+- 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: Working Towards A Neonatal Blur Theory Of Common Myopia (/showthread.php?tid=1463)
Re: Working Towards A Neonatal Blur Theory Of Common Myopia - JMartinC4 - 08-29-2011
In Psychology (in which I have an actual Bachelor of Science degree from Michigan State University :o ) there is a phenomenon called 'projection' - in which a person, as a defense mechanism to avoid examining their own behavior, 'projects' onto another the very traits which to an unbiased observer that person him/herself exhibits. I submit you may be one such. I have not called you passive/aggressive, nor dismissive of other's thoughts, research, observations, and experimentations - yet you have clearly (to me) been so of mine (if perhaps ever so slyly), and have not read even the first two of the easily obtainable scientific and legal references in my signature block. That is where this discussion needs to start, but you refuse.
I have therefore answered your questions to the degree warranted by the least amount of knowledge of the background required to understand what I'm saying - which is to say, the first two references. You have not yet attained that least amount. Isn't a 'literature review' an important part of any scientific inquiry?
Defending my considerable efforts from dismissive attacks does not make me 'passive aggressive'. I am trying to be good-natured while discussing what I believe is one of the signature issues of our age. I don't think you are as serious about it as I am.
I am enjoying the banter though! I cannot get my two sons - a Biology PhD from UCSanDiego and a DVM from KansasState - to discuss even this much with me. So, thank you extremely much! You are an excellent writer, very intelligent and cogent, and I do not mean to offend in any way. Sometimes I write and post too fast - and should try to be more 'judicious' I guess.
Re: Working Towards A Neonatal Blur Theory Of Common Myopia - hereford_picnic - 08-29-2011
JMartinC4 Wrote:I cannot get my two sons - a Biology PhD from UCSanDiego and a DVM from KansasState - to discuss even this much with me.Why do you think that is?
Re: Working Towards A Neonatal Blur Theory Of Common Myopia - JMartinC4 - 08-29-2011
The idea scares them. Especially coming from me. They are both myopic, busy, married professionals with full lives. They don't need that disturbed with upsetting ideas of enormous implication. Again, I don't blame them. But I know this idea is true, and I can't in good conscience not talk about it. I know it's true because uncovering it, layer by layer, has resulted in clearer eyesight, layer by layer.
Re: Working Towards A Neonatal Blur Theory Of Common Myopia - JMartinC4 - 08-29-2011
This idea desparately needs to be picked up and carried by someone born after 1960. I think my myopia experience (and most of us born between 1935-1960 when a caustic hours-long 1% silver nitrate solution was the near universally-applied neonatal eye antibiotic) is too different from the myopia experience of most of those born after 1960 when a non-caustic, minutes-long antibiotic ointment such as erythromicin became the standard. Any takers? Hammer? Sorrisi? 2xtreme2fit? Kalina? In fact, I'm not sure anyone born after 1960 should even be commenting on my posts because it is too foreign to their experience for them to relate.
I mean, come on - you guys remember having had clear distance eyesight which went bad. Although I'm interested in your 'style' of myopia (I expect your eyes are still slightly misaligned, with one eye over-dominant and/or your worse eye being dominant), the fact that I and most of my cohort have no memory of clear eyesight (we recall thinking our blurry distance eyesight was the way everyone saw, and we were surprised and delighted to get lenses which made the distance clear even though it meant our eyesight had always been blurry unbeknownst to us) - means we are somewhat at odds and alienated, resulting in communication breakdown.
Re: Working Towards A Neonatal Blur Theory Of Common Myopia - 2xtreme2fit - 09-01-2011
JMartinC4, hello there!
Its been a long time but I have to respond to you every now and then, I gotta say you are true about the stuff about people born after 1960 may have no clue about your life experience but I too, like you, have forgot what was my vision before it went horribly wrong. The only clear vision I have a memory of is the ones I've had after I started the Bates Method.
Re: Working Towards A Neonatal Blur Theory Of Common Myopia - JMartinC4 - 09-01-2011
2xtreme2fit Wrote:JMartinC4, hello there! Its been a long time but I have to respond to you every now and then, I gotta say you are true about the stuff about people born after 1960 may have no clue about your life experience but I too, like you, have forgot what was my vision before it went horribly wrong. The only clear vision I have a memory of is the ones I've had after I started the Bates Method.Interesting. That's not what you wrote originally. Have you had recent amnesia or something?
