A Compendium on Myopia Rehabililation

[CapitalPrince]

hey svartberg its CapitalPrince here not Tom

every lens has an optical center so when you look at the edges of your lenses things start to get distorted. it won't do any harm and there are no negative effects. the distortion on a +1.5 to +2.5 is minimal (i guess you could use high index, but that comes with the price of lower abbe value.

I currently use a -0.25/+1.5D progressive lenses. I find it much better than having several pairs of plus lenses.  I can't imagine the distortion for someone wearing -5/6/-7D diopters

[svartberg]

Haha my bad, thanks for the info CapitalPrince !

[caimanjosh]

any type of lens will create a distortion. also plus lenses tend to make things bigger, and and minus lenses make things smaller. But distortion/magnification should not be a problem unless wear + or - 2.0D or more . Another good reason to keep myopia in control

I do note that my +4.5 and +5 lenses have significant distortion -- the edges are quite easy to read through, while the center is significantly more difficult.  Also, the magnification is fairly large at this level.  Does this represent a problem?  I feel like I've continued to make progress by progressing to these more powerful lenses, albeit considerably slower progress. 

[caimanjosh]

[From the Q&A]

While optical lenses are designed to be transparent, as the lens thicken, an unintended effect invariably occurs. Namely, the light rays would become significantly diffused by the lens, and non-stop exposure to diffused blur has been shown, both in animals and by us, to induce form deprivation myopia.

In fact, we were able to replicate form deprivation effects on our own, through the prolonged use of strong minus lenses, strong plus lenses and sunglasses."

Huh, that's kind of alarming from my perspective.  I'm currently using +4.5/+5 lenses that seem to suffer from this in the center.  Previously, I had been combining a +3.5 and a +1.5 lens to make a +5 "lens".  (Because I didn't have any higher power lenses, and I was being a cheap bastard and trying not to buy any .)  With that setup, I didn't notice any blurring in the center.  But with the single +5 lens, I do.  Now I'm thinking that for anything over +4 or so, combining lower power lenses may be a better way to go.  Maybe I should've listened to my cheap instincts after all.  I may have to rejigger my reading glasses again.  Thanks for the informative posts, Tom.

[svartberg]

caimanjosh, why such a high plus are you 20/15 ?
One trick to reduce plus, is to increase distance to book/monitor instead

[OtisBrown]

HI Caimanjosh,

I generally think that (for prevention) for people with 20/30 to 20/40, a +3.00 would be fine.

I have no problem if you choose to wear a +5, but it is more than is necessary.

What distance can you read though a +5?  Theory would say about 10 inches?

Just curious for you to check.

Thanks,

[From the Q&A]

While optical lenses are designed to be transparent, as the lens thicken, an unintended effect invariably occurs. Namely, the light rays would become significantly diffused by the lens, and non-stop exposure to diffused blur has been shown, both in animals and by us, to induce form deprivation myopia.

In fact, we were able to replicate form deprivation effects on our own, through the prolonged use of strong minus lenses, strong plus lenses and sunglasses."

Huh, that's kind of alarming from my perspective.  I'm currently using +4.5/+5 lenses that seem to suffer from this in the center.  Previously, I had been combining a +3.5 and a +1.5 lens to make a +5 "lens".  (Because I didn't have any higher power lenses, and I was being a cheap bastard and trying not to buy any .)  With that setup, I didn't notice any blurring in the center.  But with the single +5 lens, I do.  Now I'm thinking that for anything over +4 or so, combining lower power lenses may be a better way to go.  Maybe I should've listened to my cheap instincts after all.  I may have to rejigger my reading glasses again.  Thanks for the informative posts, Tom.

[caimanjosh]

caimanjosh, why such a high plus are you 20/15 ?
One trick to reduce plus, is to increase distance to book/monitor instead

My right eye is close to 20/15, certainly it's 20/20 anyways.  Left eye more like 20/30 to 20/40. 
I have thought about just using weaker plus lenses and increasing the distance to the book (I use these when reading).  However, I notice that what often happens is that my body "creeps" the book closer to my face once I stop paying attentioin to that -- either I lean over slightly, or end up bringing my arms closer.  This ends up making the reading easier, and thus, I think, negates the purpose of making it as challenging as possible.  Whereas if I use a stronger plus, my body's natural tendency is to try and move the book farther away to make things more comfortable.  Thus, that works more in favor of my objective.  I think my reading distance is around a foot away or so with these lenses -- maybe as little as 10 inches at times, and maybe as much as 15 at other times, during a "clear flash". 

I did slowly (over the course of months, maybe an inch at a time) move my monitor at work farther away from me, and keep using the same plus lenses.  Since I'm not holding my monitor (unlike a book), this seems to have worked fairly well. 

[Tom]

I had some new inspiration and finding on cataract, but because my info is not in depth enough to warrant a blogpost. I just put it here.

We are having some debate with professionals here. Will post some if it turns out to be interesting enough.

[Tom]

Even worse, is an optometrist, who is "pushing", Ortho-K, as a means to avoid nearsightedness.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNNQY2_bTlo

The BIG PROBLEM?  He is wearing glasses.  If Ortho-K is that great - then why is he NOT 20/20??

