Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Plus Lens: Theory On Why It Hurts Some & Helps Others...
#1
Thumbs Up 
Let's not forget our outcome folks...

Restore our vision. Maybe even achieve super human vision.

And to do that, why not use very tool at our disposal.

Enter plus lens training:

My personal experience is I so improvement. Significant improvement. And it was fast. I thought I could regain 20/20 or better it was so fast. But, it plateaued. I'm stuck at about the 0.75 mark. (I have some theories why in a moment.)

Plus lens training when done properly is simply coaxing they eye to accommodate a little further outside its normal range of accommodation.

So why does it hurt some?

I believe it's because they are squinting/straining to get a temporary improvement. And we all know strain degrades the vision.

The key I feel is to practice plus lens training using BREATH, SOFT BLINKING, massaging the neck and shoulders, and any other relaxation techniques that work for you to bring the text into clarity.

If you're straining in any way you're doing it wrong.

But don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. I've seen huge improvement with plus lens training.

So why am I stuck at 0.75 (down from 2.25)?

Well, I have some theories.

Plus lens training is targeting the eyes themselves. But it's doing nothing for the other factors that lead to vision degradation.

1: Body tension, that leads to tension in the eyes. Particularly tension in the neck, shoulders, and thoracic spine.

2: It's not training the eyes to 'dance'. It doesn't re-pattern the movements and break the central fixation habits.

3: It does not address the emotional aspects to vision degradation.

So use the tool for what it can do. But don't stop there, address the other aspects to re-training the eyes to see properly with the tools that work best for those too.

Just my thoughts.





#2
(03-25-2015, 04:22 AM)Sage Wrote:
3: It does not address the emotional aspects to vision degradation.

It appears that restoring vision to normal requires work on mental and emotional aspect of it. And I'm not surprised since the brain is the boss.

Eventhough this is the Complementary Methods forum pay attention what Dr Bates said: "The fact is when the mind is at rest nothing can tire the eyes, and when the mind is under a strain nothing can rest them. Anything that rests the mind will benefit the eyes."

So it seems to me that you managed to clear out what could be done in a physical way. Congratulations for that. You joined the bunch of people who managed to improve their vision. What is rest should be cleared out in some other way which is probably more mental and emotional.

To repeat your words: just my thoughts. Cool
#3
(03-25-2015, 04:22 AM)Sage Wrote: [font=Tahoma
Restore our vision. Maybe even achieve super human vision.

And to do that, why not use very tool at our disposal.

Enter plus lens training:

My personal experience is I so improvement. Significant improvement. And it was fast. I thought I could regain 20/20 or better it was so fast. But, it plateaued. I'm stuck at about the 0.75 mark. (I have some theories why in a moment.)

Plus lens training when done properly is simply coaxing they eye to accommodate a little further outside its normal range of accommodation.

So why does it hurt some?

I believe it's because they are squinting/straining to get a temporary improvement. And we all know strain degrades the vision.

The key I feel is to practice plus lens training using BREATH, SOFT BLINKING, massaging the neck and shoulders, and any other relaxation techniques that work for you to bring the text into clarity.

If you're straining in any way you're doing it wrong.

But don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. I've seen huge improvement with plus lens training.

So why am I stuck at 0.75 (down from 2.25)?

Well, I have some theories.

Plus lens training is targeting the eyes themselves. But it's doing nothing for the other factors that lead to vision degradation.

1: being body tension. Particularly tension in the neck, shoulders, and thoracic spine.

2: It's not training the eyes to 'dance'. It doesn't re-pattern the movements and break the central fixation habits.

3: It does not address the emotional aspects to vision degradation.

So use the tool for what it can do. But don't stop there, address the other aspects to re-training the eyes to see properly with the tools that work best for those too.

Just my thoughts.

[/font]

Plus lens, myopic defocus, print pushing, are not complimentary methods to Bates, if anything, contradictory. It conflicts with, and confuses those who are here to learn Bates. This site is for Bates method, and complimentary means of relaxation of mind and body. This has all been debated in the past, and there are plenty of other sites to discuss the success and failures of it to your hearts content. Do what you want, but respect what this site is about.
#4
(03-27-2015, 02:33 AM)arocarty Wrote:
(03-25-2015, 04:22 AM)Sage Wrote: [font=Tahoma
Restore our vision. Maybe even achieve super human vision.

