Poll

Achieved fastest reduction in diopter/snellen values using

print pushing 1 hour a day
0 (0%)
print pushiing 3 hours a day
0 (0%)
print pushing 5 hours a day or more
0 (0%)
distance gazing outside alone
0 (0%)
print pushing and distance gazing together
1 (100%)

Total Members Voted: 1

Author Topic: My Journey  (Read 2473 times)

Offline llambers

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
My Journey
« on: June 01, 2015, 02:58:18 PM »
I have been quite inspired by much of the material on this site and on others, and I feel it would be worthwhile, both as a way of furthering the collective knowledge of the community and as a way of supplying myself with motivation and encouragement, to begin posting on this forum, that I have hitherto benefited from. 

I have been myopic since about the third grade, which coincidentally coincided with the time I began to read the Harry Potter series and probably coincided with the time I began to spend more time inside and more time reading. 

Two years ago, according to the optometrist, I was -4.5 in my left and -5.5 in my right.  As of this past Saturday, I am now -4.5 in my left and -5.25 in my right.  I am 24.9 years of age, and am a white male.  I probably discovered this method about a year ago, and applied it for a time, but inconsistently and, I think, not for more than three months.  I am presently utilizing this method (and one other, which I will post about below).  I am not using an online Snellen chart or a printed out one, imagining (perhaps) that measuring the distance at which I can read text on my computer on Wikipedia (measured at the beginning of the day and throughout) is a worthwhile enough and more expedient means to measure improvement.  I recognize, based on personal experience, the importance of keeping a record, even to the point of daily measurement, in order to improve.

As of four days ago (and as of today - I have yet noted no improvement) I can see the letters "clearly" (I know this is subjective, but I try to gauge this quickly and rapidly, so as to attain some sense of accuracy) at 24.5 mm in the left and about 25 in the right.  What is confusing to me is that I notice no great difference in acuity between the right and the left, though apparently the optometrist did. 

Finally, and I know this is beyond controversial (it's cooly dismissed I think here), but I am also trying sungazing, largely based on the testimonies of a few individuals' accounts of its effects on youtube, and my own speculations on the effects that a ton of retinal dopamine at once might have on eye growth.  I recommend to all those curious on the link between retinal dopamine and bright light exposure (particularly blue light bright light exposure) and retinal dopamine the many studies, in the tens and twenties, linking these two phenomena.  As for the testimonials, the two that I found both reported "cures" of their myopia.  The video "sungazing how did I heal my eyes" (it's by a foreigner a little late in life to English) is the more explicit of the two and notes improvement from about -4 diopters to something considerably better than that (perfect in his language), at about 16-22 minute mark.  The method involves incrementally adding 10 seconds of time to staring at the sun daily (between sunrise and an hour after sunrise or between an hour before sunset and sunset), till one reaches 40 minutes.  I have no intention of going to 40 minutes.  The other effects reported by sungazers, I have no interest in, and in fact, fail to find in myself, upon now considerable casual observation.  The reason for the 1 hour window is the assumption that the stronger UV light at other times in the day have the potential to cause damage.  It's also worth noting that most of the actually reported cases of solar retinopathy (I am not of course mentioning here, the risk of cataracts) involve staring at eclipses and the midday sun, which is far, FAR brighter than the sun in that one hour window.   

I am desperate to see improvement (literally).  This is in part why I have adopted the sungazing method in addition to this method.  Having noted no improvement yet, however, I feel no need to rely solely on this potentially blinding silliness to achieve my goal. 

Any feedback/commentary/criticism/encouragement would be much appreciated.  Though

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: My Journey
« Reply #1 on: June 01, 2015, 04:53:20 PM »
Hi llambers,

I encourage you to continue with your journey. I would read this to understand the scientific motivation for prevention.

http://endmyopia.org/behind-the-scenes-jake-what-happened-to-the-site/#comment-341

You only learn - by trying.
« Last Edit: June 01, 2015, 06:17:08 PM by OtisBrown »

Offline llambers

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Re: My Journey
« Reply #2 on: June 01, 2015, 06:12:52 PM »
Thanks.  Consistency and record-keeping.  If I can maintain these, I should be alright. 

