NottNott Fixes His Eyesight From -5 (video log!)

Yeah, definitely don’t do that… I did exactly that and we know what happened :slight_smile: I’m still struggling with to get my right eye back on track. My overall vision is pretty great, when the right eye don’t have double vision then it’s perfectly clear. But usually my right eye is just meh and doesn’t play nice. It’s getting better though so I’m optimistic :slight_smile: I’ve did a differential focal plane, so anyways no change for a few weeks (at least until middle of March), but I think there is a chance I will be at last able to reduce normalized after that.

Are you screen distance still around 64 cm?

2 Likes

Distance of face to screen about 60cm.

3 Likes

I have that exact sensation when I rub my eyes and think, “Oh, no. I can’t do that because I’m wearing contacts.” Because for me, no glasses on my face = contact lenses in. New thinking takes time!

1 Like

Actually, this. 86 the post.

Measuring without differentials in my right eye gives me 28cm, or -3.50, time to reduce. Measuring with differentials (OD/OS -1.25/-0.50) gives me like 38cm ((100/38) + 1.25 = ) -3.88, so not only don’t reduce but increase your correction to -3.75. I knew there could be problems when I reduced from -3.75/-2.75 to -3.50/-2.75 to start equalising, there they are - too quick. Snellen results only being decent in godlike light, and needing strong AF is also a sign.

Wearing -3.75/-2.75 and looking at Snellen in artificial light, not perfect, clears up to 20/20 with AF, but not perfect. Much better than the further reductions I’ve done recently though.

Same verse as the first, reduced too quickly, twice.

Some lessons:

  1. You should actually measure with differentials at this level of myopia, without glasses you can change your entire results too easily. Messing up cm measurements like I did here, by not measuring using differentials can lead to big false positives that encourage further reductions when you shouldn’t do that
  2. 40 days probably isn’t enough for a reduction, at least for me, even with three hours walking every day (like I did for -3.75/-2.75)
  3. No, you actually still can’t improve your vision that much with pure screen time

Going forward I’m thinking a frequency approach is better. I’m thinking one hour outdoors for 90 days on a given reduction is better than three hours outdoors for 40 days. Three hours a day is a really high committment. Because it’s such a high committment, you’re constantly thinking about when you can reduce to ‘see the results of your work’, which is what happened here. Combined with bad cm measurements without diffs that could plausibly back up a display of progress.

After a forum thread with 1000+ posts dedicated to intermittent failure, I’m still gonna get the last laugh with a final post saying ‘and he got back to 20/20’. My left eye’s myopia has still basically halved from my starting point from the optometrist. And -4/-3, what I did wear every day at one point, is still too strong to be considered my normalised. Fuck you myopia

2 Likes

Newbies think that this is simple and easy, there’s actually a billion factors going on when you consider any course of action to take and you have to almost have the knowledge of and execute on each factor really well. Sometimes the knowledge takes loads of trial and error as well, like the reducing too quickly thing, which really isn’t fun.

A big committment of three hours every day for 40 days creating a pressure to reduce, plus measuring without differentials giving me plausible ‘time to reduce’ results lead to reducing too quickly here. That’s building on top of the foundation of recognising blur adaptation as not real improvements.

I haven’t given up on making videos either BTW. I’ve just learnt to be really conservative before stating anything as the truth or the way it is, I could have made a ‘-3.25/-2.50!!’ vlog video for instance, only for that to be totally wrong in this series of posts I’ve just written. I write in every one of the more positive posts on here ‘or I could be doing something wrong’, because about half of the time I am literally writing a post describing the wrong action I’m about to take. Nobody wants to make a big announcement only to turn around and find it’s wrong, but that’s the world of eyesight improvement vlogging for you.

When I get to 20/20 I’m gonna be at liberty to make loads of tutorial videos and guides because I’ve been through the mill and done the hard thing and got there in the end. For now I can’t really do that, because I feel like any piece of advice I give out is just gonna be undone by the next lesson I learn, I was a big believer in not measuring with differentials for instance.

