Author Topic: How fast can you improve?  (Read 3199 times)

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
How fast can you improve?
« on: October 22, 2014, 03:45:45 AM »
Subject:  What is your current rate of improvement?

Here is an improvement of +1.00 diopters in five weeks.

Certainly, it should be possible to improve from -1 diopters to 0.0 diopters in three months - if the person had the motivation to wear the plus for all close work - during those three months.

Convert to Spherical-Equivalent.

For reference, my old prescription was:
OD -3.25, -0.75 Cyl, 180 Ax  (Equivalent:  -3.75 diopters)
OS -3.00, -0.75 Cyl, 160 Ax  (Equivalent:  -3.50 diopters )

My Normalized prescription is:
OD -2.50
OS -2.25
with no CYL correction.

That is indeed an improvement of about one diopter.  It is always good to check your own Snellen, to confirm these results.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2014, 05:37:34 AM by OtisBrown »

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: How fast can you improve?
« Reply #1 on: October 27, 2014, 06:09:10 AM »
Hi Jigsaw,

I would agree with you - but I think the average person can understand the concept of an "excessive prescription", as described here by Dr. Alex.

If the person actually CONFIRMS he passes the DMV, then he does not need a "reduced prescription" for near.  In fact his vision is going to be very clear for near.

Further 20/40 applies to 20 foot vision.  At 10 feet (as in watching T/V), is vision will be very sharp.

If a person is at 20/40 - he should not be wearing a minus lens - except for a minus in his car.  A person must have some common sense about this issue.

Obviously, if you are wearing -7 diopters, you are beyond the point where you can get back out of it.

My "opinion" is based on Drs. who have worked on recovery.  The recovery rate is about +1 diopter per year.  (See Dr. Nate's statement.)
My opinion is that few people will take the seven years to SLOWLY get back to 20/40 or so.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2014, 04:46:12 PM by OtisBrown »

Offline Ydgrunite

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 23
Re: How fast can you improve?
« Reply #2 on: October 27, 2014, 06:34:24 AM »
Obviously, if you are wearing -7 diopters, you are beyond the point where you can get back out of it.

That is your opinion based on your own experience.

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: How fast can you improve?
« Reply #3 on: October 27, 2014, 09:22:18 AM »
Hi Jigsaw,

Otis> You are totally correct.  The OD in his office believes that SCIENTIFIC-prevention (where you do all the measurements yourself, including, Visual Acuity, and Refract STATE), is totally impossible.  I would read the remarks by Vik Kumar OD, to confirm this issue.

JigSaw>  Sometimes I wonder if it would be better if there was one sub-forum devoted to myopia prevention and one sub-forum devoted to myopia rehab.  As someone who has read this board for quite a long time, I admit to having been confused at first by the intermingling of the two topics.  A casual reading makes one think a plus lens is a cure-all for myopia.  It's only a closer reading that shows that it's just a preventative measure, and its only role in rehabilitation is when the myopia is low.  I'm not sure how many people actually go to the effort to drill down and sort out the confusion.

Otis> I agree that there is endless confusion about this issue of prevention at 20/40, and -1 diopter, or the choice to do nothing about it at that point.  From Vik Kumar's statement -  it is obvious that he feels no obligation to help you -- when  prevention -- would be possible.

Otis> I believe that science shows that it will be possible - if the person will take this issue seriously.  But it is all to obvious, that almost no one will take prevention (at 20/40) seriously, so the optometrist feels no obligation to take prevention seriously.

Otis> The result is that you must know and understand that issue.  Then if you wish to restore both your visual acuity, and change your refractive state, you will have to learn to do that yourself.  This is my rejection of Vik Kumar and his belief system.

Otis> I will never say, "cure" or "therapy" when I mean self-prevention under your control.  I have no desire to "practice medicine", and this type of saving your vision, must not be considered "medicine".  I regret the conflict, but I am not responsible for the misunderstandings.

Otis> But I do say, that once you start wearing a minus lens, your vision goes down by -1/2 diopter per year, for each year you wear the minus.  This is WHY I argue for not even starting with a minus lens.  The minus lens is indeed "exacerbating" - in the extreme - but your OD will never volunteer this information to you.  That is the entire scientific issue.

