Eye Exercises (Bates Method)

[mcmarkib]

I am easily within limits for Class 1 however am curious to see if anybody has any experience of the Bates method of eye exercises for improved vision. I am sure that computers and books are responsible for me requiring glasses as I have only required them for about four years!

If it has worked for anybody, what difference has it made to your perscription?

I am a bit skeptical on this one:}

[Mister Geezer]

I recently read an article, which had techniques on eye exercises to improve vision. I have to admit that I am a bit sceptical but apparently people who have done the exercises and have had to ditch their specs.

There is a lot of reading on the topic but no doubt your local optician will dismiss the whole topic as not being worthwhile!

[LGB]

As I just posted in another thread, I have reduced my nearsighted vision to half, from about -1.50/-1.25 to -0.75/-0.50.

Look for

natural vision

or

vision improvement

on Google.

But let me write the basics:

The focus of the eye is more or less static, unchangeable, but the lens you focus with is not. It is controlled by (I think) 6 muscles in each eye.

If you are nearsighted, you cannot relax these muscles enough to focus far (as if you cannot reach your feet with your hands, legs stretched out).

If you are farsighted, you cannot contract these muscles far enough.

If you are hindsighted ... :hmm:

Anyway, for nearsightedness, the solution is (stretching) exercises, wearing reading glasses when reading or doing other near work (or weaker glasses if you are heavily nearsighted). Reading glasses are some places sold as "computer glasses", but they are essentially the same.


Becoming nearsighted has been suggested is the result of prolonged exposure to very short focsing, as if reading at a too close distance. Wearing reading glasses resembles focusing at a distance further away, forcing your eye muscles to relax. I remember reading about a Japanese study, where Japanese people were compared with regard to their need for vision correction. There was a clear tendency of the higher educated group to be more nearsighted, while those mainly having a background with shorter education were much less prone to being nearsighted.

I don't know whether it is all true, but it worked for me. Now I am just too lazy to keep up the work to entirely get rid of my nearsightedness.

This is not new at all. The Bates method is over 50 years old I think. This article is from 1973: http://www.chinamyopia.org/Preventionmagazine1973.htm but it has a lot of useful information in it.

This page contains more recent information. I cannot find the Japanese study I mention above, but there are plenty of other studies cited here http://www.preventmyopia.org/validation.html - pointing Myopia/nearsightedness to reading/TV/computer work.

Edit: Here is an animation (Flash) explaining how Myopia can be prevented for kids http://www.preventmyopia.org/flashanimation.html. There is also some effect when you are older, but the earlier you start, the better.

[Willows]

That's very interesting, LGB.

I'm -2.50/-2.25 and continually wearing contact lenses to correct my vision. It has just been getting worse and worse since my first check up at 17 or 18 (-0.50/-0.50).

I'm due for a check up soon, so I'm going to ask about reading glasses for computer work/reading. Anything to stop the eyesight from dropping back any further.

Cheers.

[Capetonian1]

LGB I would be intersted to know your age, as this would have an effect on the lens in the eye and its ability to change focus. It is true in terms of myopia prevention in kids, that the use of eye exercises (and even low powered convex lenses to relax accommodation) may be far more useful than previously believed - in terms of reducing - or preventing the progression of myopia. Reducing myopia by any significant amount in adults, by eye exercises, has not been proven scientifically. However, just doing the exercises can be good for the eyes as part of its overall focusing and converging function. :eek:

[AlexEvans]

Hi.

I'm long-sighted with astigmatism and about to have LASIK on my left eye to bring it within the class 1 limitations. Medical opinion is that successful LASIK (or other eye surgery) is the only way my left eye will ever be within the 3 diopter cylinder limit.

Do you think there is any hope that the exercises in question would be able to help me? I suppose it's worth asking before I have the operation...

My left eye: +3.00, -4.00 x 45 (6/6+)

The people at aviation house do not reccommend LASIK, but it's (probably) my only option.

What do you think?

[Capetonian1]

Hi AlexEvans

There is not likely to be any form of eye exercises that would reduce that anount of cylinder/astigmatism in the left eye, or even that amount of hyperopia. Your prescription of +3.00DS Hyperopia and -4.00DC of astigmatism is also not in the ideal range for LASIK, although the latest software "driving" the laser attempts to work to that range - I am not sure how accurate/predictable the results of LASIK will be for that Rx though.

There may be other options that you should discuss with your ophthalmologist (besides LASIK), such as an inplantable contact lens, which is reversible and would be able to correct your prescription much more effectively than LASIK. Good luck!

[Farmer 1]

A mate once told me he had mastered the Bates system of eye exercising, but he said it didn't do him any good at all.

Quite the reverse, in fact.

