Been using pluses for almost two months. Definite improvements!

[MINA]

Hey guys,

I don't really remember when my vision started to deteriorate, but it was definitely around the time my computer use started to increase. Over time, as computer use increased, my vision genuinely got worse. This continued for many years until I seriously knew 100% that my vision simply wasn't as good as it used to be (I'm 19 right now). I read a lot of stuff online about improving vision, Bates method, etc., but nothing was really convincing or had any scientific backup like the plus lens theory did. Using plus lenses actually made sense, and I figured I had nothing to lose so I gave it a try.

Interestingly, I started off with a +1.25, and had scheduled an appointment with an optometrist for the following week. I hadn't seen an eye doctor in close to a decade so I figured might as well go and check out how bad my vision really is, and for glaucoma etc. (though I genuinely didn't go there expecting much). It's a HUGE coincidence that the day I had my eye exam was the same day I started seeing vision improvement. For some reason, my vision had cleared up exponentially, after only a week! (at this time I didn't have a Snellen so I wasn't 100% sure what my acuity was). However, I had my eye exam, and walked out without a prescription for glasses, so naturally I was happy.

I continued using the plus lenses for about another month and frequently experienced clear flashes, and less eye fatigue. Maybe 1-2 days out of the week I would experience "clearer vision." Over time however, my vision became more stable. I also remember that before I started using the pluses, my vision would always deteriorate throughout the day, and by nighttime, my eyes would just be fatigued and blurred. Now however, it maybe only deteriorates 10-20% by nighttime, which is great in comparison.

So a little while later, I printed a Snellen and start taking measurements. After three weeks (at which point I had moved up to +2s), I was easily reading the 20/30-20/40 line. Some days I would use eye drops for dry eyes (it helped with eye burning, etc.) and that would usually allow me to accurately read most of the 20/20 line. This wasn't consistent though; some days were 20/20, some 20/30. AND BETTER YET, about a week later, for the first time ever, I was able to read most of the 20/16 line (though I had to slightly squint). I was definitely happy with the progress.

It's been almost two months so far, and I've been using +2.5's for all close work for almost a month now. For the most part, it seems as though my improvement has slowed down, for whatever reason. Regardless, I'm continuing with the plus lenses and hope to someday get to 20/15-20/10! I know I still have a lot of room for improvement because I would sometimes use a -1 lens to look around, and measure my Snellen (I could get to about 20/10, though the lens I use is my mom's progressive lens, so it's a bit annoying), and I know my vision isn't perfect yet.

As it stands, I started using plus lenses at the end of April, and made two jumps in diopter strength: from +1.25 to +2, then to +2.5. I'll continue to use these for maybe another month or so, or until I feel like I want to move up again.

ANYWAY, many thanks to Todd and Otis for all their contributions and appeals to nothing but pure science!

-------

* Questions

First, sometimes I would notice that my eyes would get red after wearing the glasses for prolonged periods of time (though my eyes tend to get redder than most people's anyways), so is this normal or expected? Though if it isn't normal I wouldn't really mind, they tend to clear up by morning anyway. I figure it could just be eye strain/fatigue, which I assume I'm more prone to.

Second, how necessary is it to take breaks from the glasses? Sometimes I would catch myself wearing them for 1-2+ hours straight, without a break, which could explain the eye strain.

Lastly, would it just be better off to wear the plus lenses all the time, or whenever possible, in order to maximize the total time spent "distance-viewing?" I assumed that increasing the daily amount of blur would better stimulate the eye to focus farther.

Thanks!

[OtisBrown]

Hi Mina,

Otis> You ask a number of questions - and that is always important.  I always recommend CONSISTENCY on a Snellen - so I put a bright light on it and read at 20 feet - perhaps once a week.   I also consider reading an passing the 20/40 line to be critical - for myself.  Too many people want "perfect" and they are always disappointed.   Getting to and reading the 20/25 to 20/20 line is all I will ever need or require. 

Mina> As it stands, I started using plus lenses at the end of April, and made two jumps in diopter strength: from +1.25 to +2, then to +2.5. I'll continue to use these for maybe another month or so, or until I feel like I want to move up again.

Otis>  Your increase in plus strength is a very good indication of success - from April to June.  I only advocate that a person be wise about these efforts, and understand that it does take time to get excellent long-term results.  You are looking for long-term change, and that will take perhaps six to nine months.  I check my vision with a mild "plus" +1/2 diopters, to see if I can read the 20/20 line through that lens.  If I can, my vision is truly excellent - and my "night vision" is very good.

