From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Sat Jun 10 16:45:23 EST 1995 Date: Sat, 10 Jun 95 14:40 PDT From: Beyond_20/20@Sunshine.net Subject: Re: eyeglass help (fwd) Status: RO X-Status: >I'll be getting new eyeglasses and would >like to know how much to undercorrect them to help improve my vision. >My prescription card reads "Spherical: -200, -400" "Cylindrical: -150, -125" >"Axis 001, 177" Please don't remind me how bad my vision currently is, ouch. Thanks for the opportunity to comment on your prescription and make suggestions for a reduced one. Firstly, your numbers aren't that bad. I have seen worse. Begin to accept that your vision is developing. Let go of the belief that your vision is bad. Very important! The big challenge is the difference in prescription between the eyes. I would suspect that your "naked vision" is better through the -2.00, -150", which I assume is your right eye? The choice you have is to reduce the spherical prescription equally in front of each eye or more before the right eye in order to stimulate your perception through the left. In my experience, I would suspect you could cut back the spherical part of the prescription by between 1.00 and 1.5 diopters. This means you would leave the cylinder alone for the first reduction. I will be posting an article at another time on why this is important. The new prescription would read R-0.75 -1.50 axis 001 L -2.50-1.25 axis 177. Youshould be able to drive in good light with these numbers, although the doctor would need to confirm this. Please bear in mind by just wearing weaker lenses does not guarantee that your vision will improve. In my experience you will need to actively use vision training during the day. The FAQ will give you additional steps. I hope this helps. All the best. and thanks Alex for the chance to give feedback. Robert-Michael "Products and programs for helping your eyes....naturally!" Beyond_20/20@sunshine.net [Robert-Michael Kaplan O.D., M.Ed., FCOVD] Snail Mail RR#2 S26 C39 Gibsons, British Columbia. VON 1VO Canada Voice (604) 885-7118 Fax (604) 885-0608 ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Sat Jun 10 17:32:20 EST 1995 Date: Sat, 10 Jun 95 15:29 PDT From: Beyond_20/20@Sunshine.net Subject: Re: Ok Hot shot.... (fwd) Status: RO X-Status: >pop quiz: >If I wear contacts...will using + lenses (while wearing contacts) >help while doing near work? :-) > Marco: Here's a cold shot response to your question. The whole basis of a weaker lens prescription is built on the concept of adding plus. The critical point is that the amount of plus needs to be determined, because the reduction in minus affects the binocularity. Lastly, you will still need to practise specific exercises if you desire to lessen your dependnecy upon glasses and improve your eyesight. Many of my patients go out and buy the maginifying reading glasses to wear over their contacts. Plus is cold! Robert-Michael "Products and programs for helping your eyes....naturally!" Beyond_20/20@sunshine.net [Robert-Michael Kaplan O.D., M.Ed., FCOVD] Snail Mail RR#2 S26 C39 Gibsons, British Columbia. VON 1VO Canada Voice (604) 885-7118 Fax (604) 885-0608 ========================================================================= From owner-i_see@indiana.edu Fri Sep 22 12:59:08 EST 1995 Date: Fri, 22 Sep 1995 12:33:56 -0500 (EST) From: Alex Eulenberg Subject: Determining a "fitness glasses" prescription Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 22 Sep 1995, Abigail Fermo Abinoja wrote: > Could anyone recommend a good behavioral optometrist in the St. Louis area? > I went to one referred by the Optometric Extension Program Foundation but > he informed me that vision can't be improved short of surgery. That reminds me: Always call your doctor before you make the appointment -- find out about their attitudes toward vision improvement. Some, even supposedly behavioral optometrists, are have a more "compensation-only" philosophy than others. Some, for example, will refuse to prescribe therapy of any kind to adults. > I wanted a > pair of fitness glasses but my prescription went from Spherical: -200, -400 > Cylindrical: -150, -125 Axis: 001, 177, to a prescription of Spherical: > -2.50, -4.25 Cylindrical -1.00, -0.75 Axis 010, 165. Is this much of an > improvement, at least towards a pair of fitness glasses? I don't know how > to interpret those numbers. Basically, the amount of negative sphere is the amount of nearsightedness correction (positive sphere is for farsightedness), and cylinder is the amount of astigmatism correction. Astigmatism can be thought of as an extra bit of myopia (or a little bit less) at a certain angle. Since a cylindrical curve is twice as powerful as a spherical curve, the strength, or "spherical equivalent" of your lens is computed by adding the sphere and half the cylinder. Axis has nothing to do with strength; it's merely the angle at which the cylindrical part of the lens is placed. So one eye went... from -2.00 + -1.50/2 = -2.75 to -2.50 + -1.00/2 = -3.00 ^^^^^ ^^^^^ while your other eye went... from -4.00 + -1.25/2 = -4.63 to -4.25 + -0.75/2 = -4.63 ^^^^^ ^^^^^ So your prescription really hasn't changed that much in terms of spherical equivalent. One eye's prescription has been increased by a quarter diopter, while the other is the same. The only improvement I can see is that the amount of astigmatic correction has decreased. This means your glasses