Getting Stronger: Discussion Forum

Discussion Topics => Rehabilitation => Topic started by: rtdfgdfgdfgdfg on October 09, 2014, 05:32:46 AM

Title: Do I need to find the active focus point when using plus lenses
Post by: rtdfgdfgdfgdfg on October 09, 2014, 05:32:46 AM
Or is the simple act of wearing them enough to change my eyesight ,

So, will using plus lenses, but not at the active focus blur point, still help ?
Title: Re: Do I need to find the active focus point when using plus lenses
Post by: Robin mn on October 14, 2014, 01:14:53 AM
Use suitable plus lenses so that you can get a useful reading distance.Keep the text
at the blur range and read.You can mix up by using naked eyes and print pushing.Also
Remember to avoid full minus for all close up as best as u can.Just stay in the blur range for close up.This should help releasing at least some of the close up strain.This is most important without which all other activities become
futile.If you have read Todd's blog I would also encourage you to start reading
Frauenfeldclinic.com.There are tons of articles regarding differential and normalized prescriptions etc and forum posts that may guide you.Just stay positive and look for more motivation as you move on
Title: Re: Do I need to find the active focus point when using plus lenses
Post by: Steven on October 16, 2014, 11:14:55 AM
So basically you are finding much more beneficial to use a soft enough plus lens in order to still be able to force the eye into focusing element in the blur ?

I had some success with using very strong plus lenses but unlike the minus glasses that always keep the eye focusing - a too strong plus makes the eye to have nothing to focus on.

Am i right ?

Which method worked the best in your case (forum members please answer) ?

Thank you !
Title: Re: Do I need to find the active focus point when using plus lenses
Post by: OtisBrown on October 16, 2014, 06:31:04 PM
Hi Steven,

I think it is very difficult to get out of any more than 20/40 to 20/60, or about -1.0 to -1.75 diopters.  I would not ask a person to work on "plus-prevention", unless I thought he had a REASONABLE hope of objective success.

By that, I mean the person actually reads his own Snellen, and objectively confirms he passes the DMV line.  This takes long-term wearing of a plus for all near work.

I wear about a +2.5 for the typing and reading I am doing now.  I can read and write with NO LENS.  But I want to keep my self-confirmed 20/20.  I do not consider self-protection, to be medical in any sense of the word.

I know most people do not even understand the concept - so they should learn.  I do not engage in "wishful thinking" about this issue.

The concept is that you do not "fix the obvious" with a minus lens, but you get at the "root cause" of negative status, by wearing a reasonable-strong plus for near.

Why do so few people fail to understand that basic concept?

There is no progress - until there is true understanding.  No OD will ever help you with this.  You just have to be wise about that issue.


So basically you are finding much more beneficial to use a soft enough plus lens in order to still be able to force the eye into focusing element in the blur ?

I had some success with using very strong plus lenses but unlike the minus glasses that always keep the eye focusing - a too strong plus makes the eye to have nothing to focus on.

Am i right ?

Which method worked the best in your case (forum members please answer) ?

Thank you !
Title: Re: Do I need to find the active focus point when using plus lenses
Post by: OtisBrown on October 16, 2014, 08:10:07 PM
Hi  Jigsaw,

Jigsaw>  Otis recently had an engineer report his success at improving his moderate myopia by exclusively using the plus (i.e., apparently for both close-up and distance).  I for one am skeptical because there were no details.  (Most of us experience things like clear flashes, double vision and so on tht are so extraordinary that it's hard not to talk about.  Yet not a word on any of this kind of phenomena from Otis's engineer.)

Otis> Several issues.  1)  I do not know what any given person might accomplish.  2)  I was lucky to get cataract surgery, that "reset" my vision to about +1/4 diopter.  3) My interest is to preserve my distant vision, by using exclusively a plus for near (even though I do not need it).  It is my belief, that a truly dedicated "plus preventor" like Musa, can slowly and objectively exceed the 20/40 line, and eventually get close to 20/20. (Refraction zero diopters).  4) My analysis validated Todd Becker's success.  5) Todd wore a plus for a long time, and he knew how to use it correctly. 6) I helped by nephew to understand that if he did not wear the plus, (at 20/40, at age 14), his vision would go DOWN by -1/2 diopter per year - for each year in school.  He took it as a personal goal, and wore the plus, when it "got blurry out there".  At age 45, he still wears the plus, when he sees that it is necessary.  He quits wearing it, when not necessary, obviously.  But only he knows of his own success.  (But he knows about the Eskimos and their total loss of their distant vision - from near work.  This is now a universal scientific truth - that no OD will tell you about.  So you have to learn it on your own.)

