From vicc@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU Ukn Feb 7 09:56:42 1995 From: Vic Cinc Subject: Greetings, vision enthusiasts! Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 17:26:53 +1100 (EST) Status: RO X-Status: hi, > Hi! I'm Alex Eulenberg, a graduate student in linguistics and cognitive > science at Indiana University. I've been treating my myopia with my own > version of the Bates method. Now I'm down from -1.5 diopters to less than > -1.0 in less than three years. That's according to "objective" figures (an > auto-refractometer), but my progress on subjective measures is far [snip] > to get to know each other. Why not post a little introduction to the list, > telling about your experience and aspirations in the area of eyesight > enhancement! > Here's looking at you! > Alex Eulenberg > hi, quick intro: hi I am Vic, 32 I am a computer guru, :) and comited to restoring my sight to something useable without cutting. an old boss had the operation only to "regress" within a couple of years back to glasses. And to be without lenses. I had been spending upward of $500/year of cleaner/pills/saline new lenses. I currently dont wear any corrective muck except when I drive. current prescription was at 26/april/94 R -2.25 -1.00x175 L -2.25 -0.75x178 and yes I get clear flashes too. with the advent of massive proliferation of the net, I see this as an ideal opportunity to counter the "self-interest" of the optical priesthood by disseminating usefull information to those who need it. Vic ========================================================================= From magic-man@unh.edu Ukn Feb 7 10:19:15 1995 From: Marco A Terry Subject: Re: Greetings, vision enthusiasts! (repost) Date: Sun, 5 Feb 1995 12:01:12 -0500 (EST) Status: RO X-Status: > > Hi! I'm Alex Eulenberg, a graduate student in linguistics and cognitive > science at Indiana University. I've been treating my myopia with my own > version of the Bates method. Now I'm down from -1.5 diopters to less than > -1.0 in less than three years. That's according to "objective" figures (an > auto-refractometer), but my progress on subjective measures is far [snip] > to get to know each other. Why not post a little introduction to the list, > telling about your experience and aspirations in the area of eyesight > enhancement! > Here's looking at you! > Alex Eulenberg Hi.....I am Marco......I am myopic.... Ok ok ok....sorry, but I could not resist...:-) Since Alex E. requested that we each introduce each other, here is me. I am an Undergrad in the Univ. of N.H. (5th year Senior). My major is Psychology although I am now more dedicated to computer science. I wear contacts and I do not like it. The idea of eye-surgery does not appeal to me so I am always open to any option that could give me a 20/20 without a laser beam cutting my cornea...:-) Well fellas... that's all. Oh..before I forget....I am also a wannabe Marital Artist (for those of you who understand my .sig) This is me (can you tell I'm a newbie to this list)? Cheers! -- --Marco ----- Hitotsu, Jinkaku Kansei ni Tsutomeru Koto ========================================================================= From stan@rain.org Ukn Feb 7 11:10:42 1995 From: Stan Jacobs Date: Sun, 5 Feb 1995 09:41:58 PST8PDT Subject: Introductions Status: RO X-Status: Hello everyone, My name is Stan and I'm 21 and an undergrad at UCLA (in Los Angeles, California). Actually, I'm currently taking time off from school to work on a programming internship, but that's another whole story... I've worn glasses since the third grade and have minor nearsightedness along with pretty bad astigmatism. I'm not very knowledgeable about things of this nature or improvement methods (yet) but look forward to learning more and reading posts to this group. Furthermore, I spend about 16 hours a day staring at a computer screen (limiting my social life to ytalk-ing to my girlfriend 3000 miles away), and I've noticed that my eyesight has gotten progressively worse and worse in the past two years. Coincidence? Probably not. I'm not planning to be a fighter pilot, but keeping my eyesight past the age of, oh... 24 might be a nice thing too. Oh, in addition, despite my looking quite normal and looking like I'm in pretty good shape, the fact is that I eat junk food, never eat anything vaguely healthy, and am probably lacking any vitamins which might be of even partial help to the eyes. I plan to change this. Tomorrow. Or the day after. Well, eventually. Cheers to all. Glad to join the group. -- Stan -- ._, ___| |. ____ _ ___, / __|__|/ _ '\ '__ | J. Stanforth Jacobs \__ \ |_| (_\ | | | | dynaSoft Technologies Inc. |___/___\___/_|_| |_| P.O. Box 3486, Camarillo CA 93011 ========================================================================= From JohnRICH95@aol.com Ukn Feb 19 23:23:24 1995 From: JohnRICH95@aol.com Date: Sun, 19 Feb 1995 22:23:21 -0500 Subject: Vision Therapy Status: RO X-Status: I'd like to share my experience with vision therapy. I started taking a course with the Natual Vision Center in Austin, TX, around March of last year. The course is based on the Bates method. When I started my contact lense perscription was -7.5 in both eyes. I didn't feel like I had really stuck with a lot of the vision games as much as I should after a few weeks . . . the newness of it wore off. But I was wearing an underprescribed pair of glasses so my vision would be 20/40. The eye doctor I went to was familiar with the Bates method, but he told me not to expect a lot of improvement. I choose to totally disregard any discourageing words from him since my VT instructor knew of a fellow in California who had improved -11.00 diopter vision to normal!! Anyway, I went back in November, and he said he was very impressed with my improvement. Suprised is more like it!! My contact lense perscription is now -6.0!! I only wear my contacts for outdoor activities (rock-climbing, etc. when I absolutely have to have the acuity.) Otherwise I wear my 20/40 underprescribed glasses for driving and other activites. Additionally I got a pair of glasses that were prescribed just for reading. That way I don't have the additional strain of the 20/40 lenses for close up work when I don't need it. The main thing that our instructor focused on is blinking, breathing, and sketching (not staring). Shifting, palming, sunlight, and several other things were also taught, but those first three are the "main course" for vision improvement. I'm going for a follow up VT class in 3 days, and I'll be heading back to the optometrist in May for another check up. I'll keep everybody posted. ========================================================================= From JohnRICH95@aol.com Ukn Feb 21 23:14:44 1995 From: JohnRICH95@aol.com Date: Tue, 21 Feb 1995 21:03:19 -0500 Subject: Vision Therapy continued . . . Status: RO X-Status: In my excitement to put up that last post I forgot to tell everyone about the progress I've made! My contact lense perscription (yes, I'm still wearing them occassionally, but I'm cutting back more and more!) went from a -7.5 to a -6.0 in about 8 months. Also, I no longer have any problems with light sensitivity. Great stuff! ========================================================================= From JohnRICH95@aol.com Wed Mar 29 01:36:16 EST 1995 From: JohnRICH95@aol.com Date: Wed, 29 Mar 1995 01:34:47 -0500 Subject: Re: Reply to this message! Status: RO X-Status: Alex, I wanted to give you an update on some vision improvement. I started vision therapy in March of 1994 and my contact lense perscription was -7.5 in each eye. I have backed down my perscription 3 times since then, the latest about 1 week ago. My current contact lense perscription is R -5.0 and L -5.25. I've found an optometrist who is very supportive of vision therapy - she actually took the course with my local instructor! I'll keep everyone posted as my eyesight continues to improve. John Richter ALSO - If anyone wants to talk to a Natural Vision Therapy instructor , you can call Jeanie Fitzsimmons in Austin, Texas at 327-5683. Tell her I said hello! ========================================================================= From vicc@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU Ukn Feb 24 08:08:19 1995 From: Vic Cinc Subject: steping down in lens strength Date: Fri, 24 Feb 1995 16:22:56 +1100 (EST) Status: RO X-Status: hi, just a quick note regarding the psychological aspects of myopia. last monday I visited a behavioural optometrist and aside from the sheer benefit of an encouraging professional opinion I got presribed "functional" lenses a diopter weaker then I was wearing. my first reaction was to put the new lenses into an old frame as the current -2.25s allow me to read the 10 foot line at 20 feet ie 40/20 vision. (way better then normal). but then I thought what the hell, sink or swim, and decided to "give up" my current pair, and am getting the lenses in that frame replaced with -1.25s. my current vision is around -1.5 for 20/20. these I will pick up next monday. well the week has passed without having the conveniance of knowing I can pick up my glasses whenever the need may arise. ie. I have to rely _solely_ on my own powers of accuity. and what a surprise, I have had so many "clear flashes" this week I am beging to wonder wether my -1.25s will be too strong for me! in fact I have had so many I have been actually "retraining" my accomodation, rather then just being in "awe" when it occurs. accomodation in myopes is usually very weak due to disuse. so now when I get a "clear flash" I accomodate from infinity (airport on the horizon from my work vantage point) to my computer screen in from of me and back again. and I am finding this little exercise seems to extend the clarity beyond the length of time i usually have it for. and I have also found that I can blink and still maintain my clarity. which is a first for me. my thought for the week: seeing is like sex. its all in the mind. :) Vic ========================================================================= From aeulenbe@indiana.edu Fri Mar 10 10:29:19 1995 From: Vic Cinc Subject: Re: brocks string drill Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 00:18:03 +1000 (EST) Status: RO X-Status: hi >However, I want you to know I intend for you to share the infamy of being >a deceptively respectable source of information. I have given you top >billing as "compiler" of the FAQ, not just one of four contributors. I >hope that's OK with you. yes and no. I am not really in it for the credit. my hope is that the information will be of benefit to people. and should be made as freely availlable as possible. >As a matter of fact, last fall I discovered the magic of the yardstick and >I think I know what you're talking about. I considered my experience doing >fusion at various angles plus zooming from the end of the stick to various >objects to be proof positive that the extraocular muscles have a >tremendous effect on maintaining proper acuity and eliminating >astigmatism. yes its very similar. except with a bit of string you can make it as long as you want, and the coloured beads give you something easy to fuse. at first I found that past about 4-5 feet, my vision seems to choose a single side to concentrate on. this came as a major league shock cause I alway thought I had great binocularity, I can do all the stereograms with remarkable ease. and with fusion I can consciously make a side disapear and then the other. but that was all at close distance. my bit of string is about 10 feet long with a bead every 8 inches or so. the first night I basically couldnt get much stable diplopia (hell might as well start using these words since I know what they mean :) past a few feet. I am going to keep working at, I am finindg it quite relaxing, almost like metidating, I just let my eyes move up and down the string while I think about something else. I am also finding my accomodation has extended up the string a bit. I can actully watch the focus change when I suddenly move from a bead to another. I find my accommodation is pretty slow. also I find my astigmatism is very spasmodic, it sort of jumps in and sometimes I can make it jump out. which to me really strongly suggests some sort of muscular action. not really corneal flaws. today i sort of vaguely worked out how to make things almost 100% clear, with only a faint second image. but soon as ai stopthinking about it, it reverts...its almost like I am finding my eoms one by one. I can already do conscious accommodation (have to get around to puting instruction for that in the FAQ) the other intersting thing is my unaided vision for short periods of time will actually go beyond 20/20. which i suspect is its normal state. my old script gave me around 40/20. my new script is undercorrected. (yes there is a god) and often I can get 20/20 or slightly better with it. I have an apointment with my behavioral optom. but he is booked out till may. (maybe there isnt a god) and it turns out he also does syntonics... and recomends a course of that... once upon a time, I wouldnt have even considered doing something like shining coloured lights into my eyes, but given the attitude of the optoms on s.m.v. I now think if it worked for some people there might be something in it. even if we dont have a theory to back it up. he tested my colour field of view, and while I have a normal field of view, the colour perceptions are very skewed, as far as I know they are supposed to be fairly round... more on this in may. on a different note, I got another email from a behavioral optom on s.m.v. how come these people never stick up for themselves??? he assumed I was a behavioural optometrist. :) that investment in duke elders optom book was pretty worthwhile, I might look for the other duke-elders opthal book. someone actually replied to Jeff Crabtree. he will have to reply back. no one seems to reply to me :( they all have seemed to agree to ignore me. methinks that someone is telling them how to use kill files. might do a fake post as me but a slightly skewed address to get past that little bit of nonsense. have you read suddenly successfull.