2xtreme2fit Wrote:I have quite a few things to share but for now I'll just share the story of how I got them glasses. "Rewind a little more than 2 years, my right eye is blood red - something hit my right eye. I'm in pain so my parents rush me to an optometrist. After waiting for half an hour, the Doc' uses his equipment though none of his brain to determine I need glasses. At that moment I wished I had a gun so I could shoot a bullet through his right eye & suggest him that he needed glasses. I did ask for some medication but it looked he had gone deaf after the checkup. A tear appeared out of my right eye for the poor soul (not really, actually it was the pain). I still refused to get glasses but the idea of defective vision had gripped me already.Actually, this doesn't sound like common myopia at all.
After a while, I realized I had become myopic & agreed to get glasses [-0.75 left,-1.25 right]. I was happy as long as I thought the legs of a beautiful woman were resting on my ears instead of my glasses but that happiness didn't last long. One & a half year pass by & I realize that again there is a blur even though I'm wearing glasses. I was scared because I knew how it would end if continued wearing those glasses..."
Re: Working Towards A Neonatal Blur Theory Of Common Myopia - JMartinC4 - 09-03-2011
Point with the blindspots, but look with the foveas.
Aim with the imaginary (they are real, because I can't see them, but I know they're there) blindspots. Fire (or look) with the imaginary foveas (I can't see them, but I know they are located just outside the blindspots.)
I am zeroing in on normal eyesight.
Let me say that even if my theory of neonatal eye antibiotics as a root cause of my nearsightedness ultimately proves untrue - it is still a root cause with enough probability, correlation, definition, specificity, and singularity for me to use as a focal point in memory to organize and focus my efforts at redeveloping normal eyesight. It is also early enough, predating any myopia symptoms, to provide an explanation against which I can balance, gauge and justify my improvement mentally. It is an exact root cause. It may not prove to be correct, but for working purposes, it is enough. And, of course, I still believe it is the truth. To me, it makes perfect sense.
Re: Working Towards A Neonatal Blur Theory Of Common Myopia - JMartinC4 - 09-07-2011
I woke up again at around 5:40AM, as other members have been recently reporting. I seem to go through phases of early rising. These past couple of days I have been experimenting more with the 'forward movement' concept, combined with what others have described as 'activating the periphery', and with the counting of blink length which pawlenty has recently described. So, for instance, while walking and while driving, I alternately kept my head turned obliquely about 15-30deg left or right, and combined that with counting the length of time I was able to keep my eyes open. My open eyes timelength varied between 1-3-6-9 seconds, and usually had a series of 1 or 2 seconds between blinks before I could hold my eyes open longer. The longest was one of about 20 seconds. This method was definitely associated with improved eyesight and control of the improvement.
Re: Working Towards A Neonatal Blur Theory Of Common Myopia - 2xtreme2fit - 09-13-2011
Well I can't just quite get mad at you anymore.
But I guess you could say after I wore glasses, I forgot what clear vision used to be for a long time.And I just don't care if it is not common, I came here to look for a cure & I'm not disappointed.
Re: Working Towards A Neonatal Blur Theory Of Common Myopia - JMartinC4 - 09-22-2011
2xtreme2fit Wrote:Well I can't just quite get mad at you anymore.Can you agree with me that
And I just don't care if it is not common, I came here to look for a cure & I'm not disappointed.
If:
1) my preliminary investigation/interviews into the myopic experience of
A) a dozen or more myopes who were born in US hospitals before 1960 (most or all of whom don't remember ever seeing clearly into the distance)
2) shows a significant difference versus
B) a dozen or more myopes born in US hospitals after 1960 (most or all of whom do remember having clear distance eyesight which became uncontrollably blurry)
Then:
3) it is a difference which indicates human/environmental interference on a systematic scale
And
4) that the fact of a radical change in the kind of neonatal eye antibiotics in use:
A) long lasting 1% silver nitrate solution before 1960, versus
B) short acting erythromycin ointments after 1960,
Would
5) necessarily point to a possible cause for that difference in myopic experience
And
6) thereby also the probable cause of the increasing prevalence of myopia?
To me, it's almost obvious beyond disbelief.
Re: Working Towards A Neonatal Blur Theory Of Common Myopia - Nini - 09-23-2011
Quote:A) a dozen or more myopes who were born in US hospitals before 1960 (most or all of whom don't remember ever seeing clearly into the distance)
Martin, I think you will hardly find anybody who will really rember his eyesight exactly as a child (or how good his ears ...were), because this is not somithing which is worth remembering at that age, but a 'matter of course' fact.
