Eyesight Improvement Forum
Anticorrective lense sucess story - Printable Version

+- 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: Anticorrective lense sucess story (/showthread.php?tid=2439)

Pages: 1 2 3 4


Anticorrective lense sucess story - Bifocal - 09-28-2013

A close friends daughter age 19,always had excellent vision throughout grade school,and high school.
She is studying for an engineering degree,and also taking flying lessons,and would like to be an airline pilot.
During her second year of college,she noticed some distance blur,and when she went to renew her pilot medical certificate,she failed the vision exam. She was told by the FAA doctor to see an optometrist.At the optometrist it was determined that she had 20/50 vision in each eye,and was prescribed a minus 1.00 for each eye.She began wearing the glasses for flying,driving,and college classroom,but soon found them more comfortable to wear full time. After only three months with the glasses she felt that she again was not seeing properly,and went back to the optometrist,and learned that her vision was now 20/100,and given minus 1.50 lenses for each eye. By the end of the school year last spring she had gone back again to the optometrist,and then found to be 20/200,and given minus 2.50 glasses.Both her FAA doctor,and her optometrist were concerned at how rapidly her vision had declined,and she was totally dependent on glasses now.
During her summer break,her father,and I discussed the anticorrective lense method for her. She was very excited about trying it.
She started off by wearing her distance glasses for everything except reading,and computer.For those two activities,she began wearing plus .50 glasses,which she could only tolerate for about a half an hour at first. She built up her close vision work with these glasses until she could read for two hours with them,and then increased the plus glasses to 1.00. These also were hard to use for more than a half hour,but as she became used to using them she found her distance glasses a bit too strong,so she went to her minus 1.50 glasses for most activities.Again when she could read comfortably for two or more hours with the plus 1.00 glasses,she went to plus 1.50. Shortly after being able to read for about an hour or more with these glasses,she quit using distance glasses all together. She is back at college now,and has surprised her FAA doctor with 20/20 vision in each eye.
She still uses plus 1.00 glasses for extensive close work,but has 20/20 close up vision,and can read fine without the glasses.She just feels that using them for extensive close work keeps her eyes tuned up for excellent distance vision.
Her optometrist examined her prior to her going back to school,and was simply amazed that she had 20/20 vision. He told her that he had felt that she had developed late onset myopia,and that she would have ended up with a minus 6.,or 7.00 prescription.. He had never heard of the anticorrective lense method,and was quite impressed.
She of course is overjoyed that she does not have to worry about myopia possibly ruining her career as a pilot.


Re: Anticorrective lense sucess story - clarknight - 09-30-2013

The anti-corrective method is the dangerous, harmful plus lens method advertised by Otis Brown and David De Angelis.

Avoid Un-Natural, Harmful Methods

There are dishonest teachers, authors altering Dr. Bates original books, method by adding unnatural practices that impair the eyesight, eyes health. Example; the dangerous cataract, detached retina, astigmatism… producing ‘Plus Lens Method’. (Also called Anti-Corrective Lenses.) It consists of forcing the eyes to look through blurry, incorrect, too strong close vision reading eyeglass prescriptions. Avoid this! It causes unclear vision. The method is addictive, unclear vision develops. The method forces the ciliary-lens muscle and other inner, outer eye muscles and the lens to become stiff, immobile. Circulation in the eye
is lowered, health of the eyes, lens, retina is impaired. The eyes natural refraction, movement is blocked. Extreme tension, pressure occurs in the eye.

All eyeglasses, minus and plus lenses, bifocal, prisms... lead to addiction to stronger eyeglasses, cataract, detached retina, glaucoma and other eye problems. Notice people who wear stronger and stronger reading glasses often quickly develop cataract and are then sold eye surgery. Cataract, glaucoma... are also a side effect of drugs taken for certain medical and eye conditions. Eyeglasses increase the risk.

The authors listed above block, delete all posts on their forums, groups by the many people who have been harmed by the plus lens method. Only positive statements (Which are mainly by their cultish group members) supporting the method are allowed.
The plus lens method is not the Bates method. Dr. Bates never taught this. He is against use of glasses.


Re: Anticorrective lense sucess story - Bifocal - 09-30-2013

Clarknight, The only things that you forgot to list are the gremlins that come out of the lenses,and eat your corneas,and the likelihood of your eyeballs to explode.


Re: Anticorrective lense sucess story - clarknight - 09-30-2013

Bifocal,

Why do you post a harmful method on a forum that is for the true, safe Bates Method? You can go to Otis Brown or David de Angelis' forums where all posts by people that state the method has ruined their vision are blocked.

Why post there?

Answer; to spread a destructive method that eye doctors like because it leads to sales of, addiction to eye surgery and glasses. (Note that their books are in co-work with eye doctors) Glasses lead to surgery. Eye surgery leads to stronger glasses, more surgery and blindness. Otis has had 2 cataract surgeries, Lasik on his cornea due to use of the Plus Lens method which he arrogantly still advises regardless of the harm it has and continues to do to all people including the children, seniors and pilots/military he advises to.
(Maybe the Govt. should investigate this. They use the true Original Bates Method and might be concerned that someone is trying to get their service men, ladies to use a unnatural method that will impair their vision. I am tired of you guys, I am forwarding this information to the military, my sergeant. I am retired military and used the Bates method to see for rifle, target practice to see clear. I and others do not need plus lenses, do not need any type of eyeglasses.)

