So, tell us how to do the eye exercises already!!!
EYE EXERCISES:
Look up as hard as you can until it hurts a little. Then look down, then to the left and to the right, then to the upper left, lower right, upper right and lower left, until it hurts a bit. Do it morning and night.
Second eye exercise:
Hold your finger about a foot from your face. Look at something across the room then at your finger. Repeat this about twenty times morning and night.
I think... the answer has something to do with love. You said your eyesight improved after your chilbrirth. When I meditate, my goal is to relaxedly fix my attention on something. I can see my vision quality fluctuating the more love I can tap into. But it's a difficult state to hold! Also, I think the reason "sungazing" works for people is that you approach that "state" of love when you naturally relaxedly focus your gaze on something so immensely beautiful.
I thought you and Aaron were married? What do you mean he lives two floors down? Isn't your son yours and Aaron's? I apologize for being nosy, but I think you've answered some of this in videos, but I don't know which ones. By the way, your videos are very good. I learn from you.
That is a known effect called adaption, and is best demonstrated with a younger eye, because it is dependent on lens flexibility, As the lens ages, it hardens and the degree of such adaption possible progressively drops, usually approaching 0 diopters between ages 40 and 50.
With ultrasound, we can measure the change in lens geometry resulting from a given amount of muscle activity, and observe how maximum muscle effort changes the lens's shape less and less as it ages.
@thetruthergirls Hi Truther, Tragically, there are too many ODs who think that they are the ONLY experts in the world. They always start with, "... you are an idiot, because you believe prevention is possible, but I will slam you against the wall ... and EXPLAIN your stupidity to you. Truther, there are MDs who agree that negative status is preventable, (up to 20/40) if you are prepared to conduct prevention (in that range) yourself. Just don't ask an OD for help, however.
Yes, there are brave, courageous MDs and ODs who have suggested that prevention is possible. They face a storm of protest -- in their desire to help people like Sonia avoid entry into myopia. I would suggest Googling, "Kaisu Viikari, M.D., Ph.D", and read her second-opinion, that under excellent circumstances myopia can be avoided.
@Eyelow13 No, you are the truly stupid one -- for posting here AT ALL. You don't want a logical review of the facts, you want to crush Sonia. This is HER video, not yours. Why not go back in your office, and "over-prescribe" some more minus lenses, and think yourself a "God" that you can do that. The rest of us don't think, you are a God.
Otis, you miss the whole topic and what she says. You really need to learn to read word for word on what she says. I get what she's saying about myopic and have agreed under minimal circumstances to what she's saying, BUT!!! She is wrong to say its all a scam. She's prove her ignorance by not clarifying what she means. This video is to broad and I continue to disagree with her on how she presents it, bottom line. She's wrong, she's stupid and has no degree in ANY FIELD related to any of these i
Otis, if you and Sonia feel this way then throw your correction away, NEVER get laser surgery. I'm making this simple, you hate us, THEN GO AWAY, GO BLIND AND NEVER LOOK BACK. PERIOD. Otis you are a fool, your stupid.
@Eyelow13 I don't hate you -- just you endless arrogance and scientific stupidity. There are some very fine ODs and MDs who have recognized the need for prevention -- if the person has the motivation for it. That is the real issue that Sonia is talking about. This is not about "hate" but about wise learning.
Who's stupid? Otis is. You truly are the most ignorant person I've met. Read her description she clearly states that eye exams and laser surgery are a scam. Otis get a life and realize that you are ignorant and you know nothing and neither does Sonia.
@Eyelow13 This is typical OD arrogance and stupidity. This is what Sonia's has stated, you can believe Sonia, and other ODs who post in support of prevention (second-opinion) or this arrogant OD. Take your pick.
@Eyelow13 Hi Sonia -- Incredibly, the whole glasses/contacts/laser surgery industry is a total scam, too. I recently found out that if children do eye exercises instead of wearing glasses, their vision gets restored instead of worsening.
@purity4all Sonia explains this issue in her video, "Never Admit to Drug Use". While she suggests the "Bates Method", I would point out that Bates conducted his study with kids who were not yet wearing an excessive minus lens. Further, other professionals have recommended the "plus" at that point - and have been successful. Al agree that prevention must be started before that first minus to be truly successful.
If you know anything about the anatomy of the human eye, there is no possible way to change the shape of your cornea - which is responsible for you distance vision. It is not a muscle! You are exercising your muscles surrounding the lens inside your eye. Your lens is then able to accomidate through minor prescriptions, but won't help most people-- not to mention the facts that it can cause headaches and migraines. I can't believe I even responded to this idiocy.
Actually there are a few ways to reshape the cornea. The most common is of course laser keratotomy. Another method, popular in the 1970's used special contact lenses that molded the cornea to a new shape. After a whiie, the cornea went back to its original shape, however.
@vanceman17 To be precise, your cornea is responsible for your "lens relaxed" vision, which may be distance, intermediate, or near, depending upon eye depth. Normally the muscles surrounding your lens tug at it a little bit, and it becomes flatter than if fully relaxed. With less tugging, it becomes rounder and you see closer. With more tugging, it becomes flatter & you see further. Even with "exercises", you'll need glasses if your lens reaches it's maximum or minimum before sharply focusing.
And as we age, the pliable lens becomes stiffer and stiffer, reducing the amount that it's shape can change when the muscles try to accomodate for different distances. Between age 40 and 50, the lens has become so stiff that it can only focus sharply at one distance. The muscles still work, but can no longer change the shape of the lens. If, however, the natural lens is replaced with an "accomodating" artificial lens, the ability to see sharply at different distances is restored.
oops, I wasn't so precise.. :( Where I said "the muscles surrounding your lens tug at it", "it" refers to the lens, not to the cornea, which is what some might have inferred from the context of the previous sentence. Sorry about that. Also, the tugging is from all directions. Otherwise the process of accommodation would introduce astigmatism at some distances, but not at others (or different amounts of astigmatism at different distances)
The truth is, it will take more than just eye exercises to improve your vision. One needs to follow a comprehensive eye program, created by a competent natural health care practitioner of over 40 years, that takes the whole body/mind/spirit into consideration. This is where conventional medicine falls short. We are whole beings and must treat our eyes as an integral part of that. Seriously, folks, Google EyeAerobics. The program simply works to improve your vision... GUARANTEED!
@EyeAerobics Hi, it is nice to know that some optometrists like Albert Pang O.D. Certified therapeutic optometrist support the concept that at least prevention is possible. This of course shows that "Excrement" is not telling the truth about the possibility of prevention, that Truther-Girl says is possible. I don't "attack" people because of their scientific statement. I just support science that shows that prevention is wise.
Here is the data itself: Title: Ocular Biometry of Eskimo Families. Francis A. Young, George A. Leary Primate Research Center, Washington State University, Pullman, Washington 99163 Summary of the data: Age (Average), Eyes (Each Group), Mean, Sigma (S.D.) Age 58 Eyes 96 Mean +2.21 Sigma 1.31 Age 39 Eyes 180 Mean +1.19 Sigma 1.55 Age 16 Eyes 194 Mean -0.93 Sigma 1.97 Age 9 Eyes 218 Mean +1.40 Sigma 1.70
Thanks for this video! I too have improved my eyesight... Google EyeAerobics. I'm 58 and can read tiny type. Plus, my myopia has cleared back to 20/20! I'm stoked! I DON'T like wearing corrective lenses. I strongly agree that the whole medical system needs to come clean and stop duping us! Did you know that for thousands of years the Chinese medical doctors used to charge their patients when they were HEALTHY, not when they were sick! Imagine that for a moment...
@EyeAerobics I am pleased that this optometrist supports TrutherGirl's idea that entry into myopia can be avoided. Imagine an OD who will inform you as to how to prevent myopia when you are still at -1/2 doipter and 20/40, and can clear your Snellen by these methods. Why are there so few OD who are honest about prevention?
Hi do you know what exercises you did to improve your eye, or what book did you use? I want to get a hold of these exercises. There are so many 'better vision' books on the internet, which one did you use?
@kkche15 You know your visual acuity improves, when, starting at 20/40, you work with these methods, and verify that you eventually clear or read the 20/20 line.
TrutherGirl is right on a number of levels. But it is indeed difficult to get a parent to understand the necessity to start with prevention before a child become "nearsighted". I have posted remarks by a Dr. Prentice in this thread, about this issue of threshold prevention. It is one thing to suggest prevention (at 1/2 diopter and 20/40) but it quite difficult for Truther to do it. As she stated, prevention is indeed tedious. But she still can have a choice.
Bates had the courage to ask questions about the failed Donder/Helmholtz theory -- that was never proven in science. He said it this way:
Bates> “You cannot by reasoning correct a man of an ill opinion which by reasoning he never acquired. We can also say that neither by reasoning, nor by actual demonstration of the facts, can you convince some people that an opinion which they have accepted on authority is wrong.
I go to an real doctor, and ophthalmologist -- never and optometrist like EyeLow13 -- because of his extreme arrogance. There are quite a few ODs who admit that great care should be takes with the minus and the parent cautioned about the minus and the habit of over-prescription. In fact, it is rather obvious that TrutherGirl was prescribe a -5 by an arrogant OD like EyeLow. Find an honest OD who will HELP you with prevention.