Otis> The necessity of our world - long-term close work - does take our "distant vision" down - sad to say.  It takes a very wise person to realize you do not "fix the obvious with a minus lens".  No you fix the problem with a "plus" at near.  That is the basic idea of the plus - but checking your Snellen for a reasonable, objective visual  acuity is critical.  I always verify my Snellen BEFORE I go for any exam.  If they "write" a prescription, I thank them, put is on my desk, read my Snellen at 20/20, and ignore the prescription.  But I make certain of my vision.  I have no problem with a medical person looking for medical conditions (and I insist on it) But when it comes to a "prescription" - I do that myself.

(More later.)

[OtisBrown]

Dear Mina -

Otis>  We all ask questions that tend to be a mix of "medical questions", and then practical "plus-prevention" questions.  That is reasonable, but I try to avoid giving pure-medical advice.  What I state is *my* opinion of what I should do to protect my distant vision through the school years.  I go to an ophthalmologist, but I feel I can not ask him to do what I must do for myself.  From truly basic science, it is clear that long-term near is the reason - that my natural eyes assume a negative status.  If the science behind that statement were not accurate - I would not be posting here.

Mina> Questions

Mina> First, sometimes I would notice that my eyes would get red after wearing the glasses for prolonged periods of time (though my eyes tend to get redder than most people's anyways), so is this normal or expected?

Otis> Personal answer.  I would probably "quit" for a day or two.  But in the long run, knowing what I know now, I would wear the plus.  One man, Stirling Colgate suggested "headaches".  But he choose to continue wearing the plus - since the benefits wear greater than these issues. 

Mina> Though if it isn't normal I wouldn't really mind, they tend to clear up by morning anyway. I figure it could just be eye strain/fatigue, which I assume I'm more prone to.

Second, how necessary is it to take breaks from the glasses? Sometimes I would catch myself wearing them for 1-2+ hours straight, without a break, which could explain the eye strain.

Otis> This is again personal. The pure-purpose of the plus is to get rid of the "near".  (You can call it strain-relief if you wish.)  But once you get comfortable, I would wear the plus for all close work, until my self-measured refractive state were slightly positive.  But the real result it that you will see 20/25 to 20/20, very consistently.  (Again, I do not "worry" about better-than 20/20.)

Mina> Lastly, would it just be better off to wear the plus lenses all the time, or whenever possible, in order to maximize the total time spent "distance-viewing?"

Otis> Mina - that is what I would do.  I suggested this to my Nephew, at age 14.  (I do not threated people - I just tell them the truth.) I said that for each year in school - his vision would "go down" by -1/2 diopters.  That means that, as you go down, you start wearing the plus, until you get back to the 20/25 to 20/20 range.  That is what he did, and what I do.

Mina> I assumed that increasing the daily amount of blur would better stimulate the eye to focus farther.

Otis> At least for me, and my explaining, our eyes are "designed" and must live in a "distant" environment.  The plus (optically) moves that "near to far" for us.  The long-term wearing of the plus - does exactly that.  But this is about the need for it, and the fact that it will take 6 months to "get there".  I know that many people "fear" the plus, but I try to over-come my "fear" by science and knowledge.  It takes "personal boldness" and commitment to continue your success.  I always appreciate your questions - even if my answers an not perfect.

[Todd Becker]

Mina,

Thanks for sharing your story.  You've made good progress in a relatively short time.  

It's been almost two months so far, and I've been using +2.5's for all close work for almost a month now. For the most part, it seems as though my improvement has slowed down, for whatever reason. Regardless, I'm continuing with the plus lenses and hope to someday get to 20/15-20/10! I know I still have a lot of room for improvement because I would sometimes use a -1 lens to look around, and measure my Snellen (I could get to about 20/10, though the lens I use is my mom's progressive lens, so it's a bit annoying), and I know my vision isn't perfect yet.

As it stands, I started using plus lenses at the end of April, and made two jumps in diopter strength: from +1.25 to +2, then to +2.5. I'll continue to use these for maybe another month or so, or until I feel like I want to move up again.

Progress with anti-corrective lenses is typically rapid at first, then usually slows down.  This is not unusual.

First, sometimes I would notice that my eyes would get red after wearing the glasses for prolonged periods of time (though my eyes tend to get redder than most people's anyways), so is this normal or expected? Though if it isn't normal I wouldn't really mind, they tend to clear up by morning anyway. I figure it could just be eye strain/fatigue, which I assume I'm more prone to.

