Can a myope improve unaided sight - YES or NO

Discussion in 'Optometry Archives' started by ummwellduh, Jul 18, 2006.

  1. ummwellduh

    ummwellduh Guest

    hello all

    i am interested in knowing what each of you [expert or not] personally
    think about this. pls use all the scientific or otherwise knowledge you
    possess, just personal opinions, based on our education, religious
    beliefs and misconceptions, erasoned judgement, ... all the shabang,
    and the final gist of it.

    Just answer in YES/NO

    Question: Is it possible for *at least one* person with elongated
    eyeball myopia [not the other temporary kind] to improve sight and get
    better unaided far vision [he may use them while improving], without
    any invasive/medical procedures. If you have seen even one case, or
    think it is million to one shot, please respond YES, otherwise NO.

    thanks for your input
    ummwellduh, Jul 18, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  2. ummwellduh

    ummwellduh Guest

    of course no tricks, like narrowing eyelids (squinting) or producing
    visible tears etc
    the so called pupil control *is* allowed
    ummwellduh, Jul 18, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  3. ummwellduh

    ummwellduh Guest

    i have not asked proofs....i am least interested in proofs
    just one's personal opinion one might have formed based on their
    education, training, experience with patients, own personal
    experience, misconceptions, beliefs etc etc.

    ie in a word, upto the present moment whats their take on this
    They need not put their professional reputation behind it, because it
    is only
    a part of what they are. but it would definitely be interesting coming
    from a prefessional (bcoz they are more exposed to incidents in their

    as for costs of treatment, you need not back it up with a treatment
    can one start on any treatment with a plain YES/NO??!!

    ummwellduh, Jul 18, 2006
  4. ummwellduh

    acemanvx Guest

    Probably not. Once your eyeball enlongates into axial myopia, its
    permanent. Sorry to say. This is why Otis preaches and advocates
    prevention at the treshold. What is your prescription now and how old
    were you when you got your first glasses? You may be able to relieve
    tonic accomodation which will reduce your prescription. OrthoK can
    further reduce your myopia. Theres lasik and even IOLs but both options
    are risky and may ruin your clear correctable vision.
    acemanvx, Jul 19, 2006
  5. ummwellduh

    Charles Guest

    How about by not reading or doing as much close work? I think there
    _is_ science to connect close work to the development of myopia, right?
    Whether this "cure" is worse than the disease is another question.
    Charles, Jul 19, 2006
  6. ummwellduh

    acemanvx Guest

    "Is it possible to slow the progress of myopia with effort or training

    Myopia specialists don't believe so. The FDA doesn't think so.
    authorities don't approve of the practice because nothing has been
    that works, when compared to nontreated controls."

    It is possible to slow down or even stop myopia progression, just not
    reverse it(unless its just tonic accomodation) Otis plus lens theory
    has been tried on many with much success. Eye exercises will also work
    wonders. Reducing near work is another way to slow down myopia.

    Excess accomodation is probably the main reason why most people(under
    40) respond to natural vision improvement, but hey it works. It just
    cant shorten your eye. I am getting atropine soon to do away with
    excess accomodation and reduce my dependancy on what is overminus
    glasses. My uncorrected vision may improve on the order of several
    times as well, making me much more functional without glasses.
    acemanvx, Jul 19, 2006
  7. ummwellduh

    ummwellduh Guest

    i want to get the gist of each person's research, education,
    experience, belief,
    brainwashing etc regarding this issue and avoid running around
    the complicated experiments an what they signify, and whether or not
    they apply to
    humans...thats why i want to know the *personal* opinion not
    professional one [although
    t can be based on [professional knowledge]
    and then try out [or not] non invasive, safe [according to me],
    relatively easy
    [ie not requiring revolutionary changes in daily life] stuff to improve
    unaided vision.
    ummwellduh, Jul 19, 2006
  8. You want data from people, yet aren't saying how you will use it.
    Impolite, and it would be irresponsible to provide data under
    such conditions.

    It is good you recognize you have a decision to make, so let
    me show you a different approach:

    There is a cost to wearing minus lenses to correct myopia, maybe
    a net discounted lifetime cost about 1000 hours of wasted effort.
    There is a cost to trying Bates or other exercises, say 40 hours
    if it works and 100 hours if it does not (from the frustration,
    mistakes & extra effort).