(Dawkins, Edelman, Forkiotis) about behavioral optom. full of cases, but very little on insider details. I want a text on the nitty gritty of behavioral optom... there is a course at NSW uni, on behavioral optom, I will try and get the course notes. Vic (patiently waiting for permanent unaided 40/20 sight...) ========================================================================= From scai@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu Tue Mar 21 22:46:35 EST 1995 From: Shuofeng Cai Subject: Re: Reply to this message! Date: Tue, 21 Mar 1995 22:41:27 -0500 (EST) Status: RO X-Status: Howdy, I just subscribed to this newsgroup a few days ago. I'm a grad student in computer and information science at OSU. I use computers too muc and My eyes are pretty bad, to be more precise, one of my eyes is much, much worse than the other one. My dad has the same problem BTW. My left eye is lightly near-sighted, while the right one is much worse. And guess what, the right one is getting even worse at a rate faster than the left eye! Anyway, I hope my eyes get better. Later Shuofeng ========================================================================= From CmdrGray@aol.com Wed Mar 22 01:31:10 EST 1995 From: CmdrGray@aol.com Date: Wed, 22 Mar 1995 01:29:36 -0500 Subject: Vision Freedom Status: RO X-Status: Hello again, Thanks for responding to my post so soon. I already had the appointment with Dr. Westgate about two weeks ago. He said that he hadn't heard of VF or Mr. Severson. While I was there I just paraphrased the 60 page booklet I'd received in the mail to Dr. Westgate. He was familiar with the technique of accomodation to improve vision but said there weren't many studies on it's success and that in my case(-4.25 Left,-4.00 Right) there wouldn't be much improvement. I didn't get the impression that he was trying to mislead me or anything. From his experience and reading he just hadn't seen data pointing to vision improvement for anyone using accomodation or biofeedback procedures. I have to share a bit of my history to you: I've been under the care of Dr. Joel Halpern O.D. while going through orthokeratology for the past four years. Initially my acuity was in the 20/400 range for both eyes. After about seven months of the OrthoK I could see the 20/30 line on an eye chart with my right eye...20/50 with my left immediately after removing the lenses. Unfortunately, the effect doesn't last very long(eight hours max) and now the best I can see when I take the Ortho lenses out is 20/70R 20/100L. I am a pilot and college student studying Airway Science. My goal is to fly for a major airline but I'd rather fly for the Air Force. I could pass a Class I physical needed for the airlines as I am now. My hope was through, vision therapy, of increasing my acuity to the point of passing the Air Force vision test. From reading Mr. Severson's booklet this goal doesn't seem out of reach. If I could make drastic improvement with my acuity to say 20/60 in each eye with vision therapy or more specifically Vision Freedom I could get down to 20/20 using Orthokeratology. Why am I sharing all this? Dr. Halpern has helped me a lot and I don't w ant to lose his support. I originally asked him about the VF booklet and he then set up an appointment for me with Dr. Westgate to see if he knew anything about it and if it would benefit me. They operate under the same pra ctice, Halpern Eye Associates. As I stated earlier Dr. Westgate's news was not what I wanted to hear but I think he was being honest with me. With my next office visit with Dr. Halpern he told me about a seminar he'd just been to concerning the excimer laser and it's use for PK and how a U.S. firm is refering patients to Canada for treatment. Here's my dilema. PK would disqualify me for an Air Force commision as would any other surgical technique to modify the refractive power of the cornea. I'd like to go the Vision Therapy route but my doctor doesn't have any data concerning significant improvement for myopes or anyone else. While undergoing OrthoK I can't effectively use the techniques outlined by Brian Severson. Dr. Halpern told me that he would be more than happy to help me in any way he could but he'd need evidence of vision improvements in other patients, data, or something to those effects in order to justify the suspension of my OrthoK treatment at this point. Could you send me, Dr. Wesgate, or Dr. Halpern any information on other doctors who use plus lense therapy or the book titles you listed in your last message. I'd really appreciate it. --ps I the Prodigy Browser to get the FAQ at http://silver.ucs.indiana.edu/`ae ulenbe/ but it wouldn't accept the address. Is there another way to get it? Thanks for your time ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Fri Mar 24 12:11:05 EST 1995 From: Mikko Salminen Subject: my life with glasses Date: Fri, 24 Mar 1995 18:58:44 +0200 (EET) Status: RO X-Status: Hi all, I'm Mikko Salminen, a second year student of computer science at Helsinki University of Technology. I got my first glasses when I was about 15 years old (5 years ago). I don't really know why I became nearsighted. Perhaps it has something to do with my lifestyle in those days. I took school more seriously than ever before. I did (all) my homework and read quit a lot. Sometimes I didn't sleep well (that's what I do nowadays :-) ) so I was tired and my eyes were too. But maybe it has nothing to do with that. My both sisters got glasses at age I got mine. Is that just a coincident? When I got my first glasses I hated those but soon I started to use glasses every day and every minute. In five years my vision has become worse and worse. My first lenses were -1.25, nowadays -3 and -3.25 :( In the meantime my sisters used glasses as little as possible (they said they looked more beautiful that way). They use glasses only when they really need to (like driving or watching tv). I guess it's needless to say that they both have better vision than I have. I really need glasses in my everyday life. Only at home I cat put glasses away. Have you any suggestios what to do? I don't like idea staying home and just copying all the lecture notes. _\|/_ ( O - ) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-oOOo-(_)-oOOo-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Mikko Salminen (90) 468 2038 J{mer{ntaival 7 A 112 .ooOO OOoo. asalmin2@niksula.hut.fi 02150 ESPOO, FINLAND ( ) ( ) http://www.hut.fi/~asalmin2/ =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-\ (-=-=-) /-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= \_) (_/ ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Fri Mar 24 13:18:39 EST 1995 Date: Fri, 24 Mar 95 13:09:59 EST From: mwills@zephyr.ess.harris.com (M. Scott Wills) Subject: Re: confusion (fwd) Status: RO X-Status: > From: nanci@phx.sectel.mot.com (Nancy Ahern) > My daughter is vision tested in school by the school nurse > every year. In third grade, the nurse noted distance vision > problems. We took Cheryl to the optomologist, who dutifully > prescribed glasses (rather weak ones) and recommended that > she wear them when she needs to see the TV, or the blackboard, > but that she needn't wear them any other time. IMHO, this is a toughy. I hated reading in grade school and high school because I didn't find out until college that I was far sighted. At that point I got a prescription for reading glasses and discovered the joy of reading. Had it not been for an intense need to read in order to thrive in the college environment, I would never have sought correction, and might still dislike reading. Had a school nurse diagnosed the problem earlier for me, as for your daughter, I suspect I would have enjoyed grade school and high school much more (as I did college). I suppose the members of this list would say to take that knowledge and seek natural vision improvement rather than optical correction. I did the latter and am now near sighted. I suspect that I would still have become nearsighted after the college and grad-school experience, but perhaps not as much, if I had been aware of natural vision improvement techniques at the time. On the other hand, I might not have done as well in college if I had not taken immediate steps to correct my problem. (I went from an A/B average my first semester to straight A's for the rest of my college career partly due to this effect). Scott ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Fri Mar 24 14:15:07 EST 1995 Date: Fri, 24 Mar 1995 11:08:12 -0800 (PST) From: Lois Patterson Subject: Re: confusion (fwd) Status: RO X-Status: I just wanted to add that I had an extremely bad year of school when I was 7 because I desperately needed glasses, but my parents wanted to prevent my eyes from getting worse. The teacher made fun of me because they were trying alternative methods which didn't work. Things were so much better when I got the glasses. It is quite likely my eyes got so bad because I started doing hours and hours of reading a day when I was 6. Nevertheless, (and I know no-one on the list is suggesting otherwise ) it is very important to provide vision correction to children when they need it. Lois Patterson ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Sat Mar 25 05:24:34 EST 1995 From: Vic Cinc Subject: bulk reply vision and things Date: Sat, 25 Mar 1995 20:23:34 +1000 (EST) Status: RO X-Status: Hi from down under. >From: Mikko Salminen >I'm Mikko Salminen, a second year student of computer science >[snip] >In the meantime my sisters used glasses as little as possible (they said >they looked more beautiful that way). They use glasses only when they really >need to (like driving or watching tv). I guess it's needless to say that >they both have better vision than I have. >I really need glasses in my everyday life. Only at home I cat put glasses >away. Have you any suggestios what to do? I don't like idea staying home >and just copying all the lecture notes. wear your glasses where you need them. dont wear them where you dont. use 20/40 correction glasses where you need some vision but not full vision. if you are < -5d myopic you should be to read a book without glasses. >From: nanci@phx.sectel.mot.com (Nancy Ahern) >>From: grace kuo jui chin >>Okay, I have a question that is somewhat related...what causes our eyes >>to become near-sighted in the first place? I wasn't wearing glasses until >>my eyes went bad so it certainly wasn't glasses that caused it. > >I have a related question. >My daughter is vision tested in school by the school nurse >every year. In third grade, the nurse noted distance vision >problems. >[snip] >She did this, faithfully putting them on while looking at >the board at school or while watching TV or movies, but >[snip] >This year, she complained of not being able to see very >well at all, with or without her glasses. We upped the >prescription again, and now she wears them constantly. When >[snip] >In other words, even though she was not using her glasses >all the time, her vision got worse. >How does this tie in with what I think you-all are trying >to say here? when my younger brother first got glasses he hated wearing them and only wore them in class, never out of class. once he got to uni and spent most of his time in lectures he had to wear them "full-time" and he says during this time his script got worse and worse really quickly. Similar story to Mikko's sisters. there are two possible causes for myopia. environmental and genetic. Environmental causes should be reversable. Genetic may or may not be. some people have a genetic pre-disposition to visual problems. this does not necessarily mean these are not correctable. some possible explanations for environmental myopia. straining at the near point. basically reading for hours at a time to the exclusion of the distance vision. distance vision simply fades away. A young girl that had spent her life "under the stairs" because of a crazy mother. had no distance vision when she was finally rescued. anything that is not used atrophies. straining at the far point. overachievers or frustration with blackboard material. trying "too hard", to make sense at the far point. resulting in strain or a withdrawal from the far point and introversion, back to the safe and understandable near point. boredom with the far point. is another possibility. imitation of a parent with glasses. is yet another. here is a reference specifically for children. I have not read this book, but when I get a copy I will incorporate it into the FAQ. "Your childs vision: A parents guide to seeing, growing and developing." by Richard S Kavner. O.D. 1985. >From: mwills@zephyr.ess.harris.com (M. Scott Wills) [snip] >the joy of reading. Had it not been for an intense need to read in >order to thrive in the college environment, I would never have sought >correction, and might still dislike reading. [snip] >become nearsighted after the college and grad-school experience, but >perhaps not as much, if I had been aware of natural vision improvement >techniques at the time. On the other hand, I might not have done as >well in college if I had not taken immediate steps to correct my >problem. (I went from an A/B average my first semester to straight A's >for the rest of my college career partly due to this effect). You have to decide what trade-offs you need to make to reach your goals. If you are going to undertake a vision therapy during study, then this can be difficult, due to your restricted time constraints. and the general pressure to to do well. but its not impossibble. >From: Lois Patterson > >I just wanted to add that I had an extremely bad year of school when I >was 7 because I desperately needed glasses, but my parents wanted to >prevent my eyes from getting worse. The teacher made fun of me because >they were trying alternative methods which didn't work. you can see how this would help :( >Things were so >much better when I got the glasses. It is quite likely my eyes got so >bad because I started doing hours and hours of reading a day when I was >6. Nevertheless, (and I know no-one on the list is suggesting otherwise >) it is very important to provide vision correction to children when they >need it. most people dont really notice a -0.25-0.5d change in vision very much. -0.25d means things outside of 4 meters become a little blurry. children often get by -0.5d without glasses simply because they dont know better. if problems are caught and corrected at this early stage then there may never be a need for glasses. I did not get glasses till I was over -1d at age 21 simply because I did not want them. someone lied to me and told me if I wear them for a little while my sight would improve and I wouldnt have to wear them again. where in fact once I started to wear them my sight got worse to the point I couldnt do without them until now. once you have gone past about -1d then you need glasses for certain activities. glasses