And to do that, why not use very tool at our disposal.

Enter plus lens training:

My personal experience is I so improvement. Significant improvement. And it was fast. I thought I could regain 20/20 or better it was so fast. But, it plateaued. I'm stuck at about the 0.75 mark. (I have some theories why in a moment.)

Plus lens training when done properly is simply coaxing they eye to accommodate a little further outside its normal range of accommodation.

So why does it hurt some?

I believe it's because they are squinting/straining to get a temporary improvement. And we all know strain degrades the vision.

The key I feel is to practice plus lens training using BREATH, SOFT BLINKING, massaging the neck and shoulders, and any other relaxation techniques that work for you to bring the text into clarity.

If you're straining in any way you're doing it wrong.

But don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. I've seen huge improvement with plus lens training.

So why am I stuck at 0.75 (down from 2.25)?

Well, I have some theories.

Plus lens training is targeting the eyes themselves. But it's doing nothing for the other factors that lead to vision degradation.

1: being body tension. Particularly tension in the neck, shoulders, and thoracic spine.

2: It's not training the eyes to 'dance'. It doesn't re-pattern the movements and break the central fixation habits.

3: It does not address the emotional aspects to vision degradation.

So use the tool for what it can do. But don't stop there, address the other aspects to re-training the eyes to see properly with the tools that work best for those too.

Just my thoughts.

[/font]

Plus lens, myopic defocus, print pushing, are not complimentary methods to Bates, if anything, contradictory. It conflicts with, and confuses those who are here to learn Bates. This site is for Bates method, and complimentary means of relaxation of mind and body. This has all been debated in the past, and there are plenty of other sites to discuss the success and failures of it to your hearts content. Do what you want, but respect what this site is about.

I would like to think that we aren't short sighted enough to join the cult of any belief system. But rather measure the success of any method based on one thing and that is...

Results!

Having done both, I can tell you based on results, Bates & plus lens training are very much complimentary if done using relaxation.

Who's to say Bates would not have employed the technique himself if he was alive today?

There are many things complimentary to the fundamental principles of relaxation central to the Bates method.

Many sources of eye tension simply are not addressed by Bates techniques exclusively.

To limit yourself to the any one box is not very intelligent if you ask me.

Instead, understand the universal principles. And then use whatever tool you have at your disposal that gets results.

That seems like a far more rational & productive frame to hold.

So what is our goal here? To promote the cult of any one belief system? Or to regain vision naturally?
#5
(03-27-2015, 02:45 AM)Sage Wrote:
(03-27-2015, 02:33 AM)arocarty Wrote:
(03-25-2015, 04:22 AM)Sage Wrote: [font=Tahoma
Restore our vision. Maybe even achieve super human vision.

And to do that, why not use very tool at our disposal.

Enter plus lens training:

My personal experience is I so improvement. Significant improvement. And it was fast. I thought I could regain 20/20 or better it was so fast. But, it plateaued. I'm stuck at about the 0.75 mark. (I have some theories why in a moment.)

Plus lens training when done properly is simply coaxing they eye to accommodate a little further outside its normal range of accommodation.

So why does it hurt some?

I believe it's because they are squinting/straining to get a temporary improvement. And we all know strain degrades the vision.

The key I feel is to practice plus lens training using BREATH, SOFT BLINKING, massaging the neck and shoulders, and any other relaxation techniques that work for you to bring the text into clarity.

If you're straining in any way you're doing it wrong.

But don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. I've seen huge improvement with plus lens training.

So why am I stuck at 0.75 (down from 2.25)?

Well, I have some theories.

Plus lens training is targeting the eyes themselves. But it's doing nothing for the other factors that lead to vision degradation.

1: being body tension. Particularly tension in the neck, shoulders, and thoracic spine.

2: It's not training the eyes to 'dance'. It doesn't re-pattern the movements and break the central fixation habits.

3: It does not address the emotional aspects to vision degradation.

So use the tool for what it can do. But don't stop there, address the other aspects to re-training the eyes to see properly with the tools that work best for those too.

Just my thoughts.

[/font]

Plus lens, myopic defocus, print pushing, are not complimentary methods to Bates, if anything, contradictory. It conflicts with, and confuses those who are here to learn Bates. This site is for Bates method, and complimentary means of relaxation of mind and body. This has all been debated in the past, and there are plenty of other sites to discuss the success and failures of it to your hearts content. Do what you want, but respect what this site is about.

