Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Working Towards A Neonatal Blur Theory Of Common Myopia
#61
Proposition: That most of the methods successfully used by Bates practitioners to improve distance eyesight are in effect re-creations of actions taken by newborns after receiving neonatal ophthalmologic antibiotics. I.e.:
1) swinging recreates in effect the newborn's efforts to dispell the eye antibiotic from the first eye and to avoid the instillation into the second eye, and then to dispell the antibiotic from both eyes;
2) relearning to breathe correctly and to stop holding the breath recreates in effect the newborn's fear response to the instillation of the eye antibiotics;
3) relearning to blink correctly recreates in effect the newborns' efforts to clean its eyes of the antibiotic in order to clear the eyesight;
4) shifting recreates in effect the newborn's efforts to reunify the eyesight from the eye which was treated/blurred first and whose antibiotic therefore wore off first, with the eyesight from the eye which was treated/blurred second and whose antibiotic therefore wore off a few seconds or more later;
5) palming recreates in effect the newborn's pre-birth environment, relaxing the visual system and returning it to a more normal state;
6) uncovering from palming recreates in effect the newborn's first visual experiences, leading to flashes of normal vision immediately followed by fixation on blur;
7) ...
Reply
#62
The incorrect and mis-timed instillation, and incorrect or neglected follow-up procedures connected with unnecessary neonatal eye antibiotics are the primary cause of the worldwide increasing prevalence and progressive worsening of so-called 'myopia' (nearsightedness or nearpoint fixation disorder) since the turn of the last century (around 1900). It took me 37 years to finally connect all the clues. Here are some of the references:
nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=1420
rbs2.com/SilvNitr.pdf
wexler.free.fr/library/files/yarbus%20(1967)%20eye%20movements%20and%20vision.pdf
lowingerpaul.com/second%20sight.html
BiofeedbkSetup: picasaweb.google.com/JMCCAC
AsLightray/TwigIsBent,SoVisualSystem/TreeIsInclined
MostAmericansHave1EyeWorseThanTheOther.Why? KnowTruth=SetFree
Reply
#63
As I move inexorably towards clear normal vision, the truth of my theory is more and more evident. My 'nearsightedness', or more accurately 'nearpoint fixation disorder', is shifting from the primarily overall distance blur to a more localized corneal 'schmear', and I know that I am gradually de-hypnotizing myself, and the symptomatology is reverting to the original, neonatal eye antibiotic blur, which responds much better to the Bates Methods. It is incredible. Smile
Reply
#64
It all adds up. All the puzzle pieces fit together. My theory is correct. But nobody else gets it yet. Get me? Got me. Got me? Good.
But by keeping in mind that the right side of my right eye (where the macula/fovea is) combines with some of the right side of my left eye (no fovea), and simultaneously the left side of my left eye (macula/fovea) combines with some of the left side of my right eye (no fovea), and those combinations continue back on a straight line to the two occipital lobes, where my mind has to unify them all - that knowledge is improving my ability to visually orient myself while stationary and while moving, resulting in improved eyesight.
Also keeping in mind that I was unnaturally blurred at birth by eye antibiotics and during that blur I was somewhat hypnotized into believing blur was normal; and now using some simple Batesian methods (palming/sunning/swinging/shifting) and Paul McCartney eye yoga methods, to relax my eyes/eyebrows/eyelids/cheeks/etc, is resulting in improved natural eyesight. It is pretty incredible.
The overall magical but uncontrolled clear eyesight of lenses is being replaced with a more focused clear eyesight that I am in control of and responsible for. Sit up straight! Don't slouch! Look over there! Use the good eyes God gave you! Look out! Watch where you're going! Look both ways before crossing! Stop squinting! Cheer up! Smile! Hold your head up! Don't look! Made you look! Caught your eye! You light up my life! What's the bright idea?
Yea tho I walk thru the valley of the shadow of death I will fear no evil. For thou, God, art with me. Thy rod (like the retinal rods) and thy staff (like the retinal cones) comfort me. If my eye 'offends' me, I 'cast' it out like a fly fisherman.
I recently came up with another piece of the nearsightedness puzzle which is improving my eyesight even more:
1. Each eye has an optic nerve which draws retinal light impulses from E-W-N-S of the blindspot entrypoint.
2. The blindspots are symmetrically located at or near the center rear of each eye.
3. The macula/fovea (where clear distance eyesight can occur only if light is focused thereon and mentally attended to) exists slightly to the outside of and slightly above each blindspot.
4. The maculae/fovea are also symmetrically located in each eye/retina.
5. At the optic chiasm (Greek: chi = X), behind the eyes, some optic nerve fibers from the nasal/inside area of each retina cross over and join fibers from the ear/temporal/outside area of the opposite retina. That combination continues on to the same-side occipital lobe for each eye.
6. So, for distance vision (as well as near vision), at a minimum, the distance foveal impulses must combine with the non-foveal nasal-side impulses of the opposite eye. That knowledge helps with visual orientation and positioning both while stationary and while moving.
7. So, there are two distinct sets of impulses for distance vision, which have to be unified. (This accounts for the 'vanishing dots' illusions, for example.)
8. The mind has to find the center points of both eye combinations and then unify the images, first for each eye separately, and then for both eyes together. It should happen naturally - but it doesn't for us nearpoint fixated people. But it can be learned.
Reply
#65
For the past two days I have been refining my approach, and it is working.
By 'refining my approach', I mean that I have taken everything I have learned over the past two years and applied the knowledge to make very slight changes in how I position myself, how I point and blink my eyes individually and then in unity, in order to get both eyes synchronized and pointing together at the outside world, trying to use the optic chiasm crossover as it was designed, and then slightly shifting my attention to reconnect with the clear foveal light impulses, rather than the blurry pseudofoveal impulses.
