Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
after 40 years....
#31
jiminos Wrote:I am not an expert. I can only speak to my own experience. The idea is to use lenses that do not give you 20/20 vision. For those with stronger minus lenses, then the proponents of plus lens use suggest using a weaker minus lens. For example, if you are at -7D, then a -5 or -4 would likely be recommended. the idea behind this is gradual adaptation. you did not become nearsighted overnight. you will not reverse your myopia overnight. slow, steady progress is the key to success according to plus lens proponents. (Steven De Angelis has written a book on his approach, which encompasses much more then plus lenses. I enjoyed his presentation.)

and, as always, each of us is responsible for our own eyes. if, at any time, you experience discomfort as a result of something you are doing..... stop doing it.

be well,

jim

I read the book reviews at Amazon and there are several posts from Mary Oliver saying those warnings from plus lenses. ;D

One of the autors os this book is Otis, who posted here, right? I think Dave was not an admirer of Otis behavior here. ;D

I take a look at the PVS forum and I found out that this method encourage eye muscle exercices at first, then interpolates then with defocus training with plus glasses. Do you think the book is worthy, or should I keep with pure Bates method?
Reply
#32
lfernand,

1) Mary is absolutely opposed to the use of plus lenses. I cannot and will not speak for her. I think the science behind the approach to plus lens therapy is reasonable. YOU must make your own choice.
2) Otis is NOT an author of Stephen DeAngelis' book. He wrote either the afterword for the book. You may be correct with regard to Otis' behavior here. I am not a fan of his, either. but, as an engineer, his work regarding plus lenses is worth reviewing.
3) I have a copy of the book. I have read it several times. The author alleges that the method he presents has helped others.
4) YOU must decide which approach to vision improvement you will take. I will not suggest one method over another.

be well,

jim
Reply
#33
jiminos Wrote:lfernand,

1) Mary is absolutely opposed to the use of plus lenses. I cannot and will not speak for her. I think the science behind the approach to plus lens therapy is reasonable. YOU must make your own choice.
2) Otis is NOT an author of Stephen DeAngelis' book. He wrote either the afterword for the book. You may be correct with regard to Otis' behavior here. I am not a fan of his, either. but, as an engineer, his work regarding plus lenses is worth reviewing.
3) I have a copy of the book. I have read it several times. The author alleges that the method he presents has helped others.
4) YOU must decide which approach to vision improvement you will take. I will not suggest one method over another.

be well,

jim

You mean David DeAngellis?

Im not disqualifying Otis and Mary, just telling what I found to be curious. They look like serious defenders of their own view.

I will figure it out the best approach, but do you think Bates or PVS helped you more?
Reply
#34
yes, David DeAngelis. My error. I apologize.

I also do not disqualify Otis or Mary. Both have invested a lot of time and energy in their approaches to Vision Improvement. Both are very passionate about their approaches. Both have merit. Both have some validity. I will not speak ill of either.

i cannot say that it was the Bates or PVS that helped most. Bates opened the door to something I already believed. In all honesty, I think that the absolute, positive belief that vision can be improved was the single greatest factor in re-learning to see.

be well,

jim
Reply
#35
Jim, thanks for your time in answering my questions.
jiminos Wrote:i did, and likely still do, suffer some degree of astigmatism. as near as i can tell, it is diminishing as time goes by. i sometimes have issues with multiple images, but when that happens, i pick one image and focus on that one image. it seems to help tremendously. (Thank you to David for that advice.)

indoor vision really isn't much of a problem. my visual acuity is lower than when outdoors during daylight hours. but, in truth, that was the case even when i wore glasses.
Tsukiomi has no astigmatism and doesn't have any issues with multiple images...so they are likely due to the response of the eye to astigmatism. Multiple images do not strike the retina. Rather, our vision responds to astigmatism...the variation of optical power of the eye as a function of angle (due to the cylinder)...in a way that makes us see multiple images.

I'm glad that your indoor vision is good. Your method is based on doing indoor activity. Perhaps I need to do more indoor activity as well in order to improve my indoor vision. Your vision improvement gives us hope. Thanks again. -Lou
Reply
#36
glad i could help.

be well,

jim
Reply
#37
Hi Jiminos,

Congratulations on your vision improvement. The types of approaches you've been using are pretty similar to mine.
I hope to post my own experiences under Success Stories once I get to 20/30 vision or better. My vision has improved from 20/70 - 20/100 to 20/45. Took me over ten years, but hey ... Smile It'll be interesting to see how long it takes to get to 20/30, and then 20/20.
Anyway, it's always inspiring to read stories like yours, and thanks for sharing your experiences. It really helps me stay motivated with this stuff.

Cheers,
JW
Reply
#38
Thank you for the kind words, JW. Glad I could help.

Be well,

Jim
Reply
#39
jiminos Wrote:De Angelis has written a book on his approach, which encompasses much more then plus lenses. I enjoyed his presentation.
I was looking at the reviews of De Angelis' book which talks about extraocular muscle stretching/strengthening/range of motion exercises. Can you please describe what these exercises are (which are supposed to relax the eye muscles)? -thanks, Lou
Reply
#40
lou,
with all due respect, i think it would be inappropriate for me to attempt to describe the exercises for a couple of reasons. 1) since i did not develop them, my explanations would very probably be lacking in their completeness. 2) for me to describe the exercises and methodologies would be to take money out of his pocket.

i believe he has posted several videos on youtube demonstrating the exercises.

be well,

jim
Reply
#41
Jim, that's fine. I don't want you to participate in taking money out of his pocket either. I didn't realize you would feel that you can't talk about what these exercises are at all, even in general terms. They must be that good!

I appreciate your suggestion of looking at his you tube demonstrations of the exercises, that would be great to see. I found Mark825's review of Meir Schneider’s book helpful and he put a plug in for De Angelis' book which got me curious if someone else has done a review for that book. -thanks, Lou
Reply
#42
lou_deg Wrote:Jim, that's fine. I don't want you to participate in taking money out of his pocket either. I didn't realize you would feel that you can't talk about what these exercises are at all, even in general terms. They must be that good! ... -thanks, Lou

gotta say it. that portion of your post sounds just a tad smart alecky. so be it. i said i would rather not because my explanations would be lacking.

be well,

jim
Reply
#43
Jim, I apologize for sounding smart-alecky to you. My comment was not intended to cause ill feelings. Sorry. -Lou
Reply

5 TIPS TO IMPROVE YOUR VISION IMMEDIATELY!

Quickly prove to yourself that vision improvement is possible, with this free PDF download.

Download Now