reading in the dark....

Discussion in 'Optometry Archives' started by Jerome Tan, Apr 9, 2004.

  1. Jerome Tan

    Jerome Tan Guest

    Hi there,

    I have one of the William Bateson's book, it was stated there that
    reading in the dark will improve our eyes. I wonder if it's true, I
    know a lot of people sending me warning everytime when I read on the
    dark. Is there any scientific basis behind reading or not reading in
    the dark?

    Will reading in the dark cure myopia?

    Thanks.

    Regards/
    Jerome
     
    Jerome Tan, Apr 9, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Jerome Tan

    Dr Judy Guest

    How dark? The eye needs light to see. What is being "improved"?
    Visual science tells us that the eye needs a minimum level of light to
    stimulate the retina enough for vision. The eye has two types of light
    receptors, one type is good for fine vision and needs a lot of light, the
    other type is good for form/ edge/ movement detection, is not good for fine
    visual tasks and needs less light.

    It is difficult to see clearly enough for fine tasks like reading if there
    is not enough light and you may get a temporary headache from the effort but
    no long term harm or benefit.

    I do not believe there has been any scientific study of the "goodness" or
    "badness" of reading in the dark.
    No. Scientific studies of lab animals found that confining animals in the
    dark 24/7 or otherwise failing to provide adequate visual stimulation during
    the critical vision development period of early infancy resulted in large
    amounts of myopia and other abnormalities of visual perception.

    Dr Judy
     
    Dr Judy, Apr 9, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Jerome Tan

    Otis Brown Guest

    (Jerome Tan) wrote in message
    Dear Jerome,

    Who is William Bateson?

    It is not a good idea to read in low levels of illumination.

    The problem is that we pull the reading in much closer
    if children read in poor light. And THAT is indeed
    a problem -- but an indirect result of the illumination level.

    Kids reading in deep dusk, with the eyes at 4 inches (-10 diopters)
    hours at a time -- tend to develop a negative refractive status.

    [This is the "second opinion". The "majority opinion" states
    that environment has no effect on the refractive status
    of the natural eye.]

    Best,

    Otis
    Engineer
     
    Otis Brown, Apr 10, 2004
    #3
  4. Jerome Tan

    Jerome Tan Guest

    I want to cure my myopia, medical science said it's not possible, but
    I have visited several sites where the author itself has his eyes
    cured. I wonder what's the best exercise out there for the eyes...

     
    Jerome Tan, Apr 10, 2004
    #4
  5. Jerome Tan

    The Real Bev Guest

    Reading (in good light, of course) enough so you can separate truth from
    fiction.
    --
    Cheers,
    Bev
    *********************************************
    Not all cultures are equal. If they were, we
    would have a lot more cannibal restaurants.
     
    The Real Bev, Apr 11, 2004
    #5
  6. Jerome Tan

    Dr Judy Guest

    There are a number of proven effective methods of treating myopia: glasses,
    contact lenses and refractive surgery. No exercise method has been proven
    effective. Anyone can claim anything on a website.

    Some low amounts on myopia may be due to excess accommodation; this is
    called pseudo myopia. This type will respond to exercise. To find out if
    you have any amount of pseudo myopia, ask your eye doctor to do a
    cycloplegic refraction. The difference, if any, in the amount of myopia
    found under cycloplegia and the amount you are currently corrected for with
    your glasses is the amount that can be corrected with excercises.

    Dr Judy
     
    Dr Judy, Apr 11, 2004
    #6
  7. Jerome Tan

    Otis Brown Guest

    Dear Nipidoc,

    Have you given any thought about why fundamental
    change in science develops when we have new
    concepts and ideas develop?

    The process of "washing hands" in medicine was
    fought AGAINST for many years AFTER successful
    prevention of purperal fever (childbirth) was
    disscovered by I. Semmelweis.

    After the death rate was reduced from 30 percent
    to 0.8 percent, medical studies were run
    that PROVED that "wahsing hands" had no
    effect on the purperal fever -- and the
    women continued to die in their hundreds.

    Yes, "washing hands" was the second opinion,
    and necessary for new concept and methods
    of prevention to develop.

    Best,

    Otis
    Engineer



     
    Otis Brown, Apr 11, 2004
    #7
  8. Please let us know what your engineering education and experience are. Are
    you licensed? A good engineer knows their limitations.

    From time to time, I do venture my opinions on medical matters. I make it
    clear that I am not a health professional. When I do express such an
    opinion, it is based upon scientific knowledge. Even the world's best
    physicians cannot violate the laws of chemistry and physics, and the good
    ones do not say that they can. If I speculate, I indicate that I am
    speculating.

