Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The dilemma of not recognizing people far away
#16
ted Wrote:I guess, I was talking about trying to go without glasses, since they are a deterrent to vision improvement? And he wanted to state another big deterrent? I dunno.

In my experience without glasses, I have definitely found that socializing with people near me becomes much more easy going and comfortable than when I'm wearing glasses. Has anyone else ever noticed this?
Ted, Yes,that was my intention.
Reply
#17
Nancy
2012: 20/45 on average, no glasses except for night driving

Nancy, What prescription do you use for night driving?
With 20/45 vision,I would think no more than -.75,but should be more like -.50
Reply
#18
It depends. The last time I drove at night it was coming home from the airport after a long trip. I was tired and it was raining and foggy. I wore -4 and could see well enough, not 20/20, maybe 20/35 or so, and was able to go nice and slowly since it was after midnight and there were few cars on the road. Driving after dark remains one of my big visual challenges. I want to be safe and legal, of course, but my body reacts so negatively to any glasses that I try to minimize the situations where they're absolutely necessary as much as I can. One big area of progress I noticed on this drive is that I was hardly afraid at all when I used to be full of high anxiety. Also I had no eyestrain when I got home after the nearly hour-long drive, which is a very big deal, although I did have some neck soreness from craning forward which I couldn't seem to stop doing even though I was aware of it. Baby steps, more work to do still.
Reply
#19
Nancy Wrote:I wore -4 and could see well enough, not 20/20, maybe 20/35 or so
I take it this was quite some time ago, when your vision was a lot worse than now? You say that your vision is now 20/45 on average, so -4 would be way too strong.
Reply
#20
Daniel Wrote:
Nancy Wrote:I wore -4 and could see well enough, not 20/20, maybe 20/35 or so
I take it this was quite some time ago, when your vision was a lot worse than now? You say that your vision is now 20/45 on average, so -4 would be way too strong.

Daniel, it's worth noting that there is not a direct relationship between visual acuity and lens prescriptions. I forget where I read it, but I recall reading somewhere that there are some people with severe myopia who have lower prescriptions than people with mild myopia. So I think that it is difficult to jump to conclusions about what someone's visual acuity is just based on the prescription itself. Of course, if someone has -6 or -8, then you can take a chance and assume that this person does not see 20/40, for example, but there's no guarantee either.

The other side of the story, of course, is that vision fluctuates, and the same person could see 20/20 in optimal conditions and 20/200 in worst-case conditions. I imagine that since night driving is one of Nancy's pessimums, that her visual acuity is not quite on par to what she is used to in more typical conditions. Of course, I don't know for sure.
Reply
#21
I am wondering if her posted vision is a typo,and she is actually 20/450.
It would make more sense since she said that she thought her night vision was aprox. 20/35 with the minus four on for night driving.If that is the case then her uncorrected vision during the day would be in the 20/450 to 20/500 range,and required glasses would be-4.00- -5.00 give or take a diopter or two.
Reply
#22
Bifocal, may I ask what conversion formula you're using to go from visual acuity to diopters? It is my understanding that while there is a positive correlation between the two, there isn't a formula that can accurately convert between the two quantities. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Reply
#23
There is no formula that I know of,but one is not needed,as all medical books show charts that show worldwide study results. These results are approximate,but roughly are one diopter per ten foot mark on the Snellen chart.
Reply
#24
The statement that there is not a direct relationship between visual acuity and lens prescriptions doesn't make sense to me too. But others have made this statement as if it is a common thing. The power of the negative lens corresponds to how defocused the myopic eye is. Someone who has a stronger prescription cannot see as clearly because his image is further in front of the retina than another person who has lower prescription. In general, I would think such a correlation exist between acuity and lens power.
My night vision is not good also. When pupils open up, it's harder for me to see clearly.

Bifocal Wrote:There is no formula that I know of,but one is not needed,as all medical books show charts that show worldwide study results. These results are approximate,but roughly are one diopter per ten foot mark on the Snellen chart.
Please explain...how do you apply this formula to come up with: "her uncorrected vision during the day would be in the 20/450 to 20/500 range,and required glasses would be-4.00- -5.00..."
Reply
#25
i think folks are thinking way toooooooo hard on this diopter thing..... the goal is to take off the glasses, not measure their strength. seems to me, one doesn't even need to know the diopters to measure progress.

"can you see more/better than you could before?" ... that seems like a more valid measure of progress for our purposes here. does it really need to be quantified? or perhaps, "can you see perfectly?"

but, i think, maybe, the best question might be,"are you happy/satisfied with your vision?"

$.02

be well,

jim
Reply
#26
Jim, stop rubbing it in. Some of us still cannot totally live without glasses and need that negative diopter thing to buy a new pair. -Lou
Reply
#27
Lou,
i wasn't aware that a single post was "rubbing it in." and, most certainly, it was not a personal attack directed at you. i apologize if i have offended.


jim
Reply
#28
Jim, no apologies needed. However, since you are here, can you read my post that is in your Success Stories thread? You either did not see it or didn't care to answer it, I wasn't sure. -thanks, Lou
Reply
#29
lou, response posted over in success stories. sorry. did not intend for you to feel as though i had slighted or disregarded you.

be well,

jim
Reply
#30
I have posted my current acuity and my original acuity when I started vision work in my signature line, since I get asked so often. Now I am getting attacked (it feels that way) for giving you numbers that you can't seem to accept! Someone sent me a private message asking me if my vision ever got as bad as it used to be (-10): talk about focusing on the negative! I am tempted to not say anything about my visual situation, but that won't help anyone. No, I am not 20/20 yet most of the time. Yet I have improved significantly from when I started, and do not wear glasses most of the time. It's as if some of you can't accept that it is possible to improve, and want to shoot me down, or blame me for "taking too long" and not being at 20/20 yet, or are telling me what strength glasses I should be wearing when you're not in my brain and seeing with my eyes! If you can discredit me, then you don't have to focus on your own vision practice, because maybe this is all a sham, or I'm just trying to drum up students or something. When you read my posts, please keep in mind that
1) vision varies -- I see much less well at night
2) I tend to be nervous and anxious, and my vision can decline quickly if I don't pay attention to staying peaceful
3) I am being totally honest about my situation, the successes and the challenges, both in the hopes that it will help others and also that I will get feedback that helps me

Thanks for understanding. If you don't believe anything I write here, don't read my posts.
Reply

5 TIPS TO IMPROVE YOUR VISION IMMEDIATELY!

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

Download Now