Ординатура / Офтальмология / Английские материалы / Relearning To See_Quackenbush_2000

BATES EXPLAINS NEARSIGHTEDNESS

In normal vision, it is conventionally stated that the front side of the lens changes from a flatter shape for distant clarity to a more curved shape for near clarity.

As stated above, it is universally agreed that, in nearsightedness, the eyeball is too long—and that nearsightedness is not determined by age. In the US, nearsightedness occurs very often at a young age. An explanation for this is offered in Chapter 19, "Brains and Vision."

Since the elongated myopic eyeball sees clearly up close, and since the lens is in the flatter shape, a lens that accommodates into a more curved shape would only create a greater amount of nearsightedness. This is why the nearsights are told they cannot see clearly in the distance.

Through the use of a diverging (-) lense, the image of a distant object is thrown farther back into the elongated eyeball. The distant object is now seen clearly through the corrective lense. Theoretically, the eye's lens can now continue to accommodate "normally," i.e., when the lens is flatter, the eye sees distant objects clearly, and when the lens accommodates, its front side gains more curvature and sees close objects clearly.

Bates said that when the superior oblique muscle contracts, it applies pressure on the top of the eyeball, pushing downward. When the inferior oblique muscle contracts, it applies pressure on the bottom of the eyeball, pushing upward. Acting independently, each oblique muscle would rotate the eye clockwise or counterclockwise. (You can watch this rotation by tilting your head in front of a mirror.) When both oblique muscles contract, the eye is squeezed into a long

shape. When the two oblique muscles relax, the eyeball returns to its normal round shape. This is Bates' explanation of accommodation of the normal eye. This explanation for accommodation originated many years before Bates' research was performed.

In nearsightedness the two oblique muscles contract and the person sees clearly up close—but the oblique muscles stay contracted chronically. They do not release, and the eyeball remains elongated.

When the two oblique muscles release the chronic tension they hold in nearsightedness, myopia is reversed. The reversal of myopia and the subsequent return to normal vision is clearly—and only—an issue of the release of chronically tight oblique muscles.

Since age, heredity, and the lens are not the issues involved in nearsightedness, the question for Bates now became, "Why do the oblique muscles become chronically tense, and how do I remove the cause of this chronic tension?" Finding the answers to these questions was the real brilliance of Bates. Chronic tension is caused by strain, and removal of that strain is achieved by relaxation.

ARTIFICIAL CORNEAL REFRACTION

PROCEDURES: RADIAL KERATOTOMY (RK)

SURGERY, ORTHO-KERATOLOGY, ETC.

A nearsighted eyeball, because it is elongated, has a cornea with too much curvature.

There are various artificial methods of making the cornea flatter to focus the light rays from distant objects more clearly onto the retina. Some of these include:

1.Ortho-keratology, in which a series of contact lenses is used to flatten the cornea;

2. Radial kcratotomy (RK) surgery, in which deep incisions are made in the peripheral parts of the cornea to flatten it;

3.Photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) laser, in which the top central layers of the cornea are vaporized to flatten it;

4.Plastic ring, which is surgically implanted into the cornea;

5.Enzymes (under research), in which the top layers of the cornea are digested to flatten it.

IMPROVEMENT OF NEARSIGHTEDNESS

Clara Hackett, in her book Relax and See, writes about her nearsighted students Many students were referred to her by eye doctors to receive natural vision education.

The following numbers include students who only had a few lessons and stopped, and students who were not diligent in relearning the proper vision habits

Clara Hackett writes:

There were 1,584 nearsighted people, or myopes, with vision ranging from 20/30 to

When processes like keratotomy or orthokeratology produce improved dis­ tance acuity without the use of glasses, they do not change the basic problem of myopia, only the refractive status. The change involves only the cornea, while the depth of the vitreous chamber remains increased, and so does the eyeball length. Thus, the [person] still has myopia and remains subject to all the risks of myopia.29

Many of my students have passed their dri­ ver's test without glasses after having near­ sightedness (or farsightedness) for many years. Of course, not all students improve; some students do not practice the correct vision habits, and continue their strained vision habits.