Second, how necessary is it to take breaks from the glasses? Sometimes I would catch myself wearing them for 1-2+ hours straight, without a break, which could explain the eye strain.

Lastly, would it just be better off to wear the plus lenses all the time, or whenever possible, in order to maximize the total time spent "distance-viewing?" I assumed that increasing the daily amount of blur would better stimulate the eye to focus farther.

A number of people have reported redness -- either from wearing plus lenses that are too strong, or wearing the lenses for too long.  That's an indication of eye strain.  It is a sign that you need to back off.  I don't advocate wearing plus lenses all the time.   Think of plus lens therapy as "weight lifting for the eyes".  You wouldn't carry around heavy weights all the time or lift weight for hours on end.   Anti-corrective lenses stimulate the eye to elongate, but it is important to get adequate rest and to take breaks.  The key is to alternate between close work and distance viewing.  There is no hard-and-fast rule, but I would suggest 2-4 breaks an hour.

Good luck with your progress and keep us posted.

Todd

[MINA]

Many thanks to both Otis and Todd for their quick replies:

I always recommend CONSISTENCY on a Snellen - so I put a bright light on it and read at 20 feet - perhaps once a week.   I also consider reading an passing the 20/40 line to be critical - for myself.  Too many people want "perfect" and they are always disappointed.   Getting to and reading the 20/25 to 20/20 line is all I will ever need or require. 

Yes; I've been consistently measuring 20/20 for about two weeks now. Sure I guess it's "good enough," but in either case I'll continue wearing the pluses and see whether acuity continues to improve.

I check my vision with a mild "plus" +1/2 diopters, to see if I can read the 20/20 line through that lens.  If I can, my vision is truly excellent - and my "night vision" is very good.

I've actually tried this, but it seems to completely distort my accuracy (even with only a +0.5). And this makes me wonder: if you can read the 20/20 through a plus lens, wouldn't that suggest you could read below the 20/20 (e.g. 20/15 or better) with just your naked eye?

That is the basic idea of the plus - but checking your Snellen for a reasonable, objective visual  acuity is critical.  I always verify my Snellen BEFORE I go for any exam.  If they "write" a prescription, I thank them, put is on my desk, read my Snellen at 20/20, and ignore the prescription.  But I make certain of my vision.  I have no problem with a medical person looking for medical conditions (and I insist on it) But when it comes to a "prescription" - I do that myself.

I completely agree. It's like talking to a wall trying to convince someone that YOU as an individual have objectively improved your vision. Only the individual can assess for himself and "feel" whether vision has improved. There's no placebo effect.

Think of plus lens therapy as "weight lifting for the eyes".  You wouldn't carry around heavy weights all the time or lift weight for hours on end.   Anti-corrective lenses stimulate the eye to elongate, but it is important to get adequate rest and to take breaks.  The key is to alternate between close work and distance viewing.  There is no hard-and-fast rule, but I would suggest 2-4 breaks an hour.

As for the weight lifting, I would assume that using more "weight," (in this case, a stronger plus lens) would be responsible for better "gains" (i.e. hyperopic growth). But on the other hand, if you use lighter "weights" (i.e. weaker plus), wouldn't that just be like endurance training for your muscles/eyes? So maybe wearing a stronger plus for near work, and a weaker plus for everything else. Just my theory.

[OtisBrown]

Hi Mina,

Otis>  By your own intelligence and wisdom - you can sort out what you will do.  I emphasize the need for long-term wearing of a plus, when in school or college, because of the massive data that shows that it is necessary.  As an "Engineer", I learned that if I want a job done RIGHT - I must do it myself.  This is why I teach self-checking, and objective testing with some mild plus and minus lenses.  (There are good reasons to take this additional step.)  That is a "confidence builder" for myself.  Most people who monitor their Snellen see their visual acuity "jump around" and are concerned.  That is just plain NORMAL. In fact to make a good measurement - you must take the average over several  days - to get even a good idea of where you stand.  Since you see 20/20 (as flashes), and can read through a +2.5 diopter - you are in good shape.  But to get the change you need for SOLID 20/20, it will take systematic and long-term wearing of a plus, to finally get there.

Otis>  I check my vision with a mild "plus" +1/2 diopters, to see if I can read the 20/20 line through that lens.  If I can, my vision is truly excellent - and my "night vision" is very good.  I also check with a -1/2 diopter to see if is makes the 20/20 line any sharper. 

