Nearsightedness with glasses for reading at a young age.

Discussion in 'Glasses' started by Dragon28, Feb 26, 2006.

  1. Dragon28

    Dragon28 Guest

    Hi,

    I was working with my girlfriend for about half a year (Bates'Method ).
    She has an odd problem (at least in my oppinion). She had glasses for
    distance and for reading too (both minuses).

    L eye: distance: -2.25 cyl -1
    reading : -1.25 cyl -1

    R eye: distance: -1.75 cyl -1.25
    reading : -0.75 cyl -1.25
    (We both don't know the angles of the astig.)

    I just wantd to know more about the physiological problem that she has.

    Thanks a lot,
    Best wishes,
    Eli.
     
    Dragon28, Feb 26, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Dragon28

    acemanvx Guest

    She could either be presbyopic or taking measures to reduce the strain
    of near work and slow down her myopia progression. Instead of bifocals,
    I have just taken the undercorrection route. I wear a weaker pair of
    glasses for the computer and house and near full power for distance. I
    take my glasses off for reading. Does she ever read bare eyed? My
    vision has improved a diopter.
     
    acemanvx, Feb 27, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Dragon28

    drfrank21 Guest

    Basically, she has a +1.00 add in her reading prescription (don't let
    the fact that both near and distance are in minus throw you off).
    So, after a year and a half of Bates what does she have to show
    for with all this time and energy?

    Her problem is simply refractive- she's myopic with astigmatism.

    frank
     
    drfrank21, Feb 27, 2006
    #3
  4. Dragon28

    p.clarkii Guest

    unless your girlfriend is over 40, she is not presbyopic. she is
    simply undercorrecting her nearsightedness a little using those
    "reading" glasses. some vision researchers used to think that
    undercorrection might slow progression of myopia but it was later
    proven to be ineffective. some of the Bates people continue to try it
    because they aren't aware that science has disproven their theories (or
    they just don't care). in fact, some studies have shown that
    undercorrection might actually cause myopia to progress faster! read
    this reference.

    Chung K.; Mohidin N.; O'Leary D.J. Vision Research, Volume 42, Number
    22, October 2002, pp. 2555-2559.

    and by the way just ignor this poster named acemanvx. he is a
    drug-tripping idiot who is unemployed and spends his days posting
    drivel on this newsgroup. facts are irrelevant to him.
     
    p.clarkii, Feb 27, 2006
    #4
  5. Dragon28

    Dragon28 Guest

    She was wearing glasses for reading before we started working on the
    Bates' method.

    She could read perfectly without glasses till age of 14, than she
    started seeing blury.

    Now, after half a year practicing she can read without glasses, but
    still preffers reading with glasses.
     
    Dragon28, Feb 27, 2006
    #5
  6. Dragon28

    Dragon28 Guest

    First, I've practicing the Bates' method myself, I was longsighted a
    little, it helped. In addition I have a friend who improved 1.25
    diopteries, though I tend to think that it is working.

    She started wearing reading glasses before the Bates' practicing and
    what is most wierd is that the doctor said she need to wear them while
    reading, it was the doctors idea. In my girlfriend's case the progress
    of myopia is the same as before.
     
    Dragon28, Feb 27, 2006
    #6
  7. Dragon28

    Dragon28 Guest

    Actually there are some results.

    1. She can read without glasses almost clearly.
    2. She has a little better vission sharpness.
    3. In that half a year there was no progress in myopia. (I know it
    doesn't mean anything).
    4. Her eyes are less strained.

    We are not doing suning and too much of acomodative exercises.
     
    Dragon28, Feb 27, 2006
    #7
  8. Dragon28

    acemanvx Guest

    Have her try reading without glasses and countinue to do so till she
    can read perfectly without glasses. My pescription is much higher than
    hers and I see much better without glasses from near.

    left eye: -4.5 sphere, -.75 cylindar(140 axis) correctable to 20/30
    right eye: -3.5 sphere, -1.5 cylindar(55 axis) correctable to 20/40


    In fact with my new glasses which correct my astigmastim, I see very
    blurry from near. My old glasses which ignore my astigmastim I see much
    better from near. I have to assume when I accomodate, it changes my
    astigmastim as well. The right eye sees a little blurrier than the left
    from near due to astigmastim, but with astigmastim correction, the
    right eye sees much blurrier. astigmastim correction does help my
    visual accuracy in distance but at the expense of disorting everything
    and giving me headaches and the effects of anisometropia.


    She has a low pescription so any real improvement in her vision will be
    able to free her from glasses! I reduced my myopia by a diopter but
    still have about -4 more to go, well if I can get down to about a -2 im
    done with glasses.
     
    acemanvx, Feb 27, 2006
    #8
  9. Dragon28

    Dragon28 Guest

    I won't force her to read without glasses too often 'cause it still
    makes her eyes strain.