You are proving more n more how stupid you are, the refraction is the only thing you could do lol, there is so much more in an exam, you have to be dumb. Anyone who believes that their glasses is the only reason for going to the DOCTOR they are badly mistaken. Their are hundreds of eye diseases and many severe ones. You can tell the beginning stages of brain tumors as well along with with many other neurological issues. You both are truly dumb, READ READ READ bc your idea of what a trip to the
Sonia, try to ignore the extreme arrogance of EyeLow13. Yes, there are good (second-opinion) ODs who will help your child with true-prevention (before that first minus) if you will let them -- and learn from them. To learn more from these ODs, I suggest going to Google, and typing in, "Steve Leung OD". If you want the truth, then that is how you obtain it - by study of science, facts, and ODs who will help you as they help their own children with plus-prevention.
Yes I do, when I know I'm right. And that's funny bc you and tuthergirl both referred to us as doctors. I'd like to see you try and pass the MCAT, you wouldn't make a 15, haha. So before you judge me just ask yourself why everyone isn't doing this, and TUTHERGIRL says she stopped trying, whatever that's bullcrap. If your getting healthier why would you stop trying? Come on TUTHERGIRL answer that... I swear your both so stupid I do believe my IQ drops everytime I talk to you.
@Eyelow13 Yes, in other countries you would be called "Mr.". Capable of holding up a minus lens and asking, "... is one better, is two better", but that is about you "skill level". After a child INDUCES a negative state in his natural eyes, yes, for the ignorant child you can do that. A careful review of science (the effect of a -3 diopter on the natural eye) will prove how risky that minus lens is for that child.
Haha WHAT?!!! 250 where the hell you going moron the industry average is 89 dollars and around 60 in small cities. You obviously have no idea what your talking about.
Otis your a moron, a 27 billion dollar hoax, yeah I'm sure. And yes according to you two morons eye exercises you'll never need glasses. Dr Otis, haha try this and see what happens. As for TUTHERGIRL she's sitting there knowing she won't hold her child back from eyeglasses if he cannot see. You of course are the only moron left defending your THEORY!!
I seriously think ppl like you make the medical industry wealthy bc it's morons like you that your so called science try's to understand. Haha.
Truther> Incredibly, the whole glasses/contacts/laser surgery industry is a total scam, too. I recently found out that if children do eye exercises instead of wearing glasses, their vision gets restored instead of worsening.
Second-opinion> Type "Myopia Prevention" and read Don Rehm's statement about this arrogant ignorance and this destructive minus lens.
When your kid complains he/she can't see TUTHERGIRL DO NOT PROVIDE CARE FOR THEM, that would win you parent of the year. And if you knew anything about optics your vision is hereditary, personal health and medically related as well, but you keep them tests handy and see where it gets you. Feel free to post once you try this, we're all wanting that miracle break through.
Ok listen here you ignorant punk, when you post a video on a PUBLIC site you are invoking others to express their speech. Tuthergirl, what a name, lol. Anyways if you and anyone else feels this way then STOP bringing your asses to us, stay home and go blind, risk your health and vision, I DO NOT CARE you ignorant ass. Bottom line!!! She acts as thou she knows it all and so do you, so you and her take your ignorant asses and prefetch to the world to stop going to the doctors, you'll see in the e
@Eyelow13 Truther -- you got this arrogant prig correctly identified. The second-opinion is that you place a minus on the eye and IT GOES DOWN. That is science -- check it out.
For TrutherGirl. Despite the incredible arrogance and stupidity of some ODs posting here, there are excellent professionals who support your EDUCATION to help avoid entry into myopia (negative state of the fundamental eye). Thus, this is a majority-opinion versus preventive second-opinion issue. Keep an open mind about this, and you could help your child avoid entry into myopia -- by avoiding the ignorance and arrogance of these ODs.
Yes I am, and even thou you deleted your last comment I stand behind mine. STUPID, STUPID, STUPID, you are missing the point. She is not talking about ANYTHING other than her personal situation, and there is NO WAY eye exercises can improve her issue. PERIOD, so stop the non-sense and just address what the video is about. PERIOD! You can sit here and reply to everyone's comment all you want but if your not addressing the issue at hand your comments are stupid, bc there about all these things th
@Eyelow13 Truthergirl it totally correct about you. Prevention (of negative status for the fundamental eye) is possible -- but NOT if you are involved. The minus is not safe, and has NEVER BEEN PROVEN TO BE SAFE EITHER. But you in your arrogance will never admit to scientific truth. I think that Tuthergirl is more right that you can imagine. At least in science she is correct to fear the arrogant over-prescription of a minus lens.
@Eyelow13 You seek to DENY Sonia's right of freedom of speech. Is your "profession" gone that far? I said PREVENTIVE second-opinion. That means that NONE OF THESE ISSUES ARE SETTLED. It is up to TrutherGirl to do her own research, and if she chooses, to work on true-prevention by any method she might choose -- as well as talk about it on YouTube. We are all listening!
@Eyelow13 Sonia, you are correct about the ODs. I have friends who are MDs and ODs. I do respect them -- in their office. You should OBJECT to this type of OD:
EyeLow> " Yes I do, when I know I'm right...... I swear your both so stupid I do believe my IQ drops everytime I talk to you."
Sonia, I expect an HONEST conversation about prevention with these people. But when they insult my intelligence -- I truly must research Bates and other methods. Remember -- it is not only "exercise"..but..
This is just silly. Your eyes are changing, and thats normal after pregnancy. Eye exercises are a myth, just like voodoo or lucky charms. There are a lot of people trying to sell these scam exercises, just be careful not to get tricked.
@block1385 No Doubt -- but that is not the issue. You place the natural eye in a long-term near environment, and it develops negative status as a natural process. You place a strong minus on the natural eye, and it develops that same negative status. AFTER a child has his nose-on-page, he develops that status. Then, in ignorance, you can "fix" that negative status with a minus lens. That does no solve any problem at all. Just makes matters worse -- from a scientific perspective.
@otissumnerbrown Incorrect . A minus lens will not change the curvature of the lens unless it is too strong for that person, this will have the same effect as if someone is looking at something close. This process is called accommodation, your theory is utterly basis, as otherwise every time someone looked at something close to the they would become more and more shortsighted, which is not the case.
@block1385 No, you are incorrect. You place a -3 diotper on the natural eye, and it will change its refractive state by -2.3 diopters in less than three months. That is objective science. You statement is wishful thinking that the minus is "perfectly safe" and has "no effect" on the natural eyes status. You are stating the old Donder-Helmholtz theory that the eye is not a dynamic system. You memorized false facts. Get into 21 Century science.
@otissumnerbrown Completely false. The refractive state of the eye changes by more than that when you read a book. Its called accommodation, it doesn't change your manifest refraction, if that were the case every time you read a book, or looked at anything close, you would become more and more shortsighted, everyone on earth looks at close things,and as we can all testify, we are not all becoming more and more shortsighted.
@block1385 Hmmm... In fact the eye is becoming more and more negative -- a scientific truth you seek to deny.
For Instance: FIRST-YEAR HONG KONG UNIVERSITY STUDENTS 87.5 % MYOPIC
o Goh and Lam (Goh, W.S. and Lam, C.S., "Changes in refractive trends and optical components of Hong Kong Chinese aged 19-39 years," Ophthal. Physiol. Opt., 14:378-382, 1994) found that in 2000 first-year students at the University of Hong Kong, the prevalence of myopia was 87.5%. (Don't you read?)
@otissumnerbrown But these people are becoming more myopic before using glasses, and then continuing even with glasses. This is because it is genetic. People were short sighted long before glasses were even conceived.
Stupid, stupid, stupid. Period! This woman is talking about herself in this video, REWATCH IT, therefore she is stupid by thinking that a person in her state can restore her vision. This women needs to spend her money on a makeover, salon trip and get use to her glasses/
3. At the height of the nostrils, separated by one inch on the cheeks you will have the points to massage. Inline with the eyeballs, there is also a small hole in the cheekbones.
4. Thumbs placed on the temple as support, and index fingers roll in massage movement over the bones above and below the eyes, beginning from the inside out.
This way you affect all the major acupuncture points around the eyes, which stimulate the eye operation.
@choccakegatto eye muscles (those that move it) need to be stronger, and learn also to release when needed. you roll the eyes, look near (nose) and at far objects in short succession, read books definitely without glasses, watch less TV and so on.
chinese schoolchildren need by the state to do every day accupressure on themselves in the long pause between classes.
@choccakegatto text how to use the white picture, then i shut up
1. Place thumb below the eyebrow, as on the picture, above the corner of the eye, nails downward, and push up gently to massage the appropriate point at which a small hole is located.
2. Index and thumb fingers to massage the area, where the glasses sit up in contact with the nose, close to the inner eye corners.
Thank You for your post. Just want to share that you are definitely right to suspect that may be we need not wear glasses as much as we are told . Somehow I figure this out 40 years ago that wearing glasses will not be good for me. I will only use them when I absolutely have to. 40 yrs later, I never went over 200 degree. 2 years back I bought one of those glasses with holes in them to train the eyes, I can actually see better without glasses now. So I believe if you start at younger age, better
I'm Short-Sight , i CANNOT get a perfect view or improve my view by exercices.. I'm actually 19 years old , but my left eye is -15.75 and my right eye is -18.25. Tell me how can exercices can correct totally my view.