I myself have plenty of memories of my childhood (even very young), but I don't remeber my eyesight - although I am sure it was good; I do remember an eye examination when I started school and I remember being very astonished that a little girl had to be approached very close to the eye chart in order to be able to see the letters; I was surprised because I could hardly imagine someone not beeing able to read the letters.
And I do remeber the time when my eyesight worsend at the age of about 11 and how bad I felt about it.
Re: Working Towards A Neonatal Blur Theory Of Common Myopia - JMartinC4 - 09-23-2011
Nini Wrote:Quote:A) a dozen or more myopes who were born in US hospitals before 1960 (most or all of whom don't remember ever seeing clearly into the distance)Martin, I think you will hardly find anybody who will really rember his eyesight exactly as a child (or how good his ears ...were), because this is not somithing which is worth remembering at that age, but a 'matter of course' fact.
I myself have plenty of memories of my childhood (even very young), but I don't remeber my eyesight - although I am sure it was good; I do remember an eye examination when I started school and I remember being very astonished that a little girl had to be approached very close to the eye chart in order to be able to see the letters; I was surprised because I could hardly imagine someone not beeing able to read the letters. And I do remeber the time when my eyesight worsend at the age of about 11 and how bad I felt about it.
Nini,
No, all a myope really has to do is remember the time when s/he first got lenses - what was that like?
For instance, for me and most of my pre-1960s-born cohort, it was a revelation that what we thought was our normal distance vision the way everyone saw, was in fact abnormally blurry distance vision. We then realized we had never been seeing clearly into the distance.
But for most myopes born post-1960, they clearly remember having clear distance eyesight which became blurry.
It is a significantly different myopic experience.
Re: Working Towards A Neonatal Blur Theory Of Common Myopia - Nini - 09-24-2011
When it is a slow process, even adults will be only aware of it, when you become a bit 'handicapped' or else when other people notice, that there is something wrong with you - children will even less notice it.
I remember when I was about 6 years old, after an inflammation in my ears, my hearing became very bad. I didn't notice it at all and when my mother told me that she had the impression, I didn't hear well and kept on testing my ears all the time, I became very frightened.
The doctor found some cotton wool in my ears, which had been forgotten there when I was treated with ear drops. (After removing this, I heared very well again...)
Re: Working Towards A Neonatal Blur Theory Of Common Myopia - JMartinC4 - 09-24-2011
Nini Wrote:...I remember when I was about 6 years old, after an inflammation in my ears, my hearing became very bad. I didn't notice it at all and when my mother told me that she had the impression, I didn't hear well and kept on testing my ears all the time, I became very frightened. The doctor found some cotton wool in my ears, which had been forgotten there when I was treated with ear drops. (After removing this, I heared very well again...)Ah, yes. Bad treatment + bad follow-up = bad results.
Re: Working Towards A Neonatal Blur Theory Of Common Myopia - JMartinC4 - 09-24-2011
JMartinC4 Wrote:Let me say it again, differently:Nini Wrote:Nini, No, all a myope really has to do is remember the time when s/he first got lenses - what was that like?Quote:A) a dozen or more myopes who were born in US hospitals before 1960 (most or all of whom don't remember ever seeing clearly into the distance)Martin, I think you will hardly find anybody who will really rember his eyesight exactly as a child (or how good his ears ...were), because this is not somithing which is worth remembering at that age, but a 'matter of course' fact.
I myself have plenty of memories of my childhood (even very young), but I don't remeber my eyesight - although I am sure it was good; I do remember an eye examination when I started school and I remember being very astonished that a little girl had to be approached very close to the eye chart in order to be able to see the letters; I was surprised because I could hardly imagine someone not beeing able to read the letters. And I do remeber the time when my eyesight worsend at the age of about 11 and how bad I felt about it.
For instance, for me and most of my pre-1960s-born cohort, it was a revelation that what we thought was our normal distance vision the way everyone saw, was in fact abnormally blurry distance vision. We then realized we had never been seeing clearly into the distance. But for most myopes born post-1960, they clearly remember having clear distance eyesight which became blurry.mIt is a significantly different myopic experience.
Most myopes born before 1960 didn't realize their distance eyesight was blurry until they got lenses; whereas,
Most myopes born after 1960 realized their distance eyesight had become blurry before they got lenses.
Or at least that is how they describe the experience, if asked.
It seems a startling difference to me.