M O R E O N F A R S I G H T E D N E S S ( H Y P E R M E T R O P I A )

One reason corneal surgery has become popular is because it is a "quick fix." Improv­ ing vision naturally takes a longer time because the real cause of the problem is being addressed.

Farsightedness is also called hyperopia and hypermetropia (Greek: hyper means "far," or "over"; metron means "measure"; opia means "eye").

Farsightedness means a person sees far objects more clearly than near objects In far-

sightedness, when viewing a near object, light rays come to a focus "in back" of the retina. As a result, the near object appears blurry. Of course, the light rays do not actually penetrate the back of the eyeball and come to a focal point in back of it; but the light rays would come to a focus in back of the eyeball if the back of the eyeball were transparent. Since light rays are not correctly "refracting," in focus, onto the retina, farsightedness, like nearsightedness and astigmatism, is classified as an "error" of refraction.

Conventional books describe two types of farsightedness: l) the eyeball is too short along the visual axis (hypermetropia); and 2) the lens is inflexible and locked in the flatter shape because of older age, an eye condition

referred to as presbyopia.

From "Introductory" of Perfect Sight With-

out Glasses:

... In hypermetropia8—commonly but improperly called farsight[edness], although the person with such a defect can see clearly neither at the distance nor the near point—the eyeball is too short from the front backward, and all rays of light, both the convergent ones coming from near objects, and the parallel ones coming from distant objects, are focused behind the retina instead of upon it. Both these conditions [hypermetropia and presbyopia] are supposed to be permanent, the one

aFrom the Greek hyper, over, metron, measure, and ops, the eye.

congenital, the other acquired. When, therefore, persons who at one time appear to have hypermetropia, or myopia, appear at other times not to have them, or to have them in lesser degrees, it is not permissible to suppose that there has been a change in the shape of the eyeball. Therefore, in the case of the disappearance or lessening of hypermetropia, we are asked to believe that the eye, in the act of vision, both at the near point and at the distance, increases the curvature of the lens sufficiently to compensate, in whole or in part, for the flatness of the eyeball.

The reason Bates took exception to the term "farsightedness" is because a foreshortened eyeball cannot see clearly near or far. The eyeball needs to be in the "relaxed" round shape in order to see clearly in the distance. Bates felt the term "hypermetropia" was more accurate than "farsight."

This distinction is important, because Bates believed the eyeball elongates when it accommodates to see clearly up close. For Bates, an eyeball that remains in the round shape can only see clearly in the distance; it cannot see clearly up close.

In medium and high degrees of farsightedness where the eyeball is foreshortened and both the near and distance vision are blurred, the conventional point of view is that the front side of the lens cannot accommodate (curve) enough to focus the fight rays of near objects onto the retina, but the lens can accommodate to see clearly in the distance.

Bates states above that in hypermetropia both distance and the near objects are not clear. This is true if the eyeball is foreshortened. However, if at first the eyeball simply is unable to change from the round shape into

an elongated shape, a person will be able to see clearly in the distance but not up close. (This assumes, of course, that a person agrees with Bates that the lens is not a factor in accommodation.)

In any case, everyone agrees there is a way for the eyeball to become chronically short along the visual axis, causing farsightedness. It is also universally agreed that non-pres- byopic farsightedness is not determined by age.

The conventional explanation of why the eyeball becomes foreshortened is that it is hereditary, and the eyeball deforms "some- how"—the same as for nearsightedness

When one rectus muscle contracts, the eye turns. (If one rectus muscle contracts chronically, crossed eye can be produced.) Bates conclusively proved that when all four recti muscles contract, they pull the front of the eyeball backward, against the fatty tissue in the eye orbit, and thereby shorten it from front to back. Chronic tension of the recti muscles is a simple, logical, and straightforward explanation of the foreshortened eyeball in farsightedness. When these muscles let go of their chronic strain, the eyeball returns to its normal, round state, and with it, normal vision.