@raiiinbowx : ever heard about sungazing?? Do some research on it.. by sungazing, your sight will improve, actually by using sunglasses, and contact lenses, you are destroying your sight, well, weakening it.. start with 10 sec during the first or last hour the sun is up.. but, IMPORTANT . DO research on this, looking straight at the sun is actually doing you good, when done right.. again, RESEARCH IT !! Much LOVE <3
@chemlin You're so incorrectly informed on so many levels. It seems your knowledge in the the basic principles of physics is seriously flawed and therefore CANNOT give advice like this. Bad vision is caused by the anatomy of your eye, wearing corrective lenses cannot alter the structure of your body but instead alter the direction of visible light so you can see properly. As for staring at the sun, i'm sure you'll enjoy a nice cataract by the time you're 50 at the rate you're going.
@excrementist There is no doubt that SOME people are "poorly informed" about the scientific dynamic behavior of the natural eye. But that is no reason to insult science, or people that have a "preventive" opinion -- that differs from your own. In fact, "wearing" a -3 diopters lens on the natural eye -- causes negative status for that natural eye. But that is scientific fact, not your misconception.
@otissumnerbrown You sound like you've taken a thesaurus to your entire text? I'm not sure where the minus 3 lens has come from as over prescription like that would be a clinical disaster. Even with the minus 3 you'd take them off from discomfort before they altered your vision in any way. As for the science, my 'opinion' is based on current research, i'd like to challenge you as to where your opinion about how glasses deteriorate vision, and don't use wikipedia or some new age website...
@excrementist It is rather obvious that you are a brain washed OD -- who does not understand the proven effect of a -3 diopter lens on the natural eye. It is your brain-washed ignorance that is the problem -- never science. But why not respect the second-opinion that suggests that prevention is possible. If you read the remarks of "EyeLow", I think you will understand why Truther-Girl distrusts you.
@otissumnerbrown Brainwashed? The fact is that it's my job to know about optics, seeing as I work in an opticians. I take everything I know from what I've spent years learning, you've read a few articles and think you know everything there is to know about the human eye. Don't disrespect me by quoting youtube video's as your source from information, that could be anybody on the other side. Don't bother replying until you've sourced some credible case studies proving your fact.
Eskimo data: Old Eskimos, no school, positive status, excellent distant vision. Age 39, some school, average positive status, a few negative, nearsighted. Age 16, average -1 diopter myopic. Ages 9, not yet full effect of school, still positive. Summary: In one group, 88 percent of the students were myopic. This is not "heredity", it is just that the natural eye "follows" its long-term "near" environment. Go figure!
Subject: The effect of long-term near on the refractive state of the fundamental eye. Ocular Biometry of Eskimo Families. Francis A. Young Primate Research Center, Washington State University Pullman, Washington Summary of the data: Age (Average), Eyes (Each Group), Mean, Sigma (S.D.) Age 58 Eyes 96 Mean +2.21 Sigma 1.31 Age 39 Eyes 180 Mean +1.19 Sigma 1.55 Age 16 Eyes 194 Mean -0.93 Sigma 1.97 Age 9 Eyes 218 Mean +1.40 Sigma 1.70 (Not "heredity", just long-term near.) Go figure!
Yea she right type in Myopia Explosion on Google and readabout it.
To sum it up when they give you glases its measured at about 20 feet in real life your not always looking at objects 20 feet away from you right? And plus there more information on reserch so yea i agree with her... Nice one!
@QasimAnwar135 An important point to realize is that you can make your eyes better. Much of the nearsightedness or myopia may just be temporary strain and can be reversed by simply allowing your eyes rest, focusing on distant objects. However, if you do not allow this temporary myopia to clear up before straining your eyes further, it possibly will be permanent and irreversable, which is what many people end up doing (At 20/40, end "strain" with plus). That works at -1/2 diopter, no later.
Majority-Opinion OD> All I have to say is if you wanna base your opinion on 16 chickens...go for it. The rest of us however will take the proven route with large studies to continue to treat our patients with the correction they need.
Otis> When a LARGE study was done, 250+ kids, the minus had an adverse effect. The plus prevented the eyes refractive status from going down at -1/2 diopters per year. The results were highly significant. SD computed, statistics excellent.
Im not understanding how eye exercises can improve refractive error or axial length correction. Your eye is not made out of muscles. The muscles on the outside are there to help with ocular movement and not vision, unless you have a ptosis thats blocking your pupil which could then lead to amblyopia due to a week eye muscle not being able to efficiently support your upper eyelid. My question to you is, hows your vision now? Have you continued these "eye exercises"?!?!?
@chidinho My vision is better. I no longer have strabismus or need a prism. my astigmatism is way down and my myopia rx went down a lot too. i lost motivation though because i like my glasses and get bored doing exercises. but i did get a lot of improvement and i think it was the exercises. i'm going to do a follow-up video.
@thetruthergirls Hi TrutherGirl, I will always agree that threshold prevention will depend, not on an OD in his shop (who puts his own children in a strong minus) but on the wisdom, education and MOTIVATION of the person himself. I don't support "exercise", because it is "boring" as you say. But I do support science (the "chicken data", etc) that shows the devastating effect of a minus (or near environment) on the eye. People are effective with the plus -- if they do it themselves.
@chidinho Misconception> Im not understanding how eye exercises can improve refractive error or axial length correction. Your eye is not made out of muscles.
Otis> You are jumping to conclusions, before looking at science. The idea that the eye does NOT respond to long-term near is false. It does. The word "exercise" is so poorly defined as to be meaningless. If you study science, it is clear the a strong minus lens causes negative status, in the natural eye. Draw your own conclusions.
@chidinho Eye muscles do have an effect on vision, and I'll explain why :) You see the three most common eye disorders are myopia (nearsighted - eye shape is longer than usual), hyperopia (farsighted - eye shape is shorter than usual), and astigmatism which is a combination of both. It makes perfect sense that the eye muscle would have an effect on eye shape, and therefore vision! Perhaps you've noticed older people tend to be farsighted and vice versa? That's because eye shape changes over time
@chidinho I did have a friend in highschool who suffered of strabismus and improved her problem a lot by doing eye exercices. But, she started them when she was 2 years old and she was still doing them in highschool. I cannot tell you exactly what kind of exercices she was doing but she had to go to a clinic every week. So, for some problems it works, but as you can see it is a very long process.
Prevention is a subject that does not exist for medical people. If you doubt this, go to YouTube and type, "Myopia Prevention".Then click on, "NIH vs AOA" and listen to the commentary. The MDs and ODs feel it is never THEIR responsibility to tell you about prevention with the plus (or any other method). If not THEIR responsibility -- then WHOSE responsibility. I think that is TrutherGirls complaint.
There are cases that could be solved with what you have discovered. However, most of the patients with error of refraction will not respond with the way that you are promulgating. There is a reason why there is Vision Sciences. Things that intellectual individuals research scientifically are what is important in the professional field of vision enhancement. What you discovered is simply a vision training which is already known in the world of O.D. and is not applicable to most individuals.
@gelo1523 This is typical of self-serving scientific blindness of an OD. This is NOT about a "patient". It is about science, or the second-opinion that a wise person who, could, with a study of the proven effect of a -3 diopter on the natural eye -- realize that it is clearly and exacerbating agent. It is true that a negative state of the natural eye is indeed self-induced, because of long-term near. But the "instant minus" can never help -- only make maters much worse. (Second-opinion.)
@gelo1523 With due respect to you, Dr. Chamer Prentice has clearly described the problem is a person thinks he is a "patient". You can not force a person to wear a preventive plus (when he is at 20/40). Plus prevention is indeed tedious -- but successful. Clearly the person must intellectually understand the science of prevention, before he even starts wearing the PREVENTIVE plus. I wonder how TrutherGirl will react if offered prevention for her child -- when he becomes nearsighted.
If you base your judgement on science -- in indeed shows that the natural primate eye will go down (change from plus to minus refractive state) if you place a -3 diopter lens on it. If you place these same natural eyes in a long-term cage (seven years) they develop negative status from -1.5 to -5 diopters in seven years. (F. Young study). Kids place there nose on the page for 12 years, and the ODs CLAIM that this has NO EFFECT ON THE NATURAL EYE? ODs are divorced from scientific reality.
All I have to say is if you wanna base your opinion on 16 chickens...go for it. The rest of us however will take the proven route with large studies to continue to treat our patients with the correction they need. Young children are usually not given glasses unless amblyogenic or strabismic factors are present (again proven over and over again by LARGE studies). If these factors are not present we wait for emmetropization to occur before prescribing. Good luck...you are a lost hope.
Hi, I am 12 and I think my eye-sight is -4 on my left and -3 on my right anyway I can improve I sit on the computer long hours and usually wear my glasses full time.
@jack93840 Hi Jack, This is the complaint of TrutherGirl. She suggested that she be taught how to use preventive methods (plus lens and exercise) when she was at -1/2 diopters (about 20/40). But she got stone-walled. It truly could have been prevented at that point. But read Dr. C. Prentice commentary on the public rejecting prevention at 20/40 and -1 diopters. (See previous posts). Don't expect help from an OD.