Offline llambers

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Re: My Journey
« Reply #3 on: June 13, 2015, 03:35:25 AM »
I have noted no real improvement since I began my more fastidious record keeping 2 weeks ago.  For those that noted FAST improvement (and I know that many people believe that noting can happen in this short an interval), but for those that noticed changes in less than a week, what could I be doing wrong. 

I try to read at the edge of blur on all occasions.  I think from now on I am going to try and record the amount of time I do so.  I rarely use plus lenses, because my vision is myopic enough that I can read from a comfortable distance of about a foot from the computer screen or book with blur (I don't need to create blur with plus lenses). 

I tried using the plus lens yesterday anyway, and found no significant feeling in the ciliary muscle, like I did when reading at a distance with my naked eye. 

I have several theories:

(1) I'm just not reading for a long enough.  This is why I am going to record the amount of time I read from now on.

(2) The blur that I induce in my print pushing is actually not severe enough.

(2) I'm reading on the computer.  Some of you I think have noted better results with books.  This ties in with the next theory below which is

(3) not enough time spent outside, exposing myself to blue light and retinal dopamine. 

(4) If I want fast results, I shouldn't be reading, I should be actively trying to trace edges of things at a distance,  There, was on this forum,  I know, an account of a poster's uncle who was motivated enough to stare at a Snellen for something like 2 hours a day.  I don't know that I have that motivation, especially without results.  Perhaps this is the final tedious solution to my problems. 

I understand that many of you discourage those that look for fast results, but fast results are a means to show us what works.  And I very much want to know what works. 

Offline llambers

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Re: My Journey
« Reply #4 on: June 13, 2015, 03:50:53 AM »
One more thing: I feel a pull on my ciliary muscles regardless of whether or not an object is near and far, at the edge of blur,, quite blurry, or quite clear.  I can induce this ciliary pull by focusing, by tracing edges at minute distances, which actually to an observer, results in a noticeable furrowing near the eyebrow.  Has anyone else noticed this phenomenon?  I get the impression that, in general, people are of the belief that one needs to be right at the edge of blur to contract the ciliary muscle.  But, like I said, I can trigger the same subjective feel of pulling at any distance, regardless of presence of blur. 

I should also note that I avoid almost entirely the use of minus lenses, and when I am not print pushing, I am walking around with my naked, unabetted natural eye.  I realize that this also could be an explanation for my poor performance to date, but I have also heard that people have noted good, if not superior results by going ennitrely without minus lens.  I have undercorrected minus lens (a pair of old glasses), but I only use them for driving.

Offline llambers

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Re: My Journey
« Reply #5 on: June 13, 2015, 04:22:17 AM »
Here's a posting of my measurements.   I measure my vision in terms of the number of centimeters away from my computer screen I can read a Wikipedia article.  I am, according to my latest examination at the optometrist's office (assuming no overprescription). -5.25 in the right and -4.5 in the left.  I have chosen to measure in this fashion because I find it more powerfully precise experimentally.  The hard part is determining what I call clear vision.  I am trying to do it quickly without too much thought (the closer you look and the longer think about what you look at, the more you notice how blurry something is).  Here are the measurements.
05/20/2015 - left - 24.5, right 25.25, together 22;
05/30/2015 - left - 24.5, right 24, together 22
05/31/2015 - L - 24.5, R - 24, T - 25
6/01/2015 - L - 24, R - 25, T - 24
6/02/2015 - L - 24.5, R - 24.5, T - 22
6/03/2015 - l - 24.5, R - 24.5, T - 25.5
6/04/2015 - L - 25.5, R - 23, T - 24
6/04/2015 - L - 25.5, R - 24, T - 23
6/05/2015 - L - 24.5, R - 24, T - 22.5
6/08/2015 - L - 24.5, R - 24.5, T - 23
6/10/2015 - L - 24.5, R - 23.0, T - 23m
6/13/2015 - L - 24.5, R - 23.5, T - 25, PP (7:12)
after an hour of print pushing, L - 26, R - 25
somewhere in between 20/200 and 20/100 (apparently)

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: My Journey
« Reply #6 on: June 13, 2015, 06:16:52 AM »
Hi llambers,

Vision at 10 inches.  Yes, you have confirmed that your refractive state, is about -4 diopters. (i.e., 1.00 / .25 = -4 diopters).  But I always prefer to empower myself by getting my own test lenses, my own Snellen, and hold up a -4 and determine if I can read the 20/30 to 20/20 line though my own -4 diopter lens. Yes, you seem to be over-prescribed by -1.25 diopters at this time.