Mina>  I've actually tried this, but it seems to completely distort my accuracy (even with only a +0.5). And this makes me wonder: if you can read the 20/20 through a plus lens, wouldn't that suggest you could read below the 20/20 (e.g. 20/15 or better) with just your naked eye?

Otis>  There are strong personal reasons why I look for my refractive status to be slightly positive (i.e., read the 20/20 line THOUGH a plus 0.5 diopter lens.  What you say is true - when your vision improves further (after six months) - you should be able to do that.  But equally WHEN you do that, your eye-chart vision will exceed the 20/20 line, and your NIGHT vision will be very good.  It is just an extra check I prefer to use on myself.

Otis>  What most people have a problem with - is the idea that, in school, your refractive STATE moves negative from all that close work.  The scientific fact is - that is does.  That means that the "plus" is not a "cure", because in the long-term, monitoring your Snellen, you will simply "drift down" again.  There is no failure, it is totally natural.  The solution is to just re-start the wearing of a plus, when your distant vision "comes down" from 20/20.  I know  my perspective is perhaps different from most - but that is where your own intelligence and self-motivation will play the important role for you.

Otis> What is difficult - is just making a long term commitment to do this.  Wearing the plus is not that difficult. But understanding WHY it is necessary - is indeed difficult, because it takes so long to see the final results.  Keep up the commitment and I think you will succeed.

[MINA]

There are strong personal reasons why I look for my refractive status to be slightly positive (i.e., read the 20/20 line THOUGH a plus 0.5 diopter lens.  What you say is true - when your vision improves further (after six months) - you should be able to do that.  But equally WHEN you do that, your eye-chart vision will exceed the 20/20 line, and your NIGHT vision will be very good.  It is just an extra check I prefer to use on myself.

Yeah this is so true; I notice that during the day, when there's abundant sunshine, I definitely notice how much my vision has improved. When it comes to night-vision however (or even just dim/shady/cloudy areas), it seems that barely, if anything, has changed. That's why from my experience, it seems that 20/20 during the day is more like 20/40 at night (roughly). Therefore, to get 20/20 at night, one must go beyond the 20/20 on the Snellen when measured in strong light.

What is difficult - is just making a long term commitment to do this.  Wearing the plus is not that difficult. But understanding WHY it is necessary - is indeed difficult, because it takes so long to see the final results.  Keep up the commitment and I think you will succeed. 

I agree. Over time, I've found that it's just natural wearing the plus lenses. Whenever I sit down at my computer, it just became habit to reach for my glasses. People just seem to always want the "easy" way out, and just resort to minus lenses. It's funny because either way you're wearing glasses: either minus which will worsen your vision, or plus which will prevent and/or reverse myopia. But you're right; understanding why is the most important part.

[OtisBrown]

Dear Mina -

You are very insightful about all these issues.  (With all due respect - the public walking in 'off the street' expects *exclusively* that their vision will be made very-sharp with a strong minus lens).  They do not expect, nor will they "accept", any doctor who challenges their intellect and suggests that they PERSONALLY avoid wearing the minus (at 20/40), and always wear the plus for ALL close work. 

This is where I draw the line and insist that I am never a "patient", nor do I go to a "doctor".  Nor, for that matter, if the refractive state of my natural eyes is slightly negative (i.e., 20/40 and self-measured -1.0 diopters), I will stay at that value.  This is not "anti-medicine", but rather it is personal educated engineering judgment on my (and your) part.  It is you personally making an entire series of judgments - that lead you to wear the plus properly.  My insistence that a person get some low-cost 'test' lenses, and "see for himself", is just part of that process.  To do all of this myself - is indeed VERY low-cost.  But even that is not the issue.

Mina>  I agree. Over time, I've found that it's just natural wearing the plus lenses. Whenever I sit down at my computer, it just became habit to reach for my glasses. People just seem to always want the "easy" way out, and just resort to minus lenses. It's funny because either way you're wearing glasses  either minus which will worsen your vision, or plus which will prevent and/or reverse myopia. But you're right; understanding why is the most important part

Otis> When I report or show myself measuring my refractive STATE myself - I consider this as part of an engineering goal - and not a medical goal.  When I suggest checking your refractive state (i.e., reading 20/20 through a +1/2 diopter lens) I think that is a better method to ensure your night vision.  (This is about so-called night-myopia, or blank-field myopia.) But, for a person who gets to 20/20, and better - then I think that check is the best one (even if you can see 20/20 to 20/15 as I do.)