When the four recti muscles release the chronic tension they hold in farsightedness, hypermetropia is reversed—regardless of the mechanism of accommodation.

Since age, heredity, and the lens are not the issues involved in farsightedness, the question now is "Why do the recti muscles become chronically tense, and how do I remove the cause of this chronic tension?" The answers to these questions are the same as the answers to nearsightedness—strain is the cause of the tension, and relaxation is the solution.

FARSIGHTEDNESS IS NOT HEREDITARY

As with nearsightedness, Natural Vision teachers have observed farsights improving their sight for more than seventy-five years. Bates provided many examples of farsight­ edness improving. Farsightedness, like near­ sightedness and astigmatism, is a functional problem and is due to stress. It is not genetic.

IMPROVEMENT OF FARSIGHTEDNESS

Clara Hackett, in her book Relax and See, writes about her farsighted students, "Three hundred and forty-eight of my students were farsighted; 116 discarded glasses entirely; 194 could wear weaker glasses for reading; 38 made no enduring improvement."31

A S T I G M A T I S M

From Better Eyesight magazine, October 1920-

Question: Is astigmatism reversible with this method?

Answer: Yes.

In most cases of astigmatism (Greek: a means "without"; stigma means "a point": light rays do not come to a single point of focus) the eye is twisted in an oval, lopsided, or teaspoon shape from the front point of view. Since light rays do not focus on the retina clearly, astigmatism, like nearsighted­ ness and farsightedness, is an "error" of refraction.

The conventional opinion about astigma­ tism is the same as for nearsightedness and

farsightedness—it cannot improve. This opin­ ion does not agree with many case histories of improvement of astigmatism.

From Chapter I, "Introductory," of Perfect Sight Without Glasses:

The disappearance of astigmatism,3 or changes in its character, present an even more baffling problem. Due in most cases to an unsymmetrical change in the curva­ ture of the cornea, and resulting in failure to bring the light rays to a focus at any point, the eye is supposed to possess only a limited power of overcoming this con­ dition; and yet astigmatism comes and goes with as much facility as do other errors of refraction. It is well known, too, that it can be produced voluntarily. Some persons can produce as much as three diopters. I myself can produce one and a half.

a From the Greek a, without, and stigma, a point.

From Chapter III, "Evidence for the Accepted Theory of Accommodation," of

Perfect Sight Without Glasses:

The voluntary production of astigmatism is another stumbling block to the support­ ers of the accepted theories, as it involves a change in the shape of the cornea, and such a change is not compatible with the idea of an "inextensible"3 eyeball.... It seems to have given them less trouble, how­ ever, than the accommodation of the lens­ less eye, because fewer of these cases have

Inasmuch as the eye is inextensible, it cannot adapt itself for the perception of objects situated at different distances by increasing the length of its axis, but only by increasing the refractive power of its lens . — De Schweinitz: Diseases of the Eye, eighth edition, 1916, pp. 35-36.

been observed and still fewer have been allowed to get into the literature. Some interesting facts regarding one have fortu­ nately been given by Davis, who investi­ gated it in connection with the corneal changes noted in the lensless eye. The case was that of a house surgeon at the Man­ hattan Eye and Ear Hospital, Dr. С. H. Johnson. Ordinarily this gentleman had half a diopter of astigmatism in each eye; but he could, at will, increase this to two diopters in the right eye and one and a half in the left. He did this many times, in the presence of a number of members of the hospital staff, and also did it when the upper lids were held up, showing that the pressure of the lids had nothing to do with the phenomenon. Later he went to Louisville, and here Dr. J. M. Ray, at the suggestion of Dr. Davis, tested his ability to produce astigmatism under the influence of scopolamine (four instillations, Vs per­ cent solution). While the eyes were under the influence of the drug the astigmatism still seemed to increase, according to the evidence of the ophthalmometer, to one and a half diopters in the right eye and one in the left. From these facts, the influence of the lids and of the ciliary muscle having been eliminated, Dr. Davis concluded that the change in the cornea was "brought about mainly by the external muscles." What explanation others offer for such phe­ nomena I do not know.