Otis> There are people who I thought would have no chance of getting to 20/40 (like the engineer who wrote himself up), and succeeded, and others who I thought should succeed, and did not.   I do not attempt to predict your results - for that reason.

Otis> If you have a "mild" prescription, say about -2 diopters, I would suggest you are automatically over-prescribe by one diopter.  The one thing I do recommend strongly is that you take that -2 off, and begin checking your own Snellen, objectively.  Just doing "exercise" with  no idea of what you see - is a waste of your time.

Otis> But assuming you actually do check, you might find you read most of the 20/40 to 20/60 line.  At that point, with long-term motivation, I think you could get to 20/40, in about six months -- if you have the motivation to do it.

Otis> But this is like a "diet", which most people will quit after about one month.  But that is up to you.  If you do not understand the reason why it is both wise and necessary, you will not do it. 

Otis> In my opinion, if you even BEGIN wearing a minus lens - your situation gets rapidly out-of-control.  This was exactly Raphaelson's statement, by calling the minus, "poison". He was TOTALLY CORRECT.

Otis> This is where pilot Brian Severson made himself successful.  This is because HE DID NOT QUIT.  He knew he has to pass 20/20 at home, before he went for the FAA exam.  He knew I was a pilot - who supported his goal.  It took him about six months to get there.

Otis> I think any minus slowly destroys your vision.  I am certain that Dr. Bates judged it the same way I do.  His methods were different, but the goal was indeed the same.

Otis> I urge you to continue this discussion - based on the fact that we all believe that Todd was successful - from a mild prescription.

Otis> No OD or MD can protect you. You have to do it all yourself.  I can give you suggestions, once you report your Snellen. But in fact, no one reports anything.  You are not helping yourself - if you do not check.

+++++

My major concern:  I never say "cure", only self-prevention for the following reason, stated by Dr. Prentice.  (No one medical can ever help you with this.  That is why I do prevention, including refraction myself.)

http://myopiafree.i-see.org/prent.txt

What I can now add, is that if you do not wear the plus, as suggested by Dr. Prentice, your vision simply goes down at a rate of -1/2 diopter per year.

Dr. Prentice DID NOT KNOW THIS.  This is not a "scare tactic" to get you to wear the plus.  It is now scientific truth. This is why no one can "cure" myopia.  This document should always be the START of a conversation - if the person is serious about getting out of -1 diopter.

I bear no ill-will towards anyone with a medical title.  It is just that you have to be wise enough to start prevention (and the tedious wearing of a plus) before you go much below 20/40.

All of this makes me sad -- because the information I *need* is systematically with held from me.  I can not make an intelligent decision about prevention, unless I am told scientific truth. 

Then, with scientific truth, I can start taking prevention actions, that will be effective. Or if I take "plus wearing" to be tedious, I will most likely be unable to get out of it, because I chose the wrong course of action.

I feel cheated, because my intelligence and potential self-motivation were not respected. This is not "medical prevention", it is rather scientific prevention.



Title: Re: Do I need to find the active focus point when using plus lenses
Post by: Robin mn on October 17, 2014, 09:36:33 PM
Hi everyone,
 As Todd mentioned in his articles plus lens do not come into question for high myopes.It is absolutely obsolete in order to get stimulus for improvement for distance use as one is always only in the blur which gives zero scope for improvement as the eyes have to do just too much.I do use plus lens (1.25d) only while reading for close up like while browsing the Internet on my ipod etc.The reason I use it is it gives me a more defined blur distance and by using which I feel I get more improvement.
Title: Re: Do I need to find the active focus point when using plus lenses
Post by: warnbd on October 20, 2014, 08:47:59 AM
Jigsaw,

Given that you have been trying the "hocus focus" deep blur method, can you compare the rate of progress with the rate of progress achieved with the edge-of-blur focus pushing method?  Thus if I have a finite amount of time each day, I would want to use the method that makes the most progress per day/week.  I have tried to get Nick to quantify his results (with hocus focus) but have not seen any response as of this post.  I have done pretty well with the Becker method (now at 20/40), but I am open to other strategies if they work. 

warnbd