There is no harm in avoiding the minus.
Otis, where I live (Canada), at the DMV, it's a special machine that is used and not a standard snellen chart. It simulate far vision, but the machine is about one feet long in reality. The image seen is a lot like the yellow and black squares sign that when see often at the end of a road and there are like 3-4 categories of patterns like that and you have to indicate the clearer one. The conditions simulated are more like at night than daylight and this is why I want to still improve a little because I know that my night visual acuity is not enough to drive without glasses, even if it's now better in real life situations at night without glasses than it was one year ago with glasses! Oh, and what is the Prentice that you talk often in your message Otis?
Subject: A long struggle to FIND a prevention-minded OD and MD.
Re: Obviously Dr. Bates was the FIRST.
Re: But there were OTHER professionals who felt the same way that Dr. Bates' judged this situation. That 'other' professional was Dr. Prentice. I respect BOTH these men, but Dr. Bates had the courage to run the world's first preventive study in 1913. Because of his leadership, imagination-blindness exists!!
I follow the LEGAL statement, that in most states you must (at 20 feet) read 1/2 the letters on the 20/40 line. That is the letters must be "block", and "crisp", and must be at 20 feet to be legal. Further, from my experience, the Snellen must be brightly illuminated. I think these small "box" tests are bogus -- but it is up to Canada to determine that. If you are working to pass the DMV in the USA, you will find that the requirement can run from 20/60 in the state of Georgia, to 20/50 in Texas, and 20/40 in amost all of the other states. Dr. Bates did not emphasize this issue, but if you see your Snellen at 20/70, you should avoid wearing a minus lens for a period of time. If driving a car, you must at that time wear the minus. It was Bates intention that your Snellen not remain at 20/70, but rather through your efforts, you gradually get to 20/40 or better (my opinion). That to me is an excellent standard. But don't stop there, continue to 20/25 -- that I consider excellent for anyone working with Bates methods. It is up to YOU. I wish you could "prescribe" this -- but that does not seem to work. More commentary:
Otis, where I live (Canada), at the DMV, it's a special machine that is used and not a standard snellen chart. It simulate far vision, but the machine is about one feet long in reality. The image seen is a lot like the yellow and black squares sign that when see often at the end of a road and there are like 3-4 categories of patterns like that and you have to indicate the clearer one.
OTis> THis will force you to get the strongest minus possible. There is nothing you can do about it. But you can avoid the minus at all other times and work with these preventive measures.
Otis> I like the extreme sharp vision you get from the minus also. Bu not when I find out that Bates was correct. This truly forces a "compromise" (that is difficult) as you work to improve your vision. I just think that you should have a "goal" that you confirm yourself.
Alex> The conditions simulated are more like at night than daylight and this is why I want to still improve a little because I know that my night visual acuity is not enough to drive without glasses, even if it's now better in real life situations at night without glasses than it was one year ago with glasses!
Oh, and what is the Prentice that you talk often in your message Otis?
OTis> Prentice advocated prevention also, but his method is not "standard, and is not accepted.
Best,
Otis
