Author Topic: Some thoughts  (Read 1946 times)

Offline CapitalPrince

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 187
Some thoughts
« on: February 11, 2014, 05:02:37 PM »
Many people notice that a myopic person's eyes lack central fixation, have less sadistic movements, and has some "muscle problems". Logically bates thought this could be solved by doing central fixation, shifting, and movement. However the focal plane of a myopic eye is permanently changed. It loses focus at a certain distance. So if a person is myopic enough, central fixation in a far object is IMPOSSIBLE. The eyes literally cannot converge at a far point, thus it PRODUCES less saccadic movements, can't focus, and info is lost. if a myopic person wears the minus lens, none of the "movement issues" are a problem. Bates made the wrong approach and made the totally bogus claim that close work has no effect.

why do many people have success with bates? Obviously these patients would do less close work, so ciliary myopia will be eliminated. Then some patients might be doing active focus unconsciously like shifting the letters around the Snellen. Many people like todd, shadowfoot, and my father experienced an improved in their vision by tracing distance objects, and actively using their vision.

I also believe the following (many people will disagree with these)
-short term close work (say under 30 mins), with breaks, has NO affect on the refractive state (permanently)
- A myopic person wears a plus lens and walks around (uses plus passively) has NO effect on his refractive state. his vision will not improve (again many will disagree with this)
- STRESS when held for long periods of time changes the refractive state and sometimes quite rapidly. (long near work stress produces fast myopia, far tension produces a change in the positive direction).

What does it take to change the refractive state in the positive direction?
- actively trying to clear a blurred image (the distance is not important, but the level of blur) either using plus lenses or without the plus lens UNTIL you feel stress on your eyes.
- do all close work until it is slightly blurred to get the maximum preventative effect out of the plus.
-using CBR movements, and openly your eyes wide as a impetus for active focus

 David De Angelis, Alex Frauenfeld, Brian Severson, and many others ALL support plus lenses, but they advocated MORE than using the plus and reading at the blur point. I believe the "secret" and the common theme that all advocated was using the focus actively. This will lead to a change in refractive state of +0.5D/year.

Here is a great article that many of you have probably seen before: http://www.oocities.org/dolphinhill/theorynotes.html



Offline Alex_Myopic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 429
Re: Some thoughts
« Reply #1 on: February 12, 2014, 04:45:47 AM »
why do many people have success with bates?

Before I had seen some videos about the edge of blur and how to use plus from Mr Brown I was using plus (+1) only by having read the theory basically in optics part of physics, so I was not reading in the edge of blur and I didn't know that myopic defocus could make the eyeball shorter. But I was doing the Bates method correctly and had a result of about 1 diopter less myopia. Only the suggestions of Bates of being undercorrected, not reading with myopic glasses if you can, reading and checking the Snellen even if you see it blurry, relaxation, centralization and other principles can help even if you don't reduce close strain. But I didn't believe that this was correct so I do the Bates method but knowing that the most crucial factor is close strain. Another major error of Bates is that exterior oblique muscles don't do the accommodation.
« Last Edit: February 12, 2014, 01:40:31 PM by Alex_Myopic »

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: Some thoughts
« Reply #2 on: February 12, 2014, 12:48:53 PM »
Hi Sam,

Subject: My advocacy for true-prevention (before it gets beyond 20/50 to 20/60, and -1.5 diopters.)

Item: I always enjoy these discussions - with people who have the motivation for prevention.

Item: My argument, it to 1) Check your Snellen, at say 20/50, 2) Wear a strong plus, and only for close work, at "just blur", and 3) Plan for long-term wear, because, while the natural eye will respond - the response is very slow.

Item:  As per Dr. David Guyton's statement (that I support), it up to the person himself - to protect his distant vision - and never an OD or MD.

My commentary:

+++++

Sam> I also believe the following (many people will disagree with these)
-short term close work (say under 30 mins), with breaks, has NO affect on the refractive state (permanently)
- A myopic person wears a plus lens and walks around (uses plus passively) has NO effect on his refractive state. his vision will not improve (again many will disagree with this)
- STRESS when held for long periods of time changes the refractive state and sometimes quite rapidly. (long near work stress produces fast myopia, far tension produces a change in the positive direction).

Otis> I believe that long-term close work produces a SLOW CHANGE in a negative direction.  There is a massive amount of scientific data that now shows this.  (The data was not available for Dr. Bates, so he can be forgiven for claiming the reverse.)  I do  not believe in, nor use the word, "stress".

What does it take to change the refractive state in the positive direction?
- actively trying to clear a blurred image (the distance is not important, but the level of blur) either using plus lenses or without the plus lens UNTIL you feel stress on your eyes.
- do all close work until it is slightly blurred to get the maximum preventative effect out of the plus.
-using CBR movements, and openly your eyes wide as a impetus for active focus

Otis>  End the "near" work with a strong plus.  But this does mean long-term wearing of the plus.  But I agree with Severson and DeAgelis, this the cores is the plus, and "enhanced" with Bates-type of exercise.  For me, the plus is very simple and easy.  People TALK about exercise, but know one explains what to do, how to do it, or how much exercise is required. 

Sam>  David De Angelis, Alex Frauenfeld, Brian Severson, and many others ALL support plus lenses, but they advocated MORE than using the plus and reading at the blur point. I believe the "secret" and the common theme that all advocated was using the focus actively. This will lead to a change in refractive state of +0.5D/year.