Hi Sonia, Prevention is possible, and a few medical people have determined how to do it as "Truther-Doctors". Read through the remarks by Dr. Prentice, and the public's rejection of prevention when you child's eyes are at 20/40 to 20/50. We know that kids eyes go down from that 12 years of close work -- at about -1/2 diopter per year. This is crucial scientific information if you wish to avoid (and get out of it) at 20/50. This is the "missing" information in optometry.
Hi Sonia, Given that no OD will help your child when he is at -1/2 diopter, and 20/40 on his Snellen -- as you check it -- what choice do you have? At that point, prevention would be possible If you are interested, you can review this topic by typing, "MyopiaFree" in Google, and reading the references. Yes, you are right, Optometrists HATE the idea that you get the RIGHT idea (of prevention) for your child. Thanks for your posts on this subject.
Hi TrutherGirl, You suggest that Judy OD, is conducting a scam. Since she will not even help HER OWN CHILDREN, all you can say that this is not a scam. But some optometrists wake up, and as per Dr. Prentice's statement, recognize the necessity insisting that their own children always wear a plus for all close work. That works, as per what Dr. Prentice states, and the chicken data proves as science. To find supportive ODs, ask them what they do for their own children -- for prevention.
Otis> Judy, why don't ODs help their own children with Plus-prevention?
Judy> I'm an optometrist, I work in a group with five other optometrists, in a city with several dozen optometrists,have a few dozen acquaintances who are optometrists and none of us have our children use plus at near unless those are hyperopic. (Hyperopic? The natural eye with a positive refractive state.)
Otis> In this sense, the use of a strong minus (makes matter worse) is indeed not a scam, but not wise either.
This is the real "scam" issue. But how would a person LEARN about this -- but that an OD or MD volunteer this information, and the proven effect of a minus on the natural eye. (The minus can cause myopia in the normal eye.) The "scam" is to remain silent about this issue when the child is at 20/40 (and -3/4 diopters). It is at that critical point that TrutherGirl should have been informed of Dr. Prentice's judgment -- for herself and for her son. Reject it at 20/50, and there is no second
@thetruthergirls Hi Sonia, What I meant to say was that there is no "second chance". This is because I believe you are correct, that "prevention" must be started (as you intimated) before any minus lens is worn. From the bi-focal studies, once you even START wearing a minus, your vision goes down at a rate of -1/2 diopter per year, for each year in school. Thus the idea that prevention (by any "method" must start before you start wearing a minus lens. You could have been successful.
Prentice 4 > Similar results have been attained in 34 like cases ...but the process is very tedious for the patients, and unless their understanding is clear on the subject, it is almost impossible to induce them to undergo the trial. [ Otis> This is truly the issue. It MUST be the person's wisdom, to accept the "tedious" use of a plus, and to do it with no let up, that would make prevention (at 20/50, -3/4 diopter) possible. THAT is the real and only issue. The "scam" is to discuss this.
Prentice 3 > After reading in these glasses for several days, the patient was able to read print twelve inches from the eyes. In six months I changed the glasses for reading and writing to a +4 D without seeing the patient. After using the +4 D glasses for several months he again came under my care for an examination, when the left eye gave twenty-twentieths vision.
Prentice 2> Age forty-three; myopia; had been wearing over the right eye -1.25 D, left eye -1 D, with little or no change for the space of two years; eyes in use more or less at the near point. I recommended the removal of the concave glasses for distant vision and prescribed +3.50 D for reading, writing and other office work. (-1.25 D is about 20/50 to 20/60 on a Snellen). This is the intuitive insight that Truther talks about.
Prentice 1> Medical people -- have truly recognized the natural eye's behavior, and that, at least at the threshold -- IT IS PREVENTABLE. Here is the commentary by a profoundly insightful ophthalmologist. But, as Dr. Prentice states, plus prevention (at -1 diopter is tedious). But to say that "prevention will never happen" is a tragic statement -- because it prevents a preventive scientific study -- that could be effective (The chicken data is correct SCIENCE.)
TrutherGirl> Incredibly, the whole glasses/contacts/laser surgery industry is a total scam, too. I recently found out that if children do eye exercises instead of wearing glasses, their vision gets restored instead of worsening.
Otis> There is a lot of truth in what you say. But some MDs (minority) have the correct (only preventive) method worked out. The problem is that you must do it yourself -- in this case wear a plus lens rather than the obvious minus lens. See Dr. Prentice remarks.
It's a bit harsh to call the practice of optometry a scam when you clearly seem to not understand optics and basic physiology of the eye. BUT, the patient is always right even when they are wrong so if you feel that the eye exercises help alleviate the symptoms of your myopia (if indeed your problem is simple refractive error) then keep it up!
I will try !
I am palming for ten minutes in the morning and 10 minutes when i sleep,
I feel my eyes relaxed, and i see much better,
I am doing the excercises just for two days,
I m just say the visión its slightly better,
My graduation its 7.5 to 9
See you later...
mokuho 1 hour ago
So, tell us how to do the eye exercises already!!!
EYE EXERCISES:
Look up as hard as you can until it hurts a little. Then look down, then to the left and to the right, then to the upper left, lower right, upper right and lower left, until it hurts a bit. Do it morning and night.
Second eye exercise:
Hold your finger about a foot from your face. Look at something across the room then at your finger. Repeat this about twenty times morning and night.
stopdemockery 16 hours ago
I think... the answer has something to do with love. You said your eyesight improved after your chilbrirth. When I meditate, my goal is to relaxedly fix my attention on something. I can see my vision quality fluctuating the more love I can tap into. But it's a difficult state to hold! Also, I think the reason "sungazing" works for people is that you approach that "state" of love when you naturally relaxedly focus your gaze on something so immensely beautiful.
espionaj008 1 day ago
I believe you, totally and agree with everything you say!
Love2840 1 day ago
I thought you and Aaron were married? What do you mean he lives two floors down? Isn't your son yours and Aaron's? I apologize for being nosy, but I think you've answered some of this in videos, but I don't know which ones. By the way, your videos are very good. I learn from you.
learn54 3 days ago
Dumb.
jtmurphy3 5 days ago
That very interesting to know, and I'm glad to hear that your vision has improved over time in doing these exercises.
Ijomu 5 days ago
Comment removed
otissumnerbrown 5 days ago in playlist cleaning 2
Comment removed
otissumnerbrown 5 days ago in playlist cleaning 2
Comment removed
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago in playlist cleaning 2
Comment removed
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago in playlist cleaning 2
@otissumnerbrown
That is a known effect called adaption, and is best demonstrated with a younger eye, because it is dependent on lens flexibility, As the lens ages, it hardens and the degree of such adaption possible progressively drops, usually approaching 0 diopters between ages 40 and 50.
With ultrasound, we can measure the change in lens geometry resulting from a given amount of muscle activity, and observe how maximum muscle effort changes the lens's shape less and less as it ages.
mabloom1 1 week ago
DO YOU THINK EYE EXAMS AND LASER SURGERY ARE SCAMS? Can you answer that question without being retarded and going off on other topics.
Eyelow13 1 week ago
@Eyelow13 If you think my answers are retarded and off topic, why woudl you ask me a question in the first place?
thetruthergirls 1 week ago 18
It is really helpful to listen to the "Twilight Zone" theme while reading this discussion !!!
justintestin 1 week ago
@thetruthergirls you went off the topic lol
JwVanC 5 days ago
@thetruthergirls Hi Truther, Tragically, there are too many ODs who think that they are the ONLY experts in the world. They always start with, "... you are an idiot, because you believe prevention is possible, but I will slam you against the wall ... and EXPLAIN your stupidity to you. Truther, there are MDs who agree that negative status is preventable, (up to 20/40) if you are prepared to conduct prevention (in that range) yourself. Just don't ask an OD for help, however.
otissumnerbrown 5 days ago in playlist cleaning 2
Comment removed
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago in playlist cleaning 2
Comment removed
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago in playlist cleaning 2
Your stupid, you totally dodge the remark and point I am making.
Eyelow13 1 week ago
Yes, there are brave, courageous MDs and ODs who have suggested that prevention is possible. They face a storm of protest -- in their desire to help people like Sonia avoid entry into myopia. I would suggest Googling, "Kaisu Viikari, M.D., Ph.D", and read her second-opinion, that under excellent circumstances myopia can be avoided.
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago in playlist cleaning 2
STUPID STUPID STUPID, this video does go far enough into detail.
Eyelow13 1 week ago
Comment removed
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago in playlist cleaning 2
@Eyelow13 No, you are the truly stupid one -- for posting here AT ALL. You don't want a logical review of the facts, you want to crush Sonia. This is HER video, not yours. Why not go back in your office, and "over-prescribe" some more minus lenses, and think yourself a "God" that you can do that. The rest of us don't think, you are a God.
