Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Recovery from 6D: my experience and some questions
#16
If any of you live near large outdoor amusement parks, those probably have the best combination of detail, distance, and movement, for long-swinging, especially this time of year. The only drawback is you gotta walk back to your car regularly to palm.
Reply
#17
(08-13-2014, 07:17 AM)sleepmaster Wrote: what are your diopters presently?

The reason I ask if most of us vision improvement practicioners here, me included, have gotten to be pretty good blur interpreters. I have no doubt your vision improved just curious that's all.

I've been at this vision improvement thing from the beginning of this year and the first 1 to 1.5 diopters were easy and after that it's been a total grind.

I've never considered blur interpretation if by that you mean guessing at letters in some fashion. It never occurred to me that it would be a valid way of determining ones progress. Whenever I read letters on a chart to check my vision, I see them, with all their constituent parts, no guessing needed. I kept the conditions as consistent as possible - amount of ambient light, time of day, distance, etc.) For some years now, I've been able to read (seeing, not guessing in any manner) the 20/20 line, the 20/15 line, and sometimes the 20/13 line, indoors. I stopped doing it daily, because I just didn't feel the need to do it anymore that often. Eventually you get over having to prove to yourself (which itself can trigger mental strain) that you've improved to that level. Don't get overly hung up on diopters either, if you are serious about practicing Bates. They are just snapshots of the visual system at that moment, and don't always reflect what can be day by day, hour by hour, minute by minute, or second by second changes in refraction of the unaided eye. With lenses of any type, plus or minus, the eyes will have to do something abnormal in order to see through them.
Reply
#18
I can fluctuate a quarter of a diopter depending if I'm having a good vision day or not.
I can tell my vision by the blackness of stuff during the day and the size of light halos at night, so I don't generally read eye charts to check my vision.

Obviously if I am exposed to a bunch of glare leading up into the exam, I'd expect around a quarter of diopter worse exam results to be very possible.

But despite that, I do see diopters as the purest correlation with axial length, which is what I think myopia really is. Three diopters corresponds to roughly one millimeter in axial length.

I have no allegiance to the Bates method or any method in particular. Although I think delaying a plus lens as long as possible is prudent, if I get stuck at 1-2 diopters of myopia and I don't want to wait a few years, there's a good chance I'll up the plus lenses to finish it off if I don't find something better. I wore corrective lenses for the whole day for many years of my life, and temporarily using lenses in a mild manner in contrast to the maximum load way of doing it, isn't likely to give me cataracts in and of itself. That's only increasing my lifetime usage of lenses by a couple percentage points if that.
Reply
#19
(08-22-2014, 08:43 AM)sleepmaster Wrote: I can fluctuate a quarter of a diopter depending if I'm having a good vision day or not.
I can tell my vision by the blackness of stuff during the day and the size of light halos at night, so I don't generally read eye charts to check my vision.

Obviously if I am exposed to a bunch of glare leading up into the exam, I'd expect around a quarter of diopter worse exam results to be very possible.

But despite that, I do see diopters as the purest correlation with axial length, which is what I think myopia really is. Three diopters corresponds to roughly one millimeter in axial length.

I have no allegiance to the Bates method or any method in particular. Although I think delaying a plus lens as long as possible is prudent, if I get stuck at 1-2 diopters of myopia and I don't want to wait a few years, there's a good chance I'll up the plus lenses to finish it off if I don't find something better. I wore corrective lenses for the whole day for many years of my life, and temporarily using lenses in a mild manner in contrast to the maximum load way of doing it, isn't likely to give me cataracts in and of itself. That's only increasing my lifetime usage of lenses by a couple percentage points if that.
I've gotten into the habit of wearing a light plus 1d when relaxing at home after work. Somehow it seems to helps me to relax my eyes after a day in front of the computer screen. I fthink it breaks some of my straining habits because to see clearly through the plus the eyes have to relax more than usual, though other people here may have a better technical explanation for this. And when I take off the plus everything seems much sharper.
Reply
#20
I'm still using the +0.5 lens for close up work involving print only, computers, reading. And even when I use it, I'm making sure to blink and palm more frequently than normal and to take them off every other minute to look out the window just above my monitor.

I wear a cap at all times with the rim of the cap not letting me see over the monitor into the distance unless I raise my head. I only allow my field of vision to have the minitor and stance both, if I'm not using a plus.

The close up distances have to be just right. Definitely outside the blur point, but no more than that. You don't want to lose the pull from a plus lens due to using it too liberally, but you also don't want to use it too close to just outside your blur point and feel too much puling tension. You want to keep your vision improvement, not just experience a temporary vision improvement after using a plus.

I also ordered a bunch of different pupillary lenggths from zennioptical. The fit has to be just right, because with a lens, any off measurement even if just a half a millimeter, is felt, and magnified. You can measure in front oa mirror all you want, but you dont know untill you put on the lens.

Anyway, I'm just very strict on how and when I use plus lenses. With my eyes, using a +0.5 lens is using a prescription that is 2.75 diopters away. That's analogous to using distance glasses that are 2.75 diopters too strong for you, just in the other direction. I think the stress on the eyeball, cataracts, etc, is related to the absolute value diopter difference of a lens to your prescription. I think the maximum load principle is foolish. Fixing your eyes is not like llifting weights. I just cringe at the idea of using the strongest plus lense you can make out print with, especially after just a couple months of "ocular sitretching exercises".

Not saying you are doing any of this. Just felt like commenting on some of the stuff I've seen on the internet.
Reply
#21
Can you comment on what you mean by the pull of a plus lens?