Coincidence?? Bifocal's post here was submitted quickly after I posted the truth in a comment to the newest 'Phony- written by a business partner' review to his mentors book that advises plus lens under the disguise of the Bates Method, "which it is not"; Compare the date of my comment to this post by bifocal; <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.amazon.com/review/R17UOSM3OKBW0O/ref=cm_cr_pr_cmt?ie=UTF8&ASIN=1556436777&linkCode=&nodeID=&tag=#wasThisHelpful">http://www.amazon.com/review/R17UOSM3OK ... hisHelpful</a><!-- m --> Avoid this book, teachers!! They are not the true Bates method.

All people on this Forum, including Chat may have 100% free E-books on the true Bates Method downloaded from my website. 90% of books are the result of David at iblindness.org preservation of Dr. Bates work, books, Better Eyesight Magazines.


Re: Anticorrective lense sucess story - Bifocal - 09-30-2013

Clarknight,
First off,you continually rant about plus lenses,but you have thus far failed to provide any medical,or scientific proof to back up your claims.Why should we believe you?
Your claims about Otis Brown are most likely blown way out of proportion.I do not know the man,and I hardly ever read what he has to say.Where did you get all of the info on his surgeries? Did he post them,or are you making this up.Please give the readers here some credible references. Why should we have reason to believe your accusations.
There are many cases of cataracts,worldwide,and I again ask you to offer medical,or scientific proof that plus lenses are the cause of them.
There are many people at this site trying the Bates Method and never getting anywhere beyond a few clear flashes.To them you are providing a great disservice,by frightening them from trying the Anticorrective Method,which may work for them.The method has worked for me,and others that I have written about in a number of my posts.
Regarding the U.S.military,can you provide us with proof that any branch has officially authorized the Bates method.
My oh my ,you are a bit paranoid! My post here had nothing to do with the post you made at Amazon regarding the book. I never even knew it existed,until I clicked on the link you provided.I also have never read anything by the author.


Re: Anticorrective lense sucess story - clarknight - 09-30-2013

So your saying I should leave this forum forever and allow you guys to prevail and bring on the blindness the Plus Lens causes?

Tell that to the blind man, the lady with CSR, the many other people with cataract, conical cornea, optic nerve pressure-damage and more problenms caused by all eyeglasses including and increased the Plus Lens method.

Everyone knows I am against Rishi Giovanni and his 'members' due to certain 'tactics' but I have to state; I agree with Giovanni 'solo' when I comes to the hurt, destruction the Plus Lens has caused many people. I also must state Giovanni answered a question no other teacher explained about the opposite swing for FAR vision. Yes, you can see the opposite swing when shifting on a star, the moon or a tree in the far distance. It's a shame some teachers cannot work together. At least we are together against this Plus Lens anti-natural method and a other unnatural methods.

I will let the intelligent and true good hearted public decide by reading the opinion of all people on this forum.

I am supposed to be on vacation, no computer. Ahhhh. Why am I checking in here 2 days; God sent me to stop the plus lens guys? I am to old for babysitting.


Thank you David K. for allowing the truth to shine.


Re: Anticorrective lense sucess story - Bifocal - 09-30-2013

More paranoia? Where did I say,or even suggest that you leave?
All that I ask for is to give the folks here reason to believe what you are stating. Can you do that?


Re: Anticorrective lense sucess story - clarknight - 09-30-2013

Any person trying the plus lens method will realize their close vision after using plus lens eyeglasses, then without glasses becomes more and more unclear and addition to eyeglasses (plus Lens) occurs. Then it leads to cataract... It destroys the lens movement, health. Other damage I have already posted occurs. In a short, sometimes bit longer time, 'before the person is aware if it', the distant vision and eyes health is also impaired.

This is my last post for a few days. http://I am going on vacation. I don't need to spend all my time stating the truth that has been posted many times on this forum about the health, vision damage the Plus Lens anti-corrective method causes. Only reason I am here is to prevent people from being hurt. Otis, De Angelis and associate eye doctors harm peoples vision.

Please someone else post on this thread; someone that is not being paid, coerced by the Plus lens eyeglass salesmen.

The intelligent public can realize who posts the truth; angry, abusive people or people that provide true safe FREE training.


Re: Anticorrective lense sucess story - Bifocal - 09-30-2013

Clarknight ,Last post for a few days, hummm,still no proof,just more of the same just believe what I post as truth,
Have a nice vacation,


Re: Anticorrective lense sucess story - Daniel - 09-30-2013

I'm way too nearsighted to use a plus lens, but since Clarknight wants someone else to post in this thread, I'll add my thoughts. As far as I can tell, Bifocal is correct that Clarknight hasn't provided any evidence of the danger of plus lenses. That people have developed cataracts after using them doesn't prove anything, since lots of people develop cataracts. To establish a correlation, you'd have to show that it occurred at a higher rate than average.