    Bill

    Bill
     
    Repeating Rifle, Apr 11, 2004
    #8
  9. Jerome Tan

    Otis Brown Guest

    Dear Bill,

    In the above case I was not "speculating" as you like
    to say. You would have to read the book on the
    subject of opposition to "prevention" to
    understand what I was talking about.
    Read the book, "The Cry and the Covenant".
    No speculating is required.

    Best,

    Otis
     
    Otis Brown, Apr 12, 2004
    #9
  10. Jerome Tan

    RayL Guest

    | | > I want to cure my myopia, medical science said it's not possible, but
    | > I have visited several sites where the author itself has his eyes
    | > cured. I wonder what's the best exercise out there for the eyes...
    |
    | There are a number of proven effective methods of treating myopia:
    glasses,
    | contact lenses and refractive surgery. No exercise method has been proven
    | effective. Anyone can claim anything on a website.
    --------------------------

    Treatment? So, so sad. Your kind don't know the cause of many eye defects
    let alone how to correct them. Instead you ignore the problem and stick
    cumbersome glass on the face. You even condone invasive surgery!!??

    Even a good pigeon keeper can tell you that s/he knows the internal
    condition of a bird by looking into the eyes. Does that not tell you
    something??

    Money-money-money! Oh, and ignorance.

    Don't reply, it will only make me laugh. I have my own testimony that you
    can't erase, so don't bother!

    Ray.
     
    RayL, Apr 23, 2004
    #10
  11. Jerome Tan

    Otis Brown Guest

    Dear Ray,

    Let me correct one mistake DrJudy makes about me.

    I do not use the word "exercise". The concept
    I express, is that we must maintain our
    eyes in an "open" enviroment in order to
    maintain a positive refractive status and
    20/20.

    This is something we can learn to do for ourselves.

    This approach is personally intrusive, since
    you basically must "take control" and do is yourself.

    Used at the threshold, then the concept of
    "natural vision" is that the eye must be
    kept in the open, and a plus lens used
    for all close work will have that effect.

    Dr. Bates obviously did not advocate this
    method -- althoug Dr. Jacob Raphaelson did.

    But I do not use "exercise" to describe this
    process.

    Hope this clarifies.

    Best,

    Otis
    Engineer
     
    Otis Brown, Apr 25, 2004
    #11
  12. Jerome Tan

    Ann Guest

    And if someone fails you can always blame them for that failure and
    not say that maybe the theory and method are flawed.

    Your approach reminds me of Freud's.

    Ann
     
    Ann, Apr 25, 2004
    #12
  13. Jerome Tan

    RayL Guest

    "Otis Brown"

    | Dear Ray,
    |
    | Let me correct one mistake DrJudy makes about me.
    |
    | I do not use the word "exercise". The concept
    | I express, is that we must maintain our
    | eyes in an "open" enviroment in order to
    | maintain a positive refractive status and
    | 20/20.
    |
    | This is something we can learn to do for ourselves.
    |
    | This approach is personally intrusive, since
    | you basically must "take control" and do is yourself.
    |
    | Otis
    | Engineer

    OK, Otis. I ment 'intrusive' to mean 'under the knife', or laser. :)

    Ray.
     
    RayL, Apr 25, 2004
    #13
  14. Jerome Tan

    Otis Brown Guest

    (Jerome Tan) wrote in message
    Dear Jerome,

    I would not use the word "cure", but I would say
    that pilots have cleared their vision from
    20/60 to 20/20 through intensive work with
    a plus lens.

    In every case, however, they did it themselves,
    by having a good understanding of the
    proven behavior of the natural eye -- under
    objective, testable, scientific conditions.

    Is prevention of this nature easy. Of couse
    it is not. Is is possible. That depends on
    you of couse. Is it medical? Of course it
    is not.
    This is not the case. Pure science says that it is possible
    to at least AVOID the development of a negative refractive
    status for the natural eye.

    In terms of "medicine", there are many who take
    "very difficult" for "impossible".

    But even here, the second-opinion, is that it could
    be prevented, if the preson concerned with
    is would use the preventive plus lens with
    great personal force.

    You will get a massive number of opinions about this.
    Which method you select will depend on what you
    want, any your ability to be persistant (assuming
    your naked eye vision is 20/40) is working towards
    the goal of 20/20 (Snellen -- room illumination.