only compensate and will not cure any problems. simply not wearing glasses will not improve your sight, you have to factor in what is causing your sight to degenerate. and attend to those issues. things like posture (very important) and other physical, emotional, mental, diet, lighting condition, etc. as well as rebuilding your vison with exercises etc. I spend about 8-12 hours in front of a computer screen every day, and still I have managed to improve my sight by about 30% over the last six months. Vic ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Mon Mar 27 21:32:51 EST 1995 Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 21:22:41 -0500 (EST) From: Alex Eulenberg Subject: Re: standard of care Status: RO X-Status: Here's my story. I'm a linguistics/cognitive science grad student. I was introduced to the Bates method by a Russian girl who ended up to be my wife, when I was 22. Actually, she was 20/20 and never needed to use it (until now, when the ocular stress of grad school life has been taxing her RIGHT eye). At the time I had a -1.50 both eyes prescription and always wore my glasses. Actually, before I had heard of Bates, I was already trying to improve my vision. I reasoned that if singers could improve their vocal range, why couldn't I improve my focal range? I just stopped wearing my glasses, and found I could improve just by walking around on bright sunny days. Later I started to read as much as I could on vision improvement. Now I'm 25 -- still myopic, but the last time I checked my myopia was under a diopter in each eye. Every so often I go on a patching-plus-lenses-and-lots-of-nutritional-yeast binge and my acuity shoots way up for a few days. On several occasions I have been able to read the 20 line at 20 feet indoors. My progress is kind of bumpy, but I feel I'm on my way. I find a lot depends on nutrition and exercise no matter how much visual training I do. I have started a mailing list, I_SEE (International Society for the Enhancement of Eyesight -- to join, send "subscribe i_see" to ) and have a WWW site with vision improvement materials -- http://silver.ucs.indiana.edu/~aeulenbe/ -- but you may know about this already... I had been participating on sci.med.vision since mid-November until just recently. I couldn't take the heat. If the thread "Alex's Platform" is still on your newsserver, I suggest you read that one. Also "Alex Surrenders" should give you a good idea of what happened to me. I am especially interested in non-Helmholtzian theories of accommodation, and in the extraocular muscles as a source of refractive error -- the recti causing astigmatism and hyperopia, and the obliques causing myopia. I have read Myopia Myth by Donald Rehm, and Bates in the original. I believe if there is to be a revolution in eye care, it must come from without. I believe Bates lost because he advocated a treatment that could be administered without a license -- not even the most progressive optometrists would go for that (e.g. the OEP will have nothing to do with Bates). --Alex Eulenberg (812) 857-5081 --President, I_SEE ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Mon Mar 27 22:07:11 EST 1995 From: Marco A Terry Subject: I guess standad introductions apply. Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 22:01:44 -0500 (EST) Status: RO X-Status: Ok. Since We have lots of new members - I guess I'll re-introduce myself. My name is Marco - I go to the Univ. of New Hamp. (5th year senior). I am 22 - I am majoring in Psychology & Comp. Sci (kinda) with a minor in Busines. I am a beginner Karateka (Shotokan), I meditate and I like Kilians Red (or Catamount). I have 1.5 and 1.75 I believe. My left eye has astigmatism. I took the Silva Mind Control Method - in which they have had some reported cases of dramatic improvement. I wear GP contact lenses which are great when you practise martial arts (try Sparing when somthing gets in your contact lens in the middle of a fight....ayayay!). I am, as you see, very sarcastic. I hope to, one day, aquire the 20/20 vision (Alex - I have am reading Bates, I know this is merely an average, don't flame me! ;-), that day will be a day of great embarrasment though, since I paid top dollars for contact lenses that I am hoping to stop using...I have started a program of eye vision improvement (some exercises et al.) Well - enough blabber. Send me e-mail or read my homepage (WWW) if you care to know more about me! Cheers! Marco. --- A man who has attained mastery of an Art reveals it in his every action - Samurai Maxim HomePage: http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mat/ ========================================================================= From hj@ccr-p.ida.org Sun Mar 26 09:13:38 EST 1995 From: "Harris A. Jaffee" Date: Sun, 26 Mar 1995 09:11:20 -0500 Subject: Re: random notes Status: RO X-Status: > 2. I'd be interested in knowing more about your experience with > strabismus surgery. How old were you and did you experience an increase > in astigmatism afterwards? I was 42. It was a 4th nerve paresis combined with some exotropia. An inferior oblique and a lateral rectus were weakened (recessed), so this means that the lateral rectus was moved back, away from the cornea. The inf obl is already in back, nowhere near the cornea. I believe that the surgery had no effect on my astigmatism, other than psychological. I was more aware of how things looked after the operation (because my diplopia was cured in most directions, but I had _new_ diplopia in others). Bottom line is my astigmatism in the operated eye went up from -.50 by maybe .25 or .50 diopter. (Same for the eye that wasn't touched!) I am confused that you say "surgery _increases_ astigmatism"; it would seem in some cases like mine to have a chance of _decreasing_ it. Maybe I don't understand. ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Sun Mar 26 16:28:27 EST 1995 From: "Sally Cooper" Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 09:19:01 GMT+1200 Subject: re: Reply to this message! Status: RO X-Status: I've taken a while to respond to Alex' command to reply to his message. I hope you're not all sick of hearing similar stories. I'm in my 40s. I teach computing, love to read - all the classic myope things. My sight is around -10 in my better eye. I hardly use the other eye. I wear a contact lens in the better eye. My sight has deteriorated continuously since the age of about 14. However since learning a little about natural vision I have managed to avoid a change of prescription for several years, but my sight hasn't actually improved. My main worry is retinal detachment. I have had 3 of these (in the better eye). Two needed surgery and one was laser treated. I am scared that one day they won't be able to fix it. Has anyone any ideas? I've read in the FAQ about bilberry. Would it help? Is it available in tablets etc? What do I look for? Has anyone other ideas - or similar experiences so we can commiserate? Looking forward to hearing from some of you. ---------------------------------------------------------- Sally Cooper (computing tutor) Taranaki Polytechnic New Plymouth New Zealand s.cooper@taranaki.ac.nz ---------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Mon Mar 27 20:15:46 EST 1995 Date: Tue, 28 Mar 1995 11:05:41 +1000 From: r.malingre@qut.edu.au (Reni Malingri) Subject: Another member's intro. Status: RO X-Status: INTRO ^^^^^ Name: Rene Malingre Gender: Male Age: 25 Occupation: Optometrist (part time) PhD candidate (full time) Nationality: Australian Refraction: R -2.50 L -2.75/-0.25 * 180 Spec wear: full time Favourite drink:coffee Favourite food: Medium-rare beef steak Favourite sport:Basketball Favourite band: Pearl Jam Cynicism level: Very High Belief in efficacy of vision training: Very Low Interest in whole area: High Willingness to participate in discussion: High ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Tue May 2 00:59:26 EST 1995 Date: Tue, 02 May 1995 07:52:11 +0200 (MET DST) From: ozden yumusak Subject: Re: Welcome New Members! Status: RO X-Status: Hello; I just joined to this list. I felt myself first member of this list because of so little posts! I am 30 years old and handsome. I am an Electronics/Telecom Engineer working in Turkish Telecommunications Co. I am living in Ankara, Turkiye. That's all now. Bye Ozden Yumusak ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Tue May 2 14:48:03 EST 1995 Date: Tue, 02 May 95 14:31 CDT From: RUCHKAL@ccm.UManitoba.CA Subject: New Member Status: RO X-Status: Hello, Everyone! I just joined the list and would like to introduce myself. My name is Barb Ruchkall, I'm a Research Analyst in the Office of Institutional Analysis, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba (Canada). I'm 47 years old, and up until about 40 years of age I had great eyesight. Once I turned 40, I started noticing that my arms were becoming way too short. My watch became illegible, especially in low light and people would shove papers at me too close to my face. In other words, I developed what I'm told is presbyopia. I bought a pair of reading glasses. I hate the blasted things! At first, I just didn't wear them much, but lately I find that I need them more and more. I'd been wondering if there was something I could do to strengthen the muscles that control accommodation ... seemed to me, these muscles should respond to exercise the same way other muscles in the body do. And it also seemed to me that the saying "If you don't use it, you'll lose it" would apply to those muscles as well. One day, I was surfin' the 'Net, and I came across the Natural Vision Web Site. And so, here I am! There are some other potential problems that I have: An ophthalmologist discovered that my eyes have the appearance of glaucoma, although my pressure is normal. I have large optic cups, or some darned thing. Kinda like Dolly Parton but in a less noticeable place. My field tests have all been normal, but I've been labelled a "glaucoma suspect". I visit an ophthalmologist whose special interest is glaucoma, and he "keeps an eye on me". Another potential problem is that I have an inflammatory bowel disease and have to take prednisone from time to time. Prednisone can cause cataracts and glaucoma. Needless to say, I avoid prednisone if possible. I have an eleven year old son who has a convergence problem...If he does the pencil exercise as described by BrAek in a previous post to this list, there is a point at which he begins to see double. His optometrist suggested that he do the pencil exercise, trying to focus on the pencil until the point that his vision becomes double. He also suggested that we place a postage stamp on the window, and have our son focus on the postage stamp, then look thru the window at something far away, then back to the postage stamp, etc. etc. These exercises seem to help, and I was quite impressed that the optometrist suggested exercises instead of glasses!! I'm glad to be on this list and look forward to any of your suggestions. Barb Barbara Ruchkall RUCHKAL@ccm.UManitoba.CA ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Wed May 10 01:00:31 EST 1995 From: "David Shaler" Date: Tue, 9 May 1995 21:45:43 +0000 Subject: Re: How long?? (fwd) Status: RO X-Status: On 10 May 95 at 15:25, Vic Cinc wrote: > the first types of improvements are based on better noticing > what you see. What does this mean?? How do you notice things better when you can't see them all too clearly in the first place. > the first goal is to start getting clear flashes. ie crystal > clear sight which at first may only last a few seconds. I think I had one of these. This morning when I woke up, after my eyes adjusted to the light, for a split second there, I could have sworn that I was wearing my contacts. Everything was clear. Is this possible after only doing the exercises for one day?? Also, everyone I tell about this thinks I've totally turned into a flake, because they think it's nonsense. Is there any truth to what they are saying??? _ ________ ____________ ________________ _________________________________ David Shaler / / dshaler@Direct.CA / VR.1 --------- Computer Screen / Save VR.5! / VR.2 -- Interactive Video Game / Send mail to John Matoian, Box 900 / VR.3 -------- Flight Simulator / Beverly Hills, CA 90213 USA / VR.4 ------------- Cyber Space / Send email to vr5@delphi.com / VR.5 - Virtual Sensory Reality / ___________ ________________ ____ /________________________________/ ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Mon Jul 10 23:13:09 EST 1995 Date: Mon, 10 Jul 95 21:10 PDT From: Robert_Michael_Kaplan@Sunshine.net (Robert-Michael Kaplan) Subject: Re: re-request Status: RO X-Status: Alex asked me: >Just wanted to re-request, if it's not too much to ask... >Could you please share your -6.00 to -1.50 success story with I_SEE? >--Thanks Over the years I have had many nearsighted people who have reduced the strength of their glasses. I'll share one story. I met Mary in 1988. Besides being myopic -4.50, she also had astigmatism, i.e. -2.5 to -3.00. The overall effect was -6.5 and -7.00. My first impression was her intense stare. It felt that she glued her look to mine. Mary had worn contacts for 12 years, 16 hours per day. I would say she was addicted. I asked her that question, and the answer was a definite yes. "I pop them in the morning and it is the last thing I take off at night." Mary spent a weekend in a seminar with me, and part of the teaching process involved her to take out her contacts and in a safe place being in her blur. This was very difficult for her because she had to give up control. Yes, looking clearly through 20/20 lenses is a form of maintaining control. This was very challenging for her, because, firstly she had to trust a man, me, who facilitated the process, and then learn to recapture her clearness from the inside. This meant finding her power behind her eyes. I structured process all weekend with patches, working with a partner and modified lens prescriptions, and the participants got in touch with their essence of where vision begins - in their heart. I had them practise breathing, blinking, deep winks, palming for 20 minutes listening to specially chosen music, watching slides and sharing their experiences. On the last evening of the training, Mary slipped on an old pair of glasses (from7 years before) and she had perfect 20/20. She walked along the beach and for many moments in her naked vision was able to see the ships anchored off in the bay. She even had moments of being able