Author Topic: General Discussion about Vision  (Read 2353 times)

Offline chris1213

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 76
General Discussion about Vision
« on: April 27, 2014, 12:22:54 PM »
So I was thinking about this thread: http://www.iblindness.org/forum/finally-got-20-20-crystal-clear-vision-%C3%A2%C2%80%C2%93-my-updated-success and I wondered how did he achieve 20/20 by pushing the screen further and further with his naked eye and not with a plus. Then I thought about something. If I suppose he was at -1, that would mean that with his naked eye he would be seeing what a person with a "normal eye" would see through a +1. So basically, if he puts some +1 glasses on that would translate to +2 if he had an emmetropic eye. So if someone with a -4 prescription wore +1 reading glasses, that would be like an emmetropic person wearing +5 reading glasses. I think that would stress the eyes too much. I hope this makes sense to you.

My point is, the benefit relies more on print pushing than in wearing a plus. On top of that, as I believe Otis or Todd had explained once, the purpose of the plus is to help us "pull focus" in a closer environment, so instead of going to the street, backing up from a sign and trying to bring it into focus, we do that same thing in a "virtual" environment with plus lenses. I might be wrong but then I believe that what we should focus on is on print pushing and focusing instead of just putting plus lenses on hoping to get some results. 


Many may have thought about this already but in case you didn't think about it, I mentioned it again.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here's an interesting short article: http://www.beyond2020vision.com/what-is-normal-vision-and-eyesight/. I was afraid that if I continued wearing the plus I could become hyperopic but if what the article says it's true, having mild hyperopia is a good thing because it prevents the eye to become myopic.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yet another interesting website for those who haven't checked it: https://sites.google.com/site/myopiaorg/intro
« Last Edit: April 27, 2014, 12:26:31 PM by chris1213 »

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: General Discussion about Vision
« Reply #1 on: April 27, 2014, 04:20:38 PM »
Hi Chris,

The totally normal eye with SUPERIOR vision, has a positive refractive status (that I self-measure myself).  The meaning of the word, "hyoperopia", means EXACTLY THAT.  It is a terrible word, saturated with bias - that will scare the pants off you.  This is part of the "language" that is simply wrong.  The statement is correct.  If you have this slight positive refractive STATE, of being able to read the 20/20 line THOUGH a  +1/2 diopter lens - you have superior vision.

I will always say - anyone who gets "out of -2.5 diopters - has achieved a wonderful result.

I do not understand why a person wants to use, "pure exercise".  I understand there is a mania to do it that way.  The first major step, is to avoid wearing a minus lens - what ever "method" you choose.  This means accepting 20/50 to 20/60 vision with no lens - and hoping you exceed the 20/40 line - eventually.

I make, "logical sense" of things - by my judgment of science and facts.  I know that is not the "taste" of most people. 

For me the use of the "plus" is to get rid of all "near" environment.  That is a different idea than, "strain".  Assuming you are still reading the 20/40 to 20/50 line, you can wear the plus with great ease.  But you must convince yourself that it is truly necessary.   For me it is far easier than, "exercise", and makes more sense.

The people (like pilots) who absolutely MUST pass the 20/20 line (like Colgate, Severson and Todd), had no problem convincing themselves that they MUST do both exercise and PLUS.

As always -- I recommend all methods -- but always monitoring your Snellen.  That way  you do not get a terrible over-prescription.  As long as you exceed the 20/40, you can avoid wearing the minus lens.  (Just my opinion.)

The most important truth I can establish is this.  No optometrist can help you with prevention.  It is simply too difficult for them.  (Read my remarks on wearing "ear muffs" to prevent becoming deaf.)

I do not "convince" a person to do anything he does not want to do.  i present the objective facts, as I "see" them, and encourage the person to THINK about his long-term visual future.  The real issue for me is that most people, unless having a very  high motivational level, will not accept that their vision will go down by an additional -1.5 diopters in a four year college (maybe more).  (The plus wearing people - do not go down, and keep their 20/20.) 

