From Wikipedia: >'The Art of Seeing: An Adventure in Re-education' is a 1942 book by Aldous Huxley, which details his experience with and views on the discredited Bates method, which according to Huxley improved his eyesight.
>Martin Gardner described 'The Art of Seeing' as "a book destined to rank beside Bishop Berkeley’s famous treatise on the medicinal properties of ‘tar-water’."
I read the book when I was a college undergraduate in the late 1960s. Beautifully written as one would expect. My eyesight at the time was better than 20/20 so I cannot speak to the efficacy or lack thereof of the exercises promulgated in the slim volume.
The key is shifting focus from super close to a couple of hundred yards (meters) and back a number of times more days than not. My wife and I are part of a multigenerational cohort who all wear glasses. I read a paper in ~2013-14 about how kids in Australia to Singaporian parents get less nearsightedness than a matched gourp back in Singapore. I thought it was light exposure and mentioned it to another school parent in NYC. He heard it was switching focus from near to far. So I started to guide my kid to look at cornices (roof edge decorations) or way down the street as we are walking, then to shift focus back to real close in some repition. And he got in the habit of doing it enough, and he is still glasses free at almost age 17 and the Eye Dr predicts he is clear until middle age now. So parents if you have kids teach them this skill and guide them until they get the habit !!
Given that similar claims have been around for a long time and it still lacks published results, I feel people have reason to be skeptical.
I wonder if this "training programme" could be implemented or tested using a VR workspace and varying the (virtual) distance of the working field while adjusting size so that it remains clear. The virtual environment could be finely and dynamically adjustable (as opposed to having to change lenses) and progress could be measured in a consistent environment.
On second thought, if that worked, the Apple Vision Pro might sell some additional units.
China, which has extremely high myopia in its student population, decided to tackle the problem top-down by reducing the amount of homework and forcing kids to play outside. They have some success: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9412110/
The claims have been around a long time, but how many people actually follow the guidelines? There are lots of stronger factors preventing people from doing it: economic unrest, smartphones, fear of outdoors and pollution, stronger emphasis on education, etc.
By the same token, doctors claim we can address heart disease and obesity with exercise and diet, but things don't seem to be getting any better.
This tracks very well with my experience... Too much time in a cubicle away from windows -- say, just for a week -- and my vision gets noticeably worse. A few days away from the screen, like a week on the lake, and it gets much sharper.
I'd be inclined to agree with him that it can be prevented and maybe even reversed.
Another post that confuses ereaders for tablets and phones, which is unfortunate and baffling to me as it's supposed to be in the name.
The point of ereaders is that they are like physical books and in terms of viewing experience. Tablets and phones are where you're dealing with the brightness issues and eyes darting everywhere.
This sounds useful in case you're the only survivor of a nuclear war and finally have time enough at last to read all the books you want, but end up breaking your glasses.
While I would not be surprised at all there's something to this, things like "improve and enhance our vision and brain function, at any age, along with it our sleep, balance, attention, and our cognitive and mental health" kind of set off my bullshit detector a bit. That seems way too many conditions to fix "with one easy trick!"
Things like "go out and have a walk" also exposes you to fresh air, and even mild exercise can make you feel better for all sorts of reasons. Is it really primarily about the vision system as the article says? Not so clear to me. This sounds a bit too much of a tunnel-visioned viewpoint.
tl:dr;
My vision significantly improved as an adult and seems to possibly still be improving over the five years since. I don't think I can know the cause for sure, but I did go from being mostly at computers to being mostly outdoors in the woods two years before I noticed the improvement.
longer story:
Growing up, at the doctor's they made us look at some letters on a chart far away and I didn't realize I was supposed to tell them if the letters were blurry. I was pretty good at figuring out what the blurry letters were because there are only so many options. So they always said I had 20-20 vision. At about age 21 I was driving my dad's car and put on his sunglasses which were prescription sunglasses, and suddenly I could see the crisp detail of everything - the distant treetops, the little rocks in the field along the road. I was blown away and realized my eyes were not very good and I had been missing this my whole life. I got glasses.
Then later at 27 when I was quitting my office job to go be in nature, I stopped wearing the glasses for a combination of reasons.