to read their large names. Mary visited another optometrist, on my suggestion, because I usually have a colleaugue do the measurements, so I am not biasing the findings. The O.D. I use doesn't usually know the educational plan I use to teach my patients. He reduced her nearsightedness to a 20/40 level of seeing. At this stage, Mary simply used her old frames, because I advised her that a further change would happen rather soon. This is my experience with highly motivated patients. Within three months, Mary was no longer wearing her contacts. She took a holiday to Hawaii and wore throwaway contacts while swimming and snorkling of about -4.00. The muscles around her eyes ached during this period as she became aware of the tension she had been carrying for so many years. She used acupressure points to stimulate and relax the nerve pathways to and around her eyes. Combining this with palming, Mary began having flashes of clear eyesight through her weaker glasses which were about -4.5. After about three months, a second reduction in lens power took place. This time I used the approach, I have earlier described in the posting to this group. At this time I personally refracted her and reduced the nearsighted measurement as well as increase the astigmatism component before the right eye only. I also reduced the left eye nearsightedmprescription more than the right to create a patching effect for the left eye. The rationale behind this was to begin stimulating the vertical meridian of the right eye. I knew from my past experience that this would homeopathically open up the withheld emotionality of her past. Please understand that this radical form of lens therapy is only done when I can personally supervise and facilitate the person's journey. This happened. Very soon after Mary received her new glasses, she began to feel a lot of anger, especially toward her father. This actually produced more blurriness through her new glasses and frustrated her. This is the therapy. I coached her to stay with the feelings. At this point I usually have an ongoing commitment from the client that they stay in touch with me. She moved through this phase and about a year later had her first child, a boy. As this young baby became a boy, he challenged his mother. and Mary again, had to face her past perceptions. At about this time, Her prescription was equalized between the eyes again and the nearsighted was reduced further to -3.5 with about -1.5 astigmatism. This was the last time she was to wear an astigmatic component. Mary underwent a course of personal growth at which time she ceremoniously burnt the older glasses. An Optometrist friend, who took the course with her, arranged to have some new glasses made up. A pair of -3.0's for driving, -2.0's for computer use and -1.0's for everything else. This lasted for an additional one and half years. During that time, Mary had a complete clearing with her father, who had earlier sexually abused her, and they became very close. She began to deal more lovingly with her son, and began to look at life from more of a spiritual point of view. It was no longer them and me. Her daily living became us. Mary practised yoga, walking and systematically at this point spent more and more time without glasses. She had a number of positive experiences such as walking down a steep hill and seeing the yellow line marking in the middle of the road extending all the way for one kilometer. Mary was consistently having clear eyesight. Her visual acuity on a snellen eye test was still below the level of her everyday experience. Her refractive measurements fluctuated between -1.5 and -4.00, depending on her fatigue level and soft focusing ability. The benefits to her visual journey were rewarding. She could now see her husband's eyes at the dinner table without glasses, which were now mainly -1.00's, even for driving during the day. She lives in the country and even drives on sunny days without glasses. When going to movies, she slips on her -3.0's. Mary loves the freedom from where she was in 1988. When I last saw her, a few days ago, I sensed from her attitude that glasses were soon to be a thing of the past. =A9 1995 Robert-Michael Kaplan - All rights reserved. This is a true case, however the name of the patient has been changed. =46or more information about Integrated Vision Therapy, read my new book The Power behind Your Eyes, to be published by Inner Traditions Int, in October, 1995. It is packed full of cases like Mary and lots of other useful information. Robert-Michael Kaplan. O.D., M.Ed., FCOVD. E-Mail Beyond_20/20@sunshine.net ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Tue Jul 18 18:06:35 EST 1995 Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 17:59:48 -0500 From: Alex Eulenberg Subject: Dennis Yelle's 20/40 specs Status: RO X-Status: This was posted to alt.med.vision.improve and sci.med.vision... * * * * I got some 20/40 glasses last month. These 20/40 glasses have no astigmatism correction (cylinder) in them. I got this by repeatedly asking for it. I had to go back to the doctor 3 times to get them and the doctor told me that "glasses do not make your vision get worse" but after going back for the third time and telling the doctor that the glasses were too strong I got them. Actually, they were a little weak for 20/40. When testing myself at home, I could not be sure I could have actually read the 20/40 line if I didn't already know what it said, but at least the glasses were not too strong, and I still had my 20/20 glasses anyway, in case I needed them. Next time, I will probably go to a behavioral optometrist, now that I know about them. Thanks Vic. I have an eye chart on the wall near the TV, and some geometric patterns like a large circle and a big X. I have learned what astigmatism looks like when looking at the circle and the X, so by looking at them, I can see if I have it or not at the time. It is amazing to watch my astigmatism come and go. I thought that I could get rid of my astigmatism by looking at the circle and/or the X and telling myself what they should look like and getting my eyes to adjust so that they look like what they should look like. But it is not so easy. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. Sometimes I look at the X and tell myself "this arm should be sharp and black like the other one" and something inside me says, "how do you know for sure. Maybe it is supposed to be fuzzy and gray today." So I get up and walk over to it and see that it is just as thick and black and sharp as the other arm and go sit down again. But that voice inside me is still not fully convinced. So I go back to watching TV. After a few weeks of this I noticed something else. My vision improves when I spend a minute or so looking at a human face. I look at the mouth, one eye, the other eye, and the mouth again, and it gets clearer. After a while, I look at the X and both arms look sharp and black. But if I keep looking at the X one of the arms slowly fades to gray and fuzzy. Hmm... The voice inside is not sure how the X is supposed to look. But it knows how a face is supposed to look. There is no doubt in it's mind how a face is supposed to look. No internal argument. We both agree. So I spent some more time looking at faces. And I bought some posters at K-Mart of faces. Some cartoon faces with lots of sharp edges, and some attractive women's faces some with nice bodies attached. I put some on the wall near the TV, and some near my bed. I woke up this morning over a half hour before my alarm clock rang and spent the time looking at the faces on my bedroom wall without wearing any glasses. They were fuzzy, but I knew they were faces and I know what faces are supposed to look like. After about a half an hour of this, I put on my 20/40 glasses and read the 20/25 line of my eye chart with each eye alone as well as with both eyes together. I even read some of the characters in the 20/20 line. If this keeps up, I might go back again and complain that these glasses are too strong. -- dennis@netcom.com (Dennis Yelle) "Roman scientists would not even look through Galileo's telescopes." ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Wed Jul 19 14:20:35 EST 1995 From: mat@metrica.metrica.com (Marco A. Terry) Subject: Some Questions. Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 14:21:44 -0400 (EDT) Status: RO X-Status: Howdy People. Some questions: 1. Where is Vicc? Haven't heard from him in ages...(I hope he did not unsubscribe) 2. The Background: Once and for all I have decided to give this eye therapy a serious shot. So far, w/o the aid of the therapist. I have started by using meditation to relax my eyes at night and by trying to ditch my glasses when possible (ditched my contacts...). I work infront of a computer most of the day. The Problem: I notice that w/o my glasses I feel 'stress' (or a tireness sensation) around my eyes (palming w/cold hands for some secs. helps), by the end of the day my vision is really blury and I have trouble having conversations w/o my glasses (I like to see who I talk too). I also don't have the best seating posture and look at the keyboard when I type (typing lessons?) The question: So what do I do? Thanx! -- Marco A. Terry Applications Engineer Metrica, Inc. 'The best battle you can win....is the one you 6 NEEP. Suite 400 did not have to fight..' -Sun Tzu (*I think*) Burlington, Ma 01803 ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Thu Aug 24 14:02:19 EST 1995 From: MBerezetsk@aol.com Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 14:40:40 -0400 Subject: Re: Real Results? Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 95-08-24 10:51:23 EDT, turnerg@puzzler.nichols.com (Glenn R. Turner) writes: >I would really like to hear any stories anyone has about actual visual >acuity improvement. There has only been one or two posts of this nature >since I joined this mailing list about a month ago. I did enjoy the post >about PCM, but never got any response when I asked for specifics about >this technique. It's not that I don't believe I can improve my vision >thru the techniques discussed on this mailing list, I would just like to >hear about a few people who actually did (with specifics on how much they >improved). Thanks. > >Glenn Turner >From what others have posted so far, I gather I'm the most successful user of this technique (although by now it's MY technique to a great extent, since I've discovered ways to fight not an abstract myopia but MY myopia, and the breakthrough came when I realized how much what I'm really up agains is myself). As for the "real" results--here's what has become real for me after 2 1/2 months: 1. A measurable PERMANENT improvement of about 2,5 D (except for night vision -- I know it's worse but have no figures.) 2. Long periods of measurable improvement by as much as 6D (vision 20/60 -- compare to the original 5/200, or 20/x) 3. Short flashes of 20/30. (I've never had a 20/20 correction and never saw 20/20 under any circumstances.) 4. No plateu yet -- it's getting better every day. God is the world beautiful! Elena ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Thu Aug 24 15:46:15 EST 1995 From: c22at@kocrsv01.delcoelect.com Subject: Real Results? (fwd) Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 15:26:26 -0400 (CDT) Status: RO X-Status: Forwarded message: > since I joined this mailing list about a month ago. I did enjoy the post > about PCM, but never got any response when I asked for specifics about > This might not be relevant to your question, but amazingly enough, the PCM posts here were more than what could be found in SMV for months. I asked a question on PCM once in that group of so called doctors last year, but noone replied. I can understand if they are not giving vision exercises the time of day, but I can't forgive them for ignoring PCM questions. Instead I kept reading them saying: contacts and glasses ARE the cure for myopia, beside keratonomy. I guess they must be very scared at the prospect of a non-surgical procedure ending their source of income. Very disgusting if you ask me. I gave up on the newsgroup long ago. Sorry, just venting some steam. Oh, about natural vision improvement. I have let a 'doctor' influence me into giving up on VT when I was in Junior High. From then, my prescription increases from -2.5 to -5.5 on the left, and -3.5 on the right. Despite what my 'doctor' told me, I always tried not to read a book too close anymore. Otherwise my prescription would've been a lot higher. In October of last year, I was involved in a feverishly busy software project which required near work for 8-10 hrs a day (I am talking looking at a monitor for that amount of time) for a few months. Within a few days, I started noticing that my vision was getting worse and worse (my lenses were not strong enough to see fairly distant objects clearly). I would say that my vision got worse by about -0.5 in two weeks. I started doing some simple VT. I am happy to report that the same lenses that were not strong enough before is now just right. I can't really improve much beyond this level. My problem is that 99.99% of my work is near work (writing software). For now I am settling with maintaining my vision level. If only I had the time to get undercorrected lenses. Grrrr. Andy ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Wed Aug 30 09:28:16 EST 1995 Date: Wed, 30 Aug 1995 06:49:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Roosen Subject: Miscellaneous Status: RO X-Status: D The claim has been made that Nutra Sweet is responsible for Desert Shield Syndrome. The poster is apparently unaware that considerable amounts of chemical warfare were practiced against the troops involved in that action. This has now been well documented. Additionally, a number of nuclear plants were bombed and the nuclear material was released to the environment. Hence there are many other probable causes for Desert Shield Syndrome. Various mechanisms have been suggested as the precipitating cause for myopia. These include dishonesty, sexual dysfunction, suppressed anger and several other mechanisms. Consideration of the Yerkes-Dodson Law tells us that performance in an individual increases with levels of stress up to a certain point. Beyond that point, increasing levels of stress reduce performance. Perhaps myopia results from overstress. The methods that are effective in reducing myopia are in general connected with relaxing the eye. Perhaps relaxation in general will serve to aid in reducing myopia. For instance, is there a connection between meditation and improved vision? Eyeglasses serve secondarily useful purposes in addition to "sharpening" vision. They protect the eyes from wind and debris. They also protect the eyes from ultraviolet radiation which has been shown to form cataracts. Note that most of the UV radiation that gets past eyeglasses enters through the top of the glasses. Hence, when choosing sunglasses, be sure to get a pair that has a tight fit between the top of the glasses and the bridge of the nose and eyebrow region. This group has been most useful to me in reminding and encouraging me that eye improvement works. I spent a considerable amount of effort a few years ago improving my vision with the Bates method. Then I allowed myself to be discouraged from continuing by a rather mediocre optometrist who viciously attacked the concept. I am now slowly getting back into the "swing" of things. The hints about a burning sensation connected with clear flashes were quite valuable to me. I have noticed the same effect, and had been attributing it to allergies. Now I know to recognize and seek that sensation. Also the hint about holding a book as far from my eyes as possible is excellent advice. I am operating on a low budget and cannot afford to go through new sets of glasses as an aid to vision improvement. Since I already have a set of computer glasses, I have taken to wearing them when I walk around the house and go outside. I have found that when I apply some of the vision improvement methods at the same time, this approach works quite well and I can read signs at a distance and also get some "clear flashes". Robert ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Thu Aug 31 08:50:45 EST 1995 Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 15:04:47 +0100 From: fha@ping.at (Florian Hoertlehner) Subject: Natural Vision experts in Austria (Europe) Status: RO X-Status: Hi! After I accidentally found the Natural Vision FAQ and this list, I want to d= o something to improve my vision. Therefore I have several questions. Any help is appreciated! 