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago in playlist cleaning 2
Otis, you miss the whole topic and what she says. You really need to learn to read word for word on what she says. I get what she's saying about myopic and have agreed under minimal circumstances to what she's saying, BUT!!! She is wrong to say its all a scam. She's prove her ignorance by not clarifying what she means. This video is to broad and I continue to disagree with her on how she presents it, bottom line. She's wrong, she's stupid and has no degree in ANY FIELD related to any of these i
Eyelow13 1 week ago
The formulation of a problem is often far more essential than
its solution, which may be a matter of mathematical or
experimental skill. To raise new questions, new possibilities, to
regard old problems from a new angle, requires creative
imagination and marks real advances in science.
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago in playlist cleaning 2
Otis you are a fool, your stupid.
Eyelow13 1 week ago
@Eyelow13 Typical extreme arrogance on the part of this OD.
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago in playlist cleaning 2
Otis, if you and Sonia feel this way then throw your correction away, NEVER get laser surgery. I'm making this simple, you hate us, THEN GO AWAY, GO BLIND AND NEVER LOOK BACK. PERIOD. Otis you are a fool, your stupid.
Eyelow13 1 week ago
@Eyelow13 I don't hate you -- just you endless arrogance and scientific stupidity. There are some very fine ODs and MDs who have recognized the need for prevention -- if the person has the motivation for it. That is the real issue that Sonia is talking about. This is not about "hate" but about wise learning.
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago in playlist cleaning 2
Comment removed
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago
Who's stupid? Otis is. You truly are the most ignorant person I've met. Read her description she clearly states that eye exams and laser surgery are a scam. Otis get a life and realize that you are ignorant and you know nothing and neither does Sonia.
Eyelow13 1 week ago
@Eyelow13 This is typical OD arrogance and stupidity. This is what Sonia's has stated, you can believe Sonia, and other ODs who post in support of prevention (second-opinion) or this arrogant OD. Take your pick.
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago in playlist cleaning 2
@Eyelow13 Hi Sonia -- Incredibly, the whole glasses/contacts/laser surgery industry is a total scam, too. I recently found out that if children do eye exercises instead of wearing glasses, their vision gets restored instead of worsening.
You are correct about EyeLow -- in every respect.
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago in playlist cleaning 2
Show us the exercises. I think everybody would like to try them. Thank you! This would be awesome if it really did.
purity4all 1 week ago
@purity4all Sonia explains this issue in her video, "Never Admit to Drug Use". While she suggests the "Bates Method", I would point out that Bates conducted his study with kids who were not yet wearing an excessive minus lens. Further, other professionals have recommended the "plus" at that point - and have been successful. Al agree that prevention must be started before that first minus to be truly successful.
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago in playlist cleaning 2
If you know anything about the anatomy of the human eye, there is no possible way to change the shape of your cornea - which is responsible for you distance vision. It is not a muscle! You are exercising your muscles surrounding the lens inside your eye. Your lens is then able to accomidate through minor prescriptions, but won't help most people-- not to mention the facts that it can cause headaches and migraines. I can't believe I even responded to this idiocy.
vanceman17 1 week ago
@vanceman17
Actually there are a few ways to reshape the cornea. The most common is of course laser keratotomy. Another method, popular in the 1970's used special contact lenses that molded the cornea to a new shape. After a whiie, the cornea went back to its original shape, however.
mabloom1 1 week ago
@vanceman17 To be precise, your cornea is responsible for your "lens relaxed" vision, which may be distance, intermediate, or near, depending upon eye depth. Normally the muscles surrounding your lens tug at it a little bit, and it becomes flatter than if fully relaxed. With less tugging, it becomes rounder and you see closer. With more tugging, it becomes flatter & you see further. Even with "exercises", you'll need glasses if your lens reaches it's maximum or minimum before sharply focusing.
mabloom1 1 week ago
@mabloom1
And as we age, the pliable lens becomes stiffer and stiffer, reducing the amount that it's shape can change when the muscles try to accomodate for different distances. Between age 40 and 50, the lens has become so stiff that it can only focus sharply at one distance. The muscles still work, but can no longer change the shape of the lens. If, however, the natural lens is replaced with an "accomodating" artificial lens, the ability to see sharply at different distances is restored.
mabloom1 1 week ago
@mabloom1
oops, I wasn't so precise.. :( Where I said "the muscles surrounding your lens tug at it", "it" refers to the lens, not to the cornea, which is what some might have inferred from the context of the previous sentence. Sorry about that. Also, the tugging is from all directions. Otherwise the process of accommodation would introduce astigmatism at some distances, but not at others (or different amounts of astigmatism at different distances)
mabloom1 1 week ago
The truth is, it will take more than just eye exercises to improve your vision. One needs to follow a comprehensive eye program, created by a competent natural health care practitioner of over 40 years, that takes the whole body/mind/spirit into consideration. This is where conventional medicine falls short. We are whole beings and must treat our eyes as an integral part of that. Seriously, folks, Google EyeAerobics. The program simply works to improve your vision... GUARANTEED!
EyeAerobics 1 week ago
@EyeAerobics Hi, it is nice to know that some optometrists like Albert Pang O.D. Certified therapeutic optometrist support the concept that at least prevention is possible. This of course shows that "Excrement" is not telling the truth about the possibility of prevention, that Truther-Girl says is possible. I don't "attack" people because of their scientific statement. I just support science that shows that prevention is wise.
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago in playlist cleaning 2
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago in playlist cleaning 2
Thanks for this video! I too have improved my eyesight... Google EyeAerobics. I'm 58 and can read tiny type. Plus, my myopia has cleared back to 20/20! I'm stoked! I DON'T like wearing corrective lenses. I strongly agree that the whole medical system needs to come clean and stop duping us! Did you know that for thousands of years the Chinese medical doctors used to charge their patients when they were HEALTHY, not when they were sick! Imagine that for a moment...
EyeAerobics 1 week ago
Comment removed
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago in playlist cleaning 2
@EyeAerobics I am pleased that this optometrist supports TrutherGirl's idea that entry into myopia can be avoided. Imagine an OD who will inform you as to how to prevent myopia when you are still at -1/2 doipter and 20/40, and can clear your Snellen by these methods. Why are there so few OD who are honest about prevention?
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago in playlist cleaning 2
@otissumnerbrown Quite right - the key, as always, is to find a good optometrist to take your advice from, especially where kids are concerned!
kloftoptom 1 week ago
Comment removed
kloftoptom 1 week ago
Hi do you know what exercises you did to improve your eye, or what book did you use? I want to get a hold of these exercises. There are so many 'better vision' books on the internet, which one did you use?
kkche15 1 week ago
@kkche15 You know your visual acuity improves, when, starting at 20/40, you work with these methods, and verify that you eventually clear or read the 20/20 line.
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago in playlist cleaning 2
TrutherGirl is right on a number of levels. But it is indeed difficult to get a parent to understand the necessity to start with prevention before a child become "nearsighted". I have posted remarks by a Dr. Prentice in this thread, about this issue of threshold prevention. It is one thing to suggest prevention (at 1/2 diopter and 20/40) but it quite difficult for Truther to do it. As she stated, prevention is indeed tedious. But she still can have a choice.
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago in playlist cleaning 2
Twilight: Opticians
Logitech1156 1 week ago
Bates had the courage to ask questions about the failed Donder/Helmholtz theory -- that was never proven in science. He said it this way:
Bates> “You cannot by reasoning correct a man of an ill opinion which by reasoning he never acquired. We can also say that neither by reasoning, nor by actual demonstration of the facts, can you convince some people that an opinion which they have accepted on authority is wrong.
otissumnerbrown 2 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
I go to an real doctor, and ophthalmologist -- never and optometrist like EyeLow13 -- because of his extreme arrogance. There are quite a few ODs who admit that great care should be takes with the minus and the parent cautioned about the minus and the habit of over-prescription. In fact, it is rather obvious that TrutherGirl was prescribe a -5 by an arrogant OD like EyeLow. Find an honest OD who will HELP you with prevention.
otissumnerbrown 2 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
You are proving more n more how stupid you are, the refraction is the only thing you could do lol, there is so much more in an exam, you have to be dumb. Anyone who believes that their glasses is the only reason for going to the DOCTOR they are badly mistaken. Their are hundreds of eye diseases and many severe ones. You can tell the beginning stages of brain tumors as well along with with many other neurological issues. You both are truly dumb, READ READ READ bc your idea of what a trip to the
Eyelow13 2 weeks ago
if your dumb enough to buy new glasses every two weeks you are not someone i would take advice from.
akronman27 2 weeks ago
Sonia, try to ignore the extreme arrogance of EyeLow13. Yes, there are good (second-opinion) ODs who will help your child with true-prevention (before that first minus) if you will let them -- and learn from them. To learn more from these ODs, I suggest going to Google, and typing in, "Steve Leung OD". If you want the truth, then that is how you obtain it - by study of science, facts, and ODs who will help you as they help their own children with plus-prevention.
otissumnerbrown 2 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
This video gives me motion sickness! I guess trying to stay focused on this video without getting nauseous is one of your so called "eye exercises"?
akronman27 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
akronman27 2 weeks ago
Yes I do, when I know I'm right. And that's funny bc you and tuthergirl both referred to us as doctors. I'd like to see you try and pass the MCAT, you wouldn't make a 15, haha. So before you judge me just ask yourself why everyone isn't doing this, and TUTHERGIRL says she stopped trying, whatever that's bullcrap. If your getting healthier why would you stop trying? Come on TUTHERGIRL answer that... I swear your both so stupid I do believe my IQ drops everytime I talk to you.