Two years later at 29, I had been thinking about getting glasses again as I really wanted to see the forest where I lived in detail. But I didn't do it. But one day a few months after having those thoughts, I was lying on the deck looking up at the tall trees from underneath, and realized I could see clearly the needles in detail. I looked around at the distant mountain top and could see that clearly too. I was blown away. I don't know for sure if it happened suddenly or gradually, but part of it must have progressed pretty quickly since it was within a few months of when I had thought about getting glasses.
It's been four years now, and my eyes are still great like they were right after I noticed the shift. My right eye is really sharp and the left is also better than it was originally. And while I can't be sure, it seems like my left eye has been getting better over these years, because at first I noticed my right eye had become sharp but the left was still quite blurry. I'm constantly grateful for this, it's just about the best gift I could have ever asked for.
I don't know if I was born nearsighted or if that developed due to excessive use of books and computer from a very young age. I am still able to focus up close, at ~4 inches with my left eye and ~4.5 inches with my right. I do know for sure that when I did get glasses, they not only improved my long distance vision, but also improved my focus on the computer screen 2ft away, and I would often wear them at the computer from age 21 to 27.
Also of note, when I got glasses, the way I understood the test they did to determine my prescription, it seemed there was a 50/50 chance that the prescription would be on the slightly too-strong side rather than the too-weak side, thus training my eyes in the wrong direction. I asked the eye doctor about this and they said no it doesn't matter at all. I think it would have been wise to get prescription on the slightly too weak side so that even with the glasses my eyes might be able to train themselves in the correct direction even if very slowly. I would recommend this to anyone who gets a prescription.
You likely exercised your eyes naturally when you were outdoors growing up and were close enough to be able to restore good vision while you were still relatively young.
From Wikipedia: >'The Art of Seeing: An Adventure in Re-education' is a 1942 book by Aldous Huxley, which details his experience with and views on the discredited Bates method, which according to Huxley improved his eyesight.
>Martin Gardner described 'The Art of Seeing' as "a book destined to rank beside Bishop Berkeley’s famous treatise on the medicinal properties of ‘tar-water’."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_Seeing
I read the book when I was a college undergraduate in the late 1960s. Beautifully written as one would expect. My eyesight at the time was better than 20/20 so I cannot speak to the efficacy or lack thereof of the exercises promulgated in the slim volume.
Some resources on vision therapy.
Presbyopia convergence therapy: https://raygottlieb.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/presbyopi...
Myopia under-correction therapy: https://losetheglasses.org & https://web.archive.org/web/20230528211849/https://wiki.redu...
Local vision therapists: https://www.covd.org/page/About_Us
The key is shifting focus from super close to a couple of hundred yards (meters) and back a number of times more days than not. My wife and I are part of a multigenerational cohort who all wear glasses. I read a paper in ~2013-14 about how kids in Australia to Singaporian parents get less nearsightedness than a matched gourp back in Singapore. I thought it was light exposure and mentioned it to another school parent in NYC. He heard it was switching focus from near to far. So I started to guide my kid to look at cornices (roof edge decorations) or way down the street as we are walking, then to shift focus back to real close in some repition. And he got in the habit of doing it enough, and he is still glasses free at almost age 17 and the Eye Dr predicts he is clear until middle age now. So parents if you have kids teach them this skill and guide them until they get the habit !!
Given that similar claims have been around for a long time and it still lacks published results, I feel people have reason to be skeptical.
I wonder if this "training programme" could be implemented or tested using a VR workspace and varying the (virtual) distance of the working field while adjusting size so that it remains clear. The virtual environment could be finely and dynamically adjustable (as opposed to having to change lenses) and progress could be measured in a consistent environment.
On second thought, if that worked, the Apple Vision Pro might sell some additional units.
China, which has extremely high myopia in its student population, decided to tackle the problem top-down by reducing the amount of homework and forcing kids to play outside. They have some success: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9412110/
The claims have been around a long time, but how many people actually follow the guidelines? There are lots of stronger factors preventing people from doing it: economic unrest, smartphones, fear of outdoors and pollution, stronger emphasis on education, etc.
By the same token, doctors claim we can address heart disease and obesity with exercise and diet, but things don't seem to be getting any better.
