Vision improvement at the gym – shifting
February 11, 2012
Enough talk about glasses, let’s talk about vision improvement. Since I have internally accepted my improved vision, I am seeing it everywhere! I’m letting myself see all sorts of things without glasses. That might sound like a weird way to formulate the sentence, but I really do feel like I’m letting myself see, and that it is really that easy. I’m shutting off the internal voice that says – you’ll need your glasses for that, and I simply look. I look with interest and without fear, and more and more I see what I need to. Last week I had a wopping 4 days where I didn’t need my glasses. I simply didn’t need them or even need to think about not wearing them. I’ve been rewarded, this morning I read half the letters on the 30 line from 15 feet. sweet!
As some of the longer time readers of my blog may have noticed, I talk a lot about formal and informal vision practice. My informal vision practice is what I do all day – blinking more, shifting my gaze with interest, noticing details (again with interest), and noticing the universal swing. Formal practice is like palming (I do 2-3 times 20 minutes per day right now), chart practicd every day, and so on. Here’s an idea for bringing a ‘formal’ shifting practice into everyday life.
I found an interesting way to pass the time at the gym on the elliptical machines. I’d much rather be running outside, but I think the elliptical machine is easier on my knees. The elliptical machines have TV screens on them, and there are TV screens on the wall at the other end of the hall. I use this for vision improvement practice! I figure out which channels are playing on the big screens further away and switch between them on my little screen in front of me. I can see the screen on my machine pretty well, so I use this as shifing practice. I look at the screen further away, and alternately glance at the screen close to me now and then.
There are 6 or 7 screens at the far end. I try to position myself on a machine where I can see a reality show, a sports game like soccer, and a documentary. The nice thing is there is plenty of variety between channels. Here’s a run down of the kind of things I practice.
The reality show – Here I can get good practice looking at faces further away. This is sometimes scary without glasses because of the blurred field and I don’t like to look at another person without knowing if I recognize them, if they are smiling at me or not, etc. The whole situation is awkward and that can lead to not looking at faces when not wearing glasses. So I look at the screen and take interest in what the person is doing, what emotions are apparent. This one can be difficult, because I’m pretty far away from the screeen, probably more than 20 feet. So I often look at my little screen on the trainer and I look for a key feature on the face and then seek that out on the screen further away. This shifting between the screens is similar to the shifting practice Dr. Bates recommended for doing with two snellen charts. Reality shows are great because often they just sit and talk zoomed in on the same person for longer amounts of time.
The sports channel. I really like this – there is great contrast between the green grass field and the white ball and the players in their uniforms. There are so many things to look for, not least the ball. It is good practice for peripheral vision because often when it is difficult to find the ball, I figured out the fastest way is to take the clues from the players movements. In general the fastest moving players are running toward the ball (in soccer at least) and so you can geta sense of the action from that. I often get great clear vision from watching soccer because of all the movement.
Documentaries. Now, these are the most challenging for me so far, there are usually rich colors, unknown subjects, it’s a real wild card. But when I get bored of the other two channels, it can be fun to see what’s going on, and there is so much detail in those types of shows that attention to detail comes automatically, just as it should. Vision practice should always be fun and interesting!
February 11, 2012 at 2:39 pm
The topic of looking with *interest* seems to be hot these days. I tried to experiment with that and the chart this morning, with interesting results. The idea of looking with interest is probably confusing to others just as well. How do you do something like that, which is supposed to be uncontrolled? I can understand now that my tendency by now is to look without interest, without expecting to see more than I already see. I can understand that that’s bad, and won’t lead to improvement. But on the other hand we often speak of accepting the blur. Moreover we speak of seeing effortlessly – seeing with interest sounds suddenly too active, and contradicting. So how do you avoid trying to see, how do you avoid putting effort on the vision process, and all the while developing interest in what you’re looking at? I’m not sure. But from this morning’s experience, it should be possible somehow, and is not contradictory. On the other hand, suddenly you look at a letter and start seeing it more clearly, and it feels relaxing and easy. In short, the distance between looking with interest and staring is pretty small
February 12, 2012 at 4:01 pm
Hi Fuoco, The idea behind looking with interest is that if there is something you are interested in, you stop thinking about seeing and trying to see, and you simply look without effort. On the other hand, I suppose if you have to strain to find something of interest, then it’s not going to work. For me, I’m interested in the patterns that tree branches make against the sky, so in the winter I love looking up at all the dark branches and twigs against the bright sky, and I’m interested in the way these shapes move as I walk by. Because I’m interested, I don’t think about seeing, and I always see the finest twigs with amazing acuity as a result. On the chart, it can be other things, like counting the number of corners on the letter K, or if that doesn’t float your boat, comparing the whiteness around a letter with something white in your memory (a piano key for example?). Dr. Bates often used ‘diversion’ tactics like this to get his patients to use less effort, and modern teachers have discovered that the reason it works is because of interest, and results in an enhanced visual awareness.
