Author Topic: Eyesight without glasses  (Read 410718 times)

Offline Alex_Myopic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 429
Re: Eyesight without glasses
« Reply #1170 on: November 09, 2015, 02:03:46 PM »
@4sight

Small saccadic movements are unconscious so they exist even if someone stare,

With constant staring I think the brain has more time to minimize the gosting image.

Offline User1235

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 31
Re: Eyesight without glasses
« Reply #1171 on: November 10, 2015, 09:17:36 AM »
But with constant staring sometimes the whole thing blurs and all i see if a wall of haze in front of me.Does anyone have similar experiences?

Offline 4sight

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Eyesight without glasses
« Reply #1172 on: November 13, 2015, 03:33:04 AM »

so when you stare you starve your eye and visual system the food it needs to transfer and process a good image in the brain.  To function at its optimum, the eye needs a constantly changing stimulus, or else it can start to deteriorate within seconds.   The peripheral deteriorates first and quickest, the central sight holds on the longest.  I see it sort of like the pinhole effect, without the pinholes.  It can give you false sense of improving something you may be fixating on (staring at), because the peripheral areas of vision are shutting down, while the central area is holding on to dear life, where the rays of light come in the straightest.   It is only brief, the second you shift a little, or blink, the rest of the eye receptors recover, and you are back to where you were.    You can show yourself this is how the eye works - just google troxler fading effect, and you will find many cool images that you can stare at the center, and see the peripheral fade within seconds.   But if you make tiny shifts just around the center cross, or blink, the surrounding image can be held in the brain much better.    The brain needs this constant stimulus of the photo receptors in order to maintain an image optimally.   
It is very possible to consciously suppress our eye movements, even the unconscious type, and have a negative affect on the visual system. 

Offline User1235

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 31
Re: Eyesight without glasses
« Reply #1173 on: December 22, 2015, 12:58:41 AM »
Recently i have noticed something strange.My cm results stays relatively constant at left 33cm right 45cm which equates to left-3.0 right -2.25 but i was able to obtain 20/40 on the snellen with my reduced prescription of -2.25left and -1.50 right with a bit of focusing.I dont feel that my distance vision has improved that much either so i am wondering how in the world do i get 20/40.Just saying i made sure i was at the right distance from my screen when using the online snellen.One more thing to note is that there is natural sunlight coming in from the windows but that is also present when i took my cm measurements.Any thoughts?

Offline Alex_Myopic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 429
Re: Eyesight without glasses
« Reply #1174 on: January 11, 2016, 01:40:55 PM »
With 3-2,25=0,75D myopia one can see about 20/40 so the thing you are describing is not so weird.

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/diopters-vs-20-somthing.202129/

Offline albertchan

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 13
Re: Eyesight without glasses
« Reply #1175 on: January 15, 2016, 07:08:39 AM »
My name is Albert, a new member.

2 months ago, my eyes about 20/40, combined 20/30
I had a VERY uncomfortable minus glasses, AND too cheap to get a good one.
Thus I only it for distance, AND only if necessary

My prescription have stay about the same (-1.25) for 20 years.
May 1996: R -1.25 -0.5x167, L -1 -0.25x180 (dominant left?)
Nov 2015: R -1 -0.75x90, L -1.25 (dominant right eye)

Started wearing +1.75 reading glasses for 2 months

This morning, under good light, I am 20/20 !
Since I have to wear reading glasses anyhow (I am 46),
I get all this benefit for free.

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: Eyesight without glasses
« Reply #1176 on: January 15, 2016, 09:31:10 PM »
Hi Albert Chan,

I encounter endless numbers of people who can not be "bothered" to wear he plus.  I am pleased you did so - and produced your own success.

Otis


My name is Albert, a new member.

2 months ago, my eyes about 20/40, combined 20/30
I had a VERY uncomfortable minus glasses, AND too cheap to get a good one.
Thus I only it for distance, AND only if necessary

My prescription have stay about the same (-1.25) for 20 years.
May 1996: R -1.25 -0.5x167, L -1 -0.25x180 (dominant left?)
Nov 2015: R -1 -0.75x90, L -1.25 (dominant right eye)

Started wearing +1.75 reading glasses for 2 months

This morning, under good light, I am 20/20 !
Since I have to wear reading glasses anyhow (I am 46),
I get all this benefit for free.

Offline trappedeye

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Message from new user, TrappedEye
« Reply #1177 on: January 16, 2016, 04:00:40 AM »
Message from new user, TrappedEye

Hello,

I am new here and have been reading my way slowly and thoroughly over the last few weeks. I believe I have an idea of the general gist of how this method is applied.

