Dr. M. S. Agarwal is the son of Dr. R. S. Agarwal and was also an ophthalmologist wrote a book The Complete Book of Eye Care that is available on this site.
It’s a quick read. Here is my review of it.
Well, it is a very basic book. It starts with the invective against television and enlists the very simple Bates techniques. The part that I like is a chapter on yoga exercises that include postures (asanas) and breathing (pranayama). Yes, they are very basic but most people probably never heard of them. There is a chapter on mechanical contraptions as well that supposes to improve vision (like myopeter in Donald Rehm’s book, see my previous post). Another part that I like is a chapter on diet: though not really practical for American residents as it mentions Indian fruit and vegetables, it at least makes you aware of the importance of diet for the overall health.
Speaking about diet I can’t help recommending you an excellent book by Dr. Weston Price, who was in dentistry the same figure as Dr. Bates was in ophthalmology. Read that to find out the truth about why people’s teeth are bad. And as you have probably guessed by now it’s not lack of brushing. Here is a quick synopsis of the book as it is rather long and tedious. You can also read my article on diet.
So as it is a very quick read it’s worth the time. The book is not very well written (compared to Bates or even Dr. R. S. Agarwal) but if you are just looking for information, it fits the bill. There are tons of pictures too to show you how to perform asanas and also there are charts to practice central fixation.
The part that intrigued me most was about the Swami Arjundev who was using - 20.0 glasses and was completely cured by these methods (in the Opinions chapter). I could not find more info on this though I’ll definitely continue searching.
Showing posts with label books on vision improvement. Show all posts
Showing posts with label books on vision improvement. Show all posts
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Monday, March 16, 2009
Perfect Eyesight by Robert Zuraw
Here’s another one of these New Age sites with alternative cures for the eyes. I’ve tried that a while ago so can’t give you fresh impressions. But here goes.
For some reason the info is found on the site of Mantak Chia, though the original author is Robert Zuraw. Exactly the same info. The old site evidently does not exist anymore. Where is Zuraw, you might ask? Good question. If you scroll to the very bottom of that article you will find his name. Well, I guess that's better than nothing.
Anyway, the information is pretty good, I was really into it for a while. Unfortunately I never got any kind of results from practicing the exercises. No wonder, now that I got deeper into Bates, I see that it’s basically stretching muscle exercises that do not involve muscles that are really responsible for focusing. It never ceases to amaze me why they keep comparing eye muscles to the muscles of your body in an athletic sense. I think muscles responsible for focusing are more like our inner muscles. You can’t control your stomach muscles unless you are an advanced yogi adept. But it does make more sense to me that the eye muscles are too tensed instead of being atrophied “for the lack of use”.
So we have all this “ancient” wisdom and a wide variety of exercises with mysterious names like “Egyptian Eye Dot” technique, “Sun Gazing”, etc. Acupuncture and massage are also thrown in.
Well, like I said I have not noticed any benefits. It does give good advice on performing close work. Some techniques are fun to perform and the article make you more aware of your eyes in general. And that is a good thing.
For some reason the info is found on the site of Mantak Chia, though the original author is Robert Zuraw. Exactly the same info. The old site evidently does not exist anymore. Where is Zuraw, you might ask? Good question. If you scroll to the very bottom of that article you will find his name. Well, I guess that's better than nothing.
Anyway, the information is pretty good, I was really into it for a while. Unfortunately I never got any kind of results from practicing the exercises. No wonder, now that I got deeper into Bates, I see that it’s basically stretching muscle exercises that do not involve muscles that are really responsible for focusing. It never ceases to amaze me why they keep comparing eye muscles to the muscles of your body in an athletic sense. I think muscles responsible for focusing are more like our inner muscles. You can’t control your stomach muscles unless you are an advanced yogi adept. But it does make more sense to me that the eye muscles are too tensed instead of being atrophied “for the lack of use”.
So we have all this “ancient” wisdom and a wide variety of exercises with mysterious names like “Egyptian Eye Dot” technique, “Sun Gazing”, etc. Acupuncture and massage are also thrown in.
Well, like I said I have not noticed any benefits. It does give good advice on performing close work. Some techniques are fun to perform and the article make you more aware of your eyes in general. And that is a good thing.
Thursday, December 4, 2008
A Curious Site (R.I.P)
A while ago when I was searching for any kind of information to improve myopia I came across a site that became recently defunct (no longer exists). It advertized the new method of curing the eye defects, especially myopia and astigmatism. The improvement would be quite noticeable. The effect is supposed to be cumulative. The author who called his outfit King Kelly Publishing never came to actually putting his book for sale but in his Frequently Asked Questions he put this curious information:
I believe that Bates was right in his conclusions, but his Method to achieve good eyesight is not, as far as my experience goes, the most effective. The system I developed appears to be much more powerful. It consists mainly of a pattern that you run and after running the pattern for a little bit of time, you look around and notice that your vision has improved. This happens each and every time and the improvements add up quickly. Without effort, the pattern causes the eyes to see better.
So quick sun-up: we have this mysterious “pattern”. His method also involves some object “that can be found in any house” but it is not really necessary and you don’t have to have it. His method involves no effort: that is good and in accordance with Bates. It takes only two minutes to perform, you notice the improvement immediately and the effect is cumulative. The more you do it, the quicker is the improvement. If you already have good vision, according to his claims you can develop super vision (how about seeing the moons of Jupiter?)
I was thinking that it might have been near-far swing: you need a pen or pencil but you can just use your finger. It is the only method I am aware of that produces some noticeable improvement immediately but unfortunately the effect is not cumulative. So it must not be it.