The beginners guide video I did largely played it by the books based off of pure EM content, so that’s not void or anything. Most of the stuff in these posts are details as well, which a beginner would not need to concern themselves with. Other tutorial videos, yes print pushing is still a waste of time, 0.50 diopter drops are terrible yes, and you should read loads of stuff before even beginning. Recent advice is still solid.

So maybe in the big fuck off tutorial videos I’ll end up doing when I’m basically 20/20 I’ll say something like ‘it’s better to do one hour distance vision a day for 90 days instead of three hours a day for 40 days, number of days is more important than time spent outside’ or something. I’m literally about to test that out. Not qualifed to speak about it at the moment though.

Whatever guys :stuck_out_tongue:

1 Like

And all of that is dripped in the fact that I’ve probably got some major cilliary spasm going on right now and my eye can’t accommodate properly. Then you think about the detail of does that affect your cm results as much as your Snellen, probably not. But what if it does?

I swear this is what vision improvement looks like:
tenor (1)

Shout outs to all the guys who are having a smoother ride to 20/20 than I am :stuck_out_tongue:

2 Likes

Don’t look at me, every time I try to reduce normalised I get eye strain headaches after a few days and have to go back up. Differentials reduction seems OK though, only need a few days to get used to the new one. Guess distance vision is also more challenging since focal distance limit is the horizon not 60cm. There is more potential for strain when active focussing. Yet none of the regulars on here seems to have this apart from me…

2 Likes


:smiley:

4 Likes

So accurate :sweat_smile:
High quality version:
explaining-when-to-reduce

Let’s add this to it… sorry @jakey :smiley:

4 Likes

90 days for a reduction
Worst eye -3.75
(3.75/0.25)*90=1350 days or 3.7 years. Discounting the two years I’ve been here, AHHH
506n4n

3 Likes

I know this thread is dedicated to the overanalysers :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes: but here is an alternative way of doing reductions in a laid-back version.

A definition to start with:
Inside edge of blur = the furthest point where you don’t even notice that you are wearing weaker glasses (you have zero thoughts about AF or clearing blur)

Tools you need:

  • eyes & brain
  • screen
  • your arm
  • cars with number plates

After discovering EM you should monitor and observe your eyesight and your eye habits for a few weeks while you are reading materials on EM and listen to some of Jake’s podcasts, and then you get a pair of differentials and a bit later you get a pair of normalised to start off with.
It almost doesn’t matter what they are as long as they are a bit weaker than your original full prescription…

For the differentials:
You hold your arm out and will want to be able to read any normal sized text on the screen. You should do it on the inside edge of blur which means this should come with zero effort, zero waiting time and you should be able to hold this position for the whole period of your screen time. If you move back 30+ cms and you can still read the normal sized text on the screen it’s time to drop 0.25D.
With the new differentials you should be able to read normal sized test on the screen at least at an arm’s length again and then you can start moving back and when you reached the max comfortable you drop again.
Summary: start at effortless arm’s length and work up to “arm + 30cms” being effortlessly OK at almost any time. Drop and repeat.

For the normalised:
Find a street where there are cars parking loosely behind each other on the other side of the street. You will want to be able to read car number plates at least 3 cars away without any efforts or waiting time to zoom in and this should work in almost any weather. This is a good start for your normalised and you wear them until you get to 5 car number plates on an overcast day and 7 on a sunny day. Then you drop 0.25D and with the new normalised you should be able to read car number plates at least 3 cars away.
Summary: start at 3 number plates away and work up to minimum 5 cars effortlessly at almost any time. Drop and repeat.
image

If you cannot find cars, test your vision by walking into a coffee shop and read the menu on the wall, or check the departure times on the display at bus / train stations or airports, etc.


I have just found a simulator for myopia.
It only changes images with full diopters but the blur shown with -1D is already slightly over the legal requirement of 20/40 vision for driving.
You can scale from zero to -6D, and change from classroom to lab to sports hall.
And compare your vision in normalised glasses in the real world to this and aim to be better than -1D.