I would like to think that we aren't short sighted enough to join the cult of any belief system. But rather measure the success of any method based on one thing and that is...

Results!

Having done both, I can tell you based on results, Bates & plus lens training are very much complimentary if done using relaxation.

Who's to say Bates would not have employed the technique himself if he was alive today?

There are many things complimentary to the fundamental principles of relaxation central to the Bates method.

Many sources of eye tension simply are not addressed by Bates techniques exclusively.

To limit yourself to the any one box is not very intelligent if you ask me.

Instead, understand the universal principles. And then use whatever tool you have at your disposal that gets results.

That seems like a far more rational & productive frame to hold.

So what is our goal here? To promote the cult of any one belief system? Or to regain vision naturally?

This has all been debated in the past; if you are not happy with what this site is about, there are plenty of other places to join, nobody is stopping you. Please respect what this site is about.
#6
(03-27-2015, 02:52 AM)arocarty Wrote:
(03-27-2015, 02:45 AM)Sage Wrote:
(03-27-2015, 02:33 AM)arocarty Wrote:
(03-25-2015, 04:22 AM)Sage Wrote: [font=Tahoma
Restore our vision. Maybe even achieve super human vision.

And to do that, why not use very tool at our disposal.

Enter plus lens training:

My personal experience is I so improvement. Significant improvement. And it was fast. I thought I could regain 20/20 or better it was so fast. But, it plateaued. I'm stuck at about the 0.75 mark. (I have some theories why in a moment.)

Plus lens training when done properly is simply coaxing they eye to accommodate a little further outside its normal range of accommodation.

So why does it hurt some?

I believe it's because they are squinting/straining to get a temporary improvement. And we all know strain degrades the vision.

The key I feel is to practice plus lens training using BREATH, SOFT BLINKING, massaging the neck and shoulders, and any other relaxation techniques that work for you to bring the text into clarity.

If you're straining in any way you're doing it wrong.

But don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. I've seen huge improvement with plus lens training.

So why am I stuck at 0.75 (down from 2.25)?

Well, I have some theories.

Plus lens training is targeting the eyes themselves. But it's doing nothing for the other factors that lead to vision degradation.

1: being body tension. Particularly tension in the neck, shoulders, and thoracic spine.

2: It's not training the eyes to 'dance'. It doesn't re-pattern the movements and break the central fixation habits.

3: It does not address the emotional aspects to vision degradation.

So use the tool for what it can do. But don't stop there, address the other aspects to re-training the eyes to see properly with the tools that work best for those too.

Just my thoughts.

[/font]

Plus lens, myopic defocus, print pushing, are not complimentary methods to Bates, if anything, contradictory. It conflicts with, and confuses those who are here to learn Bates. This site is for Bates method, and complimentary means of relaxation of mind and body. This has all been debated in the past, and there are plenty of other sites to discuss the success and failures of it to your hearts content. Do what you want, but respect what this site is about.

I would like to think that we aren't short sighted enough to join the cult of any belief system. But rather measure the success of any method based on one thing and that is...

Results!

Having done both, I can tell you based on results, Bates & plus lens training are very much complimentary if done using relaxation.

Who's to say Bates would not have employed the technique himself if he was alive today?

There are many things complimentary to the fundamental principles of relaxation central to the Bates method.

Many sources of eye tension simply are not addressed by Bates techniques exclusively.

To limit yourself to the any one box is not very intelligent if you ask me.

Instead, understand the universal principles. And then use whatever tool you have at your disposal that gets results.

That seems like a far more rational & productive frame to hold.

So what is our goal here? To promote the cult of any one belief system? Or to regain vision naturally?

This has all been debated in the past; if you are not happy with what this site is about, there are plenty of other places to join, nobody is stopping you. Please respect what this site is about.

arocarty, have you restored your vision?
#7
(03-27-2015, 02:57 AM)Sage Wrote:
(03-27-2015, 02:52 AM)arocarty Wrote:
(03-27-2015, 02:45 AM)Sage Wrote:
(03-27-2015, 02:33 AM)arocarty Wrote:
(03-25-2015, 04:22 AM)Sage Wrote: [font=Tahoma
Restore our vision. Maybe even achieve super human vision.

And to do that, why not use very tool at our disposal.