[fhchiang]

if the Bates method can't improve my eyesight..

i want it to At least maintain my eyesight at

R:-4.50D -1.75D
L: -4.25D -1.75D

[PhilM]

Alex, what did Gatwick say about having LASIK to bring you within the Class1 criteria. I remember reading somewhere they would not allow refractive surgery for Class1 if you didn't already meet the Class1 requirements pre-op. Ie, if you couldn't hold one before LASIK, you can't after it.

It'd be fantastic news if they have said its OK in your case though. Please let me know, I'm in a similar situation! (But had LASIK 3yrs ago for other reasons, am now well within Class1 limits now, but I was outside them before surgery) :(

[aviate1138]

Try Vision for Life.
www.rebuildyourvision.com
I found the program to certainly give my eyes a full workout and
the surrounding muscles too! If nothing else one can feel the whole area
giving some reaction. Last medical I had, the AME said my eyes were 20
years younger than my brain! :)
Aviate1138

[Flyin'Dutch']

All these eye-exercise methodes conveniently forget that most of the refraction is done by the cornea and that with most people's refraction problems the underlying issue is the incorrect length of the visual axis.

I have no doubt that by exercising you can maximise your ability to use your lens and accommodate. No exercise though will be able to correct both cornea and or the optical length of your eye.

[AlexEvans]

Hi Phil M.

Disclaimer: Please understand that I do not claim to be an authority on this subject and you should seek professional advice. However, here is my experience and understanding of the situation.

I was confused by this and may still be! On the CAA web site, they state:

"...the certification limits of eye correction with glasses and the limits of refraction before surgery are the same (+- 5 dioptres), so it is not possible to gain a medical certificate by having refractive surgery, that you would not have obtained by wearing glasses."

I believe that this statement refers to the amount of long or short sight in your prescription, the sphere measurement (first one). If I recall correctly, my eyes meet this requirement but fail to meet the requirement for astigmatism:

"...astigmatism must not exceed 2.0 dioptres."

My left eye's astigmatism (cylinder measurement, second one) is -3.50. However, there is no mention of a pre-operative limit on astigmatism in the CAA Initial Examination Visual Standards pdf, at least not one that I could find.

This lead me to wonder if LASIK would be the ticket to my class 1 medical. I wrote to Aviation House to get clarification in writing. Here's part of their reply:

"...I have discussed your case with Mr Chorley, our Optemetrist here at the CAA, who agrees that should you undergo successful LASIK surgery, you would then fall within the standard for medical certification."

So it would appear that it is possible to obtain a medical by having refractive surgery that you would not have obtained by wearing wearing glasses if the reason you don't meet the visual standards is due to the level of astigmatism and not the amount of long or short sight (refraction?).

Clear as mud? :ugh:

As it happens, to be safe, I had an "extended opthalmology" at Gatwick just to check for any other reasons why my eyes might fail the medical (there are many) before having LASIK. They found an abnormaility in the endothelium that they suspected was the start of "fuch's distrophy". Having LASIK on an eye in this condition would cause the condition to progress more quickly. I thought at that point that not only would I never be a pilot, but that I might have problems just getting on with everyday life. Next step was a visit to an opthalmic consultant who concluded that this was all a false alarm, so it appears that my flying career is back on. I just need to take the plunge and have LASIK (or some other form of refractive surgery) now.

My advice is to write to Aviation House AMD or even go in and see them. I've heard rumours that the visual requirements might be relaxed in the future too.

Hope this helps and good luck.

[hixton]

Flyin Dutch, if you have read the Bates book you will know that his research have show different to your knowing that all refraction is done by the cornea

[bluestack]

I've used the rebuild your vision programme, as linked to above, run by Orlin Sorensen, co-incidentally an airline pilot....and while I've been pretty lax about it, I've had an improvement in my eyesight at my last check-up.
One of the keys if you wear glasses (not so easy for lense wearers) is to remove them when you don't need them, reducing the reverse effect that LGB talks about utilising when doing close work while wearing a shortsighted prescription (in my case).
You'd be amazed at the amount of time you can get by without the specs...

[fhchiang]

bluestack.. did u purchase that program? rebuild your visoion what improvement u had? if it's unconvienient for u.. please PM me


hmm flyin dutch...

ya.,. i heard bout the elongated eyeball.. but i believe to certain extend.. the Cilary muscle is also understress.... if we can relieve the stress at the focusing muscle... we might be able to reduce our shortsightedness..... and the shortsightedness that remains will be solely caused by the eyeball shape.. and not the muscle...... thus in this case.. u can reduce the REfraction error cause by the muscle.. that's the best u can do because u can't reshape the eyeball when it's already long.... in short.. we may be able to REDUCE MYOPIA.. but not totally eliminate it... to me .. that's still something... at least.. u can do more stuff without glasses when you are at -2d comapred to when u are at -4.5D.. just a comparision

u get what i mean?.. well that's my theory

[LGB]

I think I was in my earliy thirties when I improved my vision.