    Trying is only mathematically worth it if there is a 9.4% or
    greater chance of success. I doubt randomized statistics would
    support a success rate anywhere near that. Probably several
    orders of magnatude lower. At that point, it becomes a foolish
    and dangerous hope, worse than a lottery ticket.

    Ethical physicians would not advise a patient even try unless
    they felt the patient unusually likely to succeeed, or unusually
    tolerant of failure (not easily frustrated). I doubt either
    applies in your case.

    But still, physicians are not veterinarians and patients are
    not meat. The patients own values and wishes must be considered
    even if wildly different from the physicians, and advised according
    to their values. Or referred if the gulf is too great.

    -- Robert
    Robert Redelmeier, Jul 19, 2006
  9. ummwellduh

    otisbrown Guest

    Dear Friend,

    If you read Dr. Judy's post -- then any "clearing" you might
    experience is a matter of "random" chance. You
    should factor her judgment into any judgment or decision you
    might make.

    You will find that the "experts" profoundly DISAGREE on
    PREVENTION. Some say it is possiible, others, impossible.

    What ever you decide, I would suggest that you
    post your current "prescription", and that
    you personally determine what you can read
    on your Snellen.

    When you say "improvement" is it wise to understand
    your "starting" point -- and your desired "end-point",
    and the PROBABILITY that you can reach your
    desired goal -- or not.

    And as you say -- with very slight effort.
    are in any "deeper" than about 20/60 -- you
    probably will not be successful.

    Assuming minimum effort.

    But good luck. Let us know what you decide.


    otisbrown, Jul 19, 2006
  10. ummwellduh

    ummwellduh Guest

    i did give people upfront 'thanks' for their "data" [YES/NO]
    people can just take it and not even provide any data, that is also
    fine by me. although i didnt get any pointed YES/NO from you,
    i observed that you did pick up the freebee 'thanks'!
    oh no!
    too computational...
    *not* interested in proofs, theories, statistics....
    i dont know how to identify an ethical person from unethical.....
    let alone physicians....[_and_ i dont want to know *how*...]
    thats a personal opinion i dont remember asking!
    and a these seem like good reasons not to tell 'how I would use it
    ummwellduh, Jul 19, 2006
  11. ummwellduh

    ummwellduh Guest

    i would consider it lucky to be that 'random' case
    i guess i am beyond 'prevention' stage...not so young anymore
    i am not sure if i want to make it another 'project'
    measuring and tracking it in a 'professional' way..
    and i am not entering any snellen chart contest...
    so it is fine if it is just a qualitative 'improvment',
    i am not trying to prove any one method's effictiveness
    in any quantitavie way.... i will know when i see clearly,
    regardless of what the chart or statistics say...
    i am not sure "effort" is the way to go ...
    ummwellduh, Jul 19, 2006
  12. You didn't. But posters can answer however they please.
    You cannot control debate but you might be able to shape it.
    I see you doing a poor job even for your own aims.
    So you must not expect [m]any of your desired replies.

    -- Robert
    Robert Redelmeier, Jul 19, 2006
  13. ummwellduh

    ummwellduh Guest

    true. hardly possible to avoid near work forever...but, as long as you
    think it *cures*...
    the implication is significant
    ummwellduh, Jul 19, 2006
  14. ummwellduh

    ummwellduh Guest

    assuming someone never did any eye exercises, and has axial myopia,
    and into 40s, would that mean he/she still might have tonic
    left from young age that can be relieved and some improvment made?
    as i understand, tonic accomodation is a reversible thing as opposed to
    axial myopia.
    ummwellduh, Jul 19, 2006

  15. Frankly, if you don't welcome the discussion you generated, ignore it, or
    don't post it to usenet in the first place
    Scott Seidman, Jul 19, 2006
  16. ummwellduh

    Sandy Guest

    Absolutely, YES.

    Unless you mean enough improvement to actually make a difference. Then
    Sandy, Jul 20, 2006
  17. ummwellduh

    ummwellduh Guest

    looks like its a unanimous NO...on this thread
    i went thru some other posts, and found you mentioned
    the book projector might work. could you pls elaborate how
    it might work? or did you mean only the tonic accomodation?
    ummwellduh, Jul 20, 2006
  18. ummwellduh

    ummwellduh Guest

    his personal opinion on me is not generated by me and its totally off
    the topic...
    and to point it out goes in the direction of 'shaping the discussion'
    as he himself mentions...
    ummwellduh, Jul 20, 2006
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.