Enter plus lens training:

My personal experience is I so improvement. Significant improvement. And it was fast. I thought I could regain 20/20 or better it was so fast. But, it plateaued. I'm stuck at about the 0.75 mark. (I have some theories why in a moment.)

Plus lens training when done properly is simply coaxing they eye to accommodate a little further outside its normal range of accommodation.

So why does it hurt some?

I believe it's because they are squinting/straining to get a temporary improvement. And we all know strain degrades the vision.

The key I feel is to practice plus lens training using BREATH, SOFT BLINKING, massaging the neck and shoulders, and any other relaxation techniques that work for you to bring the text into clarity.

If you're straining in any way you're doing it wrong.

But don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. I've seen huge improvement with plus lens training.

So why am I stuck at 0.75 (down from 2.25)?

Well, I have some theories.

Plus lens training is targeting the eyes themselves. But it's doing nothing for the other factors that lead to vision degradation.

1: being body tension. Particularly tension in the neck, shoulders, and thoracic spine.

2: It's not training the eyes to 'dance'. It doesn't re-pattern the movements and break the central fixation habits.

3: It does not address the emotional aspects to vision degradation.

So use the tool for what it can do. But don't stop there, address the other aspects to re-training the eyes to see properly with the tools that work best for those too.

Just my thoughts.

[/font]

Plus lens, myopic defocus, print pushing, are not complimentary methods to Bates, if anything, contradictory. It conflicts with, and confuses those who are here to learn Bates. This site is for Bates method, and complimentary means of relaxation of mind and body. This has all been debated in the past, and there are plenty of other sites to discuss the success and failures of it to your hearts content. Do what you want, but respect what this site is about.

I would like to think that we aren't short sighted enough to join the cult of any belief system. But rather measure the success of any method based on one thing and that is...

Results!

Having done both, I can tell you based on results, Bates & plus lens training are very much complimentary if done using relaxation.

Who's to say Bates would not have employed the technique himself if he was alive today?

There are many things complimentary to the fundamental principles of relaxation central to the Bates method.

Many sources of eye tension simply are not addressed by Bates techniques exclusively.

To limit yourself to the any one box is not very intelligent if you ask me.

Instead, understand the universal principles. And then use whatever tool you have at your disposal that gets results.

That seems like a far more rational & productive frame to hold.

So what is our goal here? To promote the cult of any one belief system? Or to regain vision naturally?

This has all been debated in the past; if you are not happy with what this site is about, there are plenty of other places to join, nobody is stopping you. Please respect what this site is about.

arocarty, have you restored your vision?

You just got done saying some very insulting things to me and to all those practicing these techniques. If you apologize, and take it all back, and show respect for what this site is about, then maybe I would be willing to share information with you and discuss the Bates method.
#8
(03-27-2015, 03:41 AM)arocarty Wrote:
(03-27-2015, 02:57 AM)Sage Wrote:
(03-27-2015, 02:52 AM)arocarty Wrote:
(03-27-2015, 02:45 AM)Sage Wrote:
(03-27-2015, 02:33 AM)arocarty Wrote: Plus lens, myopic defocus, print pushing, are not complimentary methods to Bates, if anything, contradictory. It conflicts with, and confuses those who are here to learn Bates. This site is for Bates method, and complimentary means of relaxation of mind and body. This has all been debated in the past, and there are plenty of other sites to discuss the success and failures of it to your hearts content. Do what you want, but respect what this site is about.

I would like to think that we aren't short sighted enough to join the cult of any belief system. But rather measure the success of any method based on one thing and that is...

Results!

Having done both, I can tell you based on results, Bates & plus lens training are very much complimentary if done using relaxation.

Who's to say Bates would not have employed the technique himself if he was alive today?

There are many things complimentary to the fundamental principles of relaxation central to the Bates method.

Many sources of eye tension simply are not addressed by Bates techniques exclusively.

To limit yourself to the any one box is not very intelligent if you ask me.

Instead, understand the universal principles. And then use whatever tool you have at your disposal that gets results.

That seems like a far more rational & productive frame to hold.

So what is our goal here? To promote the cult of any one belief system? Or to regain vision naturally?

This has all been debated in the past; if you are not happy with what this site is about, there are plenty of other places to join, nobody is stopping you. Please respect what this site is about.

arocarty, have you restored your vision?