Otis> I don't know anything about your private life (and probably don't want to know) but I know explicitly - that if I am entering a four year college with refractive status, my refraction will change by -1.7 diopters in four years.  (You can, and should check this yourself - if you do not trust my statement.) Virtually no OD or MD will trust your intellect to understand this issue.  The feel you are not wise enough to understand and take actions yourself to protect your distant vision.  This is truly why I am not a "patient", and this is not a medical issue.  If you future life means long-term near work, then the only answer is self measurement with plus and minus lenses.

Otis> Your remark about the fact that a Plus also means long-term wearing of a lens - is well taken by me. I will discuss this important issue shortly.

[OtisBrown]

Subject: Why should I wear the plus - when the minus is so impressive and so very easy?

Otis> Your remark about the fact that a Plus also means long-term wearing of a lens - is well taken by me. I will discuss this important issue shortly.

I do acknowledge that it takes a lot of wisdom and understanding to avoid "fixing the obvious".  For those who insist, "I don't understand why I must wear glasses - to avoid wearing glasses - I tend to agree with them.  EXCEPT, unless they understand the trade-off involved.  This is why it takes a wise person to do it - and why any success in prevention can not involve a "medical person".

For me, the issue is DEPENDENCE and knowledge.  First, putting a minus on the totally natural eye - makes it NEGATIVE - as per this animation.

http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~wildsoet/images/neg_lens_induce_myopia.swf

These all natural eyes - made myopic by JUST a minus lens.  That tell me that a minus (how ever honest the intent) is destructive to *MY* distant vision.  (Data from primate and human eyes).  This is why scientific wisdom is required.  So how do I "throw away my minus lens". 
1) By wearing a plus, while I still see the 20/50 line, and 2) Exceeding the 20/40 line, and 3) With long-term wearing of a plus - begin to read the 20/25 to 20/20 line, and my last step 4) Being able to read the 20/20 line though a +1/2 diopter lens.  (All animals in the wild have a positive refractive state - and excellent distant vision.)

So all responsibility is on myself to understand that if I wish to keep my distant vision (and avoid dependency on that minus lens), I must understand these issues to the best of my ability, and use "anti-prescription" lenses to meet that objective.  Prevention is indeed necessary, but it in fact requires long-term (but wise) wearing of a plus.  You avoid becoming a victim of that minus lens.  As you get to 20/20, and slight positive status, you can quit wearing the plus.  (Always keeping in mind that long-term near will get you back into it.

Nothing succeeds like success.  Todd great success is that he actually did it.  He will always be convinced that the plus is the right answer.  When you do it - you will be convinced also.  That is why I accept that long-term plus lens wearing is necessary - because any wearing of a minus is certain to make the long-term problem far, far worse. 

[MINA]

So all responsibility is on myself to understand that if I wish to keep my distant vision (and avoid dependency on that minus lens), I must understand these issues to the best of my ability, and use "anti-prescription" lenses to meet that objective.  Prevention is indeed necessary, but it in fact requires long-term (but wise) wearing of a plus.  You avoid becoming a victim of that minus lens.  As you get to 20/20, and slight positive status, you can quit wearing the plus.  (Always keeping in mind that long-term near will get you back into it.

Nothing succeeds like success.  Todd great success is that he actually did it.  He will always be convinced that the plus is the right answer.  When you do it - you will be convinced also.  That is why I accept that long-term plus lens wearing is necessary - because any wearing of a minus is certain to make the long-term problem far, far worse. 

YES YES. Thanks again for the reply Otis.

I definitely agree. And I'm sure this will sound a bit cynical, but I'm mostly convinced that even when presented with all the scientific evidence and sound reasoning, people will continue wearing the minus simply because it's "easy." That's why I believe this entire practice--like most things--ultimately depends on personal discipline and determination (just like exercising, everyone knows it's better for your health, but not everyone does it).

The sad reality is that the modern world/economy is pushing more and more toward technology and innovations for indoor environments. I too frequently see kids with their faces shoved in iPad/iPhone screens and then realize that's just the beginning of their destructive habit. Unfortunately, most people in the modern economy have to work 40+ hours a week with their faces fixed behind a screen. It's the same in principle. Luckily though, for those who are disciplined and open to self-experimenting, there's a way to battle it. For everyone else, it's just an "idea."

[Steven]

Mina,

Progress with anti-corrective lenses is typically rapid at first, then usually slows down.  This is not unusual.

