R-4.0,L-4.5 to -1.25,-1.25

[sleepmaster4]

Proof my drivers license vision restriction got removed:

http://i.imgur.com/fhHWo4L.jpg

[sleepmaster4]

Knowing what I know now, it's hard to believe that anyone whose worst vision was in the -3s or better, would not do this eye stuff and get their drivers license vision restriction removed.

[rtdfgdfgdfgdfg]

how does someone with -4 get started to improve ?

[sleepmaster4]

Go cold turkey, no glasses or contact lenses.  If -4 is the worst you've ever been, start watching NFL football on TV from 8 ft away during daylight.  As you're watching, avoid trying to make out what you see.  If your eyes tear up, try to zone out to relax instead of blinking.  Also spend a lot of time outside walking around a lot in wide open areas.  Just watch out when you cross streets with -4 eyes, especially during twilight hours.  That's what I did to start out. 

[rtdfgdfgdfgdfg]

are you 20/20 now ?

[sleepmaster4]

My vision is not 20/20 now, but it's probably better than some who claim to have 20/20 vision if they base theirs on blur interpreting a familiar line on an eyechart on their wall.  At eye exams administered by an optometrist that involve an unfamiliar eyechart in a darkroom, I haven't yet been able to get beyond the 20/25 line.

Even if I could read the 20/20 line in the optometrist's exam, I'd still be reluctant to say I have 20/20 vision until my refractive error is at zero diopters.  That's why the book says Part 1.  I need to get to zero diopter 20/20 vision for there to be a Part 2 book.

[rtdfgdfgdfgdfg]

okay

so if a person has -4, what do they do to improve apart from stopping glasses ?

[sleepmaster4]

Spend a lot of time outside in wide open areas, preferably symmetrical wide open areas that are both wide and deep and deeper than they are wide.  One example is walking in the centers of long straight low traffic residential side streets.  Walking is better than standing still since walking is more challenging for the eyes, similar to how it's more challenging to focus a moving camera than a stationary one.

[rtdfgdfgdfgdfg]

Spend a lot of time outside in wide open areas, preferably symmetrical wide open areas that are both wide and deep and deeper than they are wide.  One example is walking in the centers of long straight low traffic residential side streets.  Walking is better than standing still since walking is more challenging for the eyes, similar to how it's more challenging to focus a moving camera than a stationary one.

.......okay

how would I know if I was improving

[sleepmaster4]

If your vision is truly better, at night the halos around lights will seem smaller.

When you walk around outside in centers of long straight side streets to improve vision, ideally at least 30 minutes a session, it's important to keep the eyes relaxed as much as possible for optimum results.  If your eyes are still tense even after trying to relax them, you may have to zone out a little when you walk.  Naturally zone out a little, not with drugs or alcohol.  Seem a little droopy-eyed if you have to.  That's the direct opposite of trying to make out what you see, which you should avoid like the plague.  I say that because sometimes it's tempting to test your vision to see what street signs you can read from a distance, or if you can see this or that object.

Palming eyes inside a darkroom for 20 minutes at a time can also help the eyes become more relaxed before you go outside for those 30 minute sessions.

I'd try to go down from -4 to -3 this way, and then start using the +.5 plus lens for up close work once you get you get to -3.

That's based on -4 being the worst your vision ever was.  If your vision was once -5, then it's going to be tougher to get down to -3 without plus lenses and you may have to start using plus lenses once your eyes improve to the -3.5 level.

[sleepmaster4]

Another way to tell if vision is truly getting better is if vision seems more acryllic.

[sleepmaster4]

I decided to answer some questions here as well.

For awhile, the +1.0 lens seemed too weak and the +1.25 lens seemed too strong. Leaving the +1.25 lens on for a half-second, "one-one" instead of the full "one-one-thousand", seemed to be the sweetspot between shaking eye shape out of its inertia and too much stress on the eyeball which is counterproductive. This may not matter in the first diopter of vision improvement, but by the third diopter the eye is more resistant to change. Using plus lenses for a half-second seemed to work best when looking at a laptop computer keyboard just after hours of looking into extreme distances outdoors.

Right now I'm working on moving my eyes left because I think further axial length shortening is only possible if the eyes are straight, so that plus lens stimulus tugs on the center of the back of the eyeball to make it less far back. Once that's achieved, it will be time to see if plus lenses work again. I first tested -1.25 two months after turning 40. So there's a few more years left till my mid 40s to figure this out before change in lens shape starts to lessen nearsightedness further without eyeball shape needing to change.

That appears to be what helped Peter Grunwald.  Someone said that Grunwald went from -10 to -1. If that's true, he likely went from -10 to something like -3 on eyeball shape change over many years, and -3 to -1 from lens shape change in old age:

https://www.eyebody.com/about-peter-grunwald/

Not a proponent of his method btw.