This tracks very well with my experience... Too much time in a cubicle away from windows -- say, just for a week -- and my vision gets noticeably worse. A few days away from the screen, like a week on the lake, and it gets much sharper.
I'd be inclined to agree with him that it can be prevented and maybe even reversed.
https://archive.ph/w1Bf5
Another post that confuses ereaders for tablets and phones, which is unfortunate and baffling to me as it's supposed to be in the name.
The point of ereaders is that they are like physical books and in terms of viewing experience. Tablets and phones are where you're dealing with the brightness issues and eyes darting everywhere.
I was wondering the same thing, but they do talk about glare, which does exist on e-readers.
They also make the error of equating blue-light with impacting sleep, which has been thoroughly debunked.
This sounds useful in case you're the only survivor of a nuclear war and finally have time enough at last to read all the books you want, but end up breaking your glasses.
While I would not be surprised at all there's something to this, things like "improve and enhance our vision and brain function, at any age, along with it our sleep, balance, attention, and our cognitive and mental health" kind of set off my bullshit detector a bit. That seems way too many conditions to fix "with one easy trick!"
Things like "go out and have a walk" also exposes you to fresh air, and even mild exercise can make you feel better for all sorts of reasons. Is it really primarily about the vision system as the article says? Not so clear to me. This sounds a bit too much of a tunnel-visioned viewpoint.
Some folks say this book helped them
Sight Without Glasses - Harold M. Peppard
https://archive.org/details/sightwithoutglas00haro/page/n1/m...
Some folks say this book helped them and it's a free download.
Sight Without Glasses - Harold M. Peppard
https://archive.org/details/sightwithoutglas00haro/page/n1/m...
tl:dr; My vision significantly improved as an adult and seems to possibly still be improving over the five years since. I don't think I can know the cause for sure, but I did go from being mostly at computers to being mostly outdoors in the woods two years before I noticed the improvement.
longer story: Growing up, at the doctor's they made us look at some letters on a chart far away and I didn't realize I was supposed to tell them if the letters were blurry. I was pretty good at figuring out what the blurry letters were because there are only so many options. So they always said I had 20-20 vision. At about age 21 I was driving my dad's car and put on his sunglasses which were prescription sunglasses, and suddenly I could see the crisp detail of everything - the distant treetops, the little rocks in the field along the road. I was blown away and realized my eyes were not very good and I had been missing this my whole life. I got glasses.
Then later at 27 when I was quitting my office job to go be in nature, I stopped wearing the glasses for a combination of reasons.
Two years later at 29, I had been thinking about getting glasses again as I really wanted to see the forest where I lived in detail. But I didn't do it. But one day a few months after having those thoughts, I was lying on the deck looking up at the tall trees from underneath, and realized I could see clearly the needles in detail. I looked around at the distant mountain top and could see that clearly too. I was blown away. I don't know for sure if it happened suddenly or gradually, but part of it must have progressed pretty quickly since it was within a few months of when I had thought about getting glasses.
It's been four years now, and my eyes are still great like they were right after I noticed the shift. My right eye is really sharp and the left is also better than it was originally. And while I can't be sure, it seems like my left eye has been getting better over these years, because at first I noticed my right eye had become sharp but the left was still quite blurry. I'm constantly grateful for this, it's just about the best gift I could have ever asked for.
I don't know if I was born nearsighted or if that developed due to excessive use of books and computer from a very young age. I am still able to focus up close, at ~4 inches with my left eye and ~4.5 inches with my right. I do know for sure that when I did get glasses, they not only improved my long distance vision, but also improved my focus on the computer screen 2ft away, and I would often wear them at the computer from age 21 to 27.
Also of note, when I got glasses, the way I understood the test they did to determine my prescription, it seemed there was a 50/50 chance that the prescription would be on the slightly too-strong side rather than the too-weak side, thus training my eyes in the wrong direction. I asked the eye doctor about this and they said no it doesn't matter at all. I think it would have been wise to get prescription on the slightly too weak side so that even with the glasses my eyes might be able to train themselves in the correct direction even if very slowly. I would recommend this to anyone who gets a prescription.
You likely exercised your eyes naturally when you were outdoors growing up and were close enough to be able to restore good vision while you were still relatively young.