1) Does anybody know of any people who could help me here in Vienna, Austria= , Europe? I tried to find somebody, but no (local) optometrist I talked to co= uld help me further. I=B4ve read about some things I could do, but I don=B4t= want to do anything myself bevore I have spoken to an expert. The reasons for this are a) that I could damage my eyes and b) I want to make sure I am not someone where natural treatment is useless. 2) I would like to tell something about my eye problems in order. Hopefully someone could give me some advise what I could do I am 19, a workoholic and a computer freak. In the last ten years I spend about five to ten hours per day in front of my monitor. I usually spend all of my freetime in my room and I don=B4t do any sports or something else. I started wearing glasses at the age of 7-9 ( I don=B4t know exaktly). Since= then I got stronger glasses every year. Last year I started wearing contact lense= s because my glasses have become so heavy that my nose did hurt all the time. Yeah - I am shortsighted and somebody even said I have astigmatism (but I didn=B4t wear these special glasses). In the last month I moved to my new appartment I need in order to go to my favorite university. I had to leave my room and walk in the city for quite a while. I noticed two things: a) I don=B4t see much anymore and b) my sight decreases enourmous after 1/2 to one hour (I walk and after one hour I have to go home because I wouldn=B4t find anything anymore) and c) I don=B4t have a good "full-range" view (I see things front of me but not wh= at=B4s left and right). But I am not so interested in seeing things in the city. I don=B4t care so = much what I see. I don=B4t need to see the "world". The only thing I really *mus= t* see is the computer screen and some books. And have so strong problems when reading that have to do something. I am used to work for more than twenty hours a day, but now I have to stop after an hour because I have to try so hard to read. I know that believes are very important! One of my believes is not to get ill - and I am very healthy. I want to continue working on the things I like, but I don=B4t care much what I can see and what not - as long as I ca work. But now I can=B4t work anymore because of my eyes. What I really would like to know is if it is possible to improve my vision without changing this fundamental believe! I can imagine that it sounds a bit crazy... I=B4ll give you one more example of what I mean: My father invited me to travel arount the US. I didn=B4t travel with him just because there is every= thing on the Net I want to know, so there is no need for me to leave my room... Thank you, Florian =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =46lorian A. Hoertlehner EMAIL: fha@ping.at Nachtigallenweg 59 PHONE: +43-1-9142691 Austria - 1140 Vienna (Europe) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Sat Sep 2 04:35:09 EST 1995 Date: Fri, 1 Sep 95 23:05 EST From: John Richter <0007249877@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Real results! Status: RO X-Status: > Subject: Real Results? > > > I would really like to hear any stories anyone has about actual visual acuity > improvement. There has only been one or two posts of this nature since I > joined this mailing list about a month ago. I did enjoy the post about PCM, > but never got any response when I asked for specifics about this technique. > It's not that I don't believe I can improve my vision thru the techniques > discussed on this mailing list, I would just like to hear about a few people > who actually did (with specifics on how much they improved). Thanks. > > Glenn Turner > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Thu, 24 Aug 1995 14:40:40 -0400 > From: MBerezetsk@aol.com > To: turnerg@puzzler.nichols.com, i_see@indiana.edu > Subject: Re: Real Results? > > In a message dated 95-08-24 10:51:23 EDT, turnerg@puzzler.nichols.com (Glenn > R. Turner) writes: > > >I would really like to hear any stories anyone has about actual visual > >acuity improvement. I've been involved (as opposed to totally committed) to using the Bates Method for about a year and a half now. My 20/20 contact lense perscription before I started was -7.5 in both eyes. My permenant 20/20 improved perscription is - 6.5 and -6.25. That's about a 15% improvement. And I just did some of the very basic "techniques" (blink, breathe, "sketch") and wore lenses underprescribed to 20/40. I never consistently did any of the additional eye games (exercises) that were recommended. I know that if I did my vision would continue to get better. I believe that one of the biggest keys has been wearing underprescribed lenses. John Richter ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Thu Sep 7 15:37:27 EST 1995 Date: Thu, 7 Sep 95 12:55 PDT From: Beyond_20/20@Sunshine.net (Beyond 20/20 Vision) Subject: Re: Natural Vision experts in Austria (Europe) Status: RO X-Status: =46lorian wrote to i_see recently: >After I accidentally found the Natural Vision FAQ and this list, I want to = do >something to improve my vision. Therefore I have several questions. >Any help is appreciated! > >1) Does anybody know of any people who could help me here in Vienna, Austri= a, >Europe? I tried to find somebody, but no (local) optometrist I talked to c= ould >help me further. I=B4ve read about some things I could do, but I don=B4t= want to >do anything myself bevore I have spoken to an expert. The reasons for this >are a) that I could damage my eyes and b) I want to make sure I am not >someone where natural treatment is useless. >I am 19, a workoholic and a computer freak. In the last ten years I spend >about five to ten hours per day in front of my monitor. I usually spend all >of my freetime in my room and I don=B4t do any sports or something else. Snip >But I am not so interested in seeing things in the city. I don=B4t care so= much >what I see. I don=B4t need to see the "world". The only thing I really *mu= st* >see is the computer screen and some books. And have so strong problems >when reading that have to do something. I am used to work for more than >twenty hours a day, but now I have to stop after an hour because I have to >try so hard to read. snip >What I really would like to know is if it is possible to improve my vision >without changing this fundamental believe! I can imagine that it sounds a Hello Florian: I was blown away by your honest assessment of your visual and other predicament. On the other hand, I wanted to share some of my personal experiences which could make a difference to you, and your eyesight, if you were courageous enough to risk stepping out of your safety zone. I have been undertaking a personal vision and professional training in improving my vision with Robert-Michael Kaplan, a behavioural optometrist, here in Canada, who directs Beyond 2020 Vision=81, where I am currently apprenticing and working. Last year, I visited his practise as a patient, because I had worn the same lens prescription for the past 18 years, for driving, shopping and movies. My vision began to deteriorate even further, and my right eye felt like it was turning outward. I was worried and panicky that I would become dependent on glasses and my eyesight would worsen further. Within a few months of doing Dr Kaplan's prescribed vision therapy, I no longer wore my eyeglasses, even for night driving!!!!!!!! It sounds like you are in a very desperate situation, and in my humble opinion, you have some important lifestyle decisions to make regarding your well being and eyes. I have tried many therapies during the last few years, and integrated vision therapy has been the most powerful in depth and profound in simplicity. If I might be so bold as to recommend something for you, I would heartily encourage you to visit with Dr. Kaplan, who is lecturing in London, England between September 25th and October 11th, 1995 for a couple of one hour personal consultations. If you would like to discuss this with me further, please e-mail me at Beyond_20/20@sunshine.net. Also, request more information if you like. Sincerely, Kim Tasa. ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Fri Sep 8 14:36:37 EST 1995 From: MBerezetsk@aol.com Date: Fri, 8 Sep 1995 13:56:11 -0400 Subject: Elena on her permanent improvement (at length) Status: RO X-Status: I started planning this post a week ago and discovered there’s just too much I want to say! I’ll have to try to curb myself and, in describing my methods, skip over many a “why” and summarize some of the “how”s in the end -- so in case you get bored or unconvinced by my rendition of the “why”s just skip to the last portion of the post. I am very grateful to everyone who has helped me along the way with numerous tips and ideas and reference sources -- and I am grateful for this opportunity to discuss the subject I’ve become fascinated with. For the past few weeks, I’ve been accused by my family of “talking nothing but physiological, linear, and quantum optics.” Among my friends, I probably rank as a one-subject bore by now. I used to be a sharp conversationalist; these days, no matter what is being discussed, when someone asks me, “What do you think?”, the answer they are likely to get is, “I think that cloud over there looks like an overweight Dalmatian, and the one to the left is a portrait of Karl Marx, only the beard is better-groomed than in the original.” Or, on a sign-reading spell, I will contribute to the general conversation by declaring, in the tone of a celestial revelation, that “this swimming pool is not required by state law to have a lifeguard on duty!!!” Recently I’ve also had to suffer through being introduced to people in the following manner: “This is Elena; don’t pay any attention to her, she slips into a meditative trance every five minutes and isn’t really there.” This is the price I have to pay for my new visual awareness: I’m as engrossed in what I’m doing and as removed from my immediate surroundings as SOMEONE READING A BOOK; only this book happens to be spread all around me, in all directions and at all distances. Otherwise, the attitude is the same: I don’t skip words or sentences or paragraphs, and I don’t welcome interruptions. I think the key is paying attention to what/how you see AT ALL TIMES. Of course glasses should be removed from the picture, except for the situations where seeing the world the way you see it is life-threatening, like when you’re driving. For all other purposes, watch your real world. Try to understand and appreciate the fact that your blurry world is MORE real than the world of an emmetrope, closer to the truth, closer to what it physically is. A perfect world of emmetropic vision is a hoax. Nobody’s eye is an object of perfect optics, and everyone’s picture on the retina is blurry. The emmetropic brain selectively enhances the signals form the center of an image and suppresses the ones from the periphery, thereby getting rid of such REAL phenomena as light interference and diffraction; that’s how emmetropic high contrasts and sharp lines are created -- by eliminating the unwanted parts of reality from perception. A myope loses (or, more likely, forfeits) this ability to fool himself, to adorn the picture of the world this way. Far from being dishonest, we are being honest even in our perception! Far from being conformists accepting the hoax of what everyone else agrees to see as “reality,” we see a more real reality. Our blur is created by the laws of physics some of which we alone can observe directly. Lift up your head in pride, o ye myope: you see the world closer to the way God sees it. Myopia is not a disease: it’s a disagreement, a dispute, a dissatisfaction. It’s dissidence. It is, to use a very unscientific term, unhappiness. Well -- do any of you have serious reasons to believe that human condition has nothing in it to be unhappy about? Were it so, were we the ones who rain on everybody’s parade by refusing to see just how perfect the world is, we would have to be ashamed of being myopic, and rightfully jammed into glasses through which the party line can be seen so clearly. But I feel that we are simply the ones who have more sensitivity, emotionally and intellectually, to the world’s (and our own) sorrows -- and when it becomes unbearable we shut it down indiscriminately (because we don’t know how to shut it down selectively). All of it. The higher the myopia, the