You just got done saying some very insulting things to me and to all those practicing these techniques. If you apologize, and take it all back, and show respect for what this site is about, then maybe I would be willing to share information with you and discuss the Bates method.

Anyone can read my words and see I have not insulted you or anyone else.

I am though calling to light the fallacy of holding rigid, dogmatic views.

If you've regained your vision with Bates method alone, well then I'm happy to hear what you have to say regarding the matter.

If you have not, then either you're not properly applying the Bates method, or the Bates method is missing something.

If it's the later, then you're doing yourself and every user here a major disservice promoting the Bates method by vilifying other methods.

In my experience, after years & years of applying Bates method alone, then seeing rapid progress when adding other techniques leads me to belief the Bates method does not have all the answers.

Until I've regained perfect 20/20 or better vision, I still have something to learn.

I would suggest the same applies to you.

I'm not here to promote any agenda or dogma. I'm here to complete my vision restoration and regain the last 0.75. And along the way share with anybody else who has the same goal anything and everything that proved by TESTING IT to work.

So what is your agenda here? To promote a dogma at the expense of actual progress to the users here?

Or is your agenda to get to the truth?

The truth is never threatened. The truth never suffers from honest examination.
#9
(03-27-2015, 02:33 AM)arocarty Wrote:
(03-25-2015, 04:22 AM)Sage Wrote: [font=Tahoma
Restore our vision. Maybe even achieve super human vision.

And to do that, why not use very tool at our disposal.

Enter plus lens training:

My personal experience is I so improvement. Significant improvement. And it was fast. I thought I could regain 20/20 or better it was so fast. But, it plateaued. I'm stuck at about the 0.75 mark. (I have some theories why in a moment.)

Plus lens training when done properly is simply coaxing they eye to accommodate a little further outside its normal range of accommodation.

So why does it hurt some?

I believe it's because they are squinting/straining to get a temporary improvement. And we all know strain degrades the vision.

The key I feel is to practice plus lens training using BREATH, SOFT BLINKING, massaging the neck and shoulders, and any other relaxation techniques that work for you to bring the text into clarity.

If you're straining in any way you're doing it wrong.

But don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. I've seen huge improvement with plus lens training.

So why am I stuck at 0.75 (down from 2.25)?

Well, I have some theories.

Plus lens training is targeting the eyes themselves. But it's doing nothing for the other factors that lead to vision degradation.

1: being body tension. Particularly tension in the neck, shoulders, and thoracic spine.

2: It's not training the eyes to 'dance'. It doesn't re-pattern the movements and break the central fixation habits.

3: It does not address the emotional aspects to vision degradation.

So use the tool for what it can do. But don't stop there, address the other aspects to re-training the eyes to see properly with the tools that work best for those too.

Just my thoughts.

[/font]

Plus lens, myopic defocus, print pushing, are not complimentary methods to Bates, if anything, contradictory. It conflicts with, and confuses those who are here to learn Bates. This site is for Bates method, and complimentary means of relaxation of mind and body. This has all been debated in the past, and there are plenty of other sites to discuss the success and failures of it to your hearts content. Do what you want, but respect what this site is about.

I agree; The plus lens and all its other names in disguise is definitely not complementary methods. It is against the Bates Method. It is a method that impairs the vision, causes addiction to eyeglasses. It freezes the lens movement causes presbyopia, cataract. Eventually leads to myopia.

Often people send me PMs asking for free training even though I am rarely here due to harassment by the plus lens people and being banned if I fight back, defend myself. If you want training; my contact reply for training WILL NOT be through PMs or posted on here because the eyeglass people pop on my threads and harass the students. This is due to a person named Asthersky, bifocal, KazeKage and others sending me abusive personal messages and attacking me on this forum. I have also received threatening e-mails, phone calls and other more destructive things happened from these plus lens... guys. I reported this to David.

I suspect this new person Sage is the same old plus lens guys posting on here using a new phony name to redirect people to the eyeglass sales men, then to cataract and cornea.. surgeries after the vision is impaired by the plus lens.

Recently a major plus lens leader, long time forum, website owner admitted he uses the plus for years. He's addicted to glasses. So this is why he tolerates all the eyeglass sales people. Like the other plus people he uses Dr. Bates name, picture to draw people in, lying to them, letting them think the plus lens is Dr. Bates method. It is NOT!