“Accepting the blur” is a different idea, and gives the wrong impression to a lot of people. It is about not fighting it when going without glasses. It is more about being mindful of the current state of your visual system, without judgment (accepting). The idea is that it is easier to improve the vision once you have accepted the state it is in right now, in this moment. You can create the conditions for improvement, but by being non-judgmental about it, you allow yourself to relax. Perhap it should rather be something like “Don’t judge the blur”.
S
February 11, 2012 at 3:41 pm
Sorrisi,
This is a great reminder that you can incorporate vision practice anywhere. Nice going! Plus I like very much that you spent 4 days without glasses at all — the more time I spent without glasses the less I wanted to wear them. It’s interesting that I wrote a post about vision in the gym myself almost 2 years ago: http://dreamersight.wordpress.com/2010/04/04/vision-in-the-gym/ — great minds think alike! Keep up the excellent work, Sorrisi.
Nancy
February 12, 2012 at 4:02 pm
Hi Nancy, thanks for the link – I reread it – I remember that post!
Sorrisi
February 11, 2012 at 6:41 pm
Sorrisi, how about trying barefoot running? In relatively short distances while building up seems pretty nice when done properly.
Fuoco I understand what you’re saying because it IS a tight window. Remember to not stare, then look at things looking for detail, like color, shading, patterns etc. While your looking at the details, think about remembering those details to write down in depth later, all without strain.
That, is how I see it, and those who know more and think I missed something can say more.
FIAT LUX!
February 12, 2012 at 4:04 pm
Hi Fiat Lux, I actually wrote a post about barefoot running a while back and about how much I loved it. The sensations were amazing and I just wanted more! The drawback is… broken glass and dog turds, I just can’t get myself to run -anywhere- without shoes. Do you have experience with this? I’d be curious if the Viram Five Fingers are all they’re cracked up to be or if it’s just a gimmick. Because what I really loved about it was the feeling on my foot, and I guess I’d lose that even with thin shoes. What do you think? Is it worth giving it another go with minimalist shoes?
Sorrisi
February 12, 2012 at 6:27 pm
Sorrisi, actually that type of stuff is why I use minimalist shoes myself. Barefoot is nicer, but for all the gunk little seems to beat rubber between your feet and the ground. Of course, if you use your EYES generally that stuff is avoided. See another reason I like it? Your eyes need to be used to know what your feet should expect and we’re all about using our eyes, right?
The Vibram Five Fingers appear to do a reasonable job, except that a good deal of users complain of hard to remove odor, and generally after a few hundred miles they need replacement. Also, if you have Morton’s Toe Syndrome you usually can’t get a good fit. Another hindrance at least for me is an entry price of 60 US Dollars here, with the better designs being closer to $130 per pair.
I believe there to be at a few hundred different minimalist running shoes each with their pros and cons. The one I use is modeled after the running sandals the Raramuri of Mexico use sold by invisibleshoe.com. I got the DIY kit for $25 (all prices US Dollars) plus tax and shipping. Outside of the US it could get a little pricey potentially with shipping, but that’s what I chose.
It came with a piece of Vibram (a lot of companies use their material) Cherry insole 4mm thick which is pretty thin for a minimalist shoe, pretty good ground feel, some protection from the road, but still requiring good barefoot running form. Further description and other products offered by them are online at their website.
Vivobarefoot is based in the UK, they make minimalist shoes, and as I said many other companies make excellent minimalist shoes too, it’s a matter of doing your own research, choosing what features and cost you want (and possibly brand loyalty), and then buying!