more drastic the conflicts must have been that had found their only “resolution” in one’s failing to see them! The difference between failing to see and choosing to ignore may be very obvious on the conscious level, but on a deeper, unconscious level of perception, it disappears. I happen to have a very good example handy, where the organ “choosing to fail” is not the eye but the principle is the same. In the Russian émigré community whence many of my acquaintances come, I have often observed numerous cases of temporary hearing impairment whenever an unfamiliar English word or expression was used by a native speaker conversing with one of my friends whose English is less than perfect. These people, well-educated professionals accustomed to high levels of cognitive success in their native tongue, and highly frustrated by their -- average at best -- cognitive performance in a second language, didn’t realize in such situations that they’d failed to understand something: instead, they simply “didn’t hear.” Later they would often insist that a given subject was never discussed at all. They were not aware of having missed something -- instead, they were restricted in their awareness to what they didn’t miss. Everything else was not consciously ignored but unconsciously omitted, not merely from cognition but from sheer physical perception. Here’s another striking example -- of how much the way we see is our protection against... God knows what, it must be different in every separate case -- and in this particular case, something quite dramatic. A close friend of mine who is a psychiatrist, a myope totally dependent on glasses, and a hard-core skeptical thinker who utilizes nothing but an extremely non-permissive scientific logic in any discussion, was recently asked to evaluate a patient admitted to the hospital. The patient, a beautiful woman in her thirties, had recently had her high myopia corrected by laser. She had always considered her myopia “a curse” and dwelled on the opportunities she had supposedly missed because of it. The correction had given her a perfect 20/20 vision and involved no unusual side effects or complications. Two months later, she was hospitalized with acute psychosis; she has no previous history of mental illness. Her present problem is, she is not only clinically depressed but absolutely incapable of functioning in any way because she refuses to open her eyes. She says that she doesn’t want to see the world with her new vision, that getting it was “a terrible mistake,” and begs the doctors to give her back her myopia. I must say that if this patient didn’t exist I should have invented her because she really helped me to get my friend interested in discussing possible psychological aspects of myopia with me, something she never bothered to consider before. I have her roaming around with no glasses on now, and meditating, too! But of course the best part is, now her knowledge is applicable to my hypothesizing, and I can count on her for weeding out my wildest speculations while expanding and sustaining whatever is plausible. Zarin, you wrote you would be convinced with “real” changes in the eye, while what you have observed in a clear flash was just blur reinterpretation. I happened to be reading “Zen And the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance” just alongside all the books on vision improvement, so every time I encountered the word “real” it would trigger a number of intellectual reflexes contracted from reading that remarkable book. What is real? An emmetrope’s reality is constructed by the brain as much as a myope’s reality -- even more so, considering the emmetropic brain has to eliminate a greater number of “real” light phenomena like interference and diffraction before it gets its picture right. Inasmuch as through vision, we are all dealing with mental images of objects, not objects themselves, none are “real” or all of them are “real” -- it really doesn’t matter. The real “real” is electrons and protons and quanta -- something we never see anyway. I’ve always preferred avoiding my glasses -- just using them when necessary, like any device, never living in them -- because to me, they represented a mechanical distortion of MY reality, however different the latter may have been from everybody else’s reality. I’m used, cognitionwise, to something everyone on this planet has to deal with, whether they ever give it a second thought or not: to having no immediate access to anything more real than my mind’s choice of reality -- forever relative, be it myopic or emmetropic. At some point in the past (specifically, when I was 13 -- which, incidentally, is the prevalent age in females for the onset of myopia), my mind had chosen, or was forced to choose, to interpret the incoming data in a fuzzy way. To do this efficiently and with minimum monitoring, it had to do something to the eyes; it was done anatomically, organically, functionally, or through all of the above. The important thing is, however, that it couldn’t have been done without a direct command from the mind, and can be undone by the mind’s alternative decision, by its choice of a different reality, a different mode of perception/processing. The very first clear flash was enough to persuade me that it can be done, and I don’t really have to know what it is exactly that my eyes are doing to obey this command, any more than I have to monitor my liver in order for it to dispose of the toxins properly. Extrinsic muscles or the ciliary, the curvature of the lens or the saccadic movements -- who cares? (Ophtalmologists should but they don’t.) Eyes are there to look pretty, is all. The important thing happens inside my head, and to say that it’s a “mere” reinterpretation may be perfectly correct -- if we eliminate the “mere” part. It’s a reinterpretation of reality, a choice of an alternative universe, for God’s sake! What can be less “mere” than that?! Besides, I’m sure that “real” changes in the focusing mechanism do occur in the eye itself. (Otherwise, why the burning and stinging and the tears? How can these purely physical symptoms be accounted for if the eye itself is doing nothing?) Someone with -4D may be able to reinterpret the blur; with -8D, however, there’s nothing there to reinterpret: I don’t know the street sign exists, let alone interpret what’s written on it. With me, it’s not the case of something that can be seen somewhat better -- it’s all or nothing (nothing in terms of everybody else’s emmetropic world, not in terms of my own world -- but they have little in common). At least that’s how my clear flashes started. Now it’s seldom “nothing” because my vision is constantly better, but still, at around -5,5D, screwed up enough for me to appreciate the difference (in and out of a clear flash), and believe me -- you would have to reinterpret oxygen and learn how to breathe under water to get this amount of difference between the two worlds. Today I want to live in the clear world, not because it is in any way superior to my old blurry world, but because it’s a lot easier to use a world well broken in (like an old shoe), a world designed by generations of my predecessors for emmetropic use, than to cultivate my -8D (Minus Eight Dimensions!) universe which nobody can comprehend or share with me, or make more comfortable or safe. (Surely it’s not the world where they would have invented driving! But things like fuzzy logic would thrive there and technology based on it can be superior to anything dualistic logic has produced -- the Tokyo-Osaka express has already shown it!) My world is NOT defective; it’s just that the rest of this planet won’t have anything to do with it; so I have to live where they all live, or be alone in my universe. Well -- I’ve made my choice. Whatever decisions my mind has made in the past in order to avoid the perils of living in the artificially clear world of emmetropic vision will have to be void. I will never tell my mind that they were bad or wrong decisions; on the contrary, I will admire its ability to find this relatively harmless way to metaphorically express the inner conflicts so profound that in order to navigate through them without getting me into some chronically diseased state, without killing off my curiosity and imagination, and without turning me into a bitch, it had to do SOMETHING and had chosen to dim the harshness of the world on my feelings as best it could. But today I’m encouraging it to turn it all on to full blast. I am strong; I can cope; I don’t need any analgesics for the pain of living in the world I have to share with billions of creatures unlike me. I can take it. With this attitude in mind -- now for some practical recommendations from my experience. 1. Some exercises usually practiced for vision improvement are boring. Don’t do the ones you find boring. 2. Watch your visual perception AT ALL TIMES. Trace, blink, breathe, do whatever you remember to do -- but decide to dedicate a portion of your life (say, a month... a week’s vacation if a month sounds like too much) to forming this habit. I know it sounds boring... but if you tell yourself there’s a time limit and you won’t have to do it beyond this time limit, you’ll be able to talk yourself into trying. (I predict you won’t be able to stop afterwards, but that’s another story.) 3. Vision is passive. Attention is active. Never ever mix them up! It’s a very myopic thing to do. Don’t choose what you want to see, it’s your eyes’ choice. Don’t ever forget to pay attention to whatever they choose to see. A dot, a spot, a line, a letter -- if your eyes have singled it out freely, pay attention! If they lose interest and go somewhere else, follow them with your attention (not vice versa! Don’t make your eyes follow your attention!) 4. Watch every sunset like a special effects show designed with the sole purpose of impressing the single important spectator -- you. Look at every natural phenomenon this way. Look at as many as you can this way. Become the center of the universe, the one for whom the sky changes its color and the ocean brings its waves closer for observation and approval. Ascribe the eyes of an adoring puppy to the moon: all it wants to do is look you in the eyes with eager anticipation of attention. Find thousands of such eager eyes among the leaves of every tree. 5. Learn to write with your left hand. It will greatly stimulate your right (visual) brain, often idle in myopes. Don’t try to imitate your right hand’s writing or you will feel totally helpless: your left hand can’t do that, but it has a hidden OWN handwriting that has nothing in common with that of your right hand. Experiment and discover it. Don’t force it to write in the correct direction -- it often prefers mirror reversions of letters, doesn’t care whether it’s writing from left to right or right to left, and might even like to write in a circle or a spiral rather than a straight line. 6. Become a junkie for light. Mentally direct it from its every source right into your visual cortex. Thunderstorms are great: let every lightning enter your head and explode with light inside your brain! When lightnings are not available, make use of whatever is flashing: police cars, fire engines... The sound should be transformed into light, too, and blast right into your visual cortex with the power of a hurricane! 7. Rewrite every scene from your past you are not particularly proud of or happy about. Create an alternative, more satisfying memory of this scene inside your head. Delete and overwrite the first script. Let it happen the way it should have happened. Tip: use violence where you were intimidated, arrogance where you were shy, courage where you were a coward; be a perpetrator where you were a victim. Perceive yourself as STRONG. 7. Make eternal peace with who you are. Justify yourself to yourself. Justify your every action and emotion. Discover your innermost motives; discover how perfectly necessary and valid and instinctively right they’ve always been! 8. Establish an imaginary attention point in front of you, a point where a V projected from your eyes narrows down to an invisible dot in space. The angle of the V is wider at short distances, and extremely narrow at great distances. Then forget the V and be aware of just this point of attention wherever you move it. Place it on top of an object and simultaneously move the object down with this power point. Place it under the object, pushing the object up. Apply it to the left side of the object and push it to the right, then vice versa. Watch the power of your attention point move objects in space. Far and near, great and small, they all move wherever you push them. 8. Choose three objects lined horizontally in front of you (in your blur zone) on the same line of vision. Look at the central one while maintaining peripheral awareness of the other two. Don’t try to get rid of weird light/dimness effects, pulsations, etc., that you might observe this way. Blink very lightly when your eyes begin to burn -- and enjoy the clarity! Remember the sensation. Eventually you’ll be able to re-create your clear flash by just imagining this sensation whenever you choose, and later to maintain it. 9. The struggle with myopia is the struggle for control. If you go on living in a body that’s totally beyond your mental control, something else will eventually go wrong, given the appropriate genetic/environmental opportunity. Winning over one malfunction provides you with confidence and skills to fight any disease that may be lurking in the dark of the future. I don’t think this struggle for control has been initiated by my conscious self: I think it’s my survival instinct that does my blinking and tracing for me. Hence my last recommendation: treat your visual activities as a quest for survival. You won’t have to question their validity with this attitude. Treat them as the most important part of your life, as its center rather than a mere aspect. Let everything ride on this attitude. Trace your thoughts; give them geometrical shapes. Paint your sex crimson and purple and neon red. Outline your anger, watch it turn into a deadly arrow, shoot it through the heart of your enemy. Draw your love, make it into a weightless, shimmering cover to throw on your loved one’s shoulders. Crown your friends with rainbows around their heads. Stroke every cat with your eyes, and every dog. Visually recreate the process that has made a seed grow into a tree. Elena *********************** For every complex problem, there’s a simple solution, and it’s wrong. -- Sys.admin. folklore ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Tue Oct 10 12:14:40 EST 1995 From: xxxxx@xxxxxxxxx (Jerry) Subject: Myopia and palming. Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 15:41:59 GMT Status: RO X-Status: Hi, :-) I'm new to this list (Alex Eulenberg and Jim H Day may remember me from a Sci.Med.Vision-thread about myopia). Anyway, In 1,5 years my eyes have become more myopic, 1,5 years ago they were about -0.5 dpt., now they're -2.25 dpt. I've been to an eye-doctor who said that reading and close-work doesn't have anything to do with the myopia. I have learnt from various sources that some of you out there doubt that. I would like to know more about the "alternative" way of approaching the myopia-thing. 1) I have read about "Palming" on the net, but it seems just _too_ simple, does ot really work the I think it does ? (cover eyes, relax) 2) Also I plan not to wear my glasses during close-work. Anyway, I would love to hear more of these "easy to apply yourself" tips, I don't want to become more myopic. A few more question(s). My eye-doctor told me that I have "high eye-pressure". ( He said "19") As far as a I know normal pressure is 16 +/- 5. There is _no_ glaucoma in my family, does this mean I **just have high ocular pressure** and that's it ? Will palming be able to reduce this (the eye-pressure) ? Or anything else (besides the standard medicines and operations) ? All info is welcome, Greetings, Jerry. ps. For those concerned, I visit my Eye-doc each 6 months. pps. The fact that I have "high eye-pressure" was only discovered by coincidence because I was becoming a bit myopic a year ago.. ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Wed Dec 6 11:44:54 EST 1995 Date: Wed, 6 Dec 1995 10:58:47 -0500 From: aeulenbe Subject: Documented Myopia Reduction Status: RO X-Status: On sci.med.vision, In article <4a1sj0$g1s@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>, Paul Harris wrote: >Two articles in a recent (within the past year) Journal of Behavioral >Optometry were written by OD's are their personal stories of myopia and >myopia control. One woman went through a long term 8-10 years worth, >of work, (mostly on her own with infrequent periodic visits to OD's) >and made a 5 diopter shift. The man made about a 4 diopter shift. Just filling in the facts here... I don't know which man Dr. Harris is talking about, but one woman, Antonia Orfield (OD) wrote an article in the 1994 Journal of Behavioral Optometry entitled "Seeing Space: Undergoing Brain re-programming to Reduce Myopia" (pp. 123-131). It was not a five diopter shift, but still significant. From the abstract: * * * :The author underwent myopia reduction from a spectacle prescription of :-3.87 DS and -3.37 DS to -.50 DS and -.25 DS over a period of seven :years. The essence of the program was passive adaptation to a series of :weaker glasses and better vision in a reverse of the process of adaptation :to stronger and stronger glasses and a more and more warped :space world... * * * >From the article: * * * :My training consisted of three phases. :First Phase, 1975-1981: Lens reduction without any specific training :techniques until I wore a -1.50 DS [diopters] and -1.25 DS spherical :prescription. Prior to '75 I wore a -3.87 DS and -3.37 DS with a small :amount of against the rule cylinder. That Rx was based on a cycloplegic :refraction in 1973 that had already cut me from my old -4.25 DS with :cylinder OU [both eyes] prescription. :Second Phase, 1981-82: Office training with [Dr. Amiel] Francke [in :Washington, DC] for two three-month blocks of two one-hour sessions per :week, with one month free between, and two months of a home program :after. This took me down to what I now wear for good distance vision :(-.50 DS and -.25 DS in spin-case soft contact lenses). These lens :powers were determined by retinoscopy, as well as the subjective :refraction. When I left Washington, I was also wearing a +.25 DS pair of :training spectacles over my contacts for walks, and getting excellent :vision most days. During that year every lens cut was first practiced :with plus spectacles cancelling out minus before I actually received new :contacts. Even with no lensess at all, I was comforrtable at the beach :that summer, seeing numbers on the sailboats, addresses on the houses :across the street, white caps on the bay. :Third Phase, 1983-89: Further Rx reduction with [Dr. James] Blumenthal :[of the Illinois College of Optometry] in Chicago to a -.25 DS and a :Plano, and then a struggle to hold my gains. For six months I wore :nothing on either eye except to read. There followed a private tutorial :with Blumenthal on myopia control during two years of pre-optometry :classes and four years at ICO. My vision held up fairly well throug the :first year and a half of optometry studies. Then there was some slippage :in spite of our efforts, but now I am back to where I was when I left :Washington. This phase involved no actual vision training, just lens control. [...] :Since I have learned to SEE SPACE, a -2.00 flipper reveals a visibly :flat and warped distance view. A -3.50 DS or a -4.00 DS is a swimming :blur, the way my father's glasses seemed to me when I was a child. It is :hard to believe I spent years looking through them. How was it possible? :By gradual, stealthy adaptation. :How did I get out of them, then? :By gradual de-adaptation. * * * --Alex ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Mon Dec 4 12:41:52 EST 1995 From: mtorres@arl.mil (Torres Mario) Subject: Vision Quest, step 1. Date: Mon, 4 Dec 95 10:19:28 MST Status: RO X-Status: Greetings, On the first major step of my "Vision Quest" (eyesight improvement, at least), I plan to confront my optometrist (glently ;) and ask alot of questions and tell him of my intentions to try and break my dependence from glasses. I am mainly going to ask if he will help me to gradually reduce my prescription of my glasses and maybe my contacts. Though, I've gotten the feeling that glasses may be better because you don't have something in your eye which might interfere with your eye shape directly. Any suggestions about what/how I should approach him? What else to ask? Should I just go to using glasses and no contacts? I wish I could go cold turkey off of my glasses, but I work with computers and this makes it nearly impossible to do. Suggestions are appreciated, M.A.T. ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Mon Dec 4 14:16:01 EST 1995 From: "MARLA SCOGIN" Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 12:36:06 CST Subject: New on list... Status: RO X-Status: Hello all, I am new to this list. I am a graphic illustrator, designer, coordinator and an energy field therapist (Reiki Master, completed Healing Touch Program, Therapeutic Touch and currently a student at Barbara Brennan School of Healing). I am familiar to some degree with natural vision healing but do not know the details. I do know that I do not agree with my optometrist (closed and rigid) and my eyesight flucuates greatly (I am very near sighted, astigmatic, and have had reading glasses for a year or two which I use sometimes...sometimes I dont need them...I wear contacts. I was in bed for two weeks last year recovering from orthopaedic surgery on both feet and not wearing my contacts. I totally lost the need for reading glasses. I called my opt. and asked him what was going on...he said, "thats right...that happens..." . You would think that perhaps I might have been told that discontinuing contact lens use would prevent reading glasses...anyway...he believes there is no REAL improvement possible. He says once the eyes start to fail, it only gets worse. I told him I do not agree but I dont know where to start....walking around with 20/200 vision turns me into a super-introvert and I walk around looking at the floor. I hope there are optometrists on this list as well as none-optometric holistic people so I can get a well rounded view (no pun intended) of my situation. Any comments/recommendations would be appreciated. Thank you. Marla in Birmingham, AL Marla Scogin mscogin@cardio.tht.uab.edu ========================================================================= From aeulenbe@indiana.edu Wed Dec 10 23:54:43 1995 From: MBerezetsk@aol.com Date: Sun, 10 Dec 1995 23:40:06 -0500 Subject: Taking up Bill's challenge Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 95-12-10 00:48:52 EST, mjensen@crl.com (Mark Jensen) writes: >Mr. Stacy, are you a fugitive from sci.med.vision? You seem out of place >here. This listserv is for people who are interested in vision improvement >and believe they can accomplish same >snip< >Mark Jensen I think it’s not a bad idea to have Bill here -- long as he refrains from insulting anyone sci.med.vision-style. There definitely are eye problems in this world best dealt with by orthodox ophthalmology, even though myopia is not one of them. I'm sure we can learn stuff from Bill -- provided learning goes both ways! Bill -- I remember a post about a bet of sorts, I forget the details but I remember the figure -- a thousand bucks. Who were you going to pay? Can I get a piece of that pie if I prove to you that I've improved my high myopia? You could get my medical records from my respectable Park Avenue ophthalmologist whom I have visited for the last time a few years ago. I didn't know anything about natural vision improvement till June of this year -- I have copies of my original post asking for information and Alex and Vic's replies. So I've been in "self-training" for six months. I started from ground zero -- I couldn't read the first line at 5 feet. Today I can read four lines at 20 feet, and more on a good day -- up to 20/50. Because my vision now fluctuates constantly, I would prefer to wait a few more months before subjecting myself to a formal test (I'm prone to stage fright). But since the stability of my better vision continues to increase, I believe I could show you quite impressive results in a while. Oh -- and I only wear glasses for driving and unfamiliar surroundings now. Can you imagine?! Never felt better in my entire adult life: headaches, eyestrain, etc. are the thing of the past. Haven't taken a painkiller in six months. I wonder how you could measure things like these. Respectfully, Elena ========================================================================= From AmgS@aol.com Mon Dec 11 09:02:34 EST 1995 From: AmgS@aol.com Date: Mon, 11 Dec 1995 09:01:18 -0500 Subject: Re: Taking up Bill's challenge Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 95-12-10 23:51:00 EST, you write: > So I've been in "self-training" for six months. I started >from ground zero -- I couldn’t read the first line at 5 feet. Today I can >read four lines at 20 feet, and more on a good day -- up to 20/50. Elena - this is exciting to read. What did you find the most effective tools, exercises, etc - ie how did you do this? I'm just getting started, actually I'm at the 'is this really possible ? sounds like a dream come true - how do I do this' stage. My eyes are currently at -4.50 I would LOVE to be able to take my glasses off, and the headaches are telling me it's time to do *something*. Alice ========================================================================= From AmgS@aol.com Mon Dec 18 08:09:06 EST 1995 From: AmgS@aol.com Date: Mon, 18 Dec 1995 08:07:49 -0500 Subject: Re: Adam Klein's Experience with the Bates Method Status: RO X-Status: This is a great article! Thanks for sharing it. At the bottom he mentions a 3-d wallpaper for a PC - is this available anywhere ? Thanks Alice ps - I went to my Dr. yesterday and got glasses at -3.50 (was wearing -4.50) - he has never worked this path with anyone, but is interested and willing to persue it with me . . so the adventure starts! ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Tue Dec 19 23:55:37 EST 1995 From: Vic - Deus Ex Machina Subject: -2.25 x -1 -> -1.75 x -.75 Date: Wed, 20 Dec 1995 15:40:23 +1100 (EST) Status: RO X-Status: thats a 25% improvement. I finally got around to returning to my old optometrist, to get a "full" prescription, since I actually dont have one. I am going away for xmas and while I can drive around on 20/40 script on familliar roads at night, I dont feel comforatble driving out in the country at high speeds on strange roads. the whole thing was a last minute decision, and I didnt prepare for the examination at all. I knew I had gone backwards a bit in recent months, too many hours in front of a computer, but I was surprised that I hadnt reverted back to my old script of -2.25. what I should really be doing is getting back into a serious regimen of VT, which I keep putting off. anyway I didnt tell the optometrist I had been doing VT and went in complaining about headaches, which was true a year ago, so I wouldnt have to explain why I wasnt wearing my glasses. As per usual no cyclopegics, I have never had one. autorefraction and the usual health test, eye pressure. and then the subjective refraction. I couldnt really tell much difference between a lot of the lenses she made look through, so I suspect she was hovering around where she expected my Rx to be. then she checked my near vision. which I know has also improved as measured by my behavioral optometrist. she double checked my records did some more tests and finally she announced that I wouldnt need a stronger script( was -2.25 x -1) and in fact I needed a "slightly" weaker script (-1.75 x -.75) and then proceeded to sell me on the idea of getting weaker glasses. (like I needed any selling) seems almost everybody comes in expecting more "power". she didnt ask me why my vision had improved, altough she was surprised when I told her originally that I didnt wear them wandering around. seems if you are -2.25 x -1 then you cant walk around without glasses. which I found very difficult when I first tried it. but now I can see the eyes of passers by and even read parking signs. the script she gave me I call my base vision. which is the norm, the not really trying to see grove, I also have another groove I fall into every now and then where things are much clearer. I suspect maybe 10% of day I can see close to 20/20 without any lenses. there is a bit of edge "pluming" probably from astigamtism. but it seems the sphere is quite willing to revert to 20/20. now during the same year the other 3 guys in my office, also all over 30, have had increases in power. not surprisng considering how