Firstly, thank you Todd for providing this blog guide and for free as well - very kind and it shows a genuine interest in helping people for the sake of helping people, or should I more boldly say, victims of general optometry (that is how I now feel, a victim), but at the end of the day, I am responsible for my lifestyle, which has involved much close work. Todd, I am extremely grateful for this site, and, at the very least, you have instilled some hope in me that maybe, perhaps, I can reclaim my sight, something I would never have thought possible.

I sure have a big job in front of me. My eyes are -8 and -7.50. I am 33 years old and have worked academically for much of my life, starting at school, university and then work. My eyes progressed over this time, I believe as the vicious circle Todd mentioned in his lecture video.

Having read much of the stuff here, the route I would like to go is the plus lenses over the contact lenses that are minus 0.5 my prescriptions. I noticed some differences of opinion about this route's effectiveness, but, if this method could be mastered, I sure would prefer this, as I would have simply wear plus lens over the contacts fine-tuned to achieve the 'edge of blur' for the task/associated distance I am doing/at.

So far, I went and bought a stack of plus lenses - 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3 & 3.5 - and try to pick the best one to achieve the 'edge of blur' for what I am doing. My optometrist has made me some contacts with -0.5 dipoles off my normal prescription.

So this is how I am using them at the moment:
1. Contacts with -0.5 are for long distance walking, but sometimes I wear a plus 1 lens over them, especially if I am not in an open environment but a more closed one, say like a city where I am not able to romantically gaze into the far distance :)
2. Plus lens of around 1-5-2.00 achieves edge of blur when I watch the TV subtitles (around 8 meters away on my lounge)
3. Plus lens of around 3.00 achieves 'edge of blur' when I use my laptop
4. I find the 1.5 lens the closest all-rounder for the average distance of doing general tasks inside the house: cleaning up, cooking, etc.
5. When I read in bed, I will take out the contacts and hold the book quite close to my face without contacts for edge of blur

Now I maybe achieve this ghosting Todd talks about or something that is different but appears similar. Every mm I pull back from text in good focus a second grey font replica starts to begin to come pop out of the 'original font'. The more I pull back the more it jumps out. Sometimes it jumps out on top of text, others times the bottom or side. I use this ghosting? to identify 'edge of blur' as soon as it pops out I know that 'edge of blur' has started and sometimes I let it pop out completely by pulling further back, but never to the point that I am way out of focus. I find I get the 'ghosting' much, much easier/more marked/obvious with white text on black background or inverted color. I do not get it when distant viewing or looking at objects - just font. Is this the ghosting Todd talks about, I cannot be sure. I wonder if he got it for objects further away as he had better eyes than me, more suited for longer distance pushing. Either way, it is helping me find my edge of blur.

Some questions I have:

1. Now I read during this thread that plus lens should only be worn for around 2 hours. However, if I am wearing plus lens that just take me to the 'edge of blur' for what I am doing, shouldn't that be pretty mild and relax my eyes anyway - like wearing a very light weight all day. Now, if I was wearing a plus lens that was way too strong or pushing at the extreme end of edge of blur, I think I would understand this idea of doing too much better. Furthermore, if we were able to wear the minus lenses all day that the optometrists give us - granted this makes things very easy - why can't we then wear harder plus lenses all day (just not very powerful ones) - just ones that are appropriately mild for the task we are doing? Now that paper cited about how the group wearing plus lens all day didn't show improvements is different. They just wore the same type of plus regardless of what they were doing. I will be switching my plus lens throughout the day to the one that is most appropriate to be at edge of blur as much as possible.

2. I also read a difference of opinion between Todd and Otis about effectiveness of plus lens over contacts VS using minus glasses instead. Otis mentioned he had no success with this method and the the contacts kill the effect. Todd appears to have had success with that method. Debate is a good thing and should be encouraged, and people have different experiences. I do not care, as long as it is effective for the person. Personally, I don't quite see why minus lens would be different than plus lens over contacts, though I have not tried exclusively sticking to progressively weaker minus lens, rather going with the minus contacts and plus lens wear-overs for now. Anyway I am curious to hear if anyone else has had success using the contact-plus lens method? I would much rather have a stack of plus lens from 1 to 3.5 then a bunch of expensive minus lenses from 8 down to probably around 5 dipoles (in my case), though I would be willing to shell out for such a set of glasses to try the other method as well (I am aware of the Zennioptical site).

3. Timing. I understand this is a journey, but I hope I can do this in a year. I understand that for many here marked improvements have come over many years, but I am hoping with commitment, some focus (no pun intended) and clever application, I might be able to do this quicker. I guess I am just excited, but I am also obsessive about things I enjoy and have the ability to focus well (again no pun intended and it is ironic).

I am a boxer, and I feel if I can just get my vision to the distance of my opponent & for bag work max. around 1.5 meters then my eyesight could really start to take off, as boxing involves looking at much movement.

Anyway, very pleased to be part of this community and I look forward to chatting to all the characters here. I hope we can all help each other achieve our goals.