I tell you, it is working. Diabolically difficult. But doable once the entire visual system is understood and its dysfunction and the cause thereof is acknowledged. Shift away from the blur, physically and mentally. Unify the eyes, physically and mentally. Find, connect, reconnect and stay connected to the clarity. But it is a developmental method - the clear flashes are nice, but the training is to gradually realign the visual system and then learn to 'drag and drop' my attention onto the true foveal input. Or something like that.
I'm actually experiencing fewer clear flashes, but more and more gradual improvement and control over my ability to realign and reconnect with the clear eyesight I was born with and which should have developed along with me as I grew up. It was disturbed at birth and nobody knew it or acknowledged it.
Reply
#66
Just to post another idea regarding another probable source of neonatal blur which I thought of some months ago, and then came across some confirmation of on other medical websites. It seems some have begun warning new mothers/parents about the possible negative side-effects of exposing their newborns to bright camera flashes and video lighting - it can seriously affect their eyesight. Of course that dovetails nicely with my theory of eye antibiotic blur leading to nearpoint fixation or post-hypnotic auto-suggestion of blur-preference/necessity under certain conditions. However, it does not seem likely to contribute to the differential blur and eye dominance problems, though.
Reply
#67
I feel I am very close to 'breaking the code' and solving the puzzle of (my) nearsightedness.
For instance, today as I sat in my car, I realized that my face was pointed in a certain direction as I listened to the radio, but my right eye was pointed in a different direction out the window, while my left eye was pointed towards a little glint of light on the top of the steering wheel, while my mind was pointed somewhere else as I contemplated something completely different.
I then attempted to relax and unify these divergent orientations/directions, which required a lot of slight shifting/swinging back and forth of eyes, face, and body, comparing left eyesight with right eyesight, correcting my posture, remembering the optic chiasm and symmetrical foveas/blindspots, sharing the eye dominance, relaxing my breathing and blinking, and thinking into the distance about synchronizing and unifying my senses with my mind - and my distance and overall eyesight then improved. (E.g., just beforehand, there was a green SUV with blurry white letters across the front of its hood, which I couldn't read, but then started to clear, then I 'blur interpreted' the name, then I saw some of the letters clearly and read the name, LAND ROVER)
It wasn't as good as most clear flashes, but my control was better - I could select some small area/object in the distance and see it clearer - it seemed like a good step in the right direction towards developing improved eyesight.
What I have been hoping for is that when I have brought my eyesight development up to a more normal level, without magic lenses which probably did nothing for my overall development as a human being, I will then see more clearly, physically as well as mentally, regarding what my next steps should be for my life - i.e., which of the available life decisions I can make are the best for me as a happy member of humanity.
Monday AM, 25Apr11, approx. 09:00-09:10; 35th St. NW, WDC; traveling North by car then East; Clear and sunny. Looking through car windshields. Rt Handed; Rt Eye Dom.; Rt Eye Best Visioned but Lft Eye Equalizing; Position: Stationary with head turn; clear objects: stationary.
Reply
#68
Ever since I began introducing the light to my foveas and my foveas to my mind, about 6 months ago, and training my eyes to lead when they should lead and follow when they should follow, about 3 months ago, I have been gaining significant improvement and control over my visual system. It is becoming quicker and more natural every day. Today I am extremely close to reading the sharpening text in the paragraphs under Crucible of History on my Natl Geog. wall map, 6' away. I usually now just have to turn my head to the left or right, maybe cock it to adjust for astigmatism, get the eyes pointed together, and then see what they can see. My 2-3 year projection (2011-2012) for normal eyesight is looking good.
Recalibrating the Visual System (Nearsighted Since Birth)
1) Knowledge of the parts
2) Orientation to surrounding light
3) Positioning to get light on foveas
4) Connect Mind/Attention with foveas
5) Alignment to the visible object/area
6) Movement to engage the optic chiasm
7) Timing to maintain synchronicity
8) Equalize the eye dominance/leadership/followership
9) Ignore distractions
Reply
#69
My eyesight continues to improve based on my theory. This morning I revisited a previous insight regarding the line of sight orientation. The clear vision line of sight orientation for me is about 1.5 inches (at arm's length I measured two fingers width up horizontallly) above the line where my eyes want to begin seeing when I look into the distance. My visual orientation is misaligned - probably stunted during development - so that I don't initially point myself correctly for clearest eyesight. Adjusting for this requires sitting/standing taller, raising my head/face a bit, some gyroscopic head tilt to adjust for astigmatism, and voila - improved eyesight.
Reply
#70
JMartinC4 Wrote:My eyesight continues to improve based on my theory. This morning I revisited a previous insight regarding the line of sight orientation. The clear vision line of sight orientation for me is about 1.5 inches (at arm's length I measured two fingers width up horizontallly) above the line where my eyes want to begin seeing when I look into the distance. My visual orientation is misaligned - probably stunted during development - so that I don't initially point myself correctly for clearest eyesight. Adjusting for this requires sitting/standing taller, raising my head/face a bit, some gyroscopic head tilt to adjust for astigmatism, and voila - improved eyesight.