6 Likes

Good guide, especially for differentials. Having differentials too low to remain at hardcore edge blur is so much worse than just wearing a good correction. I am exactly at arm length currently, although with these diffs I was at less than half of arm length at one point, which was very bad for my back.

1 Like

But, but… should you stretch your shoulder when you hold your arm out, or pull back? And strech your fingers or relaxed fingers or maybe fist closed. Also why the girl has gloves on? And… just joking :smiley:

To be serious, thanks for this guide :slight_smile: I’m still struggling with finding the correct differentials and screen distance. With my current -2.00 and 70cm screen distance sometimes it feels like that it’s too clear. On the other hand with your “iniside the edge of blur” definition I may even should move the screen closer a few cm.
Also with the -1.75 it’s only inside the edge of blur with closed fist lengths. Though I have relatively long arms (I think) around 72-73 cm.

Based on @NottNott’s post I may need to move my screen closer :tired_face: (why there is no *sigh* emoji?)

That reminded me that I’ve forgot to post my “current vision simulation” pictures :slight_smile: My journey from -4.25 - Halmadavid - #303 by halmadavid

2 Likes

Oh, my. I have been careful in my reductions, but reading @NottNott (he of the superb video about basics that I recommend to strangers on the street ) got me worried. We’ve had a run of cloudy days where I live, and I have got to questioning myself enough to toy with going back up a quarter-diopter stronger. My measurements in different lights are what seem to me impossibly various. Then I read @BiancaK’s more latitudinarian (fancy word for laid-back) approach and I breath a sigh of relief. But, dammit, it’s like reading strict moralists versus lax moralists! Which one should I go with? It reminds me of the difference between the old advice to reduce to a strength that gives you 20/50 (which I get in bright light without glasses but am practiclly blind under the flourescent lights of my kitchen) and the more stringent one that asks for a lot more. I sure know which I like best between the Savonarola of NottNott and Pope Francis of BiancaK. I’ll probably continue to shilly-shally for a while.

4 Likes

(✿◡‿◡)

I’m not a huge fan of being complex in general. A big part of the beginner’s guide video for me was trying to distil loads of blog and wiki reading into four fundamentals that are literally what improves your eyesight. Needs to be approachable.

At the same time this thread is all about documenting in very extrenous detail all the actions I’m taking, because I can imagine there are lurkers who will never post here but are still interested in following a process of some sort. This thread will also kick-ass for a summary video when I’m 20/20 too! Maybe it’s a stream of consciousness thing :slight_smile:

2 Likes

Here’s some more of that, diggity dogs

Reducing from -4.25/-3.25 to -4/-3, and then -3.75/-2.75, maybe I made those two reductions too quickly as well, but I got away with it as it was still somewhat within the small limits of not reducing so fast as to stifle progress. But still being fast. FYI, I have found being like 0.50 below 20/20 to almost entirely stop all of my progress entirely, reducing too quickly seems to be a death sentence for my improvements.

So spending 40 days walking for three hours a day with -3.75/-2.75, maybe the real story is I had reduced too quickly the two times just before that, and I needed longer to create more breathing room before reducing again. So perhaps it isn’t a strict 90 days per each reduction, although you need more days if you’re pushing the limits obviously, as there’s more myopia to reduce.

Reducing too slowly is something I have done as well though. -4.75/-3.75 was that. That’s a thing too

1 Like

lmao @ this and the previous 2 pics
good stuff guys

1 Like

By that you mean, that for example you start with a differential at 60 cm, which is right at your inside edge of blur. Your eyes improve and you don’t move the screen back in the process? So still use it at 60 cm, even though your edge of blur is 89 cm? (right before the reduction).

You did a very good job with the videos. :+1: :+1: :+1:
It’s just those formulas flying around in the post that suggested a bit of overthinking… :sweat_smile:

2 Likes