The plus lens people can go to their own website and forum. Why are they on here forcing it on people? I still think that 2 are really not plus lens people; they are those high priced Bates teachers who attack honest and free teachers out of jealousy, greed, arrogance.

if this forum continues to prefer to keep the eyeglass, surgery people on here; Complementary Methods should be changed to something else; a truthful label.
#10
(03-28-2015, 05:00 AM)clarknight Wrote:
(03-27-2015, 02:33 AM)arocarty Wrote:
(03-25-2015, 04:22 AM)Sage Wrote: [font=Tahoma
Restore our vision. Maybe even achieve super human vision.

And to do that, why not use very tool at our disposal.

Enter plus lens training:

My personal experience is I so improvement. Significant improvement. And it was fast. I thought I could regain 20/20 or better it was so fast. But, it plateaued. I'm stuck at about the 0.75 mark. (I have some theories why in a moment.)

Plus lens training when done properly is simply coaxing they eye to accommodate a little further outside its normal range of accommodation.

So why does it hurt some?

I believe it's because they are squinting/straining to get a temporary improvement. And we all know strain degrades the vision.

The key I feel is to practice plus lens training using BREATH, SOFT BLINKING, massaging the neck and shoulders, and any other relaxation techniques that work for you to bring the text into clarity.

If you're straining in any way you're doing it wrong.

But don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. I've seen huge improvement with plus lens training.

So why am I stuck at 0.75 (down from 2.25)?

Well, I have some theories.

Plus lens training is targeting the eyes themselves. But it's doing nothing for the other factors that lead to vision degradation.

1: being body tension. Particularly tension in the neck, shoulders, and thoracic spine.

2: It's not training the eyes to 'dance'. It doesn't re-pattern the movements and break the central fixation habits.

3: It does not address the emotional aspects to vision degradation.

So use the tool for what it can do. But don't stop there, address the other aspects to re-training the eyes to see properly with the tools that work best for those too.

Just my thoughts.

[/font]

Plus lens, myopic defocus, print pushing, are not complimentary methods to Bates, if anything, contradictory. It conflicts with, and confuses those who are here to learn Bates. This site is for Bates method, and complimentary means of relaxation of mind and body. This has all been debated in the past, and there are plenty of other sites to discuss the success and failures of it to your hearts content. Do what you want, but respect what this site is about.

I agree; The plus lens and all its other names in disguise is definitely not complementary methods. It is against the Bates Method. It is a method that impairs the vision, causes addiction to eyeglasses. It freezes the lens movement causes presbyopia, cataract. Eventually leads to myopia.

Often people send me PMs asking for free training even though I am rarely here due to harassment by the plus lens people and being banned if I fight back, defend myself. If you want training; my contact reply for training WILL NOT be through PMs or posted on here because the eyeglass people pop on my threads and harass the students. This is due to a person named Asthersky, bifocal, KazeKage and others sending me abusive personal messages and attacking me on this forum. I have also received threatening e-mails, phone calls and other more destructive things happened from these plus lens... guys. I reported this to David.

I suspect this new person Sage is the same old plus lens guys posting on here using a new phony name to redirect people to the eyeglass sales men, then to cataract and cornea.. surgeries after the vision is impaired by the plus lens.

Recently a major plus lens leader, long time forum, website owner admitted he uses the plus for years. He's addicted to glasses. So this is why he tolerates all the eyeglass sales people. Like the other plus people he uses Dr. Bates name, picture to draw people in, lying to them, letting them think the plus lens is Dr. Bates method. It is NOT!

The plus lens people can go to their own website and forum. Why are they on here forcing it on people? I still think that 2 are really not plus lens people; they are those high priced Bates teachers who attack honest and free teachers out of jealousy, greed, arrogance.

if this forum continues to prefer to keep the eyeglass, surgery people on here; Complementary Methods should be changed to something else; a truthful label.

clarknight what is your current prescription and what did you start with?
#11
Stalling out at -.75 when you sarted out at -2.25 is very normal. You got rid of your ciliary myopia, and now you gotta change the shape of your eye, ie reverse axial myopia, which is much more difficult.

I myself started from the -4s and got down to the -3 area, and ever since it's been a grind(One of my eyes is barely -2 and the other is a very strong -2.25 closing in on -2)

After the first 1-1.5 diopters, it gets more difficult, regardless of what system you use, plus lense, bates, whatever.