    Best,

    Otis
    Engineer

    www.myopiafree.com



     
    Otis Brown, Apr 26, 2004
    #14

  15. Yes!


    Please, upgrade your information visiting my new official website
    dedicated to Dr. Bates, http://TheCentralFixation.com


    (PS: reading very fine print in the dark is a cure for myopia and
    imperfect sight in general, BUT you have to do it. If you do not do
    it, then it won't help!)
     
    Rishi Giovanni Gatti, May 4, 2004
    #15
  16. Jerome Tan

    Frostypaw Guest

    That's odd - I spent from age 8 to 20+ reading fine print in the dark
    and I'm -4.5 and -4.25.

    I guess I'm a medical miracle :D

    Then I had PRK and am now -.5 and 0... at 20/10 vision. what a crime.

    Please Jerome, don't waste your time
     
    Frostypaw, May 5, 2004
    #16
  17. Hi Jerome,


    Hallo Jerome,

    please ask this little idiot Mr. David K if he his cured of his own
    myopia. Because once I used to know him and he was telling that still
    he was quite blurred.

    Now I have lost his acquaintance so I do not know if he is cured
    finally.

    From what he says, it is clear he is still myopic, because he talks
    about "challenges", "handled well", and "improved".

    The truth is that there is no challenge, no need for "handling well"
    anything, nor to "improve" anything. These terms are really misguiding
    because give you the idea that you have to do something "positive" to
    get some results. The fact is that all you have to do is UN-DO.
    So, relax. Take your fine print and light a candle and read it with
    your back to the candle. It may require three or four hours to get
    relaxation.
    But it's worth a try.
     
    Rishi Giovanni Gatti, May 5, 2004
    #17
  18. Otis

    Hello Otis!

    I have to say that your webpage is very beautiful.

    Now that I have accumulated more facts with the help of my clients who
    have cured their defects of vision, either temporarily or permanently,
    I have developed my own understanding about your "plus lenses" theory.

    If you are interested, I may explain it to you on these columns.

    It is very short and simple understanging, in complete accord with Dr.
    Bates Original Teachings and system of Cure.
     
    Rishi Giovanni Gatti, May 5, 2004
    #18
  19. Jerome Tan

    Otis Brown Guest

    Dear Rishi,

    Good to hear from you again!

    With Dr. Bates, I long ago realized that final control
    must rest with the individual.

    I would be pleased to read your posts about the plus.

    The "problem" with medicine it the extent that
    responsibility must be transferred to the individual.

    If the person can take the responsibility to
    always read and pass the 1.8 cm letters at
    6 meters, then I think he has taken major
    responsibility unto himself.

    You will see from the post by Dr. Glazier that
    he agrees with the preventive approach.

    We each "describe" the reasons why an approach
    works in our own mind. If the "words" you or
    I convince a person to follow a given approach
    result in his clearing his distant vision to
    20/40 or better (assuming muscle spasam myopia)
    then we have done good service to that person.

    Our methods of advocacy are different -- but
    the goal is the same.

    I sign as "engineer" to make certain every one
    is clear that I am providing engineering-scientific
    advice -- and not "medical" advice.

    Best,

    Otis
    Engineer
     
    Otis Brown, May 6, 2004
    #19
  20. (Otis Brown) wrote in message
    Seing through a plus lens creates a strain or effort to see that can
    be compared to the strain or effort to see Dr. Bates asked his
    patients when he wanted them to demonstrate that staring at objects
    lowers the vision.

    Many people at the inception of imperfect sight can recover very well
    if they demonstrate that staring blurs more the vision while
    practicing central-fixation stops the strain and gives flashes of
    perfect sight.


    If you talk about muscle spasm myopia you are far off the subject,
    because people need a cure for imperfect sight beyond that.

    The only system that works is that of rest methods.

    You can cure everything with that,

    Far superior to any other system of treatment.

    Problem is that people are dumb, so only a very "chosen few" minority
    gets intersted in Dr. Bates stuff, not the common people.

    This is absurd because th Bates System was all about "common" sense,
    not strange things like plus lenses or other terrible inventions our
    idiot-doctors are delivering to the people.

    I hope you will give Dr. Bates a second chance: study better his own
    works. There are more than 2400 pages to study. Believe he is right,
    follow him and get some flashes of perfect sight. I know your
    personal situation is very serious and you are not so young, but in
    the article by Bates there are plenty of cases of over-80 who have got
    a cure.
     
    Rishi Giovanni Gatti, May 8, 2004
    #20
    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.