Pls suggest reduced prescription for me...

[marlon]

My most recent 'correct' prescription is -2.25 left, -1.75 right. For the past few weeks I've been using reduced lenses. -2.00 left and -1.50 right. I know, not much of a reduction (.25 difference only). That's because I was scared to wear reduced prescription.
Now I want to lower it further. Suggestions anyone?

[otis]

Dear Marlon,

No one can help you until you read this Snellen, and tell us
which line you can read. ???

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.smbs.buffalo.edu/oph/ped/IVAC/IVAC.html">http://www.smbs.buffalo.edu/oph/ped/IVAC/IVAC.html</a><!-- m -->

Click on "display", and find the line where you can read
1/2 the letters correctly.

You should read it at 20 feet. If you can not get that
distance, then select "10 feet" and read at that distance.

Once you report-back, we can suggest some ideas.

Otis

[marlon]

Thanks for the link. I'm pretty sure I can read half the letters on the 20/40 line at 10 feet. I'll wait for your suggestion.

By the way, what's my aquity? the fraction thing....and pls show me how you got that value. Thanks!!! ;D

[otis]

Dear Marlon,

Subject: Your measured visual acuity.

If you read 1/2 the letters on the 20/40 line then you have 20/40 vision -- if read at 20 feet.

But I suspect your visual acuity is 20/70 to 20/80. With some squinting, you can probably
work with no minus lens. In the Bates study, the kids did not work with a minus lens,
but rather worked to clear their Snellens from 20/70 to normal.

Rather that obtain a weaker minus, I would suggest ATTEMPTING to work with no
minus lens at all -- EXCEPT for driving a car. Just keep the minus on the
dash of the care -- and work it that way.

I think you are seriously over-prescribed. I think that a -1.0 diopter would clear your Snellen
to pass the DMV level test (if you want a lower-power Snellen. Let me know
if that is what you wish.)

My most recent 'correct' prescription is -2.25 left, -1.75 right. For the past few weeks I've been using reduced lenses. -2.00 left and -1.50 right. I know, not much of a reduction (.25 difference only). That's because I was scared to wear reduced prescription.
Now I want to lower it further. Suggestions anyone?

The majority-opinion ODs often over-prescribe the minus. The purpose of having you read
the chart is to confimr this fact.

I am not certain if you were reading the 20/40 line at 20 feet, or you "reduced" the 20/40 line
for reading at 10 feet.

I would suggest reading at 20 feet to avoid confusion on that subject.

Visual Acuity is a ratio. The first 20 is the distant in feet that is recommended to read.

The second 20 means 3/8 inch letters at 20 feet.

i would add that the DMV requires the reading of 3/4 inch letters at
20 feet -- which is more reasonable under the circumstances.

You can obtain printed charts (for out-side use) from <!-- w --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.i-see.org">http://www.i-see.org</a><!-- w -->

You have a good possibility of clearing your Snellen using Bates methods.

But either get a substantiallly reduced minus -- or avoid using it -- except
when legally required to do so.

Just my opinion,

Otis

[marlon]

If you read 1/2 the letters on the 20/40 line then you have 20/40 vision -- if read at 20 feet.

Didn't you tell me that if I can't get at 20 ft, 10 ft will do? I read at 10 ft due to lack of space. Here's what I entered in the link you gave me:
Length of line = 3 cm
Distance from monitor = 10 ft.
Chart type = Letters (Snellen)
Viewing preference = Row
So what's my acuity? ;D

With some squinting, you can probably
work with no minus lens.

You're not suggesting that I squint, are you? Because I feel squinting is forcing, so it can't be good.

Rather that obtain a weaker minus, I would suggest ATTEMPTING to work with no
minus lens at all -- EXCEPT for driving a car.

That's exactly what I've been doing for the past few weeks. I wear glasses only for driving AT NIGHT. (I can do without glasses during daytime driving.) I wear glasses for 2.5 to 3.25 hours in a week. I'm currently working on driving without them at night though.

I think you are seriously over-prescribed. I think that a -1.0 diopter would clear your Snellen
to pass the DMV level test (if you want a lower-power Snellen. Let me know
if that is what you wish.)

DMV as in Department of Motor Vehicles in the U.S.? I'm Asian, and I live in a third world country in Asia. ;D I don't know what a lower-power Snellen is.

How different is using a substantially reduced prescription compared to a slightly reduced one in terms of improving your eyesight? I feel that Bates practitioners who cannot totally discard their glasses have to gradually reduce their prescription until perfect vision is recovered. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Thanks Otis!

[otis]

Dear Marlon,

Subject: Excellent!

You did this exactly right.

Didn't you tell me that if I can't get at 20 ft, 10 ft will do? I read at 10 ft due to lack of space. Here's what I entered in the link you gave me:
Length of line = 3 cm
Distance from monitor = 10 ft.
Chart type = Letters (Snellen)
Viewing preference = Row

Code:

So what's my acuity?

This Snellen makes the adjustment for distance. Thus when you choose 10 feet, the size
of the letters is reduced as required.

Thus your visual-acuity is in fact 20/40, or 6/12, (metric).

You are profoundly over-prescribed (in my opinion) by at least -1.5 diopters.

I can only suggest what "I" would do if I confirmed that my vision was passing
(or close to passing) the legal DMV test. I would quit wearing that -2.25
diopters lens.

I would obtain a low-cost (-3/4 diopter) lens from Zenniopical.com for
$10 -- and use it ONLY WHEN NECESSARY.

