+- 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: Farsightedness (/showthread.php?tid=47)
Farsightedness - Bifocal - 01-08-2006
I have been wearing glasses for 30 years. At first for reading because I would have distance blur after reading. The first few pair were small plus, with a small astigmatism correction, didn't seem to help much, so I often wonder if I wasn't slightly nearsighted. Then after about five years I was prescribed bifocals, small plus for distance, and small astigmatism.These gave me headaches, but did solve the distance blur after reading. They got progressively stronger, but I never resigned to wearing them full time.About two years ago,I started doing some Bates exercises, and also have tried something on my own. Obtained a pair of weak -.50 glasses and began wearing them for computer use. I feel a slight strain at first, but after a short time it passes. When I look into the distance, my vision is better than if I wear my bifocals.Also when I remove these glasses my vision is now about 20/30.If I do the same computer work, with my bifocals, and remove them, my distance vision is 20/100. For me wearing weak nearsighted lenses feels relaxing,and I sometimes wear them for distance.
Re: Farsightedness - dragon28 - 01-10-2006
The relaxation effect is made by the diminution of the objects.
You can try to look at object while your eyes are relaxed. At first you may see blurry but after a while you will see clearer.
Re: Farsightedness - Bifocal - 02-20-2006
Has anyone here also used minus lenses, or found any info on the web for the use of them in eliminating hyperopia. I would be interested in any info,as I have done this on my own, and it seems to help me. Only problem is that if I wear the minus lenses for extended close work, My vision for distance is about 20/30without the glasses,but I feel more comfortable wearing them as my vision is 20/20+ with them. Also I really need them now for night driving.I can read, and do close work now with no glasses, whereas before I could not do this with my plus bifocals.
Re:Update Farsightedness - Bifocal - 07-01-2006
An interesting update: After using the minus .50 glasses to improve my farsightedness, and astigmatism, I wound up needing glasses for myopia.
I thought that my uncorrected vision was 20/30 according to my home Snellen charts. I decided to go to an optometrist to get an exam. Went to one that I had never been to, and when she ask if I wear glasses, I said, no.
It was late in the day, and I had been wearing the minus .50 glasses the better part of the day, and to drive to the appointment, but walked in without the glasses.
I couldn't make out some of the lines, so she placed the phoropter in front of me, and proceded to add lenses. At first I thought that she may be giving me plus lenses, and then realized that as the letters on the chart got clearer, they also got smaller..
I wound up with minus 1.00 for each eye, and she said my uncorrected vision was 20/80.
I had this prescription filled, and find my vision super sharp with the glasses. I had been noticing that I needed the -.50 glasses to drive, but didn't think that my vision had gotten this bad.
She said that I didn't need them for close work, but definitely for distance.
Now I have to go back to working on reversing this myopia, without getting back to farsighted/ astigmatism.
Has anyone else gone from farsighted to nearsighted? Also cannot find much reference, but read on one website that plus lenses act as a sedative to the cillary muscle, and minus lenses act as a stimulant, anyone know of other places to find info on this?
Meanwhile I am looking at sharper images thru minus glasses.and find it hard not to wear them.
Re: Farsightedness - Bifocal - 07-02-2006
An additional question. For those of you that are myopic. With minus 1.00 lenses, does this sound like an overcorrection for 20/80 vision? My vision is so incredibly sharp with these new glasses that perhaps they are an overcorrection. I can read small print with them, but not as comfortably as with the minus .50 lenses that I was using as therapy. After wearing them for any length of time my uncorrected vision seems worse with out them. Have had them on more or less constantly for about two weeks now, and have not had a chance to check them with my snellen charts. I see now how easy it is to become dependant on minus glasses, even with a small correction.However they are much more comfortable to wear than my old plus /astigmatism bifocal glasses. The smaller crisp images, are easier to handle than the old enlarged, distorted images produced by my old bifocals.
