Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
I'm interested in learning about the different methods that others have found useful for vision improvement. I also appreciate knowing the risks/dangers of these methods.

This situation is similar to one we are facing with our son who suffers from asthma and trying to decide what treatment to take. There are many FDA-approved drugs to choose from. Some people report how a certain drug works good for them, while others warn how harmful it was. Both data are useful to have.

Imho, this forum benefits from having both information. Although I may decide that such an alternative/supplemental method is not fit for me, the insight into vision improvement others have gained is valuable to know.
clarknight Wrote:Hi to everyone,

Last night the man that runs the website bifocal and jiminos link to said in a e-mail Otis is a welcome and frequent poster there. He told me Otis says his cataracts are age related. He won't admit that Plus Lens caused the two cases of cataract developement. They demand scientific studies on people using the plus lens to see if, to prove they develope eye injury. Reading glasses are Plus Lens and the Plus Lens method is worse, quickly impairs close viison, then eventually far vision. Note that seniors (and others young and older) wearing reading glasses a few years, even a few months end up needing stronger glasses and far vision also starts to blur. After these conditions advance other eye problems; cataract, retina injury, astigmatism... develop. The Plus Lens guys have eye doctors on their side because most doctors want to sell more, sronger prescriptions, then eye surgeries. Lot of money here. That's why its hard to find a study done by doctors showing the harm any type of eyeglasses, minus or plus cause and harm eye surgeries cause.

People ask for proof then after I spend time re-investigating, posting the eveidence they still want to advise this dangerous method. Otis didn't develop the eye problems until after using the Plus Lens method for many years. It hurts people!
I do feel sorry for Otis; if he had not met that doctor advising plus lens when he was in his twenties, if he had met a Bates Teacher instead he may have obtained clear vison and became a pilot back then as he wanted and maybe a Bates teacher. He was brainwashed by the eye doctors who then made alot of money selling him glasses, then eye surgeries, 3 that I know of. In his childhood, eye doctors selling him minus lenses also impaired his vision and probally his right to a happy youth. This affects the brains best function, reason, emotions; he easily belived the Plus Lens doctor and his mind locked into it for life even after he developed eye damage.

I will be creating that 'Harmful Methods To Avoid' warning article PDF for David soon so he can post it on the website, 'after he checks it'. This way at least most people will read it and can know what to avoid, to avoid people occasionally sneaking on here to sell the plus lens... I've been very busy wriiting, teaching, creating new videos, baby sitting and working so have put off doing this but I will put aside the books, videos until this PDF is done.
David keeps a eagles eye on this Forum and won't allow dangerous methods to be posted but it is an endless job, like trying to disipline spoiled or naive children! It's only 1 percent, maybe lower of all posters that try to advise this method but David has to read every post, every day to check. Wow!

Avoid the Plus Lens Method. Go to the google sci-med and other websites, groups to read more posts by other people stating they and their childrens vision have been injured by the Plus Lens method. There are also eye doctors on there speaking up about the Plus Lens.

the following will, i am sure, be viewed as being not very nice.... so be it.

Mary, you've really not said anything new. You have still not presented any conclusive evidence. I have said this before, and now so have others.... If plus lenses (reading glasses) CAUSE (not may contribute to, not may relate to, but CAUSE) cataracts.... then somebody, I would like it to be you, Mary, needs to explain to me why millions and millions of people world-wide who use reading glasses are not developing cataracts! MILLIONS! According to what you are trying to tell us, every single one of them should be developing cataracts... and it just isn't happening! Why is it that you won't address that simple piece of logic, Mary? And then... there are all those hundreds of thousands of people around the world who develop cataracts... But have NEVER worn glasses, plus or minus... EVER ... if you can explain either of those phenomena to me satisfactorily, I will hence forth support your position. Failing that... you are just another ranter with an unsupportable cause.

Everybody here knows you are opposed to plus lenses. Everybody here knows you are opposed to minus lenses.

In all honesty, Mary.... your endless rants about the horrors of plus lenses are getting every bit as tiresome as the rants by Otis. You refuse to support your position with scientific fact. (You, instead, resort to the argument that the eye doctors and scientists are all involved in a grand conspiracy to not investigate this as it might impinge on their income, innocent victims be damned, so there will never be any studies proving or disproving the link between lenses and cataracts.) Really, Mary?

Pahhh... I am done with this discussion. You will not support your position. You will not approach the issue using logic or reason. You will not listen to anybody else's position on the issue. I am done. You do not have science behind you on this one....

I wish you well in your endeavors.

be well,

clarknight Wrote:David keeps a eagles eye on this Forum and won't allow dangerous methods to be posted but it is an endless job, like trying to disipline spoiled or naive children! It's only 1 percent, maybe lower of all posters that try to advise this method but David has to read every post, every day to check. Wow!

Actually I only skim over some new posts and ignore some of them completely. The only ones I really have to look at are the posts held in queue by new members, and then once I approve one post (ie: it's not a spambot) the new member can post regularly.
Site Administrator

"Half of our funny, heathen lives, we are bent double to gather things we have tossed away." - George Meredith
Makes sense. It would be impossible to check every post.

Perfect Sight Without Glasses free download