Improve eyesight – and throw away your glasses

Are you tired of wearing glasses and disappointed that your prescription continues to get stronger every year?  It doesn’t have to be that way.  I was wearing progressively stronger lenses for my nearsightedness until ten years ago I accidentally stumbled upon a method that allowed me to acheive 20/20 vision and throw away my glasses within a year.  For the past decade I have not worn glasses or contacts, but I am able to drive, read, and see everything clearly and sharply.

The secret was learning how to actually change my eyes so that they could focus clearly on any objects — near or far, without wearing glasses.  The method I used is one of the best examples of the self-strengthening technique called Hormetism, the focus of my blog, which I’ve applied to improve my strength and resilience in many other areas.  This is not an infomercial: The method requires several weeks or months of diligent effort, with periodic followup, and results may vary. But for this relatively small investment of time and effort, you may consider the possibility of lasting freedom from prescription lenses to be worth investigating.  It worked for me and numerous others who have tried this approach. The problem with glasses and contacts are that they are crutches. Just like using leg crutches to help you walk when you are recovering from a broken or injured leg, glasses give you the instant gratification of being able to suddenly see clearly with eyes that have lost the ability to focus well on their own. Glasses are a quick fix indeed!  However, they don’t address the root cause that allowed your eyes to get out of shape in the first place: deformation of the actual shape of the eye. Myopia (nearsightedness) is caused by elongation of the eye; hyperopia (farsightedness) by the eye becoming shorter in length. And just as one’s leg would never fully recover, but would actually become weaker, if  you continued to use crutches indefinitely, the use of corrective lenses allows your eye to become progressively weaker — either more myopic or hyperopic, as the case may be.  The use of laser surgery may seem to be the best of all fixes, by permanently resculpting the cornea.  But the risks and complications can be significant, and continued bad vision habits can result in the need for repeat surgery. The approach that worked for me — and which I advocate here — is the frequent and strategic use of anti-corrective lenses for several weeks or months, combined with special techniques involving simple eye exercises that will reshape the eye to achieve and maintain visual acuity.  Unlike other eye exercise techniques, such as the Bates Method, the use of anti-corrective lenses has solid experimental support from human and animal studies. By contrast, the Bates Method is based on an unproven idea that refractive errors are caused by “eye strain” and can be relieved by relaxation exercises.

The Bates Method. William Bates believed that the eye changed shaped when attempting to focus, thereby inducing muscular tension. Bates developed a number of techniques, such as “palming” and movement exercises, to help relax the eye, and “visualization” to enhance memory of colors and shapes. But according to Wikipedia:

“Despite continued anecdotal reports of successful results, Bates’ techniques have not been shown to objectively improve eyesight, and his main physiological proposition – that the eyeball changes shape to maintain focus – has consistently been contradicted by observation. In 1952, optometry professor Elwin Marg wrote of Bates, ‘Most of his claims and almost all of his theories have been considered false by practically all visual scientists.’ Marg concluded that the Bates method owed its popularity largely to ‘flashes of clear vision’ experienced by many who followed it. Such occurrences have since been determined to most likely be a contact lens-like effect of moisture on the eye.”

By contrast with the Bates Method, the method of hormetism uses controlled application of stress to induce an adapative growth response — a physical remodelling — of the shape of the eye. Support for this approach comes from extensive animal and human studies showing that the eye actually remodels neuroplastically in response to repeated focusing stimulus.  These experimental results have been synthesized into a theory known as the incremental retinal-defocus theory of myopia development (IRDT theory).  According to the IRDT theory, extensive close-up focusing of the eyes (for example by reading and wearing minus lenses) causes the image of close objects to be out of focus on the retina, resulting in biochemical processes that affect the rate of synthesis of connective tissues that control the rate of growth of retinal tissues and the shape of the eye.  The theoretical and experimental work supporting the IRDT theory is quite interesting and is explained in more detail on the Rehabilitation page of this blog, for those who are interested in the fascinating science behind this.

