Ординатура / Офтальмология / Английские материалы / Relearning To See_Quackenbush_2000

kic eyes strain to see at the near point, producing so much hypermetropia that the subject cannot read ordinary print, and the power of accommodation appears to have been completely lost. Later, when the subject becomes accustomed to the situation, this strain is often relieved, and the eye becomes able to focus accurately upon near objects. Some rare cases have also been observed in which a measure of good vision both for distance and the near point was obtained without glasses, the eyeball elongating sufficiently to compensate, to some degree, for the loss of the lens.

The phenomena associated with strain in the human eye have also been observed in the eyes of the lower animals. I have made many dogs myopic by inducing them to strain to see a distant object. One very nervous dog, with normal refraction, as demonstrated by the retinoscope, was allowed to smell a piece of meat. He became very much excited, pricked up his ears, arched his eyebrows and wagged his tail. The meat was then removed to a distance of twenty feet. The dog looked disappointed, but didn't lose interest. While he was watching the meat it was dropped into a box. A worried look came into his eyes, He strained to see what had become of it, and the retinoscope showed that he had become myopic. This experiment, it should be added, would succeed only with an animal possessing two active oblique muscles. Animals in which one of these muscles is absent or rudimentary are unable to elongate the eyeball under any circumstances.

Primarily the strain to see is a strain of the mind, and, as in all cases in which there is a strain of the mind, there is a loss of mental control. Anatomically the results of straining to see at a distance may be the same as those of regarding an object at the

near point without strain; but in one case the eye does what the mind desires, and in the other it does not.

These facts appear sufficiently to explain why visual acuity declines as civilization advances. Under the conditions of civilized life men's minds are under a continual strain. They have more things to worry them than uncivilized man had, and they are not obliged to keep cool and collected in order that they may see and do other things upon which existence depends. If he allowed himself to get nervous, primitive man was promptly ehminated; but civilized man survives and transmits his mental characteristics to posterity. The lower animals when subjected to civilized conditions respond to them in precisely the same way as do human creatures. I have examined many domestic and menagerie animals, and have found them, in many cases, myopic, although they neither read, nor write, nor sew, nor set type.

A decline in visual acuity at the distance, however, is no more a peculiarity of civilization than is a similar decline at the near point. Myopes, although they see better at the near point than they do at the distance, never see as well as does the eye with normal sight; and in hypermetropia, which is more common than myopia, the sight is worse at the near point than at the distance.

The solution is not to avoid either near work or distant vision, but to get rid of the mental strain which underlies the imperfect functioning of the eye at both points: and it has been demonstrated in thousands of cases that this can always be done.

Bates' research begins to answer many questions about eyesight, especially the multitude of eyesight problems experienced in industrialized societies.

How LONG D O E S IT T A K E ?

Continuing in Chapter IX of Perfect Sight Without Glasses, Bates addresses the question of how much time is required to improve sight naturally:

The time required to effect a permanent reversal varies greatly with different individuals. In some cases five, ten, or fifteen minutes is sufficient, and I believe the time is coming when it will be possible to improve everyone quickly. It is only a question of accumulating more facts, and presenting these facts in such a way that the student can grasp them quickly. At present, however, it is often necessary to continue the practice for weeks and months, although the error of refraction may be no greater nor of longer duration than in those

cases that are improved quickly. In most cases, too, the practice must be continued for a few minutes every day to prevent relapse. Because a familiar object tends to relax the strain to see, the daily reading of the Snellen test card is usually suffitient for this purpose. It is also useful, particularly when the vision at the near point is imperfect, to read fine print every day as close to the eyes as it can be done. When an improvement is complete it is always permanent; but complete improvement, which means the attainment not of what is ordinarily called normal sight, but of a measure of telescopic and microscopic vision, is very rare. Even in these cases, too, the education can be continued with benefit; for it is impossible to place limits to the visual powers of man, and no matter how good the sight, it is always possible to

improve it. Daily practice of the art of vision is also necessary to prevent those visual lapses to which every eye is liable, no matter how good its sight may ordinarily be. It is true that no system of training will provide an absolute safeguard against such lapses in all circumstances; but the daily reading of small, distant, familiar letters will do much to lessen the tendency to strain when distmbing circumstances arise, and all persons upon whose eyesight the safety of others depends should be required to do this.

Generally persons who have never worn glasses are more easily improved than those who have, and glasses should be dis-

carded at the beginning of the practice. When this cannot be done without too great discomfort, or when the person has to continue his work during the practice and cannot do so without glasses, their use must be permitted for a time; but this always delays the improvement. Persons of all ages have been benefited by this practice ... by relaxation; but children usually, though not invariably, respond much more quickly than adults. If they are under twelve years of age, or even under sixteen, and have never worn glasses, they are usually reversed in a few days, weeks, or months, and always within a year, simply by reading the Snellen card every day.

WHAT A R E T H E F U N C T I O N S O F T H E LENS A N D C I L I A R Y M U S C L E ?

Bates stated unequivocally the lens is not a factor in accommodation. Yet, this author is not aware of any role attributed to the lens by Bates. If the lens does not accommodate, what is its role?

