Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / General / Vision / March 2008

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Dr Bates Cures His Sight

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Zetsu - 13 Mar 2008 20:51 GMT
The Cure of Imperfect Sight By Treatment Without Glasses - CHAPTER XX
- Presbyopia: Its Cause And Cure

[..The first patient that I cured of presbyopia was myself. Having
demonstrated by means of experiments on the eyes of animals that the
lens is not a factor in accommodation, I knew that presbyopia must be
curable, and I realized that I could not look for any very general
acceptance of the revolutionary conclusions I had reached so long as I
wore glasses myself for a condition supposed to be due to the loss of
the accommodative power of the lens. I was then suffering from the
maximum degree of presbyopia. I had no accommodative power whatever,
and had to have quite an outfit of glasses, because with a glass, for
instance, which enabled me to read fine print at thirteen inches, I
could not read it either at twelve inches or at fourteen. The
retinoscope showed that when I tried to see anything at the near-point
without glasses my eyes were focussed for the distance, and when I
tried to see anything at the distance they were focussed for the near-
point. My problem, then, was to find some way of reversing this
condition and inducing my eyes to focus for the point I wished to see
at the moment that I wished to see it.

***
ONLY ONE MAN WHO COULD CURE ME

***

I consulted various eye specialists, but my language was to them like
that of St. Paul to the Greeks, namely, foolishness. "Your lens is as
hard as a stone," they said. "No one can do anything for you." Then I
went to a nerve specialist. He used the retinoscope on me, and
confirmed my own observations as to the peculiar contrariness of my
accommodation; but he had no idea what I could do about it. He would
consult some of his colleagues, he said, and asked me to come back in
a month, which I did. Then he told me he had come to the conclusion
that there was only one man who could cure me, and that was Dr.
William H. Bates of New York.

"Why do you say that?" I asked.

"Because you are the only man who seems to know anything about it," he
answered.

Thus thrown upon my own resources, I was fortunate enough to find a
non-medical gentleman who was willing to do what he could to assist
me, the Rev. R. B. B. Foote, of Brooklyn. He kindly used the
retinoscope through many long and tedious hours while I studied my own
case, and tried to find some way of accommodating when I wanted to
read, instead of when I wanted to see something at the distance. One
day, while looking at a picture of the Rock of Gibraltar which hung on
the wall, I noted some black spots on its face. I imagined that these
spots were the openings of caves, and that there were people in these
caves moving about. When I did this my eyes were focussed for the
reading distance. Then I looked at the same picture at the reading
distance, still imagining that the spots were caves with people in
them. The retinoscope showed that I had accommodated, and I was able
to read the lettering beside the picture. I had, in fact, been
temporarily cured by the use of my imagination. Later I found that
when I imagined the letters black I was able to see them black, and
when I saw them black I was able to distinguish their form. My
progress after this was not what could be called rapid. It was six
months before I could read the newspapers with any kind of comfort,
and a year before I obtained my present accommodative range of
fourteen inches, from four inches to eighteen; but the experience was
extremely valuable, for I had in pronounced form every symptom
subsequently observed in other presbyopic patients.

Fortunately for the patients, it has seldom taken me as long to cure
other people as it did to cure myself. In some cases a complete and
permanent cure was effected in a few minutes. Why, I do not know. I
will never be satisfied till I find out. A patient who had worn
glasses for presbyopia for about twenty years was cured in less than
fifteen minutes by the use of his imagination...]
Neil Brooks - 13 Mar 2008 23:38 GMT
Is there any objective verification, before and after, of the changes
in his underlying vision??

If not, then are you aware that -- like many other things -- this is
an unverifiable, third-hand anecdote?

"My sister was a high myope ... until she ate a fish taco.  After
that, better than 20/20 vision."

Unverifiable.
Third-hand.
Anecdote.

Why bother??  Why not just participate on Otis's website ... taking
him with you?
Zetsu - 14 Mar 2008 08:49 GMT
This is not meant as a proof of anything.
I have posted this article because I feel that it is valuable in one's
journey coming to understand Perfect Sight. If you wish to believe
that Dr. Bates cured himself, then believe so. If you wish to believe
he did not, then that is also fine. I have posted this anecdote, as it
is: an anecdote, a person's own experience in his journey to
recovering sight, after being told his lens was 'as hard as stone',
and that 'there is nothing you can do'.

Now the subject of 'PROOF' is a different matter. If you wish to prove
something to yourself, then you can demonstrate the methods of the
normal eye. There are no need for controlled tests.

It's akin to this: If you and a friend go out to a park, and you say
'Look over there George. That grass is green. Isn't it splendid?', and
he replies 'No you fool, how can I possibly believe you that its
green? Do you have any controlled tests to prove this to me? Are you
some kind of absolute idiot? Do you expect me to believe that this
grass, right before me, is green?'.

To me, you sound like George.
The truths in Perfect Sight are something readily demonstratable, just
as anyone can readily tell you that 'the grass is green'. You don't
need to use controlled, group testing. It's just a fact of life, that
you can know because you, as a human, are demonstrating the fact
through your very own bodily self.
Don W - 14 Mar 2008 16:22 GMT
Actually the grass isn't green, it just looks green.
Neil Brooks - 14 Mar 2008 16:39 GMT
You seem to have NO idea about why "anecdotal" is not considered
acceptable.