are less "warped". You want to have no cylinders if at all possible. Cylinders create clarity at the expense of distorting objects to different degrees. Perhaps you recall during an eye exam being told to choose between two lenses, one yielding a fuzzy but properly proportioned image the other a clear but distorted one. The eye can learn to see more clearly without cylinders, as the unwarped visual environment stimulates the internal and extrinsic muscles to pull the eye back into shape. I mentioned earlier that balance between the eyes is considered important by many vision therapists, so ultimately, you want not only the weakest comfortable prescription, but also the prescription with the least difference between the eyes. Note that the stronger a myopic lens, is, the more it reduces the size of what you see. You want both your eyes to be looking at the same sized objects. So here are some general guidelines for helping you choose a pair of fitness glasses: * 20/40 vision (good enough for driving, but leaving room for improvement) * The least amount of cylinder -- none if at all possible. * As similar as possible strengths for both eyes. With these guidelines in mind, you should be able to work out a good fitness pair of glasses with your optometrist. Before you go, make sure you can try out the glasses in a real world environment with test frames before you leave the office -- don't be satisfied with putting your head in a box and looking at letters. And don't let them dilate your pupils, which will temporarily worsen your vision. You want to know how good these glasses are for your eyes in their natural state. Above all, call before you go to avoid disappointment. Remember, all optometrists have invested a considerable amount of time in learning how to prescribe "the correct amount of cylinder", and many will be offended when you tell them you think no cylinder is good cylinder. However, if you are confident about the issues, you can usually get kind of prescription you want. But make sure your doctor is willing to work with you on this. Otherwise you will waste your money and your time. --Alex ========================================================================= From vicc@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU Ukn Feb 21 07:35:08 1995 From: Vic Cinc Subject: eye improvment idea (fwd) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 1995 13:49:18 +1100 (EST) X-Status: Status: OR > >Since I wear contacts, taking them on and off during the day for eye >improvemnt is not a feasible thing to do. It's also not very >economical for me to keep buying lenses with decreasing prescriptions. >As an alternative idea, what if I were to just wear one lense in - I >can easily manage with just one lense in. And then hopefully the weak >eye, along with exercises, would improve. And then when the >previously weak eye was good enough, I could take the lense out of my >other eye, repeat the process, and voila - both eyes are cured. Do >you think that the severe imbalance in the eye's would be more >detrimental? yes. I dont think its a good idea. inbalances in the muscles of the eyes are called various phorias. I am no expert but methinks you would strongly be encouraging disproportionate amount of musclar development. and upset any synergy in the various systems. one of the basic premisses of Bates is that lenses upset the delicate balances between accommodation, convergence and pupil dilation. these three are governed from a single nerve bundle from the brain. the official literature even hints that contacts cause less rapid progression then frames. I think there is little cause for concern in having to purchase many pairs of glasses/contacts. these only occur in 1-2Ds increments so in my case -2.25 I need only 1 transitory pair. a -6D may need only 2 or 3. this would be spread out over some time, unless you are lucky enought to have very fast progress. remember though progress is measured in months. you also have to remember that when downgrading power in glasses you are just changing the lens and not paying for yet another mega expensive frame. contacts: you may get away with just using disposables on certain days of the week. if you already use these then there is no added cost. what I did was basically go cold turkey. I stopped wearing contacts entirely. which I used to wear from waking to sleep. now I keep handy a pair of glasses in case I need to drive. the first week was a disaster. but after that it was ok. progress was brisk, and I became complacent expecting the momentum of improvement to just carry one without any further effort on my part. nah. so back to basics. I found its important to make VT a routine task like brushing teeth. if you are what is considered low myope < -6D (amazing inst it) it may be possible to minimise the amount of time behind lenses. if you are mild < -3D (how -3D can be mild is beyond me) then going cold turkey is quite feasible. it does seem clear to me that the less time you can spend behind corrective lenses the faster you will progress. one thing I would say is that prior to begining any course on VT, I would strongly recomend getting a full occular check up, preferably with a behavioural optom. you will get a much friendlier response. to check the state and health of your eyes. and to keep an official measure of improvement. Vic =========================================================================