I chose the DIY kit from invisibleshoe.com because at the time it was the cheapest, and 4mm is about the thinnest you can find, as well as the stuff is super flexible. The only caveat I have with it is how often I have to retie it to my feet. But really, I can’t stress enough the importance of doing your own research so that you get the best possible combination for YOU out of all the different available shoes.
FIAT LUX!
February 12, 2012 at 8:37 pm
Hey Fiat Lux, thanks a lot for the info! you know I did wonder if the Vibrams would start stinking. you’ve definitely inspired me to get back into this! I did remember it was great vision training. I think I had so much fun without shoes that I just gave it up when I realized that for practical purposes (more than a mile or two) I would need something on my feet. I’ll do some research, as you suggest, and see if I can get something that will get me that free feeling back
cheers, Sorrisi
February 12, 2012 at 9:28 pm
The running sandals btw have been used in races of over 80km for the entire race. Most pairs last at least a few thousand miles on pavement, and while building up, distances are necessarily short to prevent overuse injuries (right now for me that means a daily 400m run), but eventually both barefoot and minimalist shoe running can do ultra marathons. Just something to keep in mind.
FIAT LUX!
February 29, 2012 at 12:02 am
Hi!
I absolutely am loving this blog, and I came across it on Google. I am 15 and my eyesight is about -3.75 in both eyes. I have never worn glasses, and really want to improve my eyesight. I came across this blog and found this to be interesting.
A lot of people say that eyesight can never improve with the Bates Method. That made me feel disheartened because I wanted to improve my eyesight so badly. But you are saying that it does work. I am torn, and don’t know whether those people are lying or not.
What do you think about the people who say that this can’t work?
March 11, 2012 at 6:34 pm
Hi Cherry, sorry to respond late! I have just started a new job. Thanks for your comments! And let me know if you have any questions about getting started. I’m in the process of writing updates for my blog and I will have more clear sections about this soon.
I remember being a bit afraid to start the Bates method for similar reasons – many people say it doesn’t work. I don’t worry about that anymore. I’ve personally met many people for whom it has worked and obviously know myself. What I also know is that vision improvement is specific to each person. There are many techniques within the Bates method and each person has to figure out what works for them best, and that might change over time. This means this method is difficult to study by scientists who need double blind studies and repeatability. It would take a very large study over say 5 years employing reputable vision teachers to do a proper study. That has not been done and would cost a lot of money (researchers, plus eye care professionals, plus vision teachers, plus any teaching materials, facilities, and don’t forget the legal/admin costs to get appropriate permissions/disclaimers to do health research with humans). Research is often paid by the interested industry, and in this case, the eye care industry has little interest in a method with the stated goal to eliminate glasses. Researchers applying to the NSF, for example, could be committing career suicide by going down such an unknown path. After being in research myself I’m well aware of how academic careers get pushed into what research is considered sexy. Natural vision research is not (yet!) considered sexy.
So, medical professionals who don’t believe in the Bates method are really not worth arguing with. They were taught that it doesn’t work, and they’ve most likely never tried it. So they base this decision on existing scientific evidence (which as explained above does not include a really fair Bates method test).
Other people who don’t believe it works might hold that belief because that is what their optometrist told them.
I just try to approach it with an open mind. I’ve seen it work. I’ve also seen people in online forums for whom it hasn’t worked. In general it is due to lack of practice, but it does show that the method may not be for everyone, whether that is because it won’t work for them, or because they cannot or will not fit the practice into their life.
Given all that, there is really only one thing to tell anyone who is worried about whether it works or not. Just try it and see what happens. It would only take about an hour a day for a couple of weeks to go through the main points in Dr. Bates’s book or the ‘Demonstrate’ (first page) of his magazines. There’s really nothing to lose. Learn about and try out palming, swinging, shifting, central fixation, memory and imagination techniques. See my page about how to use a Snellen chart. After giving all of that a fair try, all you have risked is a few hours that you’ve spent without your glasses looking at things, or with your eyes closed relaxing. It’s not a big risk to take just to find out if it works for you. If nothing at all happens, then consider getting some lessons with a teacher as it is possible that you did something wrong. If you notice improvement, keep in mind that the improvement you see is temporary until you practice consistently enough to make it permanent, so keep doing what you did to make it better! Finally, remember that vision fluctuates a lot, so don’t get down if your eyes are great one day but not so great the next. It takes time to find what is normal for you.