Anti-corrective lenses. The approach advocated here is a very specific use of anti-corrective lenses in combination with good visual habits to ensure routine variation in the use of the eyes for both up close and distance activities.  The most well documented use of anti-corrective lenses is for the reversal of myopia; in this case it is called “plus lens therapy”. Strange as it may seem, this involves wearing the opposite type of glasses normally prescribed for myopia or for hyperopia, making it initially less comfortable to focus. Specifically, so-called “plus” lenses are employed to overcome nearsightedness (myopia) and “minus” lenses to overcome farsightedness (hyperopia).   In my discussion on the Rehabilitation page, there is a more extensive discussion of the history of the use of plus lenses. The use of anti-corrective lenses is a classic case of the five general principles of Hormetism, as outlined on the Overview page of this website:

  1. the viewing distance is adjusted to simulate real-world conditions as closely as possible (i.e. the eye is actually focusing in the distance while reading a book or computer screen that is close up);
  2. constraint (an eye cover or plus lens) is imposed on the stronger eye to focus the stress on the weaker eye, and both eyes are held at the limit of their ability to comfortably focus
  3. the intensity is adjusted to be somewhat uncomfortable, but still short of “failure”;
  4. adequate recovery is allowed during rest periods between sessions; and
  5. gradualism is observed by progressively increasing the focal range over time in order to force adaptive remodeling of the eye.

How to proceed. The clearest explanation of how to use plus lenses was given by Brian Severson, who many years ago published the key steps in his “Vision Freedom” system.  Comparing the eye to a digital camera, Severson observed that the eye will attempt to “autofocus” on any image that is slightly out of focus, but will not even attempt to focus on objects that are significantly out of focus. Furthermore, he found that the focal range can be extended by a simple technique.  Here is the essence of the technique: Step 1. Find your starting range of focus:

“Take off your prescription lenses and put this page right on the end of your nose.  Now push the print slowly away until it becomes clear and in focus, and stop.  Now close each eye and see which one is sending the clear image to your brain.  You have just entered the range of focus of your better close vision eye.  It dominates for all close work…Now open both eyes, and slowly push the print away until the very first indication that the print is no longer perfectly clear and in focus, and stop…You have just found the limit of your range of focus for that eye”.

Step 2: Push your eyes to increase their range of focus.

For myopes, this is done by repeatedly pushing a printed page just slightly outside the range of focus, and allowing it to sharpen up or “clear”. (For hyperopes, the page is pulled closer until it blurs, then allowed to clear).  The eye gradually adapts to increase its range. This can be done with different objects at different ranges.  So it can be done with fine print close up, but also with larger objects in the distance.  It is especially useful to focus on sharp lines, such as overhead electrical transmission lines, and houses or trees with sharp edges.

For myopes, the process is best carried out by using plus lenses, the “reading glasses”, available in most pharmacies, that hyperopes typically use for close reading; conversely, hyperopes can accelerate the process by using minus lenses that myopes use for vision distance. Myopes can improve their vision by starting with the strongest plus lenses they can wear that will maintain their reading or computer just within their focal range. (Hyperopes do the converse). Typically, for mild myopia, one starts by wearing a +1 diopter lens and moving up to a +1.5 or +2 lens as soon as it becomes comfortable. If the myopia or hyperopia is extreme to the point where anti-corrective lenses do not allow a reasonable focal range, then it may be preferable or necessary to use reduced prescription lenses, i.e., lenses in which the diopter have been somewhat reduced by +1 or +2 diopters. With time and success, these can be progressively weakened, and a move can be made to anti-corrective lenses.

HERE IS THE CRITICAL STEP: For the focusing exercises, one should periodically push the book or computer slightly out of focal range and wait for the image to clear again. This will cause a slight feeling of discomfort, but the eye will focus as long as the distance is just slightly out of the comfort zone.  If your eyes cannot focus, move a few inches closer again until the reading material is just within focus.

This procedure can be followed for hours or more during everyday activities such as reading and computer work, watching TV, walking or driving. The anti-corrective or reduced prescription lens diopter rating (the plus or minus number) should be selected so as to make the eyes slightly uncomfortable, while still allowing clear focusing. If the right and left eyes are very uneven in strength, it may be necessary to match different corrections to each eye (buy two pairs and pop out and replace one side), or to cover the stronger eye with a patch or diffuser. Much as with CI movement therapy, this follows the principle of “constraint” to ensure that the primary stress is focused on the weaker eye, stimulating it to do most of the focusing, until it catches up with the stronger eye. We don’t want the weak eye to coast along with a “free ride” or only the stronger eye will benefit.

