This article is Day 22 of a long term vision improvement experiment. To get the full value of what I am learning, be sure to check out the introductory article which also has links to all of my updates.
So what am I actually doing to reverse my nearsightedness? It’s really simple, so far, and it almost sounds dumb.
Remember that scene from Ferris Bueller’s Day Off when they’re driving the Ferrari home after a day of joyriding? They realize that they have to somehow erase the miles they put on the car. Ferris says they’ll just drive the car home backwards!
It doesn’t work that way with cars, as they discover, but it might work with vision.
The system I’m trying out, described in The Secret of Perfect Vision: How You Can Prevent or Reverse Nearsightedness
But it fits with the theory. As far as I know, there’s no harm in making the world even blurrier than it already is, so I tried it. I wore some very weak +1.25 lenses (the cheap kind from a drug store) and read a few chapters of a book. I positioned the book at such a distance from my eyes that I could make out the text crisply and clearly without glasses, but if I moved the book a bit further, the text would begin to blur. Then I put on the plus lenses. You have to read text that is blurry but slightly readable, but not so blurry that you can’t read it at all. You can’t focus on an unintelligible blob, but if you can make it out slightly, you can train your eyes to focus just a little bit farther. And then farther and farther, reversing the process that made you a slave to your glasses. That’s the idea, anyway.
The first thing I wondered is why I would need to wear plus lenses to blur some text, when I could easily move a book or a computer screen away from me to the point that I can’t easily read anything. As I soon found out, it can be uncomfortable to read a book held out at arm’s length. Now I understand why hyperopes carry around plus lenses. I always thought, if you can read a newspaper at a distance but not close up, why not just read it at a distance? The problem is that the text might be clear, but it’s small. In my case, I can just barely make out 12 point text held at arm’s length. Even if I could see it clearly, it would be uncomfortable to read at that distance. And then if I could correct my vision to the degree that I could clearly see text at arm’s length, how would I extend the improvements to further distances? By trying to read the newspaper from across the room? Hence, the plus lenses.
I actually noticed some changes to my vision. Being of sound mind, I didn’t get too excited. They were small improvements to begin with, and I also made sure that I wasn’t subconsciously moving my head in closer, squinting, or using the lensing effect of tearing in the eyes to sharpen my vision. Once I made some adjustments to my set up to keep all of these factors under control, I was satisfied that my observations of improvement were reliable.
If I stare at a page of blurred text with weak plus lenses, eventually I am able to resolve it and see the text as clearly as if I was not wearing the lenses. This claim is pretty wild in itself, since any self-reported vision changes are pretty subjective. I even hesitated to make it so early on, wanting to verify it a few dozen or more times before I made it public. I am sure of what I am seeing, however.
I’ve been a graphic designer for many years and I have a very good visual memory. When I experiment with focusing on text, I will place a book at the farthest point I can clearly see the text and remember exactly what it looks like. Then I will move the book further, so that the text is blurred, but not so much that it’s completely unreadable. I get a visual memory of how blurred the letters are. As I converge and diverge my eyes, eventually the text comes into focus. Sometimes it almost snaps into focus, like a camera rapidly adjusting to a different distance. I understand the limits of subjective reporting of visual experiences, but I am confident that this is actually happening without any subterfuge on my part.
So is this significant or not? Maybe all eyes can make minor, temporary upgrades in vision. I couldn’t even tell you how much my vision changes during this easily repeatable experience, but I’m sure that it’s a fraction of a diopter. So I wonder if there is some range of better focusing that even a myopic eye can accomplish — but anything outside that small range is permanently inaccessible.
Going with the theory that my eyes gradually adjusted to negative stimulus over many years, the way to reverse it (I hope) is to subject my eyes to positive stimulus. As I have read, this would involve holding some text out to the blur point and sharpening up my focus that fraction of a diopter that I can control (which still astonishes me). Then if I read this way for a few hours every day, I will become more and more able to focus at a slightly farther distance, and then I’ll move on to yet farther distances. The plus lenses will help me to increase my focusing power while keeping the blur point within arm’s reach, to make it easier to read.
This slight sharpening of my vision that I have under my control may not be so surprising at all. Maybe an eye expert could tell me that I’m wrong to be astonished by it. Still, since I can sharpen up my vision slightly, if I keep practicing it, maybe I can gradually make it better and better. My vision gradually got worse and worse, probably through the same process of accommodation.
I haven’t gotten into the theories explaining what muscles might make this work, if it works at all. Everyone has a different model, and it will take more study of both the established and the fringe ideas to understand what might be happening physiologically.
I’m definitely on the fringe, though, but I’m exploring it with absolute fidelity to reason. Some ideas that are universally accepted as true today were once considered to be fringe hypotheses. There are some ideas that are considered wacky but I’d defend with everything I’ve got. For example, there is so much good evidence and clear thinking behind neolithic foods being responsible for modern diseases, one way or another, that I’d almost bet my life on it. Except that modern nutritional scientists probably wouldn’t give the idea a fair hearing. You might say it’s because they’re so myopic.
13 Comments
Now that is very true. Many if not all of mankind’s theories brought forth by people deemed blasphemers are now accepted by the worlds population as common knowledge. This theory is one I will not bash before I try.