Re: Farsightedness - dragon28 - 07-02-2006
What is your acuity with -1.00?
Re: Farsightedness - fidisolo - 07-02-2006
could myopia be reversed with reading glasses then? I'd rather be farsighted than nearsighted
Re: Farsightedness - Bifocal - 07-02-2006
In responce to fidasolo. I don't think you would rather be farsighted. It usually starts out with difficulty reading fine print,for which you are given weak plus glasses for reading.After wearing these glasses you quickly progress to stronger ones, and at about your third pair you also need them for distance. Most farsighted people have poor distant, and near vision. At a later point the lenses that would correct for both become inadequate, and the you get bi, or trifocals. Vision thru plus glasses is enlarged, and as the Rx gets stronger things are distorted. Also side vision thru plus lenses is reduced. New glasses are usually hard to get used to. My lenses prior to therapy were + 2.75 with an additional +2.50 in the bifocal, and a - 1.25 cyl. for the astigmatism.
Re: Farsightedness - Bifocal - 07-02-2006
In responce to Dragon 28. The optometrist said that I have 20/20 in each eye, and slightly better with both eyes. She said that she could have given me -1.50 that would be an advantage for night driving, but would definitely be too strong to do any close work with.
I did not tell her about my previous glasses history, or that I had been wearing -.50 glasses for therapy. She did think it odd that a 64 year old would be nearsighted, and commented that I most likely had late onset myopia due to using computers a lot. She said that the Rx. may increase some in the next six months, and that if I am not seeing as well, to come back.
Re: Farsightedness - dragon28 - 07-03-2006
If you see 20\20 there is no overcorrection here.
You can use 1.25 or 1.50 for driving, if your night vision is imperfect.
Re: Another update - Bifocal - 07-30-2006
After wearing my new glasses for just about a month, several friends pointed out to me that I was squinting quite a bit. I had not used my snellen chart, since getting the new glasses, but got it out, and found that with the glasses I could only see the 20/60 line with each eye. With out glasses I could barely read the 20/200 line.
I went back to the optometrist, and this time she put the blurring drops in my eyes. She then gave me a new prescription. It seems that I have a lot of astigmatism, which is why I found the first glasses so helpful for close work, even though the optometrist said that I would not need them for it.
The new glasses she prescribed are Rt. eye -.75 with -3.00 cyl. @ 179, Lt. eye -.50 with -3.00 cyl.@ 2.
Wow the sharpness of vision both far, and near!! I do need to wear them full time , as vision without them at all distances is very poor. I was surprised at how strong the lenses are. They make everything quite a bit smaller, and even my eyes look slightly smaller behind them. The lenses seem to have a white ring around the outer edge. Anyone know why?
I ask her why I could see so well with the first pair that she gave me just a bit over a month ago, and now need these strong ones. She said that with late onset myopia from extensive near point work, and a first prescription that my eyes are settling in to the prescription, and that brought out the astigmatism.
I still have not told her that I was formerly farsighted, with astigmatism. The odd part about this is that the most astigmatism cylinder that was in my farsighted Glasses was -1.25.
Now I have to get back to a regimen to try to correct this, which may be hard since I really need to wear these glasses to see.
At least I am not squinting now, and see 20/15 on my, and the optometrist charts.with each eye, and almost 20/10 with both eyes.
Re: Farsightedness - dragon28 - 07-31-2006
You are overreacted, this is not so good, try to get glasses that correct you to 20\20 or 20\25.
Re: Farsightedness - otis - 08-01-2006
Dear Friend,
Wow, from farsightedness to serious myopia and astigmatism.
I know how "powerful" and attractive 20/15 vision is.
But, as Bates said, if your Snellen is 20/70 -- and you begin
wearing a full-strength minus, your eyes will adapt to
that strong minus, and in due course your naked eye
will be at 20/200.
