mind articles

Who do you trust?

Here we go again – the same old topic: Conventional medicine vs. natural health. This time it is in regards to the health and strength of your eyes.

So the question is: “Can we regain our eyesight through nutrition, exercise and specific practices?”

Now let’s introduce the 2 corners:

1. On the right we have the general medical community (includes a majority of optometrists) who say: no, you cannot regain your eyesight!
2. On the left we have practitioners who actually believe we can do something about our eyesight including a group who follow a technique called the Bates Method. Are they just a bunch of snake oil salespeople.

In the following article I want to examine these 2 points of view and the evidence behind both to help provide a more objective point of view. 

The “No” group

According to the famous (or infamous among natural health practitioners) website against natural therapies and therapists www.quackwatch.com the answer is a resounding no!

Here is their view of the Bates Method:

"There is no basis in fact for extravagant claims of “curing” such eye defects as nearsightedness, farsightedness or astigmatism (all of which are related to structural conditions) by means of eye exercises."  As stated by the National Society for the Prevention of Blindness

Despite the fact that Dr. Bates' book was published over 35 years ago, in the words of Dr. Louis H. Schwartz, ophthalmologist: "Nowhere in the world has the medical profession accepted them." He added: "Many patients supposedly cured by the Bates Method had later to fall back on glasses again."

Dr. Sidney A. Fox, another ophthalmologist, has pointed out that nearsightedness, farsightedness and astigmatism are "static, anatomic conditions" and, as such, cannot be affected by eye exercises. He added that changes in refraction take place as a result of growing older.

The matter is summed up succinctly by Dr. Glen R. Shepherd, who stated that eye exercises cannot reduce or eliminate any condition caused by "structural defect of the eyeball" – hence they cannot possibly reduce or eliminate any refractive errors. (1)

The “Yes” group

So who is this Dr. Bates? Was he really a charlatan? Is there any science behind his method and any truth to his claims?

Dr. William Bates (1860-1931) was an ophthalmologist practicing in New York . Early in his career he started to question traditional views on eyesight through his work with clients (including using relaxation techniques) that ultimately led him to the conclusion that eyesight problems were the result of the eye muscles straining to see.

Dr. Bates is now recognized as one of the leading forces behind modern day natural vision practitioners.

So he developed simple stress relieving eye exercises that improved eyesight and allowed people to get rid of their glasses for good. Dr. Bates published his findings 1920 in a book called “Perfect Sight without Glasses”. His ideas were rejected and ridiculed by most of his associates and colleagues in conventional medicine at the time, and are still not generally accepted today. However since then the Bates Method has received a massive following especially thanks to the power of sharing information available via the internet.

According to today's vision improvement practitioners there are now many techniques to correct many types of vision problems, including lazy eye (amblyopia), crossed eyes (strabismus), near or far sightedness, and ageing vision.

So a natural question would be if natural vision training is so effective and has so many endorsements, then why do most people get Lasik surgery or corrective lenses instead?

Perhaps that is the same question as why people choose pharmaceutical drugs to relieve pain and treat their conditions instead of approaching healthy eating and natural methods of achieving health. It is harder and takes time and effort to consistently eat better, exercise and go the natural health route. Big pharma has such a hold on the health care industry also which makes a difference when it comes to who has you in their best interests. Perhaps here is also the case with the U.S. optical industry was worth $30.2 billion (Vision Council of America, 1999). This number included such items as exam fees and office visits, surgical fees, ophthalmic pharmaceuticals, retail eyewear sales, and retail sales for consumables such as contact lens solutions. (2)

Summary

So where does this leave us?

It is hard to discount the volume of people and organisations who apparently have benefited from the Bates Method. But I believe a bit of healthy skepticism is healthy.

So my advice is if you believe you have an eyesight problem or have found it suffering of late why not see an reputable optometrist - many optometrists offer free assessments. Find out if there are any underlying or more serious problems and if they are ruled out then why not try checking out some of the resource links listed and suggestions in this article (www.3dpts.com/newsletter/bodyarticle) in the short term to see if it makes a difference.

References:

(1) Quackwatch www.quackwatch.org/11Ind/bates.html

(2) Statistics on Ophthalmic Industry Sales www.allaboutvision.com/resources/statistics-ophthalmic-industry-sales.html

Your 3d Coach

Craig Burton