I know it will be almost impossible to work with no minus lens.  In fact, for close work, you will need about -2 to -2.5 diopters to read at a normal distance.  I wish you skill with this work - but it does take a long time to get results.   I only wish you had been told about plus-prevention when you could still read the 20/40 to 20/60 lines. 

Some smart 14 year-old kids, managed to "figure out" how to get an wear a plus - and slowly get back out of it.  Here is Stirling's success story - to help you.

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

I wish all of us, had the "smarts" about this issue.  It is easier to get out of it, if you can still read the 20/40 to 20/60 line.


Here's a posting of my measurements.   I measure my vision in terms of the number of centimeters away from my computer screen I can read a Wikipedia article.  I am, according to my latest examination at the optometrist's office (assuming no overprescription). -5.25 in the right and -4.5 in the left.  I have chosen to measure in this fashion because I find it more powerfully precise experimentally.  The hard part is determining what I call clear vision.  I am trying to do it quickly without too much thought (the closer you look and the longer think about what you look at, the more you notice how blurry something is).  Here are the measurements.
05/20/2015 - left - 24.5, right 25.25, together 22;
05/30/2015 - left - 24.5, right 24, together 22
05/31/2015 - L - 24.5, R - 24, T - 25
6/01/2015 - L - 24, R - 25, T - 24
6/02/2015 - L - 24.5, R - 24.5, T - 22
6/03/2015 - l - 24.5, R - 24.5, T - 25.5
6/04/2015 - L - 25.5, R - 23, T - 24
6/04/2015 - L - 25.5, R - 24, T - 23
6/05/2015 - L - 24.5, R - 24, T - 22.5
6/08/2015 - L - 24.5, R - 24.5, T - 23
6/10/2015 - L - 24.5, R - 23.0, T - 23m
6/13/2015 - L - 24.5, R - 23.5, T - 25, PP (7:12)
after an hour of print pushing, L - 26, R - 25
somewhere in between 20/200 and 20/100 (apparently)
« Last Edit: June 13, 2015, 07:00:06 AM by OtisBrown »

Offline llambers

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Re: My Journey
« Reply #7 on: June 13, 2015, 07:32:30 AM »
Thank you for the reply.  I do, however, get the impression that the overprescription common in these higher myopia cases (of which I, unfortunately enough, am an instance of) may very well depend more on the person being examined than on the examiner.  I just used this website's tool to determine my actual diopter levels and received quite different diopter levels, depending on how I took the test, with a variance of up to 1 diopter!  In other words, I got between -5.5 diopter and -4 diopter, all due to how clear, how persnickety I was about how clear my vision needed to be.  This is why I am wary of trying to estimate my vision based on how perfectly clear I can make the image at the time.  Rather, when I record my cm lengths away from the computer screen, I merely try to go for the immediate impression of increased clearness.  In other words, I do it in a sort of slapdash, quick fashion.   The Snellen Chart works well in this fashion as well, testing not the clearness of the image, but your ability to read a line at a fixed distance.

Offline llambers

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Re: My Journey
« Reply #8 on: June 13, 2015, 07:44:38 AM »
Using this online Snellen Chart (http://www.smbs.buffalo.edu/oph/ped/IVAC/IVAC.html), at a distance of about 2 feet, I am able to read more than half the letters at the 20/80 line (half the letters being one individual's standard on this board).  According to this board (http://www.improve-vision-naturally.com/20-20-vision.html), this apparently translates, for me, to -2 diopters, which strikes me as a gross under-prescription, if prescribed (an under-prescription that yet would have benefited me when I was younger).  And yet according to Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snellen_chart#cite_note-2), a ratio of 5 out of 6 letters read is used for Snellen chart approximations.  Attaining to this ratio at 20/80, I can say that I actually am 20/80, at least according to the Buffalo website.  I'll have to check with a proper snellen later. 
« Last Edit: June 13, 2015, 07:54:36 AM by llambers »

Offline llambers

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Re: My Journey
« Reply #9 on: June 14, 2015, 03:31:44 AM »