When to use the anti-corrective lenses. It is only necessary to use anti-corrective lenses for short periods of time — one to three hours each day, for the appropriate activities — to see significant progress over several weeks.  It is important to realize that the strong anticorrective lenses are only to be used for the activities for which your prescription glasses were least needed!  So for myopes, wear the plus lenses only for close work (reading and computer work); for hyperopes, wear the minus lenses when looking in the distance or across the room, but not when reading or at the computer. For myope engaging in distance activities (such as driving or viewing presentations), either no lenses or undercorrected lenses are recommended, though very mild plus lenses (less than +1 diopters) can be used when the myopia has been significantly reduced. The key is that the eye will adapt and remodel only when subjected to mildly uncomfortable stress.  If the stress is excessive, the eye gives up and no progress is made.  This principle is very similar that followed by weight lifters, who understand the importance of slight, but not excessive, overload.

Misunderstandings. Failure to understand this need to change or remove anti-corrective lenses in response to the distance of the current activity has led to some flawed studies which purported to show the ineffectiveness of plus lens therapy. One example of this is a frequently cited paper by Chung, Mohidan and O’Leary, which found that myopic children fitted with undercorrected lenses showed a more rapid progression of myopia than children wearing lenses with full correction. So the eyesight of these children actually got worse by using undercorrection than normal correction. This would appear to contradict the IRDT hypothesis that the eye can be stimulated via lens therapy to grow shorter in axial length, and hence reduce myopia. And this result has been repeatedly cited by others as disproving the effectiveness of plus lenses or under correction. However,  a re-analysis of this study by Hung and Ciuffreda of Rutgers University came to a different conclusion. In addition to normal correction and slight undercorrection groups, the Hung and Ciuffreda study included a group using “high-powered plus lenses”. Their analysis found that the high-powered plus lenses led to hyperopic growth (in other words, shortening of the eye’s axial length), which decreased the myopia of the children wearing those lenses. And the progression of myopia in children who wore undercorrected lenses is explained by the fact that they wore these all the time, not when just reading. This led to a diminished stimulus by facilitating accommodative focuses during “near-to-far viewing cycles”, which underminded the benefits of undercorrection. Based upon this analysis, the proper use of undercorrection would be to wear the undercorrective lenses only during long distance viewing. This is a key point!  Note that, according to the protocol of the study (Chung et al, p. 2556), “Subjects were instructed to wear their glasses all the time except during sleeping.” The fact that the undercorrected lenses were worn for close up viewing as well as distance viewing, would tend to undermine their effectiveness, according to the IRDT theory. In their summary, Hung and Ciufredda conclude:

Based on IRDT analysis, high-powered plus lens, full correction, and 0.75 D under-correction result in relative hyperopic, emmetropic, and myopic growth, respectively. Thus, the theory is able to explain these apparently contradictory findings. Moreover, the IRDT provides a consistent theoretical framework for understanding the development of myopia under a variety of experimental and clinical conditions.

So far from disproving the value of plus lenses and undercorrection, this study supports the IRDT theory for treating myopia. The conclusion should be taken as showing how NOT to use undercorrected lenses — don’t wear them for close work and reading, only for far distance viewing activities such as driving.  On the other hand, for close work (reading and computer use), wearing stronger plus lenses are effective in counteracting myopia. Based upon IRDT theory, I suppose the ideal combination would be bifocals with plus lenses for close vision and undercorrection for distance vision, or using two different glasses for these different situations.

Work without lenses. In addition to using anti-corrective lenses for close up activities (or distance activities, in the case of hyperopes), it is important to engage in frequent and deliberate near-to-far focusing exercises in daily life.  Without glasses, take some time to look intently and focus on distant objects, and alternate this with looking at close up objects.  Just as when using the lenses, try to focus on objects at the edge or just beyond of your current focal range, allowing them to “clear”. I found it most helpful to choose objects with crisply defined dark lines or borders, such as telephone poles and power lines or edges of buildings. You’ll soon notice that blurry or “double” images will begin to resolve. I remember becoming excited when I started to see crisp power lines, and billboard signs, and could eventually start to read signs at a distance.  This is one of the most motivating aspects of the technique. On the Rehabilitation page, you’ll find my speculations as to how this resolution of double images relates to the mechanisms of eye remodelling and the IRDT theory.