Otis> Who decides what is science?

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: How fast can you improve?
« Reply #4 on: October 28, 2014, 06:33:28 AM »
Hi Jigsaw,

Two subjects 

1) Has a preventive program been proposed -- that could succeed?  See:

I consider this to be science-based. The study proposal will NEVER be accepted or conducted by the National Eye Institute.  I know why it will not be conducted.  Do you know why medical people will object, and will not help (tragically) in any way?

All I do say is that, restricted to starting 20/50, and -1 diopter, it could succeed as science.  But it would never succeed as medicine. 

Why?  Because it is difficult.

But never say (and medical people insist) that it will 'never work', so we will not "permit it" to be conducted.  This "blocking" of a scientific study, because it is "not medicine", is the real reason there can be no progress at all.

2) Do medical people support prevention - for their own children.

Yes, in other countries, you will find that the concept of plus-prevention is more fully discussed.  But the arguments are severe.  Here are some remarks by Dr. Kaisu Viikari, who pioneered plus-prevention in Finland.  She had complete success with her own son.


From Kaisu Viikair:   (The Author is from Finland)  10/2014
Subject:  Repetition Est Mater Studiorum   (Clarification by Otis Brown)

I had given quite a few lectures in Stockholm, and as the Swedish Opticians wanted to see in
practice how the whole examination procedure takes place, they came to hold their meeting in my surgery in 1987.

And now a long time has elapsed, two generations since the publishing of my work Tetralogia in 1972.

As I just happened to hit upon empty promises and sentences of nice thoughts in the Journal Oftalmolog  (Ophthalmology)
which provoked me to attack them rudely, I sincerely hope that the time also now is ripe for them to hear what the actual
point of the issue is.

In my first books I described in detail how my surgery was particularly advantageous for all my special arrangements
for visus examinations.

So, in the beginning, when the patients came in, I snatched their glasses and began testing with different distances
in order to get a rough estimation of their latent hyperopia.
Addendum: an introduction to the essence of accommodation

At this point, I owe my readers an apology.

Even if I personally had this insight as early as in 1972, I know that this clarification is still necessary.

As I had exceptional possibilities of putting my insight into practice to the point of providing evidence and
I had enough energy to do everything that was required, I argue that the odds of ever finding
another person who could achieve all this are non-existent.

To develop an understanding of accommodation in the eye, you need to observe a very far-reaching event
clinically, gain the physiological knowledge explained on p. 41 of my book Panacea, and observe how
accommodation works in practice.

This process, using longer distances than what we are accustomed to and strong fogging, is the only way of forcing
the accommodation muscle, or musculus ciliaris, to relax voluntarily.

The reason for this is that the accommodation event is triggered automatically.

You can prevent it by imagining that you are walking along a deserted beach, without focusing, with no focal point for your eyes.

The patient is then given ”basic” fogging glasses, the strength of which is varied, and on top of those, so-called
 Confirmation test glasses that can produce rapid changes in the dioptres (+/-1.0. +/-2.0, described in my work Learn to
Understand and Prevent Myopia, pp. 18-19.) The changes must be rapid to offer opportunities for observing the momentary
relaxation of the cramp!

This will produce a highly reliable basis for evaluating the patient’s hyperopia.

This is why the setting permitted by my apartment was irreplaceable and surely helps patients to understand
the ingenuity of the arrangements.
As accommodation, or an ability to focus at different distances, is built in our eyes and triggered automatically,
it has been impossible to prevent!

However, this very process can prevent accommodation as much as possible, allowing an estimation of the eye’s
hyperopic status, at least to an extent that is adequate for treatment purposes.

As digitalisation takes over the world, being familiar with accommodation is more important than ever before.

It thus is the key solution, which nearly got left out from this revision of the lesson! For a thorough
explanation of the accommodation event, see page 41 of my work Panacea, the section on Fogging. Its less well known form,
negative accommodation, is particularly important.

The apartment in which I had my surgery was conveniently located on the second floor, and I first brought the patients
to look out at the licence plates of cars parked in the courtyard.