Recently in my zeal to get to -2 even on both eyes, I jumped my plus lens from +1 to +1.5 before my monthly eye exam, and he tested me at -2.25 and -2.5 on both closer to -2.5, which was my worst eye exam result since October of last year. Thankfully I caught it quickly enough and stopped using the +1.5 lens and combined wiith my usual distance vision work, brought it back to just about where it was before I jumped the plus lens.

There's a lesson there. Once you are in the axial myopia phase, you gotta keep grinding it out in very conservative fashion, slow and steady. I now intend to try to get both eyes to -2 even, and at that point, going from +1 to +1.25 instead of going to +1.5 immediately.

When using plus lenses, I think one should not go beyond a 3.25 diopter difference. If you go over that, you may not pay for that in the ciliary myopia elimination phase, but you will pay for that in the axial myopia phase.

If you are at >75 diopters, I would suggest griding it out with a +2.5 plus lens, and try typing with a plus, not just reading with a plus. Typing is more engaging and when you know what you are typing, you can push print from farther way.

I'd also walk along roads and track license plates of cars as they blow by you.
#12
(04-03-2015, 08:08 AM)sleepmaster Wrote: Stalling out at -.75 when you sarted out at -2.25 is very normal. You got rid of your ciliary myopia, and now you gotta change the shape of your eye, ie reverse axial myopia, which is much more difficult.

I myself started from the -4s and got down to the -3 area, and ever since it's been a grind(One of my eyes is barely -2 and the other is a very strong -2.25 closing in on -2)

After the first 1-1.5 diopters, it gets more difficult, regardless of what system you use, plus lense, bates, whatever.

Recently in my zeal to get to -2 even on both eyes, I jumped my plus lens from +1 to +1.5 before my monthly eye exam, and he tested me at -2.25 and -2.5 on both closer to -2.5, which was my worst eye exam result since October of last year. Thankfully I caught it quickly enough and stopped using the +1.5 lens and combined wiith my usual distance vision work, brought it back to just about where it was before I jumped the plus lens.

There's a lesson there. Once you are in the axial myopia phase, you gotta keep grinding it out in very conservative fashion, slow and steady. I now intend to try to get both eyes to -2 even, and at that point, going from +1 to +1.25 instead of going to +1.5 immediately.

When using plus lenses, I think one should not go beyond a 3.25 diopter difference. If you go over that, you may not pay for that in the ciliary myopia elimination phase, but you will pay for that in the axial myopia phase.

If you are at >75 diopters, I would suggest griding it out with a +2.5 plus lens, and try typing with a plus, not just reading with a plus. Typing is more engaging and when you know what you are typing, you can push print from farther way.

I'd also walk along roads and track license plates of cars as they blow by you.

I believe that plus lens can coax more then just ciliary accommodation. Changing the axial length of the eye is about getting the 6 muscles that surround the eye to relax.

Lately, I've seen long bouts of perfect 20/20 vision. 30-40 seconds or more.

What I've been doing to get that is wearing plus lens while working at the computer & constantly moving the head neck & shoulders in an infinity pattern. And of course constant focus on deep relaxing breaths, releasing more tension with every breath.

Then lots of eye shifting exercises in the distance.

Combining plus lenses with techniques to encourage shifting seems to be creating a compound effect.

These myopic teachers (pun intended) who are so closed to anything that wasn't personally christened by Bates are doing themselves and their students a serious disservice.

Politics should have no place in medicine. It's funny to see how the vilification Bates received without investigation, they are acting out themselves.
#13
What strength plus lens do you use?
#14
(04-03-2015, 08:42 AM)Sage Wrote:
(04-03-2015, 08:08 AM)sleepmaster Wrote: Stalling out at -.75 when you sarted out at -2.25 is very normal. You got rid of your ciliary myopia, and now you gotta change the shape of your eye, ie reverse axial myopia, which is much more difficult.

I myself started from the -4s and got down to the -3 area, and ever since it's been a grind(One of my eyes is barely -2 and the other is a very strong -2.25 closing in on -2)

After the first 1-1.5 diopters, it gets more difficult, regardless of what system you use, plus lense, bates, whatever.

Recently in my zeal to get to -2 even on both eyes, I jumped my plus lens from +1 to +1.5 before my monthly eye exam, and he tested me at -2.25 and -2.5 on both closer to -2.5, which was my worst eye exam result since October of last year. Thankfully I caught it quickly enough and stopped using the +1.5 lens and combined wiith my usual distance vision work, brought it back to just about where it was before I jumped the plus lens.

