Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Otis - Need your help please
#16
One difference here which makes it safe to drive with 20/100 is that vehicles here go slower compared with some other parts of the world. My average driving speed is 30 miles/hr and go upto 50m/hr on highways. At these speeds you have tremendous control over the vehicle and I have never had a single mishap.( there were a few instances where I had to brake suddenly but even these wre not close calls)

One major problem here is that very few roads have multiple speed lanes and only few roads are unidirectional and most roads are bidirectional. That means you always have to be alert to the possibiity of somebody colliding headon with you. If you take the eyes off the road you could be in trouble. Still if you can see approaching vehicles at atleast 200 feet away there is no danger . Another big advantage here is that most roads are ultra busy and it hardly matters if you cant read signs - just do whatever the driver in front of you does and hope that he is not a myope like you. Smile

20/100 is still good enough for most purposes if you are used to it. You can drive comfortably if you are used to it. As you said, our ability to imagine is enhanced when we switch to lower prescriptions and greatly amplified when you discard glasses completely. If you are always used to driving with 20/20 it would be a great challenge to drive with 20/100 for the first few days.
Reply
#17
Hi Ram.

"One difference here which makes it safe to drive with 20/100 is that vehicles here go slower compared with some other parts of the world. My average driving speed is 30 miles/hr and go upto 50m/hr on highways. At these speeds you have tremendous control over the vehicle and I have never had a single mishap.( there were a few instances where I had to brake suddenly but even these wre not close calls).One difference here which makes it safe to drive with 20/100 is that vehicles here go slower compared with some other parts of the world. My average driving speed is 30 miles/hr and go upto 50m/hr on highways. At these speeds you have tremendous control over the vehicle and I have never had a single mishap.( there were a few instances where I had to brake suddenly but even these wre not close calls)."

I see, thanks for the explanation.. that makes more sense on how you can drive at 20/100 !

"Another big advantage here is that most roads are ultra busy and it hardly matters if you cant read signs - just do whatever the driver in front of you does and hope that he is not a myope like you. "
LOL


And so I"m sorry I don't know your history, but how much has your vision improved since wearing reduced prescription ?
I'm sure you're probably doing Bates as well. For me, in the beginning,I was doing the 'Vision for Life" program which has a lot of Bates, but I ended up only doing the palming when I noticed how well the reduced prescription & + lenses were helping.
The thing that helped me most in the Vision for Life program was the 3 cups. It's how you look at 2 circles and use your eyes together to see a 3rd cup in between ? I actually couldn't do this at first .. I think I may have had a habit of using my
left eye more than my right.. Anyways, even though it was a long time since I did it, I can still do it today so I'm glad
it's lasted!


2-3 weeks ago, I received my new weaker prescription glasses. I wear these at home and outside in the backyard.
On these, I totally took off the astig correction on right eye, and it's not so bad at all ! With adequate light, I think I can see about 20/60 with them. Hopefully, I will see some improvement on that eye even though I was advised it was impossible. I like the challenge !


Regards, Its Smile me
Reply
#18
Itsme,

I dont wear weaker prescriptions now. And I dont drive now.

Even before I tried Bates I was fully aware of the dangers of 20/20 glasses and how they can cause staircase myopia. So I was using only -5D glasses even when my power was -8.5D and these glasses gave me 20/100 vision. I wanted to save my vision as I was afraid that it would go down like -10, -12. -15 etc thus making me blind after a few years. But I was not informed on the Bates method so I did not have a chance to improve vision.

After I started Bates, I completely threw away my glasses. No weaker prescriptions for me. If necesary I use a pinhole glass which is far superior to weaker prescriptions. It was quite hard at -8.5D but I managed to live without my glasses. Four months have passed and I have abt 20/200 vision now in room lighting. I can see 20/30 now with my -5D glasses - so I assume my refractive power has improved by atleast 3D ( and probably even more because glasses and VA have only minimal correlation).

I have been working on the computer 16 hours/day for the last two months ( because I am planning to have my own company and want to quit my job). This means I am working on two fulltime jobs and this has interfered with my vision and I am unable to make the kind of progress I would like. But the Bates methods are simply wonderful - I am working 16 hrs/day without glasses, can you imagine that. I dont feel discomfort in the eyes. I could have never handled such load on the eyes previously because even the one full time job left me with terrible headaches and eyeaches every day even with glasses. I never had any headaches or eyeaches in the last few weeks.