And I totally support Bates on this point. I would RATHER
work at keeping my visual-acuity at 20/40 (always pass
the DMV) rather than wear a strong minus and get
stair-case myopia from it.
This is always a problem for any OD or MD would MIGHT
wish to support "Bates" or any second-opinion.
Some compromise is necessary. But that is what
the "second-opinion" is all about.
Best,
Otis
Re: Farsightedness - Bifocal - 08-04-2006
Hello Otis,
Thank you for your information. I totally agree with you on the plus lens therapy, and I believe the minus lense therapy does work for hyperopia. I think that in my case, that I wore the minus lenses too much. My progress in reversing the hyperopia was the best if I wore the minus lenses for close work, and took them off for distance. When I Began wearing them for distance, is when I began needing them to see at any distance. The sedative effect of minus lenses is very pronounced to the hyperopic eye. and therefore I wore them far to often.and went from hyperopia , thru normal vision, and into myopia.
Have you in your study come across any info on the use of minus lenses to reverse hyperopia, or any info on the sedative effect of minus lenses, and the stimulant effect of plus. I remember reading something on this, but cannot find it now. I also remember reading in an optometry book , where they advised not to prescribe a minus .5 sphere, or cyl. unless there was a definite error, as the minus .5 has a clearing effect, even to the normal eye. That is why I began using minus .5 glasses in my farsighted reversal therapy.
Any info you may have on this perhaps could be useful to others wanting to reduce, or eliminate farsightedness,
Re: Farsightedness - otis - 08-04-2006
Dear Bifocal,
Subject: Dammed if you do -- Dammed if you don't.
You tell an interesting story indeed. But yes, you can induce a negative refractive STATE in your eyes (even at your age) a previous positive refractive STATE.
As you describe it. We all want very, very sharp vision -- instantly. It is hard to "argue" with that -- and that is what we get. The argument to "go slow" with the minus (as suggested by Bates) is totally ignored. But given all the above, let me respond:
Bifocal> Have you in your study come across any info on the use of minus lenses to reverse hyperopia,
Otis> Yes. But define "hyperopia" as a positive refractive STATE of the eye. Then everything "fits".
Otis> With that understood, then just take a population of eyes with positive refractive STATEs, and place a -3 diopter lens on them. (As a "pure" scientific experiment.) Inside of 11 months, the -3 diopter group will change their refractive STATE by at least -2 diopters. Thus a "hyperopic" eye at +0.5 diopters, will, after wearing that -3 diopters, will become a myopic eye at -1.5 diopters. This will ALWAYS HAPPEN if you do this experiment correctly.
Bifocal> or any info on the sedative effect of minus lenses, and the stimulant effect of plus.
Otis> In the "cold" language of science, I do not think there is any doubt about this result. How you "translate" it -- is up to your understanding of it. But it does describe your experience to a "T".
I remember reading something on this, but cannot find it now. I also remember reading in an optometry book , where they advised not to prescribe a minus .5 sphere, or cyl. unless there was a definite error, as the minus .5 has a clearing effect, even to the normal eye.
Otis> That is correct also. But I certainly understand the "power" of that minus. It is very "convincing" at first blush. Only later (as per Bates) do you find out how "bad" it truly is.
That is why I began using minus .5 glasses in my farsighted reversal therapy.
Otis> That would be a start. Also the Bates methods -- do work, so keep that up.
Any info you may have on this perhaps could be useful to others wanting to reduce, or eliminate farsightedness,
Otis> Please remember this -- we are born "farsighed", i.e., with a NATURAL refractive state running from zero to +9 diopters. This can not be considered a "defect" -- not at birth anyway.
Otis> Also remember that primates in the wild have excellent vision, and refractive STATES running from zero to about +1.5 dipoters. NO one should call these NATURAL refractive STATES "defects" since they are totallyl normal. That is why I am "careful" in the use of the word "defect" to describe natural refractive STATES that are valuable and necessary for good distant vision.
Best,
Otis