TrappedEye






« Last Edit: January 16, 2016, 05:46:57 PM by trappedeye »

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: Eyesight without glasses
« Reply #1178 on: January 16, 2016, 06:30:49 AM »
Hi Trapped, and Albert,

Yes, Todd got back to 20/20 by use of the plus, and his own methods.  I am always gratified when other people like Albert
manage to accomplish the same goal - by objectively reading the 20/20 line with naked eyes - on their home Snellen.

For yourself, at -8 diopters, it is admittedly a much slower process. But we ALL WISH YOU SUCCESS.

For you, your best bet it to wear a +2.5 diopter over contacts, for all reading.  Then you will get the "sense" of what recovery was like for Albert.

For a person like Albert, who could read the 20/30 line, then he needed nothing, except the discipline to wear the plus as long as required,
until he read the 20/20 line.

Otis
« Last Edit: January 16, 2016, 07:39:00 AM by OtisBrown »

Offline albertchan

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 13
Re: Eyesight without glasses
« Reply #1179 on: January 16, 2016, 10:39:30 AM »
My neighbor is #26
2 months ago, I only see 286 from my house
Now, even in bad lighting, I see 26 !

With moving objects, say driving, my vision is not as good
I think it dropped to 20/30, maybe even 20/40

My dominant right eye see 1 fuzzy image
My left see 2 sharp images on top of each other, o as oo
The brain just can't keep up fusing images from both eyes

Offline albertchan

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 13
Re: Eyesight without glasses
« Reply #1180 on: January 16, 2016, 11:11:35 AM »
On EBay, I notice they sell "emergency" myopia glasses for about $1.50 delivered.
The range is -1, -1.5, ..., -6

Is this a scam ?
If legit, this will be a cheap way for under-corrected glasses

If eyes are very different, buy 2 ($3), just pop and swap lenses
Save the unused weak lenses for the next under-correction.

I feel bad for our modern society when they sell "emergency" myopia glasses in dollar store

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: Eyesight without glasses
« Reply #1181 on: January 16, 2016, 04:56:12 PM »
Hi Albert,

Do you have a reference for those glasses/lenses I could use?  I like to go "low cost", but the best I could do was to order glasses from Zennioptical for $9, with -1/2 and -1 diopter values, and remove each lens and check my vision to make certain I could read the 20/20 line using these hand-held lenses.  The cost to me was $25 with shipping, for for lenses.

For a person who is very serious about changing his refraction by +1 diopters (from 20/40 to 20/20, self-measured -1 diopter) I strongly recommend that type of intellectual effort.  As always, the only person who BELIEVES he is successful, is always and only the person who actually looks at his own Snellen.  No one in optometry believes that you are that competent.  I tend to believe that, in your case, you are.

On EBay, I notice they sell "emergency" myopia glasses for about $1.50 delivered.
The range is -1, -1.5, ..., -6

Is this a scam ?
If legit, this will be a cheap way for under-corrected glasses

If eyes are very different, buy 2 ($3), just pop and swap lenses
Save the unused weak lenses for the next under-correction.

I feel bad for our modern society when they sell "emergency" myopia glasses in dollar store

Offline albertchan

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 13
Re: Eyesight without glasses
« Reply #1182 on: January 16, 2016, 06:37:13 PM »
Otis,
Just search "myopia glasses" in eBay
They are from Hong Kong or China

I guess quality about the same as reading glasses from dollar stores
Still unsure how they can have it delivered for $1.50

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: Eyesight without glasses
« Reply #1183 on: January 16, 2016, 07:00:33 PM »
Albert - Thanks!

Finally, you can now by your own minus glasses - at a low cost.  For a person sightly nearsighted, and eyes close to each other (in refraction) they would indeed work.  Using your own Snellen, ad you did, you can see 20/30, and with a -1/2 diopter, you would read the 20/20 line.

That is the best information of the refractive change you must obtain, achieve, develop, from wearing a plus for all close work.  I would never claim results in several weeks, however, even though that is what it to you to get results.  I always suggest about six months, just to be on the safe side. 

Clearly no OD or MD can do this for you.  So you must do it yourself - including buying temperary -1 diopters, until you can "shake loos" you vision with a plus for all close work.  Yes ... I know  that many have no success.  But when you do - you feel great about the result, when it is self-confirmed.

Otis,
Just search "myopia glasses" in eBay
They are from Hong Kong or China

I guess quality about the same as reading glasses from dollar stores
Still unsure how they can have it delivered for $1.50

Offline trappedeye

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Re: Eyesight without glasses
« Reply #1184 on: January 16, 2016, 08:25:28 PM »
Thanks Otis,

Would you know where I can get a Snellen Chart. I am not sure how useful it would be for me as I'm pretty much blind at -8, so what good will it be for me? I doubt I could see any of it. What line would -8 correspond to?

TrappedEye