Otis>  I am pleased that we all recognize that (at 20/40 to 20/50) the plus would be very wise - since it is so easy.  Thanks for the Link to that describes "plus use".

Otis> The only true failure, is that people do not seriously monitor their own Snellen.  That is ESSENTIAL for any competent work at "distant vision improvement".  But these methods will be with us for the future.

I always enjoy these wide ranging ideas and efforts.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2014, 06:46:52 AM by OtisBrown »

Offline Ydgrunite

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 23
Re: Some thoughts
« Reply #3 on: February 13, 2014, 02:26:33 PM »
David De Angelis, Alex Frauenfeld, Brian Severson, and many others ALL support plus lenses, but they advocated MORE than using the plus and reading at the blur point. I believe the "secret" and the common theme that all advocated was using the focus actively. This will lead to a change in refractive state of +0.5D/year.

Setting a conservative goal is good when telling others what to expect, but there is no way that I could accept a change of +0.5D/year or the +1.0D/year that Dr. Alex recently identified as a "relaxed pace."

In June 2013, I was given this prescription in contact lenses:
OD -9.00  Cyl -1.75
OS -9.50

If I accepted a rate of +0.5D/year, then I could only hope for 20/20 vision after 19 years.  I'm already 45 years old, so I want to change at a faster rate.  After reading up on sites like this one and Dr. Alex's in the summer, I started an aggressive improvement plan in early September.  I've worn contact lenses from when I woke up until bedtime since I was 18 years old, which probably played a role in the progression of my myopia, but it is easier for me to continue with contacts now than to switch to glasses.  I use reading glasses over my contacts for close work and drop my contact prescription whenever improvement warrants it.

I don't do any exercises or really put much effort into active focus.  I practice good visual hygiene (time outside in the daylight, reading galsses for close work) and I keep moving the focal plane with prescription changes.  I believe that it places stress on my eyes and they must compensate through a reduction in axial length.

It's not easy though.  I often have headaches and I have a persistent pain that runs down the left side of my neck.  I may not seek out the edge of blur, but I do have to live with more blurriness in general.

I keep the same prescription for both eyes now even though improvement in the right one usually leads the left.  I will not reduce the prescription until vision in the left eye is acceptable. Here are the contact lens prescription changes that I have made:

Nov. 8     -8.50
Dec. 6     -8.00
Jan. 8      -7.50
Feb. 2     -7.00

Offline mailliam

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 27
Re: Some thoughts
« Reply #4 on: February 18, 2014, 07:42:37 AM »

I also believe the following (many people will disagree with these)
-short term close work (say under 30 mins), with breaks, has NO affect on the refractive state (permanently)
- A myopic person wears a plus lens and walks around (uses plus passively) has NO effect on his refractive state. his vision will not improve (again many will disagree with this)
- STRESS when held for long periods of time changes the refractive state and sometimes quite rapidly. (long near work stress produces fast myopia, far tension produces a change in the positive direction).

What does it take to change the refractive state in the positive direction?
- actively trying to clear a blurred image (the distance is not important, but the level of blur) either using plus lenses or without the plus lens UNTIL you feel stress on your eyes.
- do all close work until it is slightly blurred to get the maximum preventative effect out of the plus.
-using CBR movements, and openly your eyes wide as a impetus for active focus


On the whole I agree with most of your points, especially the one about wearing the plus lens passively.

Can you clarify the statement you wrote that I've bolded in the quote? I don't quite understand what you mean.





Offline CapitalPrince

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 187
Re: Some thoughts
« Reply #5 on: February 18, 2014, 10:05:29 AM »
you want to make sure to use strong enough plus so tthat the letters are not in focus so that the books is beyond your far point. if the letters in focus (inside the far point), then the plus will not be as effective.

to be honest i feel you should spend the most time doing distance focus  (wiithout a plus) and use the plus when you don't have the opporunity to do distance (like in school)

Offline Myoctim

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 56
Re: Some thoughts
« Reply #6 on: February 21, 2014, 12:17:05 PM »
why do many people have success with bates? Obviously these patients would do less close work, so ciliary myopia will be eliminated. Then some patients might be doing active focus unconsciously like shifting the letters around the Snellen. Many people like todd, shadowfoot, and my father experienced an improved in their vision by tracing distance objects, and actively using their vision.

I also believe the following (many people will disagree with these)
-short term close work (say under 30 mins), with breaks, has NO affect on the refractive state (permanently)
- A myopic person wears a plus lens and walks around (uses plus passively) has NO effect on his refractive state. his vision will not improve (again many will disagree with this)

I agree because I got no improvement either with Bates nor by passively using plus lenses.

But I wonder why folks like Steven and others  did have that success?

Could it be because they are more hyperopic in their peripheral vision, so using a big diameter plus lens resulting in shifting that myopic/hyperopic signalling balance towards some hyperopic growth?

Offline CapitalPrince

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 187
Re: Some thoughts
« Reply #7 on: February 21, 2014, 12:33:05 PM »
dr frauenfeld says active focus is the key to reversing myopia (and will reverse axial myopia)
http://frauenfeldclinic.com/active-focus-the-key-to-reversing-myopia/

i think its clear that without any stress (positive stimulus or near point) the eyes do not change in any direction.

steven claims to have reversed his myopia from -5D to 20/30 by using excessively strong plus lenses like +6D.  whether that is true i don't know. But nobody else has reported success with excessively strong plus in this forum.  i don't know about the effects of peripherilal vision.