On the other hand, as I understand it the purpose of using the plus lens with myopia is to allow you to push print away, and then bring it into focus. That could just as easily be done with fine print. So why not just use fine print, without a plus lens?


Re: Anticorrective lense sucess story - clarknight - 09-30-2013

Thank you Daniel for your input.

Unfortunately all the tests for plus lens were done by eye doctors and most prefer to sell glasses, surgery so they will only support the eyeglass sales people.

I have many students that have developed eye problems from the plus lens and also minus lens before coming to us for non-eyeglasses, true Bates Method training. It is very hard to get people to write about their experiences. After they are cured, they leave. Some have experience written in e-mails but I cannot give private information. Their eye doctors refuse to document the success obtained without eyeglasses and especially the damage caused by eyeglasses because they want to sell eyeglasses and surgery. The eye surgeons are angry with me because the true Bates method training resulted in reversal of the eye-vision condition and loss of surgery sales. For years Otis Brown hid the fact that the plus lens lead to cataract and lasik surgery. Search his old posts and new on the Google, Yahoo groups. (I have saved them for evidence in case they are deleted.)

Someday, If I live long enough I will document my students progress (make special place for the ones that come to us because the plus lens has harmed them) but I doubt due to corruption in the optical, medical industry this report will ever be posted in medical journals.

I want to remind everyone that; the reading of fine print as Dr. Bate teaches WITHOUT GLASSES brings clear close and far vision. It is a natural, true alternative medicine practice without the harmful use of all types of eyeglasses.


Ok, this time I am really on vacation. I must say this discussion on IB has been fun.


Re: Anticorrective lense sucess story - Bifocal - 09-30-2013

I just went for the first time to Clarknights web site.
With all of the products that she sells there, it is not surprising that she would perceive a method like anticorrection lenses,as a threat to her income,and try to discredit it.
Very unprofessional to slam other methods that do work,to protect your own income.
Just for the record,I am in no way connected to any business relating to plus lenses use,or anticorrection method. I have merely been a success,and witnessed other successful users of this method.
Any time I have posted this type of info on the legitimate thread titled other methods,Clarknight feels that she has to attack it with the same unsubstantiated,and unverified scare tactics.


Re: Anticorrective lense sucess story - arocarty - 10-01-2013

Bifocal Wrote:I just went for the first time to Clarknights web site.
With all of the products that she sells there, it is not surprising that she would perceive a method like anticorrection lenses,as a threat to her income,and try to discredit it.

You make huge assumptions, without any evidence. Isn't that what you are claiming she is doing? If you had one hundreth of the passion for using plus lenses as she does for promoting and trying to teach the Bates method, you too would have you own web site, where you could make whatever claims you want, list all the credible scientific evidence you claim supports it, help others uninhibited, and post all their success stories, etc. I asked before why you just don't make your own site, and never heard a response. It's so easy to do these days, and free - is it just laziness? Mary (Clark) dedicates a ton of her personal time to helping others, for years, for FREE, expecting nothing in return. Dollars are obviously not what motivates her.

Never heard of Otis? You really need to get out more. Start reading the I-See yahoo group forum, it started in 1995, one of the first promoting vision improvement. If you think Clark can rant, you haven't heard anything. His exaggerated, weakly supported claims about the plus lenses usage have had medical professionals joining in for years and pointing out every illogical and inaccurate statements.

If one is going to lean on 'scientific' evidence to support plus lens usage, than one would need to demonstrate the evidence based on repeatable, peer-reviewed, blind clinical trial studies showing its efficacacy. (human studies, not on monkeys or termites) Pub Med is a very good source for such information. Problem is, scientifically speaking, of course, using plus has not shown to have any significant difference in slowing myopia. If it did, the medical community would be embracing it without concern. Fact is they are not.


a couple samples, of scientific evidence, for those who care:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11874738">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11874738</a><!-- m -->

A study on military students:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7258283">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7258283</a><!-- m -->


Re: Anticorrective lense sucess story - clarknight - 10-01-2013

Arocarty,

Thank-you for helping with professional statements on this subject and the nice compliment. Wish I could express myself more like you and couple others.

I totally brunt out trying to endlessly post the truth about this subject over the years. It's like a depressing knife in the gut when people experience addiction to glasses and other eye problems due to the plus lens method.

I even feel bad 'in some ways' for Otis. If you study his history it shows that it was an eye doctor that brainwashed him into the plus lens method when he was in his teens (maybe early 20's.) He clings to it for some strange reason even after all the problems it has caused him.


Re: Anticorrective lense sucess story - Bifocal - 11-02-2013

I found this study to verify the anticorrective lense method.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.iovs.org/content/51/12/6262.full.pdf+html">http://www.iovs.org/content/51/12/6262.full.pdf+html</a><!-- m -->