Fact: eye exercis
Eyelow13 2 weeks ago
@Eyelow13 Yes, in other countries you would be called "Mr.". Capable of holding up a minus lens and asking, "... is one better, is two better", but that is about you "skill level". After a child INDUCES a negative state in his natural eyes, yes, for the ignorant child you can do that. A careful review of science (the effect of a -3 diopter on the natural eye) will prove how risky that minus lens is for that child.
otissumnerbrown 2 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
Comment removed
otissumnerbrown 2 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
Haha WHAT?!!! 250 where the hell you going moron the industry average is 89 dollars and around 60 in small cities. You obviously have no idea what your talking about.
Eyelow13 2 weeks ago
@Eyelow13 This is your typical OD that you complained about. Yet this optician hates this video. Not all of them are as idiotic as this one however.
otissumnerbrown 2 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
@Eyelow13 Just the last bill from the last OD.
otissumnerbrown 2 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
Otis your a moron, a 27 billion dollar hoax, yeah I'm sure. And yes according to you two morons eye exercises you'll never need glasses. Dr Otis, haha try this and see what happens. As for TUTHERGIRL she's sitting there knowing she won't hold her child back from eyeglasses if he cannot see. You of course are the only moron left defending your THEORY!!
I seriously think ppl like you make the medical industry wealthy bc it's morons like you that your so called science try's to understand. Haha.
Eyelow13 2 weeks ago
Truther> Incredibly, the whole glasses/contacts/laser surgery industry is a total scam, too. I recently found out that if children do eye exercises instead of wearing glasses, their vision gets restored instead of worsening.
Second-opinion> Type "Myopia Prevention" and read Don Rehm's statement about this arrogant ignorance and this destructive minus lens.
otissumnerbrown 2 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
When your kid complains he/she can't see TUTHERGIRL DO NOT PROVIDE CARE FOR THEM, that would win you parent of the year. And if you knew anything about optics your vision is hereditary, personal health and medically related as well, but you keep them tests handy and see where it gets you. Feel free to post once you try this, we're all wanting that miracle break through.
Eyelow13 2 weeks ago
Ok listen here you ignorant punk, when you post a video on a PUBLIC site you are invoking others to express their speech. Tuthergirl, what a name, lol. Anyways if you and anyone else feels this way then STOP bringing your asses to us, stay home and go blind, risk your health and vision, I DO NOT CARE you ignorant ass. Bottom line!!! She acts as thou she knows it all and so do you, so you and her take your ignorant asses and prefetch to the world to stop going to the doctors, you'll see in the e
Eyelow13 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
otissumnerbrown 2 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
@Eyelow13 Truther -- you got this arrogant prig correctly identified. The second-opinion is that you place a minus on the eye and IT GOES DOWN. That is science -- check it out.
otissumnerbrown 2 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
For TrutherGirl. Despite the incredible arrogance and stupidity of some ODs posting here, there are excellent professionals who support your EDUCATION to help avoid entry into myopia (negative state of the fundamental eye). Thus, this is a majority-opinion versus preventive second-opinion issue. Keep an open mind about this, and you could help your child avoid entry into myopia -- by avoiding the ignorance and arrogance of these ODs.
otissumnerbrown 2 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
Yes I am, and even thou you deleted your last comment I stand behind mine. STUPID, STUPID, STUPID, you are missing the point. She is not talking about ANYTHING other than her personal situation, and there is NO WAY eye exercises can improve her issue. PERIOD, so stop the non-sense and just address what the video is about. PERIOD! You can sit here and reply to everyone's comment all you want but if your not addressing the issue at hand your comments are stupid, bc there about all these things th
Eyelow13 2 weeks ago
@Eyelow13 Truthergirl it totally correct about you. Prevention (of negative status for the fundamental eye) is possible -- but NOT if you are involved. The minus is not safe, and has NEVER BEEN PROVEN TO BE SAFE EITHER. But you in your arrogance will never admit to scientific truth. I think that Tuthergirl is more right that you can imagine. At least in science she is correct to fear the arrogant over-prescription of a minus lens.
otissumnerbrown 2 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
@Eyelow13 You seek to DENY Sonia's right of freedom of speech. Is your "profession" gone that far? I said PREVENTIVE second-opinion. That means that NONE OF THESE ISSUES ARE SETTLED. It is up to TrutherGirl to do her own research, and if she chooses, to work on true-prevention by any method she might choose -- as well as talk about it on YouTube. We are all listening!
otissumnerbrown 2 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
Comment removed
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago in playlist cleaning 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@Eyelow13 Sonia, you are correct about the ODs. I have friends who are MDs and ODs. I do respect them -- in their office. You should OBJECT to this type of OD:
EyeLow> " Yes I do, when I know I'm right...... I swear your both so stupid I do believe my IQ drops everytime I talk to you."
Sonia, I expect an HONEST conversation about prevention with these people. But when they insult my intelligence -- I truly must research Bates and other methods. Remember -- it is not only "exercise"..but..
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago
This is just silly. Your eyes are changing, and thats normal after pregnancy. Eye exercises are a myth, just like voodoo or lucky charms. There are a lot of people trying to sell these scam exercises, just be careful not to get tricked.
block1385 2 weeks ago
@block1385 It is a myth to intimate that a minus lens has NO EFFECT ON THE REFRACTIVE STATE OF THE EYE. That is science, not OD "bull".
otissumnerbrown 2 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
@otissumnerbrown Glasses work, millions of people every day put them on, and see clearly.
block1385 2 weeks ago
@block1385 No Doubt -- but that is not the issue. You place the natural eye in a long-term near environment, and it develops negative status as a natural process. You place a strong minus on the natural eye, and it develops that same negative status. AFTER a child has his nose-on-page, he develops that status. Then, in ignorance, you can "fix" that negative status with a minus lens. That does no solve any problem at all. Just makes matters worse -- from a scientific perspective.
otissumnerbrown 2 weeks ago
@otissumnerbrown Incorrect . A minus lens will not change the curvature of the lens unless it is too strong for that person, this will have the same effect as if someone is looking at something close. This process is called accommodation, your theory is utterly basis, as otherwise every time someone looked at something close to the they would become more and more shortsighted, which is not the case.
block1385 2 weeks ago
@block1385 No, you are incorrect. You place a -3 diotper on the natural eye, and it will change its refractive state by -2.3 diopters in less than three months. That is objective science. You statement is wishful thinking that the minus is "perfectly safe" and has "no effect" on the natural eyes status. You are stating the old Donder-Helmholtz theory that the eye is not a dynamic system. You memorized false facts. Get into 21 Century science.
otissumnerbrown 2 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
@otissumnerbrown Completely false. The refractive state of the eye changes by more than that when you read a book. Its called accommodation, it doesn't change your manifest refraction, if that were the case every time you read a book, or looked at anything close, you would become more and more shortsighted, everyone on earth looks at close things,and as we can all testify, we are not all becoming more and more shortsighted.
block1385 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
otissumnerbrown 2 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
@block1385 Hmmm... In fact the eye is becoming more and more negative -- a scientific truth you seek to deny.
For Instance: FIRST-YEAR HONG KONG UNIVERSITY STUDENTS 87.5 % MYOPIC
o Goh and Lam (Goh, W.S. and Lam, C.S., "Changes in refractive trends and optical components of Hong Kong Chinese aged 19-39 years," Ophthal. Physiol. Opt., 14:378-382, 1994) found that in 2000 first-year students at the University of Hong Kong, the prevalence of myopia was 87.5%. (Don't you read?)
otissumnerbrown 2 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
@otissumnerbrown But these people are becoming more myopic before using glasses, and then continuing even with glasses. This is because it is genetic. People were short sighted long before glasses were even conceived.
block1385 1 week ago
Comment removed
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago in playlist cleaning 2
Comment removed
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago in playlist cleaning 2
Comment removed
otissumnerbrown 2 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
Comment removed
otissumnerbrown 2 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
Comment removed
otissumnerbrown 2 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
Stupid, stupid, stupid. Period! This woman is talking about herself in this video, REWATCH IT, therefore she is stupid by thinking that a person in her state can restore her vision. This women needs to spend her money on a makeover, salon trip and get use to her glasses/
Eyelow13 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
otissumnerbrown 2 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
@Eyelow13 Are you an optometrist? I think she was complaining about you.
otissumnerbrown 2 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
3. At the height of the nostrils, separated by one inch on the cheeks you will have the points to massage. Inline with the eyeballs, there is also a small hole in the cheekbones.
4. Thumbs placed on the temple as support, and index fingers roll in massage movement over the bones above and below the eyes, beginning from the inside out.
