Here's the story, I'd be fascinated for feedback from any of you medical chappies.
Like everybody else round here, I've had to have a periodic medical since I was 18, with the normal reason of keeping me airborne.
Now I've never failed a medical, including that I have never failed the eyesight test. However, I've noticed over the last ten years or so that I have had to strain a bit more each time to read the bottom line on the chart. So far as I could tell this was not long or short sightedness - focussing presented no problem, but one of resolving the fine detail. Whilst it was noticeable (to me) I simply attributed it to getting older.
Now I've just had this years annual excuse for an AME to poke me about, but for the first time in years I was able to read the bottom line without straining at-all.
Now just to eliminate obvious things; I've used the same AME for the last 5 years who has not apparently changed his surgery, equipment or practices. I've never smoked, my alcohol consumption has remained pretty much constant for most of my adult life - so I don't think that those are players.
However, about 2 years ago, I started exercising much more regularly than I have for 8-10 years (now about 3 hours hard exercise per week) - and this year's medical showed my lowest pulse rate and blood pressure for probably a dozen years (not that it's ever been bad, but pulse has gone from 65 to 55, and blood pressure from high average to lowish - sorry, I don't recall the numbers).
So the obvious deduction (for me) is that being fitter has improved my eyesight's ability to resolve fine detail. But, not being medically trained I have no theory to call on in this? Does it seem a reasonable deduction to you medics?
All in the spirit of scientific inquiry.
G