Otis> This "licence plate" check was more accurate that more conventional visual acuity tests.  Dr. Kailsu is indeed a "believer" in true prevention, and supports it a completely as possible.

Otis> I would compare her remarks with the optometrist Vik Kumar, to see the drastic and profound difference in opinion of these two fine people.

Otis> Rather than engage in verbal, "combat", I just respect them by calling plus prevention, the second-opinion, and seek to have you properly informed of how to do it - before you go very much below 20/40.

Otis> The science of plus prevention is very good.  But few people take science seriously. Here is a study that shows that the plus, used intelligently, and correctly, can have the effect of prevention, and some recovery from 20/40 to 20/60.

But of course, you can perhaps not understand it.  Science is never easy.

Otis> Who decides what is science?

Hi Otis,

Good question.   I'm guessing it's the United States, and particuarly, monied interests in the United States.

There were a couple of posts on Alex's board on how behavioral ophthamology was, and is, commonplace in the Soviet Union/former Soviet Union.  With less money to go around --  among both the populace and the medical community -- folks made do with practicing good vision habits n preference to adopting the minus prescription habit.  There had to be either science of folk wisdom behind this kind of practice.  If it was science, I'd love to know where those studies went.
« Last Edit: November 12, 2014, 06:26:29 AM by OtisBrown »

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: How fast can you improve?
« Reply #5 on: October 28, 2014, 04:20:20 PM »
Hi Jigsaw,

I have her book, and her site - if you wish to read it.

As far as what she states - REMEMBER she believes that

1) The plus is totally safe,
2) The plus is wise for  threshold prevention
3) She went "against" the prevailing orthodox theory that any prevention was totally out of the question.

You can glean this from her writings.  My point is that the orthodox theory (that prevention is impossible) is challenged by medical people.  There is a need for a "breath of fresh air" with people who have a strong desire to prevent, who can still read the 20/40 to 20/50 line.

From Kaisu Viikair:   (The Author is from Finland)  10/2014
Subject:  Repetition Est Mater Studiorum   (Clarification by Otis Brown)

Hi Otis,

I've heard of Kaisu Viikair before and her early recognition of the faulty course of vision medicine is pretty admirable.  Ever since, I've always been wondering about her "practical" advice.  I've seen refernces to her vague suggesttion to "see space", but that is unhelpful without knowing what it means.  Have you ever come across any of her writings that describe such terms in detail?

« Last Edit: October 28, 2014, 07:07:21 PM by OtisBrown »

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: How fast can you improve?
« Reply #6 on: November 11, 2014, 04:43:12 PM »

Subject:  How fast can I get out of 20/40 vision?  How fast can I change my refractive STATE from -1 diopters to 20/20?

Obviously no one can guarantee any results - if you never read your own Snellen chart.  Further, I suggest you measure your own refractive state -- to confirm results.

I suggest that a positive change of +1 diopter is possible - if the person can STICK with wearing the plus for one year.  Sadly, few people have that kind of intense interest and motivation.

Here Dr. Nate shows a change of about 1.25 diopters per year.  But it is indeed a slow proposition from -6.5 diopters.  I think a far better idea is to start the "reversal" before you go below -1 diopters.


By Dr. Nate:

A quick question about when to decrease normalized prescription.

I started with a prescription of -6.75. I heard about myopia rehab at gettingstronger, and did it on my own for about 2 years. At the start of this year I had a trip to the optometrist, and was told that my fully corrected prescription was -4.75. I started the year with a normalized prescription of -4.25. This year I’ve slowly worked my way down to -3.25, trying to make an adjustment of .25 diopters every 2-3 months.

I can currently read the 20/20 line with my -3.25 lenses. It is initially blurry, but I can “pull” it into focus without too much effort. It’s pretty clear once I pull it into focus, but their is a residual “haze”, that I can’t resolve. I also find that I can’t really drive at night with my current glasses-I need to go up a notch or two.

My question is: have I pushed too far? Is there danger in making an adjustment before my eyes are ready, that will slow my progress? Which line should I be able to read with the normalized lenses, and even more important, how clear should that line be?


(From Dr. Alex.)