As I was reading your input I found myself trying your reversal method on the spot, with my smart phone screen at a distance, and I can say this much is true: eyes, as genetically or environmentaly affected as they may be to the individual, are wonderous marvels of human anatomy. Having a progressively worse case of Myopia myself, I can agree with you in that there is at the very least a temporary change in focus that has a varying limit. Having stayed awake for a long time this particular day, I can input that fatigue has a definate affect on how much your myopic eyes will venture from their “official” limits. I will keep exploring this… Keep on theorizing Tod.
Your defiantly on too something here. I found that when I chose a different life style, i.e changing jobs and working outdoors my eye sight dramatically improved, I also noticed that people in this line of work had the opposite problem.
Long-sightedness.
I’ve found that people can’t accept this way of thinking, when I say “glasses make your vision worse” people seem to laugh it off as ridicules.
My the optical companies are keeping informational things like this at bay?
What happened too the post? I clicked on the next blog and I got inflation.
Im a little confused, i have been reading many websites about myopia so my brain is a little frazzeled. I have only just started researching myopia. Ive had the problem since i was about 16 and it has very slowly gotten worse. Though the more i read, it seems mine isnt that bad. My last perscription was around 1.25 each eye back in 2003. I have just gotten second prescription (payed for by work) at 1.5 for left and 1.75 for right. I really felt like a number both times i went for the prescriptions, which to me screams its just a business to process you and isnt really there to ‘help’ you.
Ive just stumbled across your website and was thinking down the same lines as you for correcting my myopia. Mine is due to computers. My work and home life revolve around them. I know my eyes have adopted to an up close existance. From what i understand my muscles that control my eyes lenses are overstrengthened. So i need to relax my eyes in order to allow my lens to return to its origional state.
Onto my initial confusion… In the third last paragraph of your post ‘Reducing myopia with plus lenses’ you stated you saw a slight improvement in vision wearing plus lenses. But then stated you vision only worsened? Are you able to expand upon what you meant? I realise it was 18 months ago, but any further insight yould be greatly appreciated.
Further to my last post my initial idea was to buy some +1.00 reading glasses. With these glasses sitting in my normal position away from my computer, my screen would appear slightly blurry. But my eyes would be relaxed. My thoughts were eventually my eyes would relax to the point where i could see the monitor clearly. My thoughts were to then buy some +1.25 glasses, rinse and repeat. Just a theory from the ignorant but cheap and simple to test.
You have to find out what works for you. For me, using my computer without glasses is sufficient, but I found plus lenses useful when reading books. Maybe I’ll graduate to needing plus lenses for the computer. Regarding your last comment, in what way did I state that my vision worsened?
You stated ‘Still, since I can sharpen up my vision slightly, if I keep practicing it, maybe I can gradually make it better and better. My vision gradually got worse and worse, probably through the same process of accommodation.’ Did you mean wearing plus lenses worsen your vision?
Oh, no. I meant that during all the years I focused up close on a computer screen or a book for hours at a time without focusing on the distance, my vision gradually got worse and worse. So if I put similar stress on my eyes in the opposite direction, forcing them to focus a little bit further and further, maybe it will gradually improve.
Ok great thanks for the clarafication. Ill give it a go and hopefully be able to stop or even reverse my condition. Though i have found many sites saying the shape of your cornea effects your ability to focus also. So hopefully mine isnt too distorted lol.
Yeah, who knows if our myopia is permanent, partially correctable, or totally correctable. Seems like correcting it naturally is worth a try before going under the laser.
To help with this (preventive) process, I prepared some videos on how to obtain and set-up a Snellen eye chart, and then use test lenses (from Zennioptical) to do everything your self. Just go to YouTube, and type, “OtisSumnerBrown”, and watch the videos. Leadership is doing everything yourself.
Hi, I’ve been reading myopia.org, it says about the same theory to save children vision from harmful minus glasses, very informative. I am transforming all the close work to far work. I daughter do her reading on visualizer that display on 42″ TV at a distance. I copy & paste web content from Safari to a free App called Arrow Notes on my iPhone/iPad, this App is capable of changing the font size to 48! I read them at 1 arm distance.
Hi Tod and group,
I think that the use of the plus is difficult, and must start early. This is for people posting a -1 diopter prescription, and don’t want to wear it. Here is one man’s experience.
http://schwerdfeger.name/articles/pluslens.shtml
This works in the early stage, but it does take intense insight and personal motivation.
I did the same same thing you did when I was 20 years old many years ago. At age 18, I had -4.5 diopters to “correct” my left eye, -5.00 diopters for the right and -1.75 or stronger correction for astigmatism. I was not of sound mind at the time, but as of yesterday when I went to get my drivers license renewed, I could easily see, with both eyes the 20/20 line with a prescription of -2.25 for both eyes and without any astigmatism correction. At age 18, I was legally blind with 20/400 vision. Now I can see the Snellen chart with between 20/70 to 20/50 unaided. By using plus lenses, you teach your eyes/ brain ( subconscious) to learn how to see, literally, from a larger perspective. I admire what you’re doing. I look at it like lifting weights: The harder you make it on yourself, the stronger you become. Good luck! You’ll need much discipline and an enormous will power to overcome the desire to see things the easy (but corrupted) way. I still have a ways to go and it’s been over twenty years; I ‘m not giving up!