T H E CILIARY MUSCL E PUMPS

AQUEOUS HUMOR

The contraction and relaxation of the ciliary muscle pumps aqueous humor into the posterior chamber of the eye. Does the ciliary muscle have other functions? Does it change the shape of the lens for a reason other than accommodation?

A BRIGHTNESS/DARKNESS

LENS THEORY

A book1 8 1 read many years ago suggested that one function of the ciliary muscle might be to alternately flatten and give more curvature to the lens to aid in night and day vision, respectively.

Could the erratic fluctuations in the sizes of reflected images from the front side of the lens in Helmholtz's research, confirmed by Bates' research, be caused by changes in intensity of the original light source or other changes in lighting during Helmholtz's experiments?

Is there a reason that the iris and the ciliary muscles are both circular muscles that are nearly parallel to each other?

When the iris dilates in darkness, we see a larger picture, by about 10%. Could it be the ciliary muscle dilates simultaneously with the iris? This could pull on the edges of the lens, giving the lens its flatter shape as stated in the Helmholtz lens theory.

In true19 nighttime vision, the cones do not function, and there is no central vision. Since only the rods function in true nighttime vision, the best vision possible is 20/400, and only in the peripheral vision. Peripheral vision constitutes about 99% of the visual field.

The maximum concentration of rods is located in a circle, 180 around the fovea. Does a flatter lens "spread out" the light rays onto

One of the most dramatic studies presenting evidence against the heredity theory of nearsightedness was conducted in Alaska in 1970. Wendy Murphy writes:

... for years ophthalmologists have insisted that nearsightedness stems from an innate anatomical problem. The experts may have been wrong. In 1970, for example, Francis A.Young of Washington State University checked the eyesight of the inhabitants of the village of Nuvuk in Point Barrow, Alaska, an isolated community of people of Eskimo ancestry. He found that parents and grand parents, who were generally illiterate, had almost no nearsightedness, while among the villagers less than 25 years old, who all had been taught to read, about 60 percent suffered from this impairment.24

Many of my students have been told that the reason they cannot improve their nearsightedness or farsightedness is because these problems are "structural." The physical causes of nearsightedness are anatomical and structural. But they are not "innate."

Natural vision students change the structure of their eyes when they improve their vision. Bates' research showed that the eye muscles let go of their chronic strain—strain which is squeezing the eyeball out of shape— when correct vision habits are relearned.

Murphy also discusses how it has been shown that the more education, from elementary through graduate school, a person receives in the US or Canada, the greater percentage of those students become nearsighted. Fifty percent of graduate students are nearsighted, "a proportion far greater than among people of the same age who do not attend graduate school."25

Rita Rubin, discussing the work of MIT

Department of Brain and Cognitive Science's researcher Jane Gwiazda, writes:

Until scientists discover ways to prevent myopia, Gwiazda says, parents might want to advise kids not to sit too close to the TV or read for hours without taking a breakactivities that scientists speculate could contribute to nearsightedness, which is practically nonexistent in preliterate societies ... She theorizes that the children's eyes might react to prolonged close-up work by elongating —2 6

The "TV and reading for hours without taking a break" is not the cause of nearsightedness. According to Bates, the cause of nearsightedness is the formation of strained, incorrect vision habits. It is more likely—but not essential—a person will form inconect vision habits during these activities compared to some other, more mobile, activities. By "taking a break/' the person simply has more mobility. Movement is the first principle of natural vision.

An article entitled "In Debate on Myopia's Origins, The Winner Is: Both Sides?" in Tk New York Times states:

Yet in primitive cultures, where hunting and gathering is commonplace and illiteracy prevails, myopia is practically nonexistent ... Upwards of 70 percent of Taiwanese schoolchildren are now reported to be nearsighted. Myopia skyrocketed among Eskimos when their children first started going to school 27

Kennebeck states:

There are those... who insist that one is born nearsighted, that it is hereditary ...

But it is not so It is not hereditary.lt would make no difference if the parents, grandparents, uncles or aunts were or were not nearsighted. Each and every one who

is nearsighted had to acquire it himself. There are parents having normal eyes whose children might be nearsighted, and there are nearsighted parents whose children's eyes are normal or farsighted.28

The blurred vision of a parent can, and often does, make a difference, because a child can emulate the parent's strained vision habits. Still, the point is blurred vision is not genetic. It is caused by the formation of abnormal, strained vision habits.

Due to the above studies and other research, some orthodox are now saying that nearsightedness is only "probably hereditary."

The fact that thousands of students have improved their nearsightedness naturally is additional indication nearsightedness is not hereditary. I have watched several children

improve their vision along with their parents in my classes.

A holistic practitioner told me that when she was a child, during a period of high stress, she became nearsighted and was given glasses. She refused to wear them. Several months later, after the stress had passed, her vision returned to clarity, and she has never needed glasses since. I have heard similar stories from other people.

The fact that people improve their eye- sight—without even knowing why it im- proves—is important. Other than diseases and accidents, Bates showed that a person's vision depends upon correct vision habits— whether the person is aware of them consciously or not.