This way you affect all the major acupuncture points around the eyes, which stimulate the eye operation.
another link about these pressure points:
bit(.)ly/t1lfFv
vomit55 2 weeks ago
what are the exercises? how can i find out???!
choccakegatto 2 weeks ago
@choccakegatto eye muscles (those that move it) need to be stronger, and learn also to release when needed. you roll the eyes, look near (nose) and at far objects in short succession, read books definitely without glasses, watch less TV and so on.
chinese schoolchildren need by the state to do every day accupressure on themselves in the long pause between classes.
kaleidoscope(.)cultural-china(.)com/chinaWH/images/exbig_images/8e6865c8d7932748a008eb6c65b76f1c(.)jpg
vomit55 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@choccakegatto another pic for the pressure points:
3(.)bp(.)blogspot(.)com/_EqTVIWXbbrk/S_UAo8CU19I/AAAAAAAAAt4/1qDxSD9o0Vo/s1600/szem_masszazs(.)jpg
vomit55 2 weeks ago
@choccakegatto text how to use the white picture, then i shut up
1. Place thumb below the eyebrow, as on the picture, above the corner of the eye, nails downward, and push up gently to massage the appropriate point at which a small hole is located.
2. Index and thumb fingers to massage the area, where the glasses sit up in contact with the nose, close to the inner eye corners.
vomit55 2 weeks ago
Thank You for your post. Just want to share that you are definitely right to suspect that may be we need not wear glasses as much as we are told . Somehow I figure this out 40 years ago that wearing glasses will not be good for me. I will only use them when I absolutely have to. 40 yrs later, I never went over 200 degree. 2 years back I bought one of those glasses with holes in them to train the eyes, I can actually see better without glasses now. So I believe if you start at younger age, better
sbm2618 2 weeks ago 2
Comment removed
otissumnerbrown 3 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
I'm Short-Sight , i CANNOT get a perfect view or improve my view by exercices.. I'm actually 19 years old , but my left eye is -15.75 and my right eye is -18.25. Tell me how can exercices can correct totally my view.
raiiinbowx 3 weeks ago
@raiiinbowx : ever heard about sungazing?? Do some research on it.. by sungazing, your sight will improve, actually by using sunglasses, and contact lenses, you are destroying your sight, well, weakening it.. start with 10 sec during the first or last hour the sun is up.. but, IMPORTANT . DO research on this, looking straight at the sun is actually doing you good, when done right.. again, RESEARCH IT !! Much LOVE <3
chemlin 3 weeks ago 5
@chemlin You're so incorrectly informed on so many levels. It seems your knowledge in the the basic principles of physics is seriously flawed and therefore CANNOT give advice like this. Bad vision is caused by the anatomy of your eye, wearing corrective lenses cannot alter the structure of your body but instead alter the direction of visible light so you can see properly. As for staring at the sun, i'm sure you'll enjoy a nice cataract by the time you're 50 at the rate you're going.
excrementist 1 week ago
@excrementist There is no doubt that SOME people are "poorly informed" about the scientific dynamic behavior of the natural eye. But that is no reason to insult science, or people that have a "preventive" opinion -- that differs from your own. In fact, "wearing" a -3 diopters lens on the natural eye -- causes negative status for that natural eye. But that is scientific fact, not your misconception.
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago in playlist cleaning 2
@otissumnerbrown You sound like you've taken a thesaurus to your entire text? I'm not sure where the minus 3 lens has come from as over prescription like that would be a clinical disaster. Even with the minus 3 you'd take them off from discomfort before they altered your vision in any way. As for the science, my 'opinion' is based on current research, i'd like to challenge you as to where your opinion about how glasses deteriorate vision, and don't use wikipedia or some new age website...
excrementist 1 week ago
@excrementist It is rather obvious that you are a brain washed OD -- who does not understand the proven effect of a -3 diopter lens on the natural eye. It is your brain-washed ignorance that is the problem -- never science. But why not respect the second-opinion that suggests that prevention is possible. If you read the remarks of "EyeLow", I think you will understand why Truther-Girl distrusts you.
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago in playlist cleaning 2
@otissumnerbrown Brainwashed? The fact is that it's my job to know about optics, seeing as I work in an opticians. I take everything I know from what I've spent years learning, you've read a few articles and think you know everything there is to know about the human eye. Don't disrespect me by quoting youtube video's as your source from information, that could be anybody on the other side. Don't bother replying until you've sourced some credible case studies proving your fact.
excrementist 1 week ago
Comment removed
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago in playlist cleaning 2
@excrementist “I know that most men … can seldom accept even the
simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them
to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in
explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to
others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the very
fabric of their lives. Try to develop a scientific mind.
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago
great video, girl!!!
NuclearNympho 3 weeks ago
Eskimo data: Old Eskimos, no school, positive status, excellent distant vision. Age 39, some school, average positive status, a few negative, nearsighted. Age 16, average -1 diopter myopic. Ages 9, not yet full effect of school, still positive. Summary: In one group, 88 percent of the students were myopic. This is not "heredity", it is just that the natural eye "follows" its long-term "near" environment. Go figure!
otissumnerbrown 3 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
otissumnerbrown 3 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
Yea she right type in Myopia Explosion on Google and readabout it.
To sum it up when they give you glases its measured at about 20 feet in real life your not always looking at objects 20 feet away from you right? And plus there more information on reserch so yea i agree with her... Nice one!
QasimAnwar135 3 weeks ago
@QasimAnwar135 An important point to realize is that you can make your eyes better. Much of the nearsightedness or myopia may just be temporary strain and can be reversed by simply allowing your eyes rest, focusing on distant objects. However, if you do not allow this temporary myopia to clear up before straining your eyes further, it possibly will be permanent and irreversable, which is what many people end up doing (At 20/40, end "strain" with plus). That works at -1/2 diopter, no later.
otissumnerbrown 3 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
they had to make me some lenses so thy could have a hope of a fools
clue in understanding what it is i see.
McmullenEJ 3 weeks ago
total Numptie
sgcockburn 3 weeks ago
Majority-Opinion OD> All I have to say is if you wanna base your opinion on 16 chickens...go for it. The rest of us however will take the proven route with large studies to continue to treat our patients with the correction they need.
Otis> When a LARGE study was done, 250+ kids, the minus had an adverse effect. The plus prevented the eyes refractive status from going down at -1/2 diopters per year. The results were highly significant. SD computed, statistics excellent.
otissumnerbrown 3 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
this is stupid
MepZero 3 weeks ago
Im not understanding how eye exercises can improve refractive error or axial length correction. Your eye is not made out of muscles. The muscles on the outside are there to help with ocular movement and not vision, unless you have a ptosis thats blocking your pupil which could then lead to amblyopia due to a week eye muscle not being able to efficiently support your upper eyelid. My question to you is, hows your vision now? Have you continued these "eye exercises"?!?!?
chidinho 3 weeks ago 4
@chidinho My vision is better. I no longer have strabismus or need a prism. my astigmatism is way down and my myopia rx went down a lot too. i lost motivation though because i like my glasses and get bored doing exercises. but i did get a lot of improvement and i think it was the exercises. i'm going to do a follow-up video.
thetruthergirls 3 weeks ago
@thetruthergirls when will you do the video?
EliteFootballer7 3 weeks ago
@thetruthergirls : Research SUNGAZING !!!
chemlin 3 weeks ago
@thetruthergirls Hi TrutherGirl, I will always agree that threshold prevention will depend, not on an OD in his shop (who puts his own children in a strong minus) but on the wisdom, education and MOTIVATION of the person himself. I don't support "exercise", because it is "boring" as you say. But I do support science (the "chicken data", etc) that shows the devastating effect of a minus (or near environment) on the eye. People are effective with the plus -- if they do it themselves.
otissumnerbrown 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
otissumnerbrown 1 week ago in playlist cleaning 2
@chidinho Misconception> Im not understanding how eye exercises can improve refractive error or axial length correction. Your eye is not made out of muscles.
Otis> You are jumping to conclusions, before looking at science. The idea that the eye does NOT respond to long-term near is false. It does. The word "exercise" is so poorly defined as to be meaningless. If you study science, it is clear the a strong minus lens causes negative status, in the natural eye. Draw your own conclusions.
otissumnerbrown 3 weeks ago
@chidinho Eye muscles do have an effect on vision, and I'll explain why :) You see the three most common eye disorders are myopia (nearsighted - eye shape is longer than usual), hyperopia (farsighted - eye shape is shorter than usual), and astigmatism which is a combination of both. It makes perfect sense that the eye muscle would have an effect on eye shape, and therefore vision! Perhaps you've noticed older people tend to be farsighted and vice versa? That's because eye shape changes over time
laiinie 3 weeks ago
@chidinho Your lens and eye is FULL of muscles, and I have spoken with patients that indeed lowered their prescriptions with only exercises.
yosefyitz 2 weeks ago
@chidinho I did have a friend in highschool who suffered of strabismus and improved her problem a lot by doing eye exercices. But, she started them when she was 2 years old and she was still doing them in highschool. I cannot tell you exactly what kind of exercices she was doing but she had to go to a clinic every week. So, for some problems it works, but as you can see it is a very long process.
potocatepetl 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
otissumnerbrown 2 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
Prevention is a subject that does not exist for medical people. If you doubt this, go to YouTube and type, "Myopia Prevention".Then click on, "NIH vs AOA" and listen to the commentary. The MDs and ODs feel it is never THEIR responsibility to tell you about prevention with the plus (or any other method). If not THEIR responsibility -- then WHOSE responsibility. I think that is TrutherGirls complaint.