That is what an OD will never tell you - because he figures you have no motivation to do this type of prevention - yourself.  In many ways - I agree with him.

So I was thinking about this thread: http://www.iblindness.org/forum/finally-got-20-20-crystal-clear-vision-%C3%A2%C2%80%C2%93-my-updated-success and I wondered how did he achieve 20/20 by pushing the screen further and further with his naked eye and not with a plus. Then I thought about something. If I suppose he was at -1, that would mean that with his naked eye he would be seeing what a person with a "normal eye" would see through a +1. So basically, if he puts some +1 glasses on that would translate to +2 if he had an emmetropic eye. So if someone with a -4 prescription wore +1 reading glasses, that would be like an emmetropic person wearing +5 reading glasses. I think that would stress the eyes too much. I hope this makes sense to you.

My point is, the benefit relies more on print pushing than in wearing a plus. On top of that, as I believe Otis or Todd had explained once, the purpose of the plus is to help us "pull focus" in a closer environment, so instead of going to the street, backing up from a sign and trying to bring it into focus, we do that same thing in a "virtual" environment with plus lenses. I might be wrong but then I believe that what we should focus on is on print pushing and focusing instead of just putting plus lenses on hoping to get some results. 


Many may have thought about this already but in case you didn't think about it, I mentioned it again.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here's an interesting short article: http://www.beyond2020vision.com/what-is-normal-vision-and-eyesight/. I was afraid that if I continued wearing the plus I could become hyperopic but if what the article says it's true, having mild hyperopia is a good thing because it prevents the eye to become myopic.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yet another interesting website for those who haven't checked it: https://sites.google.com/site/myopiaorg/intro
« Last Edit: April 27, 2014, 08:59:07 PM by OtisBrown »

Offline chris1213

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 76
Re: General Discussion about Vision
« Reply #2 on: April 27, 2014, 11:45:11 PM »
I completely agree with your statements Otis, thank you for expanding the thread and explaining.
« Last Edit: April 28, 2014, 01:31:19 AM by chris1213 »

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: General Discussion about Vision
« Reply #3 on: April 28, 2014, 06:01:59 AM »
Hi Chris,

I know that an OD in his "office", can never help you.  But that is always the "starting point" of a discussion with people who can still read the 20/40 line and will personally measure their own refraction.  The optometrist who truly got the "right idea", called the minus, "poison".  It was my purpose to expand that idea, and understand it.  No one can "reduce" the concept of prevention to a simple idea.  But, after long-review, I believe that a few people will take their distant vision seriously.  I have attempted to explain some of these ideas on my site:

http://myopiafree.wordpress.com/

I have no "fight" with an OD or MD.  It is just that they are like "hearing aid salesmen" to me.  (I do not intend that to be an insulting remark.)

But, I put full responsibility on myself (and others) to either wear the plus (and always exceed the 20/40 line), or lose your distant vision during four years of college. 

My site might help you - or maybe not.  But the more you learn - the better you will be able to protect your distant vision - for life.

I truly agree that "honest prevention" is profoundly difficult.  It is not for the "casual" person who has "zero motivation".

This is a "science path" that requires long-term motivation.  You might not be able to understand all the reasons why it is necessary, but if you do, and wear the plus on a steady basis through four years of college, I am certain you will always exceed the 20/40 line, and very slowly clear the 20/20 line.

This is what my nephew did - from Junior High School, through graduate school.  He is now 45 years old, and still "re-news" his wearing of the plus, when he sees his Snellen, "getting blurry out their."

So this method is indeed "safe for the long-run".  But the issue of your motivation, is what you will have to "fight with".

There is no "short term" method at all.  There is no "magic exercise" at all.  There is no one who is medical who is going to help you  at all.

There are only two "paths", for you to choose.  I hope you choose the right path.