I will be quiting my regular job in a few months and this will give me considerable time to do Bates methods and also rest my eyes. Currently I spend 90 minutes/day but these are not fully effective because I do them late at night as I am completely short of time. When I do these routines I am already quite sleepy and hence they are only half effective. I am sure my eyes will get better as soon as I can rest them more than I rest them now - I am getting improved flashes of upto 20/70 and I would be interested in making these more long lasting and permanent.

It has been rather easy to understand now that vision is really dependent only on how aware you are. The more you are aware of what you are seeing, the better you see. If I try to practice this on a distant chart sometimes there are spectacular flashes of improved vision. If you are not paying attention to what you see then you see poorly. With this knowledge I can really control how much I see on the chart but the real challenge is in getting the control subconsciously else vision improvement will be limited to some improved flashes and wont become permanent. There is only a small difference between staring and attentive looking but with more practice this becomes easier.
Reply
#19
Hi Ram.

Hey,
before I go ahead and reply to your last post, how do you guys do that nice cut & paste from a previous reply ??? thanks!

************************************************************************************************************************************************
I really applaud you for being able to throw your glasses away after starting Bates, and also being able to work so long a day
without them.. wow.. It sounds though like your hard earned efforts have really reaped the rewards of shedding more than 3 diopeters ! I remember the 'hell' I went through just going down 1 diopeter, initially !!! (I know I am no where in your
league.. LOL ) I got terrible headaches, nausea, I didn't feel like myself.. I almost quit ! Somewhere around the 3rd week, it all started to get better, and shaving diopeters since then has been a breeze.

You said: 'The more you are AWARE of what you are seeing, the better you see.' - when you say 'aware' , you mean
using imagination of what's there ?


Keep up the good work!
Regards Its Smile me
Reply
#20
Awareness is a rather philosophical concept. In layman's language it is being more attentive. Bates calls this central fixation. I think those who experience these improved flashes easily understand this term because defining it is harder.

To give an example - When you switch from letter 'A' to letter 'B' on a chart, your mind must be immediately aware of 'B' and the attention on 'A' must recede into the background very quickly. Your mind must follow your eyes very rapidly. ( or rather the other way around) Myopia and other defects are because our mental attention remains fixed on 'A' even after our eyes have moved to 'B'. The above is not only applicable to separate letters such as A and B but also to different parts of letter A and B. So myopia is mainly due to a rather lazy mind that refuses to follow the eye. If you are looking at one object and thinking of another, naturally your vision will be poor. By practising the mind-eye coordination very consciously, you can temporarily improve your vision. But care should be taken not to force this coordination, you need to go about it rather efortlesly. It is difficult to explain but it comes with practice. All 'clear flashes' reported by the members of this forum are exactly due to this. Long term improvement can happen only when this awareness becomes your natural trait and lasts even while you are not practising the methods.

The above is vastly theoretical and in practice, long term myopia would have caused structural changes in the eyeball too, because of the chronic tension in the muscles responsible for vision. It takes real commitment to be free of myopia in such cases. In many people there is considerable mismatch between their VA without glasses and the power of lenses needed to yield 20/20 vision. This is because of long term myopia that has altered the length of the eyeballs and in such cases it is relatively easier to demonstrate improved VA by training the mind, but objective proof in the form of zero refraction is hard to come by and Bates routines have to be practised for months or years. You can have normal vision even if the eye doctor says you have refractive error and prescribes you glasses - this is because lens is not the only factor responsible for vision - vision is a much more complex process than our doctors know. Eye is not a camera at all not even remotely close. Finding the focal length of the eye and suggesting 'accurate glasses' is rather stupid in my opinion because vision is always varying. Those who take off their glasses completely can actually monitor that vision changes by significant amounts even in a single day. Glasses prevent this kind of fluctuations by maintaining the constant refractive error they are supposed to correct and gradually destroys vision. Even weaker prescriptions are not that good but it seems some people really benefit from that approach.
Reply
#21
Hi Ram.

Your comment: 'Myopia and other defects are because our mental attention remains fixed on 'A' even after our eyes have moved to 'B'. The above is not only applicable to separate letters such as A and B but also to different parts of letter A and B. So myopia is mainly due to a rather lazy mind that refuses to follow the eye. If you are looking at one object and thinking of another, naturally your vision will be poor.'
My question: why do myopes have a lazy mind ? as in your example, why is it that when we look at ' B' we still think
of 'A' instead of focusing on 'B'? Is this the fault of our prescription 20/20 glasses ?


