Bates Method of natural eyesight improvement

[timtim]

I have been reading an interesting book based on the Bates Method of improving eyesight naturally. Does anyone know if this can help keratoconus? I am constantly trying new and stronger lenses, and basically the book says that this is putting more and more strain on the eye muscles and the brain, making things worse. It's hard to believe that, since we have a disorder where our cornea is shaped incorrectly, that this method can fix that, but I'm curious if it can help.

[Andrew MacLean]

So far as I am aware, these 'natural' methods of sight improvement work on the muscles that help focus the eyes. KC is a degenerative condition of the cornea. I don't think that there can be any effect, good or bac, of eye exercises on the progression or otherwise of KC.

I think that there was a string about something similar a while back

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=4144

Andrew

[Lynn White]

Hi Tim

The Bates book was written around 1920 and was based on Bates' assertion that the eye focussed by a process of lengthening and shortening of the eyeball. It has since been shown that it is in fact the lens of the eye that focusses. He claimed that "strain" caused all sorts of other eye conditions such as cataracts and glaucoma, retinal and optic nerve conditions. His exercises were supposed to cure you of any such ills. There can be some apparent improvement in vision by training the individual to recognise blurred images more accurately, but this does not actually affect the measurable refractive error. Ironically enough, if you over exert your eyes on near work, the lens can go into spasm, thereby increasing the refractive error and this effect can be reduced by relaxation. This only happens in a small number of cases though.

The thread that Andrew is pointing to is something different and based on exercises to reduce problems in the way the eyes work together. Such exercises do have some value if you have a real problem in your binocular vision system. However, no exercises are going to affect the power of the glasses you need if you have KC, as this is caused by corneal changes.

As to strain, as an optometrist I can attest that most headaches and eyestrain symptoms are caused by NOT wearing glasses when you need them and are relieved by wearing the correct prescription!!

[timtim]

That's interesting, Lynn. The last thing you said, about how strain is caused by NOT wearing your glasses, is the exact opposite of what the book I am reading ("Relearning to See" by Thomas Quackenbush) says over and over again. Not to say I don't believe you...some of the stuff in the book seems based on quite old research that is sometimes hard to believe.

There is a short segment in the book about keratoconus, and it even says that keratoconus is CAUSED by the years of strain that we put on our eyes by using glasses, lenses, etc. I thought this seemed a little bit too bold of a statement, but could there be any truth to this?

Either way, its still an interesting book and I am enjoying learning some of the stuff it has to say about eyesight.

[Lynn White]

Tim,

Yes I know what I am saying is the exact opposite of what is in the book. As I explained, the book is based on assumptions, not on scientific fact. Just because something is printed in a book does not mean its true. If you read an old text asserting the world was flat and you would fall off the edge if you sailed the ocean, you wouldn't believe it would you? In fact, it was people who doubted what was written in books who sailed the oceans and found new lands, wasn't it?

This whole argument is rather chicken and egg. Bates and his followers tended to say that glasses cause eyestrain, damage your eyes and as you say, even cause keratoconus. OK, then let me ask you this. If glasses CAUSE these problems, how come glasses were invented in the first place? Did someone back in the 18th century sit down and think up a wheeze to con people out of money? Did he say to people yes, I know you can see perfectly well and have no eyestrain but tell you what, you wear these and your eyes will get even better? Then, having bought them, the person found they got headaches and their vision got worse so went back for more? Glasses were an invention that addressed a need. In fact, back in Roman times, people resorted to using gem stones as visual aids.

When my patients who need reading glasses come up with this "glasses make your eyes worse" argument, I ask them, were you wearing glasses when your eyesight started to deteriorate? The answer is always no. We as optometrists see people all the time who come to us with poor eyesight who have never been near glasses!

As to keratoconus, well just think about it. If this claim was true, keratoconus would be a lot more prevalent than it is now. Also, how do you explain people who wear glasses and have KC only in one eye? I am afraid there is no truth to glasses causing keratoconus at all. I know in this country we pretty much correct everyone who has an eye defect, but in other countries who are not so fortunate, people with KC can go all their lives without any visual aid at all.

Enjoy the book! However, be wary of "learning" about eyes from these publications. The descriptions of how the eyes work are generally not valid and have been disproved by many years of scientific endeavour!

[timtim]

Thanks Lynn, its good to get your point of view and what you've learned on it. My next question is, why do they continue to make books based on such old ideas if it's incorrect? Just to make money I guess. I mean, the book I bought is fairly new I believe. I'm confused why they would continue to make them if a lot of the information has been proven false.

[Andrew MacLean]

In the UK they publish all sorts of things for which they think that there is a market. I guess that the United States publishing economy is no different.

There is a distinction between reputable science and pseudo-science as well as all sorts of other styles of book that fall either between or beyond either end of that little spectrum.

Andrew

[timtim]

Also, to answer your question about why glasses were invented in the first place...I would say (based on what the books answer would me...not mine), that people began to need vision correction because they were not using their eyes correctly and it made their vision bad (not centralizing, relaxing, etc...), and then someone developed a correction for this with glasses. Again, I am not saying this is what I believe, it's just how I would answer your question based on what I've learned from the book. I find it interesting to hear different opinions on the subject as I read. I think there are some good things in it, but a lot of it I am questioning.

One part that I read last night talked about how sunglasses were bad. It said that bright sunlight is good for your eyes. It talked about how people use sunglasses as a "crutch" (like glasses), and they rely on them, and then can't handle the light that they need. This part struck me as strange too, as I've always heard that strong UV rays from the sun can be quite damaging to the eyes...and I've always protected mine with sunglasses.

[Andrew MacLean]

As I understand it there can be a problem with heavy reliance on sunglasses: because they admit less light, the pupil is more dilated and can allow more UV to pass into the eye and damage the macula or macule. For this reason, opticians in the UK are a bit particular about the sunglasses they will dispense and I never wear sunglasses without also shading my eyes with the broad brim of my hat.

It is a complicated business, knowing the right thing to do!

Andrew

[timtim]

yeah Andrew, that's pretty much exactly what the book says about the use of sunglasses. I use them almost everytime I go in the sun, so I think I'm going to try to change that to some extent. My light sensitivity is pretty bad, and my sensitivity to glare (like the sun reflecting off of a car) is extremely bad. I'm going to try sunning with my eyes closed to build up my sun tolerance. Do you think this will work?