i have brought the book "relearning to see" from amazon.com. It is the book which has the highest rating by the most number of users, i understand that it teaches teh Bates method in detail
I have worn glasses for 14 of my 19 years on this planet. I am myopic, current presciption is -6 left and -7.5 right. I am what you may categorise as severely myopic
I have considered LASIK, but quite frankly it scares the sh*t out of me. So i have simply resigned myself to a life of wearing glasses.
I would be extraordinarily happy if i could reduce my prescription to say -2 or -1.5. Damn each new pair of lenses (super thin, high refractory index) costs me more than a telescope!!
so my question is can it be done using the bates method? if so have i brought the correct book and what timeframe and daily commitment would i be looking at?
Relearning to See is a great book and helps people get a understanding of the Bates method the way it is meant to be understood. This book tells you that the Bates method is not a system of eye exercises but about dropping bad eye habits and relearning the correct ones which are the same used by people who have perfect sight. Also, no other book (besides the original Bates book or magazine compilation) to my knowledge directly cites from the Better Eyesight magazine compilation and explains what Bates is talking about, and this book does it quite a lot. There are other things that are part of the method that help achieve better sight, such as relaxation and the imagination. It's a very good book (and the correct one) for newcomers who want to understand the Bates method. But eventually, the original book by Bates (downloadable from iblindness.org) and the magazine compilations are what you really should fall on after you read Relearning to See (which gives you a comprehensive introduction/overview of several things covering the natural vision improvement movement such as its origin - Dr. Bates himself).
That's great you avoided LASIK, the damage it does is permanent as the corneal flap has never been known to heal completely and most complications of LASIK come from the corneal flap itself. The doctors do not tell you that LASIK is not as wonderful/harmless as the ads tell you, and people who have had LASIK and say they're happy with it oftentimes still have complications like ghosting and halos. The symptoms cannot be relieved, it is irreversible once the damage's been done. Simply put, it's better to try a natural approach to improving vision before going for an artifical, quick fix that will permanently alter the cornea irreversibly.
My vision improved in only two months (not putting as much energy in the method as I could've due to researching but still!) from 20/70 binocular vision in Dec. 2006 to a near-permanent 20/20-20/15 by Feb. 16, 2007, after which I went into nonstop research mode and am about to go into nonstop application mode -- and there is nothing better than the use of the imagination in improving vision, I can testify to that through my own experiences. Bates said:
Of all the discoveries that I have made, there is none of so much practical value as the discovery of the importance of the imagination.
Jamie2820 Wrote:If you had to choose between them, Bates book is the best, but Relearning to see is a great additional book, and one which might be better to read first.
Jamie
Agreed, Jamie! Same goes for the other things you've said.
Quote:My vision improved in only two months (not putting as much energy in the method as I could've due to researching but still!) from 20/70 binocular vision in Dec. 2006 to a near-permanent 20/20-20/15 by Feb. 16, 2007,
Aww... only I could find a way to convince my parents that this will work. Considering I there going to force me to get a drivers licence soon. :'(
I could actually get some good books on the Bates Method. Bates writes his books like someone writing for a science journal.
Quote:Aww... only I could find a way to convince my parents that this will work. Considering I there going to force me to get a drivers licence soon. Cry
I could actually get some good books on the Bates Method. Bates writes his books like someone writing for a science journal.
Bates was a very intelligent person with great professional writing abilities. It is true that it sometimes costs us our understanding. However if he was to write his books like a 5-year-old, the medical and optometry fields would not recognize his works. Trust me, most medical professionals' opinion as to the accuracy of a published work lies in the author's style of writing. This is why people like Tom Q decided to put Bates' writing in common terms. Unfortunately details leak in the process. As Spock and Jamie said, Tom Q does not go into imagination much, nor does he describe practicing with the test card. I believe both of those, along with relaxation, are THE most important concepts in Bates techniques.
My suggestion to you: Get your drivers license. It doesn't matter whether you have an X condition or not. If you wait until your eyesight improves, you pressure your eyes to improve. This sort of pressure turns into a subconscious effort to see, which most greatly hinders you progress. Besides, you can have the condition removed from your drivers license in less than 5 minutes when you improve your sight to your DVM standards.
Binocular vision is vision in which both eyes are used together. <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binocular_vision">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binocular_vision</a><!-- m -->
Another way of describing it might be when vision of both eyes converge and fusion to form one image.
adjustedrace Wrote:Aww... only I could find a way to convince my parents that this will work. Considering I there going to force me to get a drivers licence soon. :'(
Has your sight gotten worse recently (i.e. have you had to get a stronger prescription or can't see 20/20 through your current one)? If so, you should point out to them that until your eyes stabilize, your ability to drive safely will be compromised (as a new driver especially), since your vision may quickly slip without you realizing it and well before you would be tested again. This leaves Bates out of the equation.