    Other strange fact that I didn't notice is that she always has problem
    with reading with her full corrective glasses. From what I know that
    may be caused by presbyopia, but she is just 17, and it started from
    age of 9 if not earlier.
    I can't say that you improved your vission. Improving 1 diopter but
    geting 1 astig. rather seemed like no improvement to me, but it is all
    about how you feel, Diopteres don't mean anything. How did your vission
    sharpness improved?
     
    Dragon28, Feb 27, 2006
    #9
  10. Dragon28

    CatmanX Guest

    Get her vision checked properly. There is little chance of Bates
    working, it hasn't yet.

    There are a myriad of other options, try some.

    dr grant
     
    CatmanX, Feb 28, 2006
    #10
  11. Dragon28

    Dragon28 Guest

    Get her vision checked properly. There is little chance of Bates
    Dear Dr. Grant,

    Her vision was checked twice (different optometrists), both with drops
    (are those dropes Atropine drops?)
    The results were the same as half a year before, little improvement in
    the sharpness, I don't remamber the numbers.

    I wanted to understand the physiology of her problem though I could
    find a better approach for "treatment" and excersises.
     
    Dragon28, Feb 28, 2006
    #11
  12. Dragon28

    CatmanX Guest

    That's good, but cycloplegia, while popular with many, is not the best
    arbiter IMO, but does suggest stasis in the Rx. The purpose for the
    reading glasses is to slow progression of the myopia, not stop it.
    While there is much work that suggests that myopia can't be halted by
    reading corrections, there is a group discerned by Goss and Grosvenor
    that will slow down by around 50%, the esophoric myope.

    Bates won't work as it is flawed from its inception. Bates was wrong.
    You can't argue right from a position of wrong as Otis and Ace attempt.
    Everything behind Bates assertions is incorrect. He did not prove the
    eye ball changed shape, only that the reflex changed direction when
    people accommodated, all optometrists know this. He also claimed that
    women who looked through plano lenses became colour blind (?) and I can
    only assume he meant this also happened when they looked through
    windows.

    If there is little difference between the cyclo refraction and her
    script, there is no accommodative component and thus nothing to come
    i=out.

    dr grant
     
    CatmanX, Mar 1, 2006
    #12
  13. Dragon28

    acemanvx Guest

    "I can't say that you improved your vission. Improving 1 diopter but
    geting 1 astig. rather seemed like no improvement to me, but it is all
    about how you feel, Diopteres don't mean anything. How did your vission

    sharpness improved?"


    My astigmastim was undercorrected last time or maybe it was
    overcorrected this time. The strange thing is I see worse from near
    with my new glasses that correct my astigmastim! I quickly flipped
    between the two glasses I had and the one that ignored all my
    astigmastim was sharper from near. The astigmastim correction does help
    distance vision but hurts the quality. Things appear disorted, smeared,
    doubled with glasses, especially in the right eye. I am happier with my
    glasses which ignore my astigmastim, go figure! I guess that makes two
    of us with strange eyes. She needs bifocals to read, yet shes 17 and a
    low myope. I need glasses that DONT correct my astigmastim or I get
    eyestrain, headaches and strange, disorted vision!
     
    acemanvx, Mar 1, 2006
    #13
  14. Dragon28

    CatmanX Guest

    Yes and you are still a moron.

    dr grant
     
    CatmanX, Mar 1, 2006
    #14
  15. Dragon28

    p.clarkii Guest

    drug-tripping moron
     
    p.clarkii, Mar 2, 2006
    #15
  16. Dragon28

    Dragon28 Guest

    I like your point about colorblindness, that's interesting...LOL

    You mean that her reading glasses are just to slow down myopia? But she
    has a problem with reading without them, she can read but not fast
    reading, she needs to concentrate at the words and not just noticing
    them like in normal reading. That problem started when she was 14, but
    since age of 9 (till 14) she was reading without glasses becouse it
    made her eyes hurt.

    Strange, isn't it?

    I am not trying to do anything except relaxation in Bates, the
    relaxation is usefull, also, undercorecting is helping too, sometimes
    she walks without glasses and she feels ok with that now. Though I
    think Bates do work somehow.
    When I was practicing Bates myself I was doing lots of acomodative
    excersises and relaxation, it did helped, now I see even beter than
    20\20 and I can read from a very close distance too. I have another
    aproach to Bates' method than he did, I am trying to find the problem
    and than trying to fix it and not doing all the excersises, just the
    relevant, I think that it is beter this way.

    However, I don't understand why are you so against Ace? What had he
    done?
     
    Dragon28, Mar 3, 2006
    #16
  17. Dragon28

    Dragon28 Guest

    Check yourself again
     
    Dragon28, Mar 3, 2006
    #17
    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.