It's back to Mike Tyner's infamous shark repellent spray.  He sprays
it, daily, in his yard.  As yet, he's had no shark infestation.

Google "false cause," "correlation does not equal causation," or "post
hoc ergo propter hoc."

Otis's method seems quite similar: try X for years.  If it works, it
was because of X.  If it fails, you didn't do it right.

Yet, as always, there's NO evidence that these methods/interventions
cause ANY change in the statistical probability that:

- some people get better without treatment,
- some people get worse without treatment,
- and some people stay stable without treatment.

Absent that sort of control, you really SHOULD be on faith.vision.
You're asking people to believe things for which there is simply no
evidence.

And ... Don's right.
Zetsu - 14 Mar 2008 18:19 GMT
Yeah yeah, fine the grass isn't green but the point remains... now I
will repeat that this post is not meant to serve as evidence. IT IS AN
ANECDOTE AND NOTHING MORE THAN THAT. I HAVE POSTED THIS TO HELP THOSE
WHO TRULY SEEK PERFECT SIGHT (OBVIOUSLY NOT YOU). And I repeat that
this is not something you prove or don't prove. It is A FACT OF LIFE
THAT THE SIGHT IS RESTORED WHEN THE STRAIN IS RELIEVED, AND THIS IS
READILY DEMONSTRATABLE, BY ANYONE ANY TIME ANY PLACE.

DON'T BE LAZY, PROVE THE FACTS TO YOURSELF IF YOU HAVE THE GUTS TO AT
LEAST TRY.
Dr. Leukoma - 14 Mar 2008 18:26 GMT
> Yeah yeah, fine the grass isn't green but the point remains... now I
> will repeat that this post is not meant to serve as evidence. IT IS AN
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> DON'T BE LAZY, PROVE THE FACTS TO YOURSELF IF YOU HAVE THE GUTS TO AT
> LEAST TRY.

Then if the sight is not restored, the strain must not have been
relieved.  Is this the logic?

Look here.  Anything that is so readily demonstrable and repeatable
must have a scientific basis.  If that is the case, then I would
expect to see pages of studies in the scientific databases.  I think
the fact that there are no studies found in the scientific databases
serves to contradict your assertion, or so it would seem.
Zetsu - 14 Mar 2008 18:32 GMT
There have been studies carried out (see David Kiesling's 'Evidence'
page) but they are UNIMPORTANT. Now what is truly utterly remarkable
is that you refuse to try out and demonstrate something. If I give you
an apple, and I say it tastes nice, now that is a matter of subjective
opinion. On the other hand if I give you a sum, 1+1, and you go ahead
and calculate it (hopefully it won't take too long) the answer in the
decimal system is always 2 no matter what. Now if I give you an
equation:

Imperfect sight =  Norm. + Effort

Then you take a little short time to calculate the equation.

Imperfect sight - Effort = Norm. + Effort - Effort

On the right side Effort cancels each other out, so you are remaining
with just Norm. What is strange is that, YOU REFUSE TO DO A LITTLE
EQUATION.
Don W - 15 Mar 2008 04:00 GMT
Is division by zero permitted?
otisbrown@embarqmail.com - 15 Mar 2008 04:53 GMT
Sure, Don -- it equals infinity.

Which is the amount of time that Zit and Brooks are going
to spend posting their stuff here.

> Is division by zero permitted?
Neil Brooks - 15 Mar 2008 04:56 GMT
On Mar 14, 8:53 pm, otisbr...@embarqmail.com wrote:
> Sure, Don -- it equals infinity.
>
> Which is the amount of time that Zit and Brooks are going
> to spend posting their stuff here.

The irony, and audacity, of Mr. Otis "Probably >15,000 posts on the
'Net, PLUS his own website dedicated to his crap" Brown saying that is
uncanny.

But not surprising.

Who's "Zit," by the way?  Having a little adult acne problem, are you?
Jason Sperry - 15 Mar 2008 06:34 GMT
LMAO
otisbrown@embarqmail.com - 15 Mar 2008 12:38 GMT
" At every crossroads on the path that leads to the future, tradition
has
placed 10,000 men to guard the past.."

- Maurice Maeterlinck, Belgian poet,
playwright, and 1911 Nobel Laureate in literature

> LMAO
Zetsu - 15 Mar 2008 12:42 GMT
Neil Brooks - 15 Mar 2008 13:51 GMT
On Mar 15, 4:38 am, otisbr...@embarqmail.com wrote:
> " At every crossroads on the path that leads to the future, tradition
> has
> placed 10,000 men to guard the past.."

Here, again, is the ultimate irony and idiocy of Otis Brown.

In the PAST, these things were taken on faith.

In the present and the future, we use scientific testing to validate
what actually works and what does not.

Whether or not Jason "Deck Shoe" Sperry and Atchoo are laughing their
respective a.ses off does nothing to alter this fact.

You, Otis, are the dinosaur.  If you think something will help, work
to have it tested in RCCTs.
Zetsu - 14 Mar 2008 18:22 GMT
>Otis's method seems quite similar: try X for years.  If it works, it
>was because of X.

Where have I asked you to try anything for years? THE TRUTHS OF
PERFECT SIGHT CAN BE DEMONSTRATED, IN MINUSCULE MOMENTS. Years of
anything are not required.

Rate this thread:






 
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.