Well, it would be great to find out what it is but I suppose he took his secret to his grave, I mean disappeared from the face of the internet. As far as everything goes it might have been a scam but he was fairly modest and said things like “it seems to work for everyone”, etc, he never said that his method guaranteed a perfect vision. His so-called pattern takes two minutes to perform. His ambition was to put doctors and glasses salesmen out of business. A worthy endeavour, no doubt, but a little overambitious. It takes more than one person to shatter this kind of bureaucracy.
On the other hand… he has disappeared. And now his site has disappeared too. Hmm…
I believe that Bates was right in his conclusions, but his Method to achieve good eyesight is not, as far as my experience goes, the most effective. The system I developed appears to be much more powerful. It consists mainly of a pattern that you run and after running the pattern for a little bit of time, you look around and notice that your vision has improved. This happens each and every time and the improvements add up quickly. Without effort, the pattern causes the eyes to see better.
So quick sun-up: we have this mysterious “pattern”. His method also involves some object “that can be found in any house” but it is not really necessary and you don’t have to have it. His method involves no effort: that is good and in accordance with Bates. It takes only two minutes to perform, you notice the improvement immediately and the effect is cumulative. The more you do it, the quicker is the improvement. If you already have good vision, according to his claims you can develop super vision (how about seeing the moons of Jupiter?)
I was thinking that it might have been near-far swing: you need a pen or pencil but you can just use your finger. It is the only method I am aware of that produces some noticeable improvement immediately but unfortunately the effect is not cumulative. So it must not be it.
Well, it would be great to find out what it is but I suppose he took his secret to his grave, I mean disappeared from the face of the internet. As far as everything goes it might have been a scam but he was fairly modest and said things like “it seems to work for everyone”, etc, he never said that his method guaranteed a perfect vision. His so-called pattern takes two minutes to perform. His ambition was to put doctors and glasses salesmen out of business. A worthy endeavour, no doubt, but a little overambitious. It takes more than one person to shatter this kind of bureaucracy.
On the other hand… he has disappeared. And now his site has disappeared too. Hmm…
Monday, December 1, 2008
Donald S. Rehm The Myopia Myth
Here is a totally different method claiming to prevent and reverse mild myopia. It’s none other than the (in)famous “plus” glasses method. Why “infamous”? Well, first of all, these people think that they got the answer. According to them we are back to Leibniz theory of nearsightedness, according to which visual defects like myopia are caused by the changing in the shape of the lens.
I wonder how they explain the reason for hyperopia? The lens can become too round during accommodation but what makes it flatter than it is? Explain that!
Back to the review. I read Rehm’s book. The idea is that you should wear plus glasses (with convex lenses) for close work in order to prevent lens accommodation. But here’s right from the horse’s mouth:
He actually admitted that his vision went slightly worse even when he wore “plus” glasses working at some tense job. While he was on vacation his vision improved. He thought it was due to his glasses but we can see that he was just relaxed and that was the real reason.
He flatly denies that Bates method has any foundation behind it though he does admit that lots of people were helped. He can’t come up with better explanation than they hypnotized themselves into that or something like that.
He came up with some apparatus that he called myopter. Same thing: it supposed to eliminate near-point accommodation and help with fusion.
I wonder if the proponents of this theory see that you basically just exchange “minus” glasses for “plus”? Somehow, I don’t think so.
In my opinion he just missed the whole point. He would be far better off developing good visual habits than coming up with a weird mechanical contraption. But when he admitted that his vision became worse that for me personally, has clinched his case. So I do not recommend his book. It’s far better to apply the Bates method straight from the master himself.
If you want to try the convex lenses method to improve myopia, check out books The Secret of Perfect Vision and How I Cured My Myopia by David de Angelis. He claims that he discovered some kind of ocular gymnastic and his system helps to reverse myopia. I personally have not read any of his books, his site does not give any information what his system is all about so I can’t say anything about it or really recommend it. If you tried it, your feedback is surely welcome! Total absence of any reviews about his system looks suspicious.
I wonder how they explain the reason for hyperopia? The lens can become too round during accommodation but what makes it flatter than it is? Explain that!
Back to the review. I read Rehm’s book. The idea is that you should wear plus glasses (with convex lenses) for close work in order to prevent lens accommodation. But here’s right from the horse’s mouth:
He actually admitted that his vision went slightly worse even when he wore “plus” glasses working at some tense job. While he was on vacation his vision improved. He thought it was due to his glasses but we can see that he was just relaxed and that was the real reason.
He flatly denies that Bates method has any foundation behind it though he does admit that lots of people were helped. He can’t come up with better explanation than they hypnotized themselves into that or something like that.
He came up with some apparatus that he called myopter. Same thing: it supposed to eliminate near-point accommodation and help with fusion.
I wonder if the proponents of this theory see that you basically just exchange “minus” glasses for “plus”? Somehow, I don’t think so.
In my opinion he just missed the whole point. He would be far better off developing good visual habits than coming up with a weird mechanical contraption. But when he admitted that his vision became worse that for me personally, has clinched his case. So I do not recommend his book. It’s far better to apply the Bates method straight from the master himself.
If you want to try the convex lenses method to improve myopia, check out books The Secret of Perfect Vision and How I Cured My Myopia by David de Angelis. He claims that he discovered some kind of ocular gymnastic and his system helps to reverse myopia. I personally have not read any of his books, his site does not give any information what his system is all about so I can’t say anything about it or really recommend it. If you tried it, your feedback is surely welcome! Total absence of any reviews about his system looks suspicious.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
