+- Eyesight Improvement Forum (https://www.iblindness.org/forum)
+-- Forum: General Discussion (https://www.iblindness.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Complementary Methods (https://www.iblindness.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: THIS SITE NEEDS TO GET THEIR FACTS STRAIGHT?? (/showthread.php?tid=1178)
THIS SITE NEEDS TO GET THEIR FACTS STRAIGHT?? - blauw - 05-25-2009
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.unleash-your-vision.com/faq.html">http://www.unleash-your-vision.com/faq.html</a><!-- m -->
I found this website. They say that the Bates Method only works the eye muscles! Never yet have I been doing eye circles etc that you find on some other vision improvement sites!
I want to see what others think of this Unleash Your Vision site...... anyone think it may be a scam?
Good luck to all,
blauw
Re: THIS SITE NEEDS TO GET THEIR FACTS STRAIGHT?? - otis - 05-27-2009
Dear Blau,
Subject: Avoid getting "Scammed".
First, read Bates 1913 study.
Second, read your Snellen.
Third, avoid the minus if at all possible.
I have talked to quite a few people. They report a minus "prescription". They almost NEVER read a Snellen. In other words, they
don't trust themselves to look at a Snellen (bright light) and report it.
There is a element of "independence" a person should (or must) have for prevention using Bates/Prentice methods.
I personally both:
1. Read my Snellen and had obtained the standard trial-lens kit, so:
2. I measure my refractive STATE also (Which is about +1/2 diopters.)
As long as I take personal resonsbility to PASS the LEGAL LINE (i.e., 20/40, or 1.8 cm letters at 6 meters) I AM NOT GOING TO WEAR A MINUS LENS.
Futher, I am going to work TOWARDS 20/20 (brightly lit Snellen), and keep it there.
I am an engineer. I can not be "scammed" if I take complete responsibility to do all of this myself. Obviously I distrust the majority-opinion ODs and MDs who over-prescribed the minus, and say NOTHING of the "secondary effect" (proven in science) of the minus lens on the eye.
If anyone was "scammed" -- it was me as a child, by NOT being offered the preventive choice -- BEFORE THAT FIRST MINUS.
I don't like to be "scammed" in that manner -- even by well-intentioned majority-opinion ODs.
But that is indeed was Dr. Bates was all about -- technical and scientific honesty. That is what I prefer. That is whas Bates and David attempt to provide here.
Otis