Do your eyes feel more rigid in the aligned orientation ? There should be such a feeling despite that you relax your eyes. Do your eyes feel more relaxed in the aligned orientation compared to the misaligned orientation, or do you have to force alignment with some slight tension ? Just curious. Wow, you are really getting some progress, congratulations. I myself also have learnt how to use my eyes in a way that improves my eyesight. Today I did some palming, I am not palming so often anymore, but today I was overwhelmed by some very much deeper and darker black colour in my eyes while I palmed. I thought, wow, I didn't know there were higher gears concerning this than I already thought was the optimum, but there obviously is.
Reply
#71
Perhaps you could take one point - that is an observation I've made since I started eye-trainig - into consideration for your theory.

I see more and more double images, especially in my better eye, the more I train it.
But these are not 2 equal images, but one, which is more and more clearing up and one 'blurry' in the background, that is underneath the clear image; as if the clear image would arise or emerge out of a blurry sea. The more distant the seen objects are, the greater the difference between the 2 images, and when I approach a certain object with clear contours - for example a traffic sign - I can watch both images approach each other, then overlap and finally fuse into one.

My theory is, that the blurry image is the 'perpheric vision', which is always blurry, as one can only see clearly in a very small point. Up to a certain distance, this peripheric vision is clear enough so that it doesn't trouble the sight at the near point. But if you look far away, only the clear image seen in the fovea should be dominant.
When we train our eyes to always look in short distances and take in as much informatio as possible at one time ( as requires our modern life style ) we train our brain to see the peripheric vision as dominant - which results in a 'blurr' when we look in the distance.