much time we spend staring at computers. so hey doc Stacy do I qualify for some of that cash? you can have access to my records for the last 5 years from the same optometrist. I have heard the usual stories about people making good progress and then when they stop they slip back to as bad or worse then they started, so I am encouraged that having done nothing VT like for nearly half the year I havnt sliped back very far at all. probably no more than -.25. I am certainly encouraged enough to start doing it all again and aim for another lower plateux. Vic ========================================================================= From MBerezetsk@aol.com Mon Dec 25 20:27:21 EST 1995 From: MBerezetsk@aol.com Date: Mon, 25 Dec 1995 20:26:03 -0500 Subject: Elena tells all (long) Status: RO X-Status: Hi everybody, here I go again. My approach so far consisted in: 1) reading all the books on the subject that two dozen local libraries could produce; 2) trying to assess all possible emotional, behavioral, psychological, intellectual, cultural roots and consequences of myopia; 3) experimenting with many Batesean techniques and inventing some of my own; 4) removing contacts forever and avoiding glasses most of the time (while owning three pairs none of which is a full correction); 5) using yoga, meditation, visualization; 6) taking many vitamins and supplements (after thoroughly researching the subject) and some herbs. IMHO, the key to success is to think your myopia through and through, to understand its exact place and role in your psychological makeup. If you perceive yourself as a malfunctioning robot you might benefit from treating myopia as a technical problem; but if you're pretty sure you're human, you are more likely to succeed if you understand it as an outcome of any number of psychological/physiological events, some independent and some intertwined, synergetic, linked in cause/effect loops, vicious circles, etc., etc.. I consider trying to dig out all possible roots of the evil a very important part of the process (at least in the case of high myopia, which is the only case I had a chance to study thoroughly from the inside). I devoted my previous (September) post to some speculations around this idea (to convey everything I came to believe and understand in the past few months, I would have to write a book.) This time, however, I'll try to stick to describing some of my practical techniques, since that's probably what you'll be looking for. However, I should emphasize that, to me, separating "practical" and "theoretical," physiological and psychological, seems rather counterproductive. As one Nobel-prize physicist converted to Taoism once said referring to his understanding of the workings of our whole universe, "it's all mind-stuff." While I'm neither a physicist nor a Taoist, I find the concept appealing and have been trying to apply it to my personal case. The techniques I'll describe are not the only ones I use, but I've been more successful with them than with the "generic" ones. As for nutrition, vitamins, etc., I don't know if I'm a better expert than the next guy/gal, so I leave it out. Everyone is welcome to ask questions, and I'll be grateful for any feedback. I have also included an appendix -- a little case history so you can evaluate and compare some of my myopic experiences with your own. (Nearly everyone's vision will compare favorably with mine, so you'll get an additional reason to expect success in your case.) I've benefited greatly from visualization and meditation. I experimented a lot and learned to combine the two. Before I started VT, I only had a passing interest in meditation and a very brief experience; what told me to look further was a striking similarity of my purely physiological responses to meditation and to some Batesesean techniques. Those are all rather subtle sensations, but they are signs of deep relaxation and can't be mistaken for anything else once you've learned to recognize them. I decided to look for images that would work best as triggers of this state. I think those images have to be very personal -- again, no generics -- so you can't really benefit from mine, but I'll give you an example that may help you find your own. I have extremely clear early childhood recollections, not only of significant events but of virtually everything (before I became myopic I had photographic memory). At four years of age, I once picked up a tiny black stone shaped as a perfect sphere. I remember holding it in my palm, finding it pretty exciting, and wondering what the purpose of such perfection on such a small scale could possibly be. I couldn't even show it to other kids or my parents because it was too small for them to pay any attention. Now, Bates-instructed, I was searching for a perfect black object to remember, and immediately retrieved the image of that stone and mentally answered the question of the four-year-old about its purpose: to be remembered, over three decades later, as an example of how incredibly well you (we? I?) can SEE, my dear! Now the perfect black is represented to me by a tiny spherical speck in my own four-year-old palm, and meditation on this object takes me back in time. I open my eyes and, at least for a while, see as clearly as in my childhood. I've been practicing "the art of blinking" a lot, experimenting with different techniques and combining them with short, "instant" visualizations. I've learned to blink very lightly to avoid a painful clear flash (when my clear flashes just started they were accompanied by a lot of pain and tearing -- a sensation of an unbearably bright light and some onion juice in my eyes). I have developed a different blink to instantly start a clear flash (works 90% of the time) -- I keep my eyes closed a split second longer than in an ordinary blink and imagine pushing the eyeballs backward and a little downward with the insides of my lids, then open them as though my lids are operated by very soft springs. A note for females: I find some useful blinking techniques incompatible with mascara (the upper and lower eyelashes tend to stick together). Excessive tearing in the beginning may also be a problem, so stick to waterproofs or better do without for a while. I took up some yoga. After a yoga workout, I lie down flatly on my back and, with my eyes closed, imagine the eyeballs in a free-fall inside my scull, all the way to the back of my head. After this visualization, everything looks maybe a bit smaller (like through the glasses) and a lot more distinct; the relaxation value is unmatched. When I do a Buddhist meditation (with attention on your breath), I imagine breathing in and out through my closed eyes as if they were nostrils, or in through my eyes and out through the back of my head, or in through the nose and out through the eyes. When I do a Dzogchen meditation, for which you are supposed to keep your eyes open, I do it in front of the Snellen eye chart and "put my awareness into my eyes." I take regular walks with the specific purpose of looking into the distance. (No glasses of course!) I visualize a lot while I walk, constantly imagining all kinds of weird thing. My eyes floating freely above in the sky, looking downward with excited curiosity. The earth being rotated backward by my stepping feet, as if I literally walk on the surface of a giant ball. The space and time changing places, as if I'm exercising free will in choosing my direction of movement in time but am being dragged along involuntarily through space. I don't stick to one particular visualization -- I invent them on the move and change frequently. I get my best vision this way. I've tried self-hypnosis. I wrote down a list of key words and phrases that I associate with the idea of perfect vision, and then incorporated them in a suggestion in the form of a page-long rhythmic poem. I did it because I suspect that anything rhythmic has a better chance of reaching the unconscious. I repeat it to myself when I start falling asleep at night. (Sorry I can't share it with you -- I wrote it in Russian, because it's the only language I knew when my vision was good, so I keep in mind that the deep unconscious memory levels I'm trying to reach might not understand any English.) I use 3-D pictures to practice convergence and divergence. I got them from a $3.50 children's book, "Eye Illusions," which I accidentally came accross in a drugstore (while doing my shopping without glasses...). I have six of them mounted on the wall near my computer. _________ Appendix: A little case history. I had perfect vision as a kid, and a coincidental photographic memory which made any type of learning a piece of cake -- and which was totally obliterated after a couple of years of big-time myopia. I started reading at 3, and was through with children's books and meticulously going through my parents' library by the age of 5. My paternal grandmother was a -18D myope; however, my parents, now presbyopic, were both 20/10 till their late forties. At 10, I had a routine vision exam at school, and the doctor told me I needed glasses and gave me a note for my parents. I flushed the note down the toilet and lived happily... not ever after, unfortunately, but for three more years. At 13, I noticed for the first time that something indeed might be wrong with my vision: things started to disappear form the chalkboard. For a few months, I dealt with the problem by having other kids copy stuff from the chalkboard into my notebook. (In the alcohol-drenched Ukrainian miners' neighborhood of my childhood, my peers were tough, anti-intellectual, and anti-Semitic; I had fought my way to acceptance and respect in numerous and merciless fist fights I got into at the slightest provocation and on very short notice, even though I was a Jewish intellectual and a skinny girl. Glasses would certainly interfere with this image of a fierce Amazon warrior I had cultivated myself into out of necessity.) Sometimes I could still see the chalkboard myself -- it all depended on the lighting, the mood, the subject... Finally I gave up and went in for an eye exam. I have no idea how it is done here, but where I lived, ten to fourteen days of cycloplegia were a standard measure before you got your first Rx for myopia. They made a big deal out of differentiating between an "accommodation spasm" and "genuine" myopia. If the minus Ds were low they sometimes prescribed plus lenses for close work, along with the minus for distance. If higher they sometimes prescribed vision therapy. Yes -- in the Soviet Union, in 1970, an _ophthalmologist_ prescribed VT. I went in for it for a month or two and improved, then quit it and relapsed. They didn't explain what could be done at home on my own, and aimed the in-office training only at the accommodation spasm, so they didn't "go all the way" either. Yet, as a side note, I should mention that when I first came to the U.S. six years ago, the biggest jolt of the infamous cultural shock was delivered by seeing the sheer number of people wearing glasses. Anyway, my VERY FIRST Rx was OS -3,25, OD -3,5. Which probably means that I had a high adaptability to under- and no correction right from the start. Even as my vision reached -8D over the next 25 years, I've never become addicted to glasses. I could always walk, talk, eat, cook, swim, dance, listen to the music, and of course read without glasses. (I did get a -2,5D pair for reading at some point, but I started using it only a few years ago. I now use it for computer work and the TV, and once again I don't need any correction for reading.) Removing my glasses had always been my automatic response to any situation which didn't absolutely demand that I have visual control over it. I never felt OK wearing glasses, never had a comfortable pair, got headaches and eye irritation from contacts, couldn't take full correction at all (my head and my eyes felt like they were about to explode the second I tried it), and my vision ALWAYS took a plunge whenever I had to spend long hours every day wearing glasses without a chance to utilize my normal "on and off" routine. The plunge was always sudden rather than gradual (two to six weeks was all it took to get an extra half or full diopter), so there's no doubt in my mind as to this pattern. As for the amount of close work, it has always been approximately the same and always extensive. Whenever I came to a doctor complaining that I couldn't see zilch in my latest pair of glasses anymore, I wound up with a stronger prescription and a comment that, "fortunately," I had "very healthy eyes." That was nice to know, of course, but I always stumbled at the logical block a designation of my eyes as "healthy although myopic" created in my mind. Surely no one would call "healthy" a pair of legs that couldn't walk? ...Unless of course the key was the controls. The mind, or the brain, or both. Someone who is paralyzed due to a stroke might have healthy but useless legs. That was the first inkling of the idea that whatever is wrong with my vision might lie somewhere deeper than the organ itself. But before my first reading of Bates, I couldn't make heads or tails of this vague idea, because I always believed the standard explanation for the structural defects and the resulting hopeless incompetence of a myopic eye. The biggest mistake of my entire life. Today's situation: I drive in -5,5 glasses and, away from home, have them handy at all times but seldom put them on. I write this wearing -2,5 glasses, sitting 1 1/2 feet away from the screen and using the zoom feature (115%) so I don't have to move closer. I have 20/60 or better unaided vision about 30% of the time indoors, about 60% of the time outdoors. Everything is slowly, gradually improving, I haven't experienced a setback so far. My biggest current problem is floaters: not new floaters (I recognize their shapes from ten years ago) but old floaters with a new visibility. They puzzle me a great deal because right now, they look like they are a major overlooked (no pun) component of myopia rather than a mere symptom. They interfere with my focusing, are probably responsible for my monocular polyopia (they "drag" additional images off the real one when they move across my center of vision), and move in TOTALLY DIFFERENT PATTERNS depending on whether I'm having a clear flash or not. I'm in the process of gathering information on the bastards and will be grateful for all contributions. Elena =========================================================================