Anyone seen this study called 'Blur adaption in myopes'? It's about how myopes will recover their vision partially when leaving their glasses off. It's a study orthodox eye care use to discredit the Bates Method.
What's interesting about it is this:
1. It does not say that improvements in vision are based on wishful thinking, like the WebMD article states. They are not 'imagining' they are seeing better, they ARE seeing better when their glasses are left off and the improvement is measurable.
2. While they could not find a difference in the subject's refractive state, it was felt that improvements in the visual system accounted for the difference.
3. They cautiously suggest that people could improve their vision by not leaving their glasses on all the time. Note that this is something the American Optometric Association does not want people to hear.
johnwayne Wrote:http://www.optvissci.com/pt/re/ovs/fullt...-00009.htm
Anyone seen this study called 'Blur adaption in myopes'? It's about how myopes will recover their vision partially when leaving their glasses off. It's a study orthodox eye care use to discredit the Bates Method.
What's interesting about it is this: 1. It does not say that improvements in vision are based on wishful thinking, like the WebMD article states. They are not 'imagining' they are seeing better, they ARE seeing better when their glasses are left off and the improvement is measurable. 2. While they could not find a difference in the subject's refractive state, it was felt that improvements in the visual system accounted for the difference. 3. They cautiously suggest that people could improve their vision by not leaving their glasses on all the time. Note that this is something the American Optometric Association does not want people to hear. Cheers, John
BRILLIANT! Exactly the kind of studies I think need to be done. These are the kinds of studies that are going to eventually, inevitably lead the 'scientific' community back to the observations, discoveries and methods of Dr. Bates and his followers. But this study is dated September, 2004. It should have generated additional studies. What happened?
