Hi, I’m new in the forum (although I’ve read a whole bunch of forum threads) and this is my first post, so please excuse me if I break any established norms. My name is Chris, I’m 35 and I currently live in Oslo, Norway.
How I discovered Endmyopia (skip this part if it’s not interesting, it got a bit long)
I got curious about getting rid of my contacts in March this year and I threw away my contacts and glasses completely April 1st, following advice from at Bates method book. At that time I was wearing -1.75/-1.25 contacts on both eyes (occationally wore my -1.75/-1.5 glasses too), which I suspect was getting slightly undercorrected after too many bad habits this last Covid-19 year.
Initially when I stopped wearing lenses, I could really see and feel the improvement, almost from day to day. But after some weeks, it stopped. And it frustrated me, because there were so many Bates method stories on quick fixes. So I arranged a video conference with the Bates method teacher who wrote the book. Although she was very nice and had lots of knowledge, it really didn’t help much or teach me anything other than was in the book. So I started looking around for more information and luckily found endmyopia.org. I read up on all I could, listened to all the YouTube videoes and bought Le Rough Guide, which was awesome, and here I am. And I feel so much better now, knowing it will take time, and being liberated from all the weird things I had to do following the Bates method, which gave my serious paranoia.
(NOTE: To be fair to this particular Bates method person, she’s not about excercises and actually opposes them, and she’s not about eye vitamins etc. It’s all about relaxation techninques. And actually, after I understodd the Endmyopia method, in retrospect I can see that the Endmyopia techniques to some degree actually were present in her work too, it was just drowning in all the other stuff.)
Well, to not make this story way too long, I’m now down to my year 2012 glasses, which are -1.25/-1.00 and give me super sharp 20/15, almost 20/10 vision, so probably too strong. (In good lighting I can even see 20/15 with -0.75/-0.75 contacts). So definetly some improvement here.
What really made sense for me with Endmyopia was the “use distance vision” and “limit near work” ideas, and I do get the Actice Focus thing, which is almost more automatic focus to me, as some here in the forum describe it. But since I hate glasses and almost never wore them before, and I love the feeling of going without my contacts, I’ve (almost) not been wearing corrections since April. And I will probably contunue with it (except for when i really need it), unless I get some really convincing answers to my questions.
I’m quite methodical about this and would like to understand the underlying mechanisms of improvement. Hence there are a couple of things related to AF/stimuli that I don’t quite understand yet. Please forgive me if they are discussed in a forum or blog post, I just haven’t found it.
Stimuli is a key, no doubt. And as we know, hyperopic defocus is the stimuli for developing myopia and eyeball elongation. So what puzzles me then is why isn’t myopic defocus the key stimuli for myopia reversal and eyeball shortening? If one is an automated prosess, why isn’t the other? Why is a concious effort (AF) needed? (I understand that to get proper myopic defocus you need to use your distance vision anyways and not be staring at a screen all day).
Related to this, I find it difficult to understand the concept of blur adaptation too. The blur is just myopic defocus, which the brain should be able to recognize, as it knows that the light is focused in front of the retina. Furthermore, if the lens inside the eye has the ability to focus light correctly (if within it’s range to do so), why isn’t the visual cortex able to understand that severe myopic defocus need correction? I know that biology is slow, so it will probably take a lot of time if it’s seriously defocused. But my point is, why isn’t this defocus by itself proper stimuli?
I’m not disputing the fact that (1) it is stupid to go around everywhere not seeing, so it’s propbably better to wear some correction along the way, and (2) having a lot of myopic defocus doesn’t seem to increase the progress rate (which i feel my own experience shows too).
Infants and animals
But what comes first—the ability to know what you are looking at so that the brain (visual cortex) can correct it to its optimal apperance, or the correction of defocus so that the brain can learn and interpret what you are seeing? I’m thinking of infants, they need to learn to see before they understand what they see. They cannot “clear up” anything conciously, beacause they don’t know how it should look. Still, the brain corrects and adapts the eyes. And I’m also thinking of animals, they cannot clear up anything based on text or other conscious effort, still they can have good vision, and even regain good vision after lense-induced myopia, as shown in research.
So I guess, my fundamental question here is: Why is conscious effort needed to improve? Shouldn’t myopic defocus combined with adequate use of proper distance vision by itself be enough to reverse myopia?
I would really appriciate anyone who takes the time to reply to my post.
Enjoy the rest of your weekend!