Actually, I didn't get glasses before I was 17 (after several years of lots of reading and studying). I maxed out at ... around -1.5/-1.25, and went down to -.75/-.50, that is, right/left eye. My right eye has always been slightly worse than the left.

It is really about habits. I didn't use the reading glasses much for a while, and I still do a lot of near work. I have kept my vision under control, and at least I seldom wear glasses when not needed. I really shouldn't wear them when flying either, for the sake of the eyes, but for the horizon scan of that odd traffic without transponder (hmmm) that one is supposed to do all the time. Who does that anyway, and even with 20/20, you won't see them in time anyway, unless they are making contrails.

Forget the packages you can buy. There are lots of people, especially Americans who will write books and sell packages for/against anything! All you need is a pair of cheap reading glasses (now I am talking nearsighted), maybe in different strengths. What you want to do is have anything from +1 to +3 more than your prescription, depending on how near you are working. Are you reading a lot, or sitting with your face glued to your laptop at a foots distance or so, go for around +2. If you are around -2, that means just keep your glasses off. If you are -5, buy a pair of +2s and wear when you have contacts on, or get glasses that are +2 more than your normal subscription.

The worst you can do for your eyes is wear your normal glasses and do real near work for a long time. That is just winding up the tension further => stronger glasses next time you get a test.

A bit complicated, but to sum it up, the optimal solution for training your eyes would be a pair of adaptive glasses that adjusted the strength depending on where you look! Unrealistic (at the moment), but they would function just the way the autofocus works in most cameras. For a more realistic solution, glasses with a gradient strength couold be used, but it is very important they do not become crutches for your eyes, but just the opposite.

[bluestack]

fhchiang,

yeah, I purchased the rebuild your vision programme. I was -1.5 which through time increased to -1.75 and since starting to use the tips from rebuild your vision and various tips like LGB's I've gone back to approx -1.5.

Although I've not stuck to the programme, I was going to spend a coupla grand on laser surgery so figured the programme was worth the few dollars...

There's a few useful tips in the programme, which it's not my place to pass on for free - but personally, I'd stick to LGB's advice and you'll get the same results for a lot less $$$

[fhchiang]

well...

for the past year or so..

i've been reading and using the computer

without my glasses at all.......

but considering i'm

about between -4 to -4.5 in both eye with astig -1.75d both eye...

it's quite a challenge for me.

[Ridgerunner]

I have used the vision for life program, and certainly have noticed improvement despite the optitians dismissing it as being a nice day or what not. Worth a look if you are concerned enough about it.

[Nearly Man]

Hi guys, there is a program called EyeQ that has was developed by a Japanese chappy.
Have heard that either an air force or an airline use it and recommend it. That's as much as I know but I'm sure a google search would bring it up.

[AlexEvans]

EyeQ is for speed reading rather than vision improvement... isn't it?

[Cool_Hand]

Bizarrely enough, I worked in an engineering office that happened to be located in an airport control tower. With me working on a computer most of the time and looking out of the window at every aircraft that made an approach improved my eyesight to where at my class one renewel I was told if the improvement carries on as it is I'll have no need of glasses within the year. Unfortunately I changed job and I think my vision is backsliding. So I think there is a lot involved in exercising the eyes especially for me.

I'm very interested in what LGB has to say about the reading glasses but forgive my ignorance, what are the +1, +2 etc. references about? Are we talking Dioptas? I can't remember my prescription but can find it as required. But are you saying that all I need to do is wear a pair of reading glasses when working at my computer or reading a book? I assume for mid range i.e. tv just keep the glasses off? At the moment all I wear my glasses for is driving and flying.

[Loose rivets]

Well, I started out fairly clear in my own mind about eye exercises. I'm now totally confused.

About 2 years ago, I mentioned a 20 year old (ish) article in a well known science magazine. It showed micrographs of the human lens and good drawings of the fibrous / muscle supports to the lens. To my dismay, it clearly showed the anchor points on the lens moving inwards with age. This meant that any attempt to strengthen them was futile. At about this time, Mrs R started reading "Better sight without glasses" and found that she was having the first signs of shortsightedness...about halfway through the book! About the only interesting thing about that book was the hint of old English in its prose.

You need to take on board the point raised by a professional earlier in this thread. Roughly speaking, the lens only fine tunes the settings we are blessed with.