I completely agree with your statements Otis, thank you for expanding the thread and explaining.
« Last Edit: April 28, 2014, 11:06:36 AM by OtisBrown »

Offline chris1213

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 76
Re: General Discussion about Vision
« Reply #4 on: April 28, 2014, 06:10:09 PM »
It's interesting that after my post, Alex Frauenfeld wrote this article: http://frauenfeldclinic.com/is-print-pushing-the-best-way-to-improve-your-eyesight/. Great explanation in a simple way.

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: General Discussion about Vision
« Reply #5 on: April 29, 2014, 06:06:49 AM »
Hi Chris,

I am certain that my "attitude", that "prevention is possible", comes across as *me* being in a "rabid attack" against optometrists - who are trying to do the, "best job possible".  Thus I am made out to be the "bad guy" who knows "nothing about medicine", or from an OD's, "point of view", NOTHING ABOUT SCIENCE.

The other "effect" is that I am accused of, "practicing medicine without a license".  I say no to both "perceptions".  (You can make your own judgment of these two issues.)  My interest was to inform my "blood relatives", that they should not allow themselves to be caught in the "minus lens trap".  This is the reason for my post about "preventing hearing loss", by wearing ear muffs - exclusively for prevention of deafness.  That is definitely not "medicine".  I maintain the same attitude towards wearing the plus for near.  It is not medicine.

I regret this "contest" about "what to do", or what you should do.  I greatly appreciate Dr. Alex's efforts, since he is attempting to do what Dr. Bates attempted to do - over 100 years ago.

The one "issue" is this.  I know a minus lens "works" - always.  I know prevention is truly "difficult".  I know - unless the person himself does his own checking - he will only take the minus seriously.

This is why optometrists have CONCLUDED that even the slightest prevention - is impossible.  Perhaps it is - in their office.  I will not argue that issue with them, as long as a "patient" is involved.  (A patient is defined as a person who is ignorant, and will not look at his own Snellen, nor take the -1/2 diopter/year issue seriously.)

When I say, "pushing print" (for a intelligent adult at 20/40), I mean that he wishes to get "maximum effect" from the plus lens he is wearing - for all close work.  If he uses a very weak +1/2 diopter, and "leans foward", when reading by 5 inches, HE TOTALLY CANCELS OUT any benefit of wearing the plus.  If this instruction is not taken seriously - the plus will have no effect. 

This means the person can not be a "patient", since patients are not expected to understand WHY it is important to read though a plus at the "just blur" point.

(This issue is very serious.  When "bifocal" studies are run - the person is given no information on how to wear the plus.  Thus the child, not understanding HOW to wear the plus, simply leans forward, cancels out the desired effect of the plus, and the "study" is called a failure.  That is why OD conducted studies fail.  Keep that truth in mind as we go through this issue.)

We know that highly motivated, intelligent persons, like Todd, who were not "too deep" into nearsightedness, managed, with STEADY wearing of the plus, to restore their distant vision - first to 20/40, and then with continued  plus use, to 20/20.

But this is never medicine, nor is success a medical success.  It is the success of an independent wise mind, that take plus-prevention seriously.  (In my opinion.)

The plus is for prevention, not for a "cure".

It's interesting that after my post, Alex Frauenfeld wrote this article: http://frauenfeldclinic.com/is-print-pushing-the-best-way-to-improve-your-eyesight/. Great explanation in a simple way.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2014, 06:10:37 AM by OtisBrown »

Offline Ydgrunite

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 23
Re: General Discussion about Vision
« Reply #6 on: April 29, 2014, 07:27:44 AM »
We know that highly motivated, intelligent persons, like Todd, who were not "too deep" into nearsightedness, managed, with STEADY wearing of the plus, to restore their distant vision - first to 20/40, and then with continued  plus use, to 20/20.

And how do you define "too deep" into nearsightedness?

You say that you appreciate Dr. Alex's efforts, so here is a quote from him:

Quote
I am frequently asked whether the Frauenfeld Method works for high myopia.  And of course it does – as long as you haven’t had retinal detachment, we can always work our way backwards to healthier vision.