I wear a +0.25d at the office. It basically vision without glasses but with a slight haze. I originally got it so that people who are used to seeing me with glasses won't start asking silly questions like why aren't you wearing your glasses etc.
Reply
#22
(08-22-2014, 08:43 AM)sleepmaster Wrote: I can fluctuate a quarter of a diopter depending if I'm having a good vision day or not.
I can tell my vision by the blackness of stuff during the day and the size of light halos at night, so I don't generally read eye charts to check my vision.

Obviously if I am exposed to a bunch of glare leading up into the exam, I'd expect around a quarter of diopter worse exam results to be very possible.

But despite that, I do see diopters as the purest correlation with axial length, which is what I think myopia really is. Three diopters corresponds to roughly one millimeter in axial length.

I have no allegiance to the Bates method or any method in particular. Although I think delaying a plus lens as long as possible is prudent, if I get stuck at 1-2 diopters of myopia and I don't want to wait a few years, there's a good chance I'll up the plus lenses to finish it off if I don't find something better. I wore corrective lenses for the whole day for many years of my life, and temporarily using lenses in a mild manner in contrast to the maximum load way of doing it, isn't likely to give me cataracts in and of itself. That's only increasing my lifetime usage of lenses by a couple percentage points if that.

The eye chart in the Bates method is far, far more than for just checking one's vision. I find it a little odd that you would rely on a much cruder means of checking acuity, for someone who seems so obsessed with exact axial length, diopters, and other conventional optics. Acuity, even refraction can vary when all other things are seemingly equal. Perfectly shaped eyes with eccentric fixation can exert all sort of strains leading to poor vision. There may be some correlations, but diopters are far from pure, especially when it comes to ones unaided acuity.
Reply
#23
The halos around lights at night works well since refractive error is magnified at that time. It works for me since my eye exam results tend to be what I expect.

For most people side things like ciliary myopia are more easily dealt with compared to the more permanent hard to get rid of form of myopia. And astigmatism tends to go away before that form of myopia is fully cured. So even if it doesn't start out as a predominantly axial length issue, it tends to become one over time after they've been at natural vision improvement for awhile, hence diopters. If someone has some pathology adversely affecting their vision, of course that's different, but I think for most people here, it's an issue of the excessive length of the chamber between the lens and the retina.

I have an eye chart on my wall, but it's purely to bring out blackness from print at a distance. Any line I can read I have taped over, so the only lines uncovered are the 20/15 line and the 20/10 line. I short swing at those two lines around 10 ft away.
Reply
#24
Quote:For most people side things like ciliary myopia are more easily dealt with compared to the more permanent hard to get rid of form of myopia.
I had axial myopia for sure (VERY HIGH DIOPTRE) and I could even feel my eyeballs sticking out when I closed my eyes and palm. So far I have no problems restoring that type of myopia.
Reply
#25
I've come to believe this ciliary myopia-axial myopia stuff. I was in the -4 to -5 range and dropped to -3 in a month and change, but since then it's taken me a whole year just to go from -3 to -2. I think the first part was ciliary myopuia and the "grind" was addressing axial myopia

Incidentally, lasik people often undercorrect to -1 instead of zero diopters, as lasik eye surgeons seem to be very aware how people corrected to zero diopters often end up needing +1-+1.5 reading glasses later on. Better to eliminate the ciliary myopia before lasik than after.
Reply
#26
Thank you for this inspirational account of your experience. I had -6D in 2015 Jan and now I have improved to around -5D in both the eyes...but then the progress has almost stopped and sometimes it becomes very demotiavating ... until I read other people's success stories...so congratulations and thank you for sharing your experiences.
Reply
#27
Whatever you do, don't give up after it gets harder after your first diopter gain. Everyone goes through that. I dropped from the -4s to -3 and my optometrist who is himself a natural vision practitioner, prescribed me undercorrected contact lenses of -2.5,-2.5 thinking that's all I could get. I never wore those contact lenses. The next month I tested at -3.25 despite working my ass off to improve my vision. It was pretty demoralizing. But I stuck with it, and 19 months later I tested -1.75 in both eyes two days ago. The name of hte game is persistence and an unwillingness to quit. If you really want it bad enough you can do it.
Reply
#28
(07-30-2015, 11:49 AM)sleepmaster Wrote: Whatever you do, don't give up after it gets harder after your first diopter gain. Everyone goes through that. I dropped from the -4s to -3 and my optometrist who is himself a natural vision practitioner, prescribed me undercorrected contact lenses of -2.5,-2.5 thinking that's all I could get. I never wore those contact lenses. The next month I tested at -3.25 despite working my ass off to improve my vision. It was pretty demoralizing. But I stuck with it, and 19 months later I tested -1.75 in both eyes two days ago. The name of hte game is persistence and an unwillingness to quit. If you really want it bad enough you can do it.

Two things, sleepmaster.

1 Congratulations! I know you've been dwelling for a long in the region 2-2.25. Now you're 1.75! That's a new move down. Great. Smile

2 I think you're the only one here whose optometrist is a natural vision practicioner. Now I'm not surprised you're going to check your vision once a month without being ridiculed by him.
Reply
#29
I followed that up with a more solid doublel -1.75 end of last month.

THis month I'm shooting for double -1.25s(-1.25 for each eye). I think I'm at -1.5 now. I'm on a roll now.
Reply
#30
I just tested at double -1.25s today(-1.25 in each eye)

Half a diopter improvement in 30 days, I like that.
Reply

5 TIPS TO IMPROVE YOUR VISION IMMEDIATELY!

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

Download Now