Quoting Bates again:

Astigmatism was usually produced in com­ bination with myopic or hypermetropic refraction. It was also produced by various manipulations of both the oblique and recti muscles. Mixed astigmatism, which is a combination of myopic with hypermetropic refraction, was always produced by trac-

tion on the insertion of the superior or inferior rectus in a direction parallel to the plane of the iris, so long as both obliques were present and active; but if either or both of the obliques had been cut, the myopic part of the astigmatism disappeared. Similarly after the superior or the inferior rectus had been cut the hypermetropic part of the astigmatism disappeared. Advancement of the two obliques, with advancement of the superior and inferior recti, always produced mixed astigmatism.

From Bates' Better Eyesight magazine, November 1927:

All persons who have astigmatism have eyestrain. When the eyestrain is relieved, the astigmatism disappears.

Bates' viewpoint on errors of refraction is convincing and his viewpoint on accommodation is reasonable.

NOTES

1The author [TQ] wishes to minimize showing images of animals used in research.

2This caption and text are from Perfect Sight Without Glasses.

3These graphics, caption, and text are from Perfect Sight Without Glasses.

4This caption and text are from Perfect Sight Without Glasses.

5Ibid.

6Ibid.

7These graphics, caption, and text are from Perfect Sight Without Glasses

8Ibid.

9Ibid.

MThese graphics, caption, and text are from Perfect Sight Without Glasses; numbers have been added for clarification.

11Ibid.

12These graphics, caption, and text are from Perfect Sight Without Glasses.

13Ibid.

14Ibid.

15Ibid.

16Ibid.

17Ibid.

18Unfortunately, I have been unable to locate this reference to give the author proper credit.

19True nighttime vision is defined as any situation in which only the rods are functioning, but not the cones. This is discussed further in Chapter 17, "The Retina."

20Richard G. Kessel and Randy H. Kardon, Tissues and Organs: a text-atlas of scanning elec-

tron microscopy (New York: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1979), p. 101.

21Leon Schlossberg and George D. Zuidema, The Johns Hopkins Atlas of Human Functional

Anatomy (Baltimore:The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1972), p. 55.

22Charles H. May, Diseases of the Eye (Baltimore: William Wood and Company, 1943), p. 364.

23From Perfect Sight Without Glasses, Chapter I, "Introductory."

24Wendy Murphy and the Editors of Time-Life Books, Touch, Taste, Smell, Sight and Hearing

(Alexandria, VA: Time-Life Books Inc., 1982),

P-77-

25Ibid., p. 78.

26Rita Rubin, "Still in Diapers, and Off to the Eye Doctor," U.S. News & World Report (June 21, 1993), PP-69-70.

27Jane E. Brody,"In Debate on Myopia's Origins The Winner Is: Both Sides?" The New York Times, June 1,1994.

28Joseph J. Kennebeck, Why Eyeglasses are Harmful for Children and Young People (New York: Vantage Press, 1969), p. 34.

29Bruce May, Rx for Nearsightedness: StressRelieving Lenses, Optometric Extension Program Foundation pamphlet (1981).

30Clara A. Hackett and Lawrence Galton, Relax and See (London: Faber and Faber, Limited,

1957), P-25.

3 ' Ibid.

32These graphics, caption, and text are from Perfect Sight Without Glasses.

[Bates'] basic view of the underlying causes of nearsightedness and other eye problems, and his approach to their remediation, have stood the test of time and new knowledge. He is, in a real sense, the spiritual grandfather of all who are involved in restoring functional vision.1

—Optometrist Ernest V. Loewenstein,

Ph.D.,O.D.,iQ82

BATES: N E A R S I G H T E D N E S S =

F A R S I G H T E D N E S S • A S T I G M A T I S M = N O A C C O M M O D A T I O N

For Bates the issues of accommodation and errors of refraction are connected. To summarize:

If extrinsic eye muscles are chronically tight, producing nearsightedness, farsightedness, and/or astigmatism, the eye cannot accommodate to see clearly both near and far. When the external muscles are relaxed, the eye accommodates normally again by the action of the two oblique muscles.