Any exercise is good, but all things in moderation. However, I am personally convinced that some people can correct focus by manipulating the large muscles that move the eye. They do in effect, distort the whole eye. I know I do this. The problem is, that this can cause all sorts of eye spasm and resulting pain in extraordinary circumstances. As an aside, it's worth mentioning that I'm sure that my ability to do this stems from early childhood, and a morbid fear of blindness. Rare, but I know I'm not unique.

What I'm trying to get across, in rather a long winded manner, is that in doing these exercises, one can not be sure which muscles are being tugged at. I quite quickly learned to correct for a rather disappointing cataract operation. The - 1.5 can be hauled into sharp focus on demand, and
I'm certainly not reforming the shape of my lens--since it is man made. (Actually, that's not quite true, but the range that I can effect is minute.)

To sum up. By all means go a tad shy of prescription if you feel that this will help, but not for long. Muscles need rest and eyes are no different in this respect. The looking up from the screen to infinity many times a day is a good scenario. If you do not have a window onto infinity, then that is the time to wear the exercising prescription...just for a few moments, then back to the restful lens.

There is essentially no difference to going to the gym, and overdoing it for hours. Gentle stretching and rest is best.

[Capetonian1]

Loose rivets your post has summarised the point very well. In the eyecare profession "eye exercises" are a very important aspect of certain treatment modalities. For example eye exercises for certain types and stages of "squint" (tropias and phorias), amblyopia (lazy eye), convergence insufficiency as well as a range of accommodative disorders are commonplace. Their efficacy is also well researched and scientifically proven.

However, the results of the use of "eye exercises" to try and treat a refractive error such as myopia or hyperopia is not well established. Although exercise techniques may certainly help aid the function of the ciliary muscles controlling the lens; the use of such exercises to treat a refractive problem does not address the aetiology or cause of the problem. Simply, a refractive error such as myopia or hyperopia is essentially due to the eyeball being too long or too short in relation to the power produced by the cornea. Therefore eye exercises will simply not be able to reposition the focal point of light back onto the retina where it should be.

In the case of presbyopia which occurs at around age 45, where one tends to need reading glasses, the cause of this is very different. A review of the mechanisms of accommodation and the development of presbyopia indicate it unlikely that a loss of strength of the ciliary muscle in the eye is the cause of presbyopia. On the contrary in fact, the literature demonstrates that the muscles in the eye are actually stronger at age 50 than they were at age 15 thereby negating any theory that the muscles get weaker as one gets older. Rather, the flexibility of the lens in the eye is reduced due to its increased growth throughout life as well as lens sclerosis. Another aspect is that because the lens continues to grow throughout life, there is less and less space available around the lens for the muscles to exert their mechanical traction and therefore accommodation is reduced. This loss in accommodation takes place throughout life (commensurate with the growth of the lens) and the rate of change is well established scientifically.

To sum up, eye exercises are a very useful treatment option for certain indicated eye disorders. But there is little scientific evidence to suggest that eye exercises offer any improvement for purely refractive errors or presbyopia.

[bluestack]

while I understand what's being said about the causes of myopia related to length of eyeball etc, I do think there's two differences in causes of these conditions, one I (as a layman and reading the above) believe to be physiological and one to be environmental.
I can't say and have never been told by an optician (don't know if they can) whether my fault is through these cillary muscles or a change in eyball shape/length.
But I sit a computer all day, and until recently all while wearing glasses for distance. This must have a detrimental effect on eyesight surely as I know the position I take at my desk caused a minute lengthening of the muscle across the back, which delayed the healing of a shoulder injury due to alignment.
So why not the eye also??

[Loose rivets]

Indeed. It's all very interesting stuff, but very difficult to know what is going on sometimes. The telemetry from the spine is complex, but nothing compared to the brains ability to gather information from the eyes.

People with poor eyesight are able to do things that a linear logic of visual performance would prohibit. The brain works round all sorts of difficulties. It is how it does it that causes other problems sometimes.

I am personally convinced that the brain can use the extra-ocular muscles to facilitate focusing, but I haven't really made much effort to find any published work on this phenomenon.

[sailor]

For anyone considering lasik surgery I would recommend a google search for INTACS. I am no expert but understand that the FAA medics allow a return to work in less than a week. Briefly 2 crescent-shaped plastic "interior contact lens" segments inserted under surface of the conjunctiva (surface material); they can be changed if the eye presription subsequently alters or removed if for any reason you don't like them, and the eyebll returns to its original state. No loss of eye material involved and as the eye is one of the fastest-healing parts of the bod no probs after a couple of days and the FAA like it!
Anyone out there had it done?

[aviate1138]

Sailor said in part ...

"Anyone had it done?" [Lasik surgery INTACS]

Aviate 1138 asks....

How many laser eye surgeons have had it done to them???

Must say the new technique sounds very neat and tempting!

Aviate 1138