--> Video: What's Your Maximum First Diopter Reduction - For Normalized?

Even though this may not apply to most of us darlings here, posting it anyway:

Update Nov 2019: Pro Topic videos are now available as an optional part of the rough guide: https://courses.endmyopia.org/le-rough-guide-sign-up/


My first drop was -1.0 diopters.
I could drop from -5.0 to -4 and that gave me almost 20/30. almost.
I wanted to make it a perfect 20/30 but I remembered jake’s blog posts about 1.0 diopter is the maximum to do when starting out.
after a month my eyes started to adapt to the change. after two months and a half my eyes adapted completely,
but looking back it is more ideal to make a 0.75 reduction.
after the 1.0 diopter reduction, I felt that my eyes want to rest for a while. it’s like I took them to a marathon without any preparation or rest in between.
it’s not that I felt my eyes were tired but when i tried to introduce to them another reduction I could feel the stress. they were like asking me to give them some time to relax from the marathon.


I started a -1.5 -2.25 for both eyes, so I decided to eliminate some astigmatism first. I decided to order my first pair of reduced normalized at -1.5 -1.75 and I was very surprised that I got completely used to them in only a day!


There’s quite a bit of over-correction present in many cases!

When I went to the optometrist, a bit before finding about Endmyopia, she wanted to give me -5.5 glasses with a bunch of astigmatism correction. I told her they felt too strong, so she accepted to decrease to -5.25. When I ordered my first normalized, I went with -4.75 and just left out the astigmatism correction (I was used to contact lenses with no astigmatism correction anyway).
So in a way, we could say that I went from -5.5 + astigmastism correction to -4.75, which could be -1 decrease right away, but I’m sure it was a lot of overcorrection. Because even with those really lower diopters, I could see better than 20/50 on my Snellen indoors right away.

1 Like

They love cylinder correction for some reason. I had posted some time ago about real astigmatism, which is exceedingly rare.

In most cases people just can’t tell the difference during the exam, so when the (ridiculous) “is it better this way, or this way” questions come up while they’re getting diopters sorted, they don’t realize they’re getting cylinder correction added. And as long as it doesn’t make your vision worse, you’re very likely to get that awesome astigmatism ‘diagnosis’.

It’s ridiculous, the whole entire thing. :zipper_mouth_face:


It’s exactly what happened to me at one optometrist. I could see no difference between the two pictures he showed me and even if I told him that he insisted. I finally selected randomly one picture and tadaaam I had an overprescribed spherical prescription with cylinder :roll_eyes: Then I went to an ophtalmologist who works with a lens kit and she confirmed I have no astigmatism. I also don’t trust the autorefractor and other machines some optometrists use to measure eyesight.


Exactly. And consider how many of these experiences I’ve had to deal with over the years from students (thousands of times), it’s basically how the entire profession (for the most part) worldwide does it.

It’s quite literally making up vision conditions that don’t exist, and “prescribing” for them. Which in term creates those exact conditions. Lens induced myopia and astigmatism.


In February 2019, I was sent to a cornea specialist who told me I have one of five available pathologies with my cornea, but not to worry, it’s the least bad of the five.

In reality, when I was a kid, without glasses, I could see way better than 20/10. Then I had a year of marathon reading, including using a flashlight under the covers and ended up with dreaded minus lenses…and a ten year wait until my first astigmatism. To be told I have a corneal defect is laughable. What I’ve got is =2…75D and -3.25D of input into my visual system that consistently distorts my vision, and the cornea which is attached to it.

It’s crazy making. These people have a lot of education…I want to ask, did it really take you 12 years of college to get this stupid?


It’s crazy making. These people have a lot of education…I want to ask, did it really take you 12 years of college to get this stupid?

It makes me question myself quite a bit. As in, I’m not actually trying to be that arrogant, to say I know more than somebody who specifically went and got an extensive education on the subject. I WANT to be able to trust people to solve these specialist type of problems for me. I want to just pay somebody who knows the thing, and be done with it.

By the same token, it very obviously is a big red flag for others finding this resource. To any logical person it may seem a stretch that this random dude online somehow knows better than everybody, and that a massive global professional institution would be categorically wrong.

I really, really, really don’t like being “that guy”. It’s fringe, it’s anti-social, and it pisses a lot of people off. Not a very productive endeavor.

But then all the e-mails from parents, and getting their kids eyes back. Which side wins, the one where I don’t want to be the Alex Jones of myopia, or the one where we don’t leave people in the dark about things that can really affect their well-being?

If it was a wider discussed subject, it wouldn’t be a problem. I’d be fine talking about methods and strategies to reduce myopia. It’s the preceding topic, where we haven’t made it past the conspiracy theory level on the myopia subject, that really is less my thing.



I still have a lot of respect for the time, effort, and education that went into the making of the doctors. In particular, there are pathologies beyond the lens-induced myopia and astigmatism that doctors can be very helpful at solving.

But there seems to be a huge gaping hole in the behavioral optometry and regular optometry fields when they can’t tell you, hey, you need better habits, your ciliary will unlock. Get out there and play center field after you finish your homework. That’s the majority of the issue, and like you have pointed out, a 95% myopia rate in Asian countries.

I’m having some successes, albeit subjective–things like being able to see and distinguish between my iris and pupil in the bathroom mirror, or being able to read the scale without needing my glasses, as I did six months ago. It drives me crazy when my eye doctors tell me acuity can’t be improved. Why are they not interested in finding ways to understand it and teach it to patients?

I’ll just be glad to be done with myopia. I know the day will be here. Even if I don’t clear up 100% of the astigmatism, I’d be ok with not needing glasses 95% of the time, and certainly not for basic life tasks. Specialized tasks, OK.


Part of the problem is that there is so much data out there that makes up the curricula. I.e., well, expect x% of your patients to have an astigmatism correction…so that gets baked into the equation.

Too bad the paleo people don’t get onto the opto people. To have a dude with glasses standing there telling me how the cave men ate and not even think once about how they were able to see without an optician…

I don’t know. Maybe I digress.


I can say that very few people from countries just south of the United States wear glasses. And no kids are wearing them, unless they have influence from the US or they move to the US there’s little glasses. There is doctors and I assume there are eye doctors but I bet they aren’t taking the kids to the eye doctor. Just saying.

1 Like

Doing a paleo podcast later today, actually. :wink:

1 Like

Hope this point makes it on air!

Hey @jakey where can we find this paleo podcast your in. Sounds interesting for both the endmyopia talk and the paleo talk.

Will update when it’s up. :slight_smile:


Where is it? :heart_eyes:

Will update as they come out. :slight_smile:

1 Like

what if it starts from getting used to not wearing glasses at all. for example if someone is at minus 4 but accustomed to not wearing glasses at all whether he should wear -0.75 then -1.5 then -2.25 then -3 then -3.75 then reduce as usual because we cannot change the focal plane more from 1 diopter at a time?