A number of people have reported redness -- either from wearing plus lenses that are too strong, or wearing the lenses for too long.  That's an indication of eye strain.  It is a sign that you need to back off.  I don't advocate wearing plus lenses all the time.   Think of plus lens therapy as "weight lifting for the eyes".  You wouldn't carry around heavy weights all the time or lift weight for hours on end.   Anti-corrective lenses stimulate the eye to elongate, but it is important to get adequate rest and to take breaks.  The key is to alternate between close work and distance viewing.  There is no hard-and-fast rule, but I would suggest 2-4 breaks an hour.

Good luck with your progress and keep us posted.

Todd

Mina, when the progress slows down buy a stronger plus lens and use it all the time when you do nothing.

I would buy the strongest plus you can find (+6 in my town) and use that one.

Red eyes are a consequence of not blinking enough ( you start to stare as vision gets blurry ).

[MINA]

Hey Steven,

Thanks for the reply, and my apologies for the delayed response.

Mina, when the progress slows down buy a stronger plus lens and use it all the time when you do nothing.

I would buy the strongest plus you can find (+6 in my town) and use that one.

Red eyes are a consequence of not blinking enough ( you start to stare as vision gets blurry ).

Interesting. At first thought, it seems to make sense: stronger plus = more improvement. But I just figured the entire point was simply to induce a blur point.

Say I read at a comfortable distance (with blur) with some medium-strength plus, are you saying it would actually be better if I got a stronger plus while maintaining the same degree of blur? What I mean is, the stronger plus only makes things blur at a closer distance. So when you say wear a stronger plus, isn't the whole point simply to increase the blur, in which case I could just simply move further away from the print (with a moderate plus), thereby increasing the blur? Or are you saying I should just get a stronger plus regardless, or only when doing nothing?

As for the eye redness, it occasionally happens even without the glasses so I'd say the link between the two isn't that clear. Guess it could be lack of blinking --> dryness --> redness.

[OtisBrown]

Hi Mina and Steve,

Otis> I hope I can add my commentary.

Mina> So a little while later, I printed a Snellen and start taking measurements. After three weeks (at which point I had moved up to +2s), I was easily reading the 20/30-20/40 line.

Otis>  I know you are wearing a +2.5 diopter for all close work. For where you are - that is a perfect choice - for comfort and distance.  In my opinion, it would not make sense to try to wear a stronger plus.  Just continue to wear the plus as a "long-term" habit.  (I know that idea is difficult - but it is necessary.)  This will be a matter of your personal judgment.

Otis> At least for me, wearing a +2.5 diopter gets all that "near work" into the distance.  That is what makes sense to me - at least.  Others say "strain relief".  Again, my point is the plus that is both comfortable - but has the maximum effect - which is what that +2.5 diopter does for you.  I always believe in "home checking", because only if you do that - do you believe the results you obtain.  I think you could get to 20/18, if you wish, but only 20/20 is required.  This is what Shadowfoot obtained.  Here is another success story - and he has his explanation and reason for his success.


http://schwerdfeger.name/articles/pluslens.shtml

Otis>  The important thing is that you trust yourself, and do it yourself and succeed.  Even if it takes five months of "plus" wearing.

Hey Steven,

Thanks for the reply, and my apologies for the delayed response.

Mina, when the progress slows down buy a stronger plus lens and use it all the time when you do nothing.

I would buy the strongest plus you can find (+6 in my town) and use that one.

Red eyes are a consequence of not blinking enough ( you start to stare as vision gets blurry ).

Interesting. At first thought, it seems to make sense: stronger plus = more improvement. But I just figured the entire point was simply to induce a blur point.

Say I read at a comfortable distance (with blur) with some medium-strength plus, are you saying it would actually be better if I got a stronger plus while maintaining the same degree of blur? What I mean is, the stronger plus only makes things blur at a closer distance. So when you say wear a stronger plus, isn't the whole point simply to increase the blur, in which case I could just simply move further away from the print (with a moderate plus), thereby increasing the blur? Or are you saying I should just get a stronger plus regardless, or only when doing nothing?

As for the eye redness, it occasionally happens even without the glasses so I'd say the link between the two isn't that clear. Guess it could be lack of blinking --> dryness --> redness.

[MINA]

Otis>  The important thing is that you trust yourself, and do it yourself and succeed.  Even if it takes five months of "plus" wearing.

Yes I agree. That's why I just keep doing what I'm doing because it seems to be working for me. No need to fix what isn't broke. I mean five months sounds like a long time, but once you get into the habit, you realize you can just stop counting; it really just comes second-nature to reach for the glasses, which is ideally what everyone should be striving for.