Your comment:'The above is vastly theoretical and in practice, long term myopia would have caused structural changes in the eyeball too, because of the chronic tension in the muscles responsible for vision. It takes real commitment to be free of myopia in such cases. In many people there is considerable mismatch between their VA without glasses and the power of lenses needed to yield 20/20 vision'
My comment: Yes, this is what I've been reading from others but honestly my own experience was that after wearing my 20/40 contact lenses and doing + lens I was tested on the Snellen (which is the worst scenario) by the cornea surgeon and he said I had 20/20 vision. I think I must be very unusual. Even John Yee said so that not many people get success from reduced prescriptions. The only thing I can think of is that I stopped straining to see. It doesn't bother me anymore if I don't
see sharply and clearly. I guess I'm using my imagination more and that feels ok.


Your comment: ' Eye is not a camera at all not even remotely close. Finding the focal length of the eye and suggesting 'accurate glasses' is rather stupid in my opinion because vision is always varying. Those who take off their glasses completely can actually monitor that vision changes by significant amounts even in a single day. Glasses prevent this kind of fluctuations by maintaining the constant refractive error they are supposed to correct and gradually destroys vision.
Your comment: Completely agree on that. It's great that you could do without your glasses !


Regards, Its Smile me
Reply
#22
itsme Wrote:Hi Ram.

Your comment: 'Myopia and other defects are because our mental attention remains fixed on 'A' even after our eyes have moved to 'B'. The above is not only applicable to separate letters such as A and B but also to different parts of letter A and B. So myopia is mainly due to a rather lazy mind that refuses to follow the eye. If you are looking at one object and thinking of another, naturally your vision will be poor.'
My question: why do myopes have a lazy mind ? as in your example, why is it that when we look at ' B' we still think
of 'A' instead of focusing on 'B'? Is this the fault of our prescription 20/20 glasses ?

Possibly. The thing is even normal eyes have temporary myopia from time to time and corrects itself. Unless they put the first glasses on you, the chances of you becoming highly myopic is slim, though it is still possible. We need different glasses for reading at distance and near and dim and bright conditions. But the eye doctors give you a thick worse fit prescription all the time. This is always over correction at times your vision tries to correct itself and thus prevents you from recovering from mild myopia. Once you have -2D or more, it is impossible to get back normal vision simply by discarding glasses and you need to practice the routines,

I became first myopic at the age of eight. My eye doctor at that time was a sensible person and told my parents not to put glasses on me and it had a good chance of improving my sight. This doctor was right because I had good vision when I was nine. During the next few years, I still remember I had excellent vision - I even remember "showing off" my great vision to others which now makes me feel embarassed,

When I was fourteen I found that I had myopia the usual way - unable to read the blackboard. I could read 20/40 in good light but I remember that my first prescription was somewhere around -2D to -2.5D. I had no idea of vision and glasses at that time. I just used these glasses all the time because my doctor warned me my eyes would get worse if I dont wear them all the time. Now I know very well that -2D and above for 20/40 was really over presciption. But I had no idea and continued to wear these glasses and after an year my vision had gone down to 20/200. So I got a new glasses which was -3.5D. This was probably not over prescribed but the damage was done. 20/40 was mild myopia which could even cure on its own just like I got cured as a child. My vision grew steadily worse and I knew even without reading Bates that my doctor was dead wrong about glasses and that glasses destroyed vision. I had -5D when I was eighteen and could probably see 20/400. When I doing my enginerring I threw away my glasses just like I did now, and my vision improved slightly during these four years I was without glasses. But I had no knowledge that vision could be improved and no doctor ever told me that there was even a remote chance.

When I got employement in 1996, I was forced to use glasses again because my vision was very poor and could not see the monitor. For four years prior to that I had not worn glasses so my eyes were at abt -4.5 at this time. But as soon as I started using my glasses again, my vision got progressivly worse every year and reached -8.5D in 2003. I really felt scared that I would become blind or get retinal detachment and I started using weaker glasses because I read somewhere that helped to conserve vision. It stablised my vision at -8.5D for five years until I found about Bates this year. I think I have shaved off 3D or more in these last four months and now eee as well as I could in 1990.