I would work with the Bates methods (and other methods) to further
clear the 20/40 line towards 20/20.

This is a typical over-prescription that Bates so strongly objected
to.

What do you plan to do now? ???

Second-opinion best,

Otis

[otis]

Dear Friend,

Additional remarks.

DMV as in Department of Motor Vehicles in the U.S.?

Yes. I use this reference to establish the "minimum" Snellen you must pass, i.e.,
1.8 cm letters at 6 meters. (This is for your safety. You pass this, and you
are doing very well at this point.) It suggests that a minus lens
of -1/2 to -3/4 diopters would clear the 20/20 (or 6/6) line for your.

I'm Asian, and I live in a third world country in Asia. I don't know what a lower-power Snellen is.

Sorry, I meant lower-power minus lens.


How different is using a substantially reduced prescription compared to a slightly reduced one in terms of improving your eyesight?

Otis> if you had a set of minus lenses (LOW COST) you could place a -3/4 diopter lens in front of your
eyes and CONFIRM that the -3/4 diopter CLEARED the 20/20 line for you. (You could by
a -1/2 and -1/4 lens and combine them to -3/4 diopters to prove this TO YOURSELF.
(They cost about $5 per lens).

Thus by YOUR measurement you would get the CORRECT minus to clear your Snellen.
Your refractive STATE would be -3/4 diopters.

I feel that Bates practitioners who cannot totally discard their glasses have to gradually reduce their prescription until perfect vision is recovered.

Well, 20/20 is considered "perfect". So you are correct, you have about -3/4 diopters to "go". But this
is totally under YOUR control -- as it should be in science.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

You have considerable intelligence with these issues.

Best,

Otis


Thanks Otis!

[Bryan]

Otis I just wanted to note that Marlon said she/he read the 20/40 line from 10 feet not 20 feet like you think. If the 20/40 line is read at 10 feet, that is 20/80 eyesight.

[David]

I want to remind everyone that your prescription in diopters (-2.00) is not a measurement of vision. It's a measurement of what strength of lenses the eye doctor stops at in the exam room. The standard procedure is to keep increasing the strength until you stop seeing better with added power. If the eye doctor finds that you can read 20/20 with a -2.00 correction, but with -4.00 you can read 10/20 (better than 20/20), then your prescription is given as -4.00. If you go to a different doctor without your existing records, you could very well receive a different prescription.

So someone with a -4.00 prescription might read 20/100 without glasses or might read 20/400, just as a general example of how there's really no conversion between the two. Once you factor in astigmatism or something else, there's no telling except that it's not going to be good.

So there's also no way of determining what reduced prescription is appropriate. You can try to make a science out of it, factoring in how well you see without glasses, how well you want to see with a reduced prescription, etc., but it still comes down to a shot in the dark, and I don't think a reduced prescription is normally of any benefit except to take the edge off a strong prescription that may be unnecessarily taxing on your eyes. People want to make this all about glasses and prescriptions, but getting your vision back is more about learning to use your eyes without strain.

Dave

[otis]

Dear Bryan,

Subject: The person who checked his Snellen got this right

Otis I just wanted to note that Marlon said she/he read the 20/40 line from 10 feet not 20 feet like you think. If the 20/40 line is read at 10 feet, that is 20/80 eyesight

.

In fact I asked this person to double check.

While 20 feet is the preferred distance, most people can not get 20 feet back from their
monitor.

The letter size for 20 feet is 0.75 inches. Thus had he selected 20 feet, that would have
been the size of the letter.

But if he can not back off to 20 feet, then the computer reduces the size of the
letter by 1/2.

This is considered acceptable in optometry, and some tests are done at that
distance.

But techincally, the "line" should say 10/20, which is of course the same as 20/40

I trust the intelligence of the person doing his own checking to understand
this simple analogy.

Otis

[marlon]

Thanks guys!!! One last question Otis, just to be sure, when you say -3/4 diopter lens, do you mean -0.75?

Thanks again!! I will continue to work on my snellen and doing Bates methods. ;D

[otis]

Dear Marlon,

Subject: Accurate checking of your visual acuity.

Thanks guys!!! One last question Otis, just to be sure, when you say -3/4 diopter lens, do you mean -0.75?

Yes!

Since the issue has been measurement accuracy, I suggest that you check your
eyes so you can read 1.8 cm at 6 meters.

If you can do that, you pass virtually all DMV requirements around the world.

I know you can do better than the DMV standard -- and I think you should.

But you now have "control" over your distant vision -- they way
that Bates would advise it.


Good luck!

Otis

[infinitewolf]

reduced prescription? just leave your glasses off completely.

[otis]

Subject: Throw away those negative lenses -- and SEE.

reduced prescription? just leave your glasses off completely.

Absolutely correct!

He meets the reasonable requirement of the DMV -- and there
is no reason why he should be wearing a -2.25 diopter lens
all the time.

Note: Typically -2.25 diopter indicates a 20/140 Snellen.
Had he continued with that minus -- done no Bates -- he
would have been at 20/140, thanks to that
over-prescribed minus lens.

Bates was right.

Otis

[apavel]

Yeah Marlon,
People at -8 go for reduced prescriptions. Your -2.25 left, -1.75 right is icing on the cake, you can probably go without them. Just don't squint as Otis suggested!! (He doesn't know the Bates method).
If you want to use the Bates method to improve your eyesight, forget reduced prescription. You'd be almost certainly wasting your time. That's the harsh truth based on what we've observed in many people.

Paul