 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Vision / March 2006Nearsightedness with glasses for reading at a young age.
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. 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. 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. 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. 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. > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > I just wantd to know more about the physiological problem that she has. 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 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. 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. 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. >Ace: 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 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? 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 >Get her vision checked properly. There is little chance of Bates >working, it hasn't yet. 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. 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 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? "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! Yes and you are still a moron. dr grant drug-tripping moron Check yourself again |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.