Yes, so I think in my case if I did not wear my first prescription I would have normal vision now. This bad first prescription triggered off a myopia chain for me and without any knowledge of NVI I was just going to go blind. But I am quite happy now that the trend has reversed and the threat of impending blindness is gone for good. I had to throw off glasses coz i had no choice - I certainly cant waste my precious time on half methods which use glasses. Bates has completely rejected the uses of glasses in any home treatment. I wanted results at all costs so I endured all the difficulty without glasses. Now I dont need glasses anymore, I dont have the slighest temptation to use those ugly thick glasses even when I cant see - I never try to see these days. Let the objects come to your eyes and be happy with what you see and make no efforts. Wink
Reply
#23
Dear Ram,

You have my total vote of confidence.

Quote:RAM> Yes, so I think in my case if I did not wear my first prescription I would have normal vision now. This bad first prescription triggered off a myopia chain for me and without any knowledge of NVI I was just going to go blind. But I am quite happy now that the trend has reversed and the threat of impending blindness is gone for good.

One of my interests (when I was very young) was to "understand" Bates. What he attempted to accomplish in
his 1913 study -- and why the study was terminated as it showed promise of more success.

I can "respect" medicine for many things. But not for that "shut-down".

In my opinion, the "termination" occurred for these reasons:

1. The majority-opinion did not "like" the idea of true-prevention.

2. Apathy. Most people don't have the motivation to take prevention seriously.

3. Most people think you are doing a "medical thing" when you read a Snellen eye-chart.
(That was the reason the Snellens were yanked from the classroom. That is not
fair nor reasonable).

4. The person must be older (as we are on imagination-blindness).

5. The 1913 study was a "threat" to the "standard minus" -- in that if more people
cleared their Snellen (as per the study), there would be a "distrust" of that minus lens.
(As Bates so clearly spelled out.)

==================

I am certain we need help with prevention. I am also certain that we need to
run a "second" 1913 effort.

Think that will ever happen? Where is the National Eye Institute -- when
we need them?

Otis
Reply
#24
Very nice.. . My 1st pair of glasses were over prescribed, as well. Sad

your comment: I never try to see these days. Let the objects come to your eyes and be happy with what you see and make no efforts.
my comment: Right on !!

Thanks for sharing your testimony !
Regards, Its Smile me
Reply
#25
Otis, I sent an email to your yahoo email account. thanks itsme
Reply
#26
itsme Wrote:Very nice.. . My 1st pair of glasses were over prescribed, as well. Sad

your comment: I never try to see these days. Let the objects come to your eyes and be happy with what you see and make no efforts.
my comment: Right on !!

Thanks for sharing your testimony !
Regards, Its Smile me

When my sister came here for vacation this year, I tested the vision of her two kids, and found that the eider son had 22/15 and the younger daughter had 14/20. My sister was worried that her six year old daughter could not see normally and was asking me if she should take her to the doctor. I told her not even to breathe the word 'eye doctor'. I told her that she will be probably be allright when she comes back next vacation if the eye doctor is kept out. If she still has problems next year, I told her we can teach her to use her eyes properly. I wanted to do that this time too, but the child would not listen to me and showed little interest in following my instructions and I decided not to force anything now. Maybe next year if necessary.

However I found the elder one with good vision to be quite brilliant and having wonderful memory while the myopic child had lesser ability to memorize. I asked them if they could see the letters swing - the keen eyed was prompt in telling me that not only the letters but the whole world seemed moving, but the myopic child did not nod assent but seemed confused.( as to why the world must swing).

I found my sister a bit myopic too( 20/30) and taught her some of the methods I do. After two months now, she said her vision is very sharp most of the time and occasionally gets slightly blurred. But she is keeping up the exercises.

Once I get back good vision I want to educate more people and warn them of the dangers of eye doctors and eye glasses ( atleast my friends and family). They will probably not listen to me now as I am still quite myopic. Atleast people can avoid that unnecessary first prescription and give themselves a good chance of having good vision for the rest of their lives. Some people will become myopic inspite of all this, but atleast their number will be much lesser as in the primitive societies.


S
Reply

TEST YOUR VISION AT HOME!
- Free Eye Chart PDFs

  • 20 ft, 10 ft, and Near Vision Charts
  • Letters Calibrated to Correct Printed Size
Download Now