Have you heard of the Bates method?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bates_method
Bates said that you could heal your eyes naturally, by relearning how to see properly. Contacts, glasses and laser surgery, as permanent lenses, aren't healing your eyes, they are making it worse by putting additional tension on external eye muscles that are already squeezing the eyeball out of shape or turning the eye out of normal alignment.
Re: Have you heard of the Bates method?
...was there a point there that I didn't see?
Anyways, Bates ideas had no grounding in actual science, and all in all the "successes" attributed to his methods were, in all likelihood, just results of wishful willpower and a placebo effect.
Kudos though, I was expecting this to be a "masturbation makes you blind" joke.
Re: Have you heard of the Bates method?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Tarkenfire
...was there a point there that I didn't see?
Anyways, Bates ideas had no grounding in actual science, and all in all the "successes" attributed to his methods were, in all likelihood, just results of wishful willpower and a placebo effect.
Kudos though, I was expecting this to be a "masturbation makes you blind" joke.
No, there weren't any points you didn’t see. I just want to know opinions of those who have personal experience or valid knowledge of the subject. Has it ever occurred to you that you might be wrong?
Re: Have you heard of the Bates method?
The lens is a lie
trust the Force
Re: Have you heard of the Bates method?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Tarkenfire
... Kudos though, I was expecting this to be a "masturbation makes you blind" joke.
It’s a question of the kind “Is it true that CFC is instrumental in depleting the ozone layer of the earth?”
In the Matrix, nothing is as it seems.
Re: Have you heard of the Bates method?
I can guarantee that 'relearning how to see properly' won't help if your problems with eyesight are unrelated to matters that can be solved by simple methods such as contacts or laser surgery.
Also, placebos are too mainstream.
Re: Have you heard of the Bates method?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ranshiin
I can guarantee that 'relearning how to see properly' won't help if your problems with eyesight are unrelated to matters that can be solved by simple methods such as contacts or laser surgery.
Strabismus included?
Re: Have you heard of the Bates method?
I have heard a friend say that you should try your eyes without glasses sometimes. To not be so dependant on glasses. This made me think of that.
Re: Have you heard of the Bates method?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Your Source
In 2004 the American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) published a review of various research regarding "visual training",[3] which consisted of "eye exercises, muscle relaxation techniques, biofeedback, eye patches, or eye massages", "alone or in combinations". No evidence was found that such techniques could objectively benefit eyesight, though some studies noted changes, both positive and negative, in the visual acuity of nearsighted subjects as measured by a Snellen chart. In some cases noted improvements were maintained at subsequent follow-ups. However, these results were not seen as actual reversals of nearsightedness, and were attributed instead to factors such as "improvements in interpreting blurred images, changes in mood or motivation, creation of an artificial contact lens by tear film changes, or a pinhole effect from miosis of the pupil."[8]
Food for thought.
Re: Have you heard of the Bates method?
If you're interested in whether the method works, I suggest you consult your local ophthalmologist. If anyone has "valid knowledge of the subject", as you yourself has put it, it would be specialized doctors who have gone through years of extensive training.
And not to be smart, but the best place to look for sound advice regarding the scientific validity of controversial medical procedures (or the scientific soundness of anything, for that matter) is probably not anonymous message boards on the Internet.
Re: Have you heard of the Bates method?
Considering all of his physiological bases were shown to be false, his theory doesn't have very much ground to stand on. This isn't my field of study, but as a scientist that already puts it at a pretty low caliber as far as soundness goes.
Re: Have you heard of the Bates method?
Personally I would naturally think it's a loads of rubbish, but my boyfriend actually did this. Granted the damage to his eyes was very minor so the prescription glasses he had weren't strong. But he decided to just not wear glasses because they annoyed him and after about a year his eyes were corrected. His optician could barely believe it. I don't think this would work with stronger prescriptions though (like my brothers) but who knows. =S
Re: Have you heard of the Bates method?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Datenshi
If you're interested in whether the method works, I suggest you consult your local therapist
Agreed
Re: Have you heard of the Bates method?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Forgotten Show
Food for thought.
It's rather stale bread for thought.
---------- Post added at 07:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:48 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Datenshi
...
And not to be smart, but the best place to look for sound advice regarding the scientific validity of controversial medical procedures (or the scientific soundness of anything, for that matter) is probably not anonymous message boards on the Internet.
I am not looking for advice. My eyes are perfect.
---------- Post added at 08:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:48 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Cantelope
Considering all of his physiological bases were shown to be false, his theory doesn't have very much ground to stand on. This isn't my field of study, but as a scientist that already puts it at a pretty low caliber as far as soundness goes.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1447376/
Re: Have you heard of the Bates method?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Chris
Was this supposed to prove a point? I get the feeling you misinterpreted what I said.
Re: Have you heard of the Bates method?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Cantelope
Was this supposed to prove a point? I get the feeling you misinterpreted what I said.
I’m just asking - To what extent can we trust what we read regarding the physiological bases?
Re: Have you heard of the Bates method?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Chris
Strabismus included?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nystagmus
When it's with regards to damaged/improperly developed optic nerve and similar nerve systems, it's untreatable.
Re: Have you heard of the Bates method?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Tarkenfire
...was there a point there that I didn't see?
Anyways, Bates ideas had no grounding in actual science, and all in all the "successes" attributed to his methods were, in all likelihood, just results of wishful willpower and a placebo effect.
Kudos though, I was expecting this to be a "masturbation makes you blind" joke.
All this is at the end of the day is self fulfilling prophecy as you said with the wanting of eyes to be healed
Re: Have you heard of the Bates method?
Modern ophthalmology is so keen to heal the eye - sarcasm.
Watch this video starting from 1.15.14
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21_VWHKcNlg
Re: Have you heard of the Bates method?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Chris
It's rather stale bread for thought.
It means exactly what it says: no evidence has been found that supports the Bates method. Did you read your own source? Have you done research on the method you're inquiring about? What objective conclusions have you drawn, and from what? I was hopeful that you were the good kind of troll that encourages intelligent discourse, but the more I read of you the more convinced I am that you're just obstinate and argumentative. Shame.
Re: Have you heard of the Bates method?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Forgotten Show
the good kind of troll
I can't say I consider that anything but an oxymoron. (by the by...oxymoronic should be a word)
That said, the delimiter would be the belief of the person in question; if they truly believe what they say, I don't consider it trolling, even if no evidence is given, no research is done.
At that point it is simply ignorance, which is not an excuse for anything, but is not necessarily malicious.
I personally didn't care enough to try and see in this case.
Re: Have you heard of the Bates method?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Forgotten Show
It means exactly what it says: no evidence has been found that supports the Bates method. Did you read your own source? Have you done research on the method you're inquiring about? What objective conclusions have you drawn, and from what? I was hopeful that you were the good kind of troll that encourages intelligent discourse, but the more I read of you the more convinced I am that you're just obstinate and argumentative. Shame.
I got your point. Thank you! I assure you that the research was done, and I have all reasons to believe that the Bates method is effective. This thread is a part of the research.
Re: Have you heard of the Bates method?
Pretty Much ''Seeing Is Believing'' xD