This truly is about money, isn't it. 

I wear a plus for "near", to save my distant vision.  You see my videos, and I READ the 20/20 line objectively.

Un-like Anderson, I do not need, nor want your money.  Neither did Dr. Prentice.  It all depends on you. 

There is nothing "easy" about prevention.  I never said it was.  Anyone who says that - is cheating you.

 Try to think about it.

Ha! I never got a response from Dr. Anderson. I hope that at some point he manage to earn enough money from Ortho-K, and start to truly work on myopia prevention after his retirement!

[OtisBrown]

Hi Tom,

It is possible to learn enough from the insightful optometrist, that the minus lens is a "bad idea", and you should seek to avoid wearing it.  The ODs who call the minus lens "poison" have the correct idea.  But of course the public, (at 20/40), can not be "prescribed a plus", at that point.  So this tragedy must continue.

Both of us know for certain - that Anderson is never going to happen. IT is a waste of your time to attempt to talk about any of this. In fact excessive concentration on the word, "MYOPIA" causes major intellectual blindness, to
all possibilities -- that a person can be wise enough to start prevention, while still at 20/40 (self-measured -1 diopters), and slowly get back to
0.0 diopters, and close to 20/20.   Here is the 7 minute video discussion this issue on NOVA.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rlz2_U4MdiI

People like Todd, and pilots, do manage to over-come their resistance to wearing a "plus for near", and wear no minus at all (if reading the 20/40 line).

But that take real intelligence, and continuous motivation.  You must truly convince yourself that it is necessary, and then
never quit wearing the plus, while in school.

This is absolutely never a medical problem, and the solution is indeed pure-personal.   This is the line that separates
scientific knowledge and what a medical person THINKS he knows.

Even worse, is an optometrist, who is "pushing", Ortho-K, as a means to avoid nearsightedness.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNNQY2_bTlo

The BIG PROBLEM?  He is wearing glasses.  If Ortho-K is that great - then why is he NOT 20/20??

This truly is about money, isn't it. 

I wear a plus for "near", to save my distant vision.  You see my videos, and I READ the 20/20 line objectively.

Un-like Anderson, I do not need, nor want your money.  Neither did Dr. Prentice.  It all depends on you. 

There is nothing "easy" about prevention.  I never said it was.  Anyone who says that - is cheating you.

 Try to think about it.

Ha! I never got a response from Dr. Anderson. I hope that at some point he manage to earn enough money from Ortho-K, and start to truly work on myopia prevention after his retirement!

[rtdfgdfgdfgdfg]

print pushing works

what more is there to say

[HansK]

Unfortunately, for me and others (gekonus etc.), it does not work.

[OtisBrown]

Hi Hans and Gekonus

You guys made a good effort.  I am not certain how much, "plus wear", and "print pushing" you did while " wearing a plus,"
but at least you made an effort.

For me, I am just lucky,  I wear the plus 2.75 as I type  this, and go down stairs, and read the 20/20 line.  i know that
no  one who is "medical" can do anything for prevention (as Dr. Prentice stated it), and I must personally always exceed,objectively
the 20/30 line.

I know you are going to go through a four year college.  So perhaps your effort is finished, now. You do know
that some people are successful (Todd, Severson, Shadowfoot) while others ... are not.

The minus will always work for you ... and you know the plus prevention will never work for you.

This is why I respect the optometrist.  He can not figure out who can makes themselves successful, and who can not.

This is indeed, "intellectual and personal", and can never be a "prescription".  I never want to be considered
a critic of an optometrist - for exactly that reason.  I enjoy talking with you.

Unfortunately, for me and others (gekonus etc.), it does not work.

[HansK]

Hi Hans and Gekonus

You guys made a good effort.  I am not certain how much, "plus wear", and "print pushing" you did while " wearing a plus,"
but at least you made an effort.

For me, I am just lucky,  I wear the plus 2.75 as I type  this, and go down stairs, and read the 20/20 line.  i know that
no  one who is "medical" can do anything for prevention (as Dr. Prentice stated it), and I must personally always exceed,objectively
the 20/30 line.

I know you are going to go through a four year college.  So perhaps your effort is finished, now. You do know
that some people are successful (Todd, Severson, Shadowfoot) while others ... are not.

The minus will always work for you ... and you know the plus prevention will never work for you.

This is why I respect the optometrist.  He can not figure out who can makes themselves successful, and who can not.

This is indeed, "intellectual and personal", and can never be a "prescription".  I never want to be considered
a critic of an optometrist - for exactly that reason.  I enjoy talking with you.

Unfortunately, for me and others (gekonus etc.), it does not work.

I made effort, no question. I have several pair of glasses (1 distance prescription [slightly undercorrected] and 2 "near" prescriptions] and when I am at home, I have them next to me. My mother always asks me what I am doing with those lenses and why I am changing them.

75-85% of the time, I have a slight myopic defocus. Sometimes, while reading, I find reading sharp text "relaxing". I even quit ortho-k, but I did not make any consistent improvement. Short-term yes, I was able to read 20/30, sometimes even 20/20, but after a while, I was back where I started.