otissumnerbrown 3 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
There are cases that could be solved with what you have discovered. However, most of the patients with error of refraction will not respond with the way that you are promulgating. There is a reason why there is Vision Sciences. Things that intellectual individuals research scientifically are what is important in the professional field of vision enhancement. What you discovered is simply a vision training which is already known in the world of O.D. and is not applicable to most individuals.
gelo1523 4 weeks ago
@gelo1523 This is typical of self-serving scientific blindness of an OD. This is NOT about a "patient". It is about science, or the second-opinion that a wise person who, could, with a study of the proven effect of a -3 diopter on the natural eye -- realize that it is clearly and exacerbating agent. It is true that a negative state of the natural eye is indeed self-induced, because of long-term near. But the "instant minus" can never help -- only make maters much worse. (Second-opinion.)
otissumnerbrown 4 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
@gelo1523 With due respect to you, Dr. Chamer Prentice has clearly described the problem is a person thinks he is a "patient". You can not force a person to wear a preventive plus (when he is at 20/40). Plus prevention is indeed tedious -- but successful. Clearly the person must intellectually understand the science of prevention, before he even starts wearing the PREVENTIVE plus. I wonder how TrutherGirl will react if offered prevention for her child -- when he becomes nearsighted.
otissumnerbrown 4 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
So what are the exercises?
HyperSpify 4 weeks ago 15
If you base your judgement on science -- in indeed shows that the natural primate eye will go down (change from plus to minus refractive state) if you place a -3 diopter lens on it. If you place these same natural eyes in a long-term cage (seven years) they develop negative status from -1.5 to -5 diopters in seven years. (F. Young study). Kids place there nose on the page for 12 years, and the ODs CLAIM that this has NO EFFECT ON THE NATURAL EYE? ODs are divorced from scientific reality.
otissumnerbrown 4 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
All I have to say is if you wanna base your opinion on 16 chickens...go for it. The rest of us however will take the proven route with large studies to continue to treat our patients with the correction they need. Young children are usually not given glasses unless amblyogenic or strabismic factors are present (again proven over and over again by LARGE studies). If these factors are not present we wait for emmetropization to occur before prescribing. Good luck...you are a lost hope.
27eyedoc 4 weeks ago
Did I just waste time watching this so that you won't share the exercises you're doing?
kpare23 4 weeks ago
Hi, I am 12 and I think my eye-sight is -4 on my left and -3 on my right anyway I can improve I sit on the computer long hours and usually wear my glasses full time.
jack93840 4 weeks ago
@jack93840 Hi Jack, This is the complaint of TrutherGirl. She suggested that she be taught how to use preventive methods (plus lens and exercise) when she was at -1/2 diopters (about 20/40). But she got stone-walled. It truly could have been prevented at that point. But read Dr. C. Prentice commentary on the public rejecting prevention at 20/40 and -1 diopters. (See previous posts). Don't expect help from an OD.
otissumnerbrown 4 weeks ago in playlist cleaning 2
WTF? She's crazy, pregnancy can change a Rx...just saying
SaraBeth444 1 month ago
CRAZY
wiccanmoonman 1 month ago
Hmmm, she is still wearing high minus lenses in her other videos. Guess it comes and goes.
ILENSER 1 month ago
WHAT EXERCIES CAN I DO FOR MY EYES? ANSWER: BATHES METHOD EXERCISES.
sanalicious 1 month ago
Hi Sonia, Prevention is possible, and a few medical people have determined how to do it as "Truther-Doctors". Read through the remarks by Dr. Prentice, and the public's rejection of prevention when you child's eyes are at 20/40 to 20/50. We know that kids eyes go down from that 12 years of close work -- at about -1/2 diopter per year. This is crucial scientific information if you wish to avoid (and get out of it) at 20/50. This is the "missing" information in optometry.
otissumnerbrown 1 month ago in playlist cleaning 2
how do you exercize?
sticksbass 1 month ago
hello, what all did you do to exercise your eyes? i sure can use some help. thanx.
Billlovejr 1 month ago
@Billlovejr Go to Google and type I-SEE. Read the site and join the discussion group about these issues.
otissumnerbrown 1 month ago in playlist cleaning 2
Hi Sonia, Given that no OD will help your child when he is at -1/2 diopter, and 20/40 on his Snellen -- as you check it -- what choice do you have? At that point, prevention would be possible If you are interested, you can review this topic by typing, "MyopiaFree" in Google, and reading the references. Yes, you are right, Optometrists HATE the idea that you get the RIGHT idea (of prevention) for your child. Thanks for your posts on this subject.
otissumnerbrown 1 month ago in playlist cleaning 2
Hi TrutherGirl, You suggest that Judy OD, is conducting a scam. Since she will not even help HER OWN CHILDREN, all you can say that this is not a scam. But some optometrists wake up, and as per Dr. Prentice's statement, recognize the necessity insisting that their own children always wear a plus for all close work. That works, as per what Dr. Prentice states, and the chicken data proves as science. To find supportive ODs, ask them what they do for their own children -- for prevention.
otissumnerbrown 1 month ago in playlist cleaning 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Otis> Judy, why don't ODs help their own children with Plus-prevention?
Judy> I'm an optometrist, I work in a group with five other optometrists, in a city with several dozen optometrists,have a few dozen acquaintances who are optometrists and none of us have our children use plus at near unless those are hyperopic. (Hyperopic? The natural eye with a positive refractive state.)
Otis> In this sense, the use of a strong minus (makes matter worse) is indeed not a scam, but not wise either.
otissumnerbrown 1 month ago in playlist cleaning 2
This is the real "scam" issue. But how would a person LEARN about this -- but that an OD or MD volunteer this information, and the proven effect of a minus on the natural eye. (The minus can cause myopia in the normal eye.) The "scam" is to remain silent about this issue when the child is at 20/40 (and -3/4 diopters). It is at that critical point that TrutherGirl should have been informed of Dr. Prentice's judgment -- for herself and for her son. Reject it at 20/50, and there is no second
otissumnerbrown 1 month ago in playlist cleaning 2
@otissumnerbrown What do you mean 'reject it at 20/50 and there is no second?
thetruthergirls 1 month ago
@thetruthergirls Hi Sonia, What I meant to say was that there is no "second chance". This is because I believe you are correct, that "prevention" must be started (as you intimated) before any minus lens is worn. From the bi-focal studies, once you even START wearing a minus, your vision goes down at a rate of -1/2 diopter per year, for each year in school. Thus the idea that prevention (by any "method" must start before you start wearing a minus lens. You could have been successful.
otissumnerbrown 1 month ago in playlist cleaning 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Prentice 4 > Similar results have been attained in 34 like cases ...but the process is very tedious for the patients, and unless their understanding is clear on the subject, it is almost impossible to induce them to undergo the trial. [ Otis> This is truly the issue. It MUST be the person's wisdom, to accept the "tedious" use of a plus, and to do it with no let up, that would make prevention (at 20/50, -3/4 diopter) possible. THAT is the real and only issue. The "scam" is to discuss this.
otissumnerbrown 1 month ago in playlist cleaning 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Prentice 3 > After reading in these glasses for several days, the patient was able to read print twelve inches from the eyes. In six months I changed the glasses for reading and writing to a +4 D without seeing the patient. After using the +4 D glasses for several months he again came under my care for an examination, when the left eye gave twenty-twentieths vision.
otissumnerbrown 1 month ago in playlist cleaning 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Prentice 2> Age forty-three; myopia; had been wearing over the right eye -1.25 D, left eye -1 D, with little or no change for the space of two years; eyes in use more or less at the near point. I recommended the removal of the concave glasses for distant vision and prescribed +3.50 D for reading, writing and other office work. (-1.25 D is about 20/50 to 20/60 on a Snellen). This is the intuitive insight that Truther talks about.
otissumnerbrown 1 month ago in playlist cleaning 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Prentice 1> Medical people -- have truly recognized the natural eye's behavior, and that, at least at the threshold -- IT IS PREVENTABLE. Here is the commentary by a profoundly insightful ophthalmologist. But, as Dr. Prentice states, plus prevention (at -1 diopter is tedious). But to say that "prevention will never happen" is a tragic statement -- because it prevents a preventive scientific study -- that could be effective (The chicken data is correct SCIENCE.)
otissumnerbrown 1 month ago in playlist cleaning 2
TrutherGirl> Incredibly, the whole glasses/contacts/laser surgery industry is a total scam, too. I recently found out that if children do eye exercises instead of wearing glasses, their vision gets restored instead of worsening.
Otis> There is a lot of truth in what you say. But some MDs (minority) have the correct (only preventive) method worked out. The problem is that you must do it yourself -- in this case wear a plus lens rather than the obvious minus lens. See Dr. Prentice remarks.
otissumnerbrown 1 month ago in playlist cleaning 2
It's a bit harsh to call the practice of optometry a scam when you clearly seem to not understand optics and basic physiology of the eye. BUT, the patient is always right even when they are wrong so if you feel that the eye exercises help alleviate the symptoms of your myopia (if indeed your problem is simple refractive error) then keep it up!
Kudosmate 1 month ago