Agreement with Bates' position that errors of refraction are caused by chronically tense external eye muscles has been echoed by

some modern eye doctors. One of my students stated that her ophthamologist said that this is the case. Recently another ophthamologist stated publicly that nearsightedness, farsightedness, and astigmatism are caused by chronically tense external eye muscles, and that this tension can be reversed.

Bates' ideas regarding errors of refraction are simple, reasonable, and explain a multitude of facts that have not been adequately explained in any other way.

From the holistic perspective, there is no difference between nearsightedness, farsightedness (including presbyopia), astigmatism, and strabismus, because strain is the underlying cause of all of these problems.

The hairnful vision habits a person acquires when creating functional problems are the same. As we shall discuss later, the type of blurred vision an individual acquires appears to be correlated to a person's hemisphere dominance (see Chapter 19, "Brains and Vision"). No matter what the hemisphere dominance, all students in natural vision education classes relearn the same correct vision habits.

Bates was too far ahead of his contemporaries for his advanced ideas to be accepted by the orthodox.

"MA N IS N O T A R E A S O N I N G B E I N G "

Many people have asked Natural Vision teachers,''With such compelling research and evidence presented by Bates and others, why is Bates' work not embraced by the orthodox?" Perhaps the best answer comes from Bates in the last paragraph of Perfect Sight

Without Glasses:

The fact is that, except in rare cases, man is not a reasoning being. He is dominated by authority, and when the facts are not in accord with the view imposed by authority, so much the worse for the facts. They may. and indeed must, win in the long run; but in the meantime the world gropes needlessly in darkness and endures much suffering that might have been avoided.

Bates' biggest discovery may have been how the conventional system reacted to his research and discoveries.

From Better Eyesight magazine, April 1923:

DR. BATES' LECTURE

By L. L. Biddle, 2nd

For the benefit of those who were unable to attend Dr. Bates' lecture, before the New York Association of Osteopaths, at the Waldorf Astoria on Saturday Evening, February 17th, I decided to take down a few notes which I will now try to compile.

The chairman introduced Doctor Bates by stating that the Osteopaths take away the crutches and Doctor Bates takes away the glasses—

He then commenced by telling how he made his first discoveries and cited the opposition he had to buck against. He

stated that his attitude of mind, ever since he was a little boy, was to find out all the , facts possible about a subject and then work on these as a basis, rather than on a guess or theory. When he commenced practicing medicine in 1885, one of the first patients who came to him had a slight degree of myopia or nearsightedness. Upon examining his eyes with the ophthalmoscope, he found that the patient was not nearsighted all of the time. When the patient was looking at a blank wall and not trying to see anything, his eyes were for short periods, normal. He persuaded this patient to go without his glasses and his eyes finally reached a point where they stayed normal all the time.

Doctor Bates said that he then started boasting around the hospital about this improvement. However, it got so on the house-surgeon's nerves that he brought up a ward patient who was nearsighted, and with him Doctor Bates managed to have equal success. Much to his surprise, instead of the rest of the doctors praising him, and trying to find out how he accomplished these heretofore impossible improvements, Dr. Bates suddenly became very unpopular with the rest of the staff These successes nevertheless spurred him on in his experiments at the New York Aquarium and at the laboratory of the Columbia College for Physicians and Surgeons, and as a result he discovered that the accommodation of the eye is not brought about by a change in the shape of the lens, but by the lengthening and shortening [back to spherical] of the eyeball itself, as the bellows of a camera.

When he explained and illustrated this to his doctor friends, it disturbed them greatly. The surgeon who had charge of the laboratory came to him and said: "Do you know that you have proven that Helmholtz is wrong and furthermore if you wish to be