An Optometrist Clears Vision using Bates

Subject: Understanding how and why and
an optometrist cleared his vision.

Re: Discussion of the difficulties.

We must realize that not ALL ODs are hostile to prevention -- only
some of them.

Here is a statement by Ray about his success in clearing
his Snellen using various methods:

============

To Dispersee from Ray G.:

Re:Voluntary clear flashes

In my opinion you should keep doing what you are doing. Quick
hard blinking is a form of relaxation. At some point the forced blink
will soften until finally you'll just have to imagine blinking to
clear your sight. That's what happened to me.

I totally reversed my myopia. It took me 1.5 years during which
I devoted a lot of time to doing Bates, yoga and other body and
relaxation practices. For the first six months I had no change in my
visual acuity. Then I had a flash of clear vision that lasted just a
few seconds. Then another about a month later, three weeks after that
and gradually more often. These were spontaneous flashes. One day it
occurred to me to try to create a voluntary flash. Several weeks
later I achieved a flash that resulted after about 30 minutes of
shifting, central fixation, visualization/memory (pure Bates stuff as
far as I understood it).

Over the next months I got better at creating voluntary flashes.
It took less and less time and the flashes stretched into moments,
then minutes and I could see clearly for longer and longer. I could
clear the distance with a quick deep blink and sustain it with
relaxed blinks and dynamic attention (Huxley's term) just as you
describe. Then I began to look into the distance every few minutes to
check my far vision and if blurry, to make it clear until one day I
looked up and realized that I could make it clear faster than it took
me to look. At that point I realized that even if I were still myopic
by some strict definition, it didn't matter because I could clear my
sight faster than I could change fixation from near to far and
therefore I had succeeded in curing my myopia. I didn't measure my
refraction at that time, but did later both subjectively (finding the
minimum lens for maximum clarity) and objectively (with a retinascope
and an automatic refractor).

Keep up the good work.

Ray Gottlieb

Ray Gottlieb, O.D., Ph.D.

==========

Part 2

Dear Friends,

Subject: Vision-clearing by a professional. He states that
it is not "easy".

There are two groups supporting prevention:

1. Bates teachers, who claim no medical training, but
will support you with Bates-type of
methods. You can use your own Snellen to verify your
results.

2. Medical people -- and their support. These are called
"Behavioral Optometrists". They will use the Bates methods
on themselves and clear their vision. For that reason, if
you wish a medically trained person to help you -- look
for a BEHAVIORIAL optometrist in your area for that
type of assistance.

+++++++++


Dr. Ray Gottlieb's experience

I don't think the flashes of clarity after the quick squeeze blink
are due to changes in the tear film. It feels like the squeeze is
stretching the extra ocular muscles or maybe the pulley system that
these muscles pass through.

Yes, my objective refraction went to zero in both eyes. I didn't have
a large myopia to start, just -1.25 D (20/50) in my right eye and
-0.62 (20/30) in my left I was about 16-17 when my myopia first
began (freshman year in college) and about 30 when I started doing
Bates. I wore glasses only when I needed them. My eyesight cleared
before my refraction decreased. So I did have it easy because my
myopia was mild but I did work with a woman who started with -13 D
with -2 D of astigmatism. Both eyes were about the same. She worked
even harder than I did and last time I saw her she had worked down to
-6 D with no astigmatism and without glasses could get flashes of
20/40.

To John B. Yes, in a way improving eyesight is impractical. It takes
patience and energy (like meditation). I was very motivated. I was
myopic, an optometrist and interested in yoga, alternative life
styles and human potential. I didn't believe in Bates, I just wanted
to find out if it worked and treated the whole effort as an
experiment. I would make up little experiments, like spending three
hours in the park alternating sunning then palming then sunning then
palming, to see if anything changed in my sight.

Ray Gottlieb

Ray Gottlieb, O.D., Ph.D.
336 Berkeley Street
Rochester, NY 14607

On Oct 20, 11:09 am, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote:
> Subject: Understanding how and why and
> an optometrist cleared his vision.

Snip usual Otis Brown bullshit.

Correlation doesn't necessarily equal causation.

Have you looked at the USAF Academy study? Something like 7% of
incoming cadets shifted from myopic toward hyperopic during the 2.5
years of the study ... and this was WITHOUT any active correction,
therapy, or treatment modalities.

So how DOES a "man" like you support the notion that Dr. Gottlieb's
actions had ANY impact whatsoever on the outcome? And WHAT OF people
like your niece, Joy, who -- despite your intervention -- are still
myopes?

You've NEVER been able to demonstrate that your pet therapy alters the
normal distribution of outcomes in myopes even one iota.

Think that's part of the reason that I call you a pathological liar
and an absolute ****ing idiot?

Hint: yes, that's PART of it. The reasons, in total, are almost
limitless, though.

:-)

Just another scam to sucker in the Otis Browns of the world. PT Bbarum
is still correct.

On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 11:09:38 -0700, "(E-Mail Removed)"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
>Subject: Understanding how and why and
>an optometrist cleared his vision.
>
>Re: Discussion of the difficulties.
>
>We must realize that not ALL ODs are hostile to prevention -- only
>some of them.
>

Attention readers who are not familiar with the troll named Otis
Brown. Otis believes that virtually ALL practicing optometrists are
either dishonest or misinformed because they do not practice methods
that he believes can prevent the progression of myopia in adolescents.
He doesn't accept that such methods as using plus reading glasses for
near work, using bifocal reading glasses, and having myopes remove
their glasses for reading, have already been tested in controlled
statistical studies and have been found to have no effect on
refractive change.

When presented with the publised proof that what he claims is true,
Otis disregards the evidence and just proclaims even loader that he is
correct. be wary of Otis; he is a few cards short of a full deck.

OD's are not at all hostile toward preventing myopia development. Its
just that no effective prevention methods have yet be proven. Otis
doesn't care-- he had great faith that using plus readers to read will
effectively reverse myopia if you just "believe" and "try hard endogh"

Take what Otis says with a grain of salt. He is certainly NOT a
scientist or an objective thinker by and stretch of the imaginations.
Its probably best to just humour him.