When I now train my eyes to look at only 1 small point in the distance and see the resulting image ( in the fovea ) as the dominant one, I get 2 images: the central, clear one and the peripheric one, which still maintains its 'aquired dominance'.

Now it is a matter of training to make the central vision more and more dominant and to get the peripheric vision to loose its dominance....which will still take a lot of practice and patience.
Reply
#72
Here is what I think is a probable problem with NVI methods that use an approach unlike mine (all of us based on the Bates Methods):
I am of the belief based on the past two years' research that most nearsighted people are accustomed to using unsymmetrical pseudo foveas instead of our actual symmetrical foveas. Although the pseudo foveas are incapable of normal eyesight (only available through the real foveas), the pseudo foveas will in fact contain some percentage of cones (real foveas are 100% cones). I am afraid that other methods which do not first address the need to find and use the real foveas, may actually result in people managing to pinpoint the cones in their pseudo foveas and attaining some improvement that way. But it would probably never result in normal eyesight.
Reply
#73
JMartinC4 Wrote:Here is what I think is a probable problem with NVI methods that use an approach unlike mine (all of us based on the Bates Methods):
I am of the belief based on the past two years' research that most nearsighted people are accustomed to using unsymmetrical pseudo foveas instead of our actual symmetrical foveas. Although the pseudo foveas are incapable of normal eyesight (only available through the real foveas), the pseudo foveas will in fact contain some percentage of cones (real foveas are 100% cones). I am afraid that other methods which do not first address the need to find and use the real foveas, may actually result in people managing to pinpoint the cones in their pseudo foveas and attaining some improvement that way. But it would probably never result in normal eyesight.

If people use pseudofoveas (peripheral) to much it will result in that the eyes elongate, but then the real foveas will get blurry.
Well, is it then too late to get things normal again >Sad , most probably no, if you start use the real foveas the eyeball would get shortened as a counteract, but mistakes in the healing process is not allowed, there is only one way that restores the eyesight back to normal again, the natural way.
Reply
#74
hammer Wrote:Do your eyes feel more rigid in the aligned orientation ? There should be such a feeling despite that you relax your eyes. Do your eyes feel more relaxed in the aligned orientation compared to the misaligned orientation, or do you have to force alignment with some slight tension ? Just curious. Wow, you are really getting some progress, congratulations. I myself also have learnt how to use my eyes in a way that improves my eyesight. Today I did some palming, I am not palming so often anymore, but today I was overwhelmed by some very much deeper and darker black colour in my eyes while I palmed. I thought, wow, I didn't know there were higher gears concerning this than I already thought was the optimum, but there obviously is.
Often when I get a good alignment there is a feeling of slight tension around the eyes inside the eyesockets - but it feels good - as if I'm 'using' my eyes correctly - and it's accompanied by improved eyesight. I can kind of feel the foveas coming into alignment - especially the worse left eye. It's weird in a good way.
Reply
#75
hammer Wrote:If people use pseudofoveas (peripheral) to much it will result in that the eyes elongate, but then the real foveas will get blurry.
Well, is it then too late to get things normal again >Sad , most probably no, if you start use the real foveas the eyeball would get shortened as a counteract, but mistakes in the healing process is not allowed, there is only one way that restores the eyesight back to normal again, the natural way.
Agreed! And again, this is why the best way to do this is gradually over a couple of years. It would be great if David and all of us could determine some general 'stages' of (re)development so people could recognize when progress is being made or when they need to adjust their methods to fit the next phase. As long as this website doesn't get destroyed we should be able to review our posts and look for distinct 'phases' in development. But I've got over 400 to review. And I'm not done yet.

I think the dental braces analogy is still appropriate - with Invisilign, I got a new set (based on a computer model based on a dental impression of my teeth) of aligners to use every 6 weeks or so. Each new set was slightly straighter than the previous set. If we had a way of determining the misalignment of a person's visual system then maybe we could create a computer model based on the Bates Methods and improvements which would show how to use which methods to gradually realign the parts.

Maybe we could use a video analysis like they do in golf - take digital videos of a nearsighted person doing tasks, and then compare/overlay it with someone known to have near-perfect eyesight doing the same tasks. Then it maybe could be broken into an alignment grid for biofeedback training. Or something like that.
Reply

Perfect Sight Without Glasses free download