There's a lesson there. Once you are in the axial myopia phase, you gotta keep grinding it out in very conservative fashion, slow and steady. I now intend to try to get both eyes to -2 even, and at that point, going from +1 to +1.25 instead of going to +1.5 immediately.

When using plus lenses, I think one should not go beyond a 3.25 diopter difference. If you go over that, you may not pay for that in the ciliary myopia elimination phase, but you will pay for that in the axial myopia phase.

If you are at >75 diopters, I would suggest griding it out with a +2.5 plus lens, and try typing with a plus, not just reading with a plus. Typing is more engaging and when you know what you are typing, you can push print from farther way.

I'd also walk along roads and track license plates of cars as they blow by you.

I believe that plus lens can coax more then just ciliary accommodation. Changing the axial length of the eye is about getting the 6 muscles that surround the eye to relax.

Lately, I've seen long bouts of perfect 20/20 vision. 30-40 seconds or more.

What I've been doing to get that is wearing plus lens while working at the computer & constantly moving the head neck & shoulders in an infinity pattern. And of course constant focus on deep relaxing breaths, releasing more tension with every breath.

Then lots of eye shifting exercises in the distance.

Combining plus lenses with techniques to encourage shifting seems to be creating a compound effect.

These myopic teachers (pun intended) who are so closed to anything that wasn't personally christened by Bates are doing themselves and their students a serious disservice.

Politics should have no place in medicine. It's funny to see how the vilification Bates received without investigation, they are acting out themselves.

This site does not embrace plus lenses nor sees it as a complimentary technique. It conflicts with what this site promotes, and creates an atmosphere of unproductive confusion. It is why the moderator and owner restructured this site. If you feel so strongly about it, you have multiple options: there are sites out there dedicated to just that, where you can speak to your hearts content about it, or you could create your own site, be kingpin owner and moderator, and create your very own belief system. Or open a coffee shot and hand out a pair of plus lenses with every latte - the possibliities are endless. If one goes into a vegetarian store, do you try to convince them to sell rib-eye and pork loins because YOU think it is more nutritious? Exercise your free will, instead of making oneself all disgruntled, whiny and bitter, implying that those who support more traditional Bates are being unintelligent, short sighted, cultish, or whatever additional disrespectful or condescending things you might have to say. Supporters here have a right to believe and promote whatever they want. It does not affect or hurt you in the least. And you have the right to find other places to promote plus lenses, myopic defocus, etc., it's not as if anyone is holding you captive.
#15
The plus lens freezes the eyes' lens and also impairs the eyes' natural convergence. It also affects divergence and other eye-vision functions. The eyes become more and more dependent on the plus lens to see up close. Eventually the far vision is also impaired.

The plus lens method is completely AGAINST the Bates Method. It destroys the eyes health, function, cause tension, strain and ruins the vision.

Why is such a destructive method allowed in the complementary threads?

A true complementary method is;

Some Behavioral Optometry looking close and far exercise mixed with relaxation, shifting, central-fixation; done as natural as possible.

Abdominal breathing practices.

Alexander technique and other movement practice.

Brain hemisphere integration.

Use of color.

Nutrition.

EFT, spiritual stuff.

Many more things are complementary.

Wearing additive eyeglasses is not.

Here's free true Bates Method training video and e-book;

I have not forgot about doing the anti-plus lens method video. A lot is done and it will be posted on YouTube this year so the public knows the truth about this awful method. I been busy creating new free e-books, movies, audios for the blind guys. Perfect Sight Without Glasses will be free in Audio asap; doing it after many requests from the blind man in Utah. The guy who helped cure my neck injuries with his Mormon Pure Sea Salt and Water bible recipe.

He went blind after giving into wearing glasses, stronger and stronger glasses prescribed by the eye doctor 40+ years, and when he was older; even after he kept saying he was seeing blue-purople lights and had temp bouts blindness; the doctor just kept increasing the eyeglass prescription. Then a blood vessel in the retina burst. He went blind. Also glaucoma, black cataracts... He has to have operations now.

So; avoid all glasses. Go natural; use the Bates Method and be independent, free and see clear for life.

Perfect Sight Without Glasses free download