A final word: Be patient. Your eyes took a long time to lose their shape, and they won’t pop back into shape overnight.  Just as building muscles in the gym takes time and discipline, remodeling your eyes is a step-by-step process that takes time. Most likely, you’ll notice progress in spurts. And just like going to the gym, you will need to keep you eyes in shape by periodically using anti-corrective lenses (especially if you will be spending a lot of time reading or at the computer), and by varying your daily activities to include looking at both near and far objects. But if you stick with it, you’ll find your eyesight is improving, perhaps at a time when many of your older friends are finding their eyesight is getting worse. If this topic interests you, please comment below,  or check out the Rehabilitation Discussion Forum, where a number of people have reported their success with using the Hormetism method for improving eyesight, manual dexterity, and other areas of overcoming the need for corrective devices.

April 2012 update:  See my interview, How one person improved his vision, for details on how the above method helped one individual achieve 20/15 vision!

July 2014 update: A recent clinical study by Scott Read of young adults in the journal of Investigative Opthamology and Visual Science provides fresh proof of the IRDT theory.  The article, “Human optical axial length and defocus”  found that fitting people with plus lenses or minus lenses induces significant changes in axial eye length within as little as an hour.

August 2014 update: At this year’s Ancestral Health Symposium in Berkeley I gave a talk about the causes of myopia and how to reverse it.  I’ve posted the video and slides on my post, Myopia: a modern yet reversible disease.

March 2016 update:  For a step-by-step approach and answers to common practical questions about how to get started, see my post, FAQ for vision improvement by Hormetism


  1. Christian


    I am myope with -1.75 in my left eye and -2.5 in my right eye. I’ve read many posts and all the blog but there’s something I still don’t understand. I push the screen to see which is my focal range, and then when I am slightly out of the focal range I put the +1 reading glasses but the image gets worse. So should I find the focal range with the plus lenses on and then slightly push the screen away?

    I had a really good vision since I was young, I was able to read billboards that were far away. I told like 7 doctors that I knew my myopia began when I started using the computer for 6 or 8 hours a day. No one in my family wears glasses, not even my grandparents so if there’s a book or anything that will help me learn the eye exercises with the plus lens method please tell me about it.

    • Todd


      If you can read at the edge of focus at a comfortable distance, then you don’t need to use plus lenses…just do the print pushing with your naked eye. If your myopia weakens to the point that you would have to sit more than 20 inches (half a meter) away from your computer or book, then THAT is signal to start using plus lenses.

      If you are using plus lenses (like your +1 lens) you should find the edge of focus, and the print pushing, while wearing the plus lenses.

      Regarding book recommendations, a good overview of plus lens therapy and other exercises for myopia reduction can be found in The Secret of Perfect Vision, by David DeAngelis.

      Hope that clears things up (no pun intended)!


    • HI Christian,

      Subject: It there “one book” – that might help me understand?

      Frankly – I wish there were. But here is my effort to analyse the eye’s behavior, for pilots.

      I also maintain a site to present ODs and MDs who argue that prevention should start before your Snellen-chart goes below 20/60 – as an “either-or” choice you must make. I think ALL ODS AND MDS should TELL US about prevention, and virtually all of them REMAIN SILENT. I object to that “silence”. Here is my site to try to summarize these issues:

      Let me add one absolute necessity – get a Snellen eye-chart (for Free). Put a bright light on it – and determine if you can read the 20/60 line. (I know this is difficult – but you must do it.) Then let us know if you can do that.

  2. Steven

    Post this one :

    I managed to get from -4 in both eyes to -3 in my left dominant eye and -3.75 in my right non-dominant eye in under 1 month by simply not wearing glasses.

    I am going to buy a pair of -1.5 -1.5 (under corrective) to use it when i read things on the computer, because -1.5 would mean that letters on a computer are slightly out of focus and this will let my eyes to improve.

    I would use plus lens for close reading but unfortunately i would not see anything.

    I know minus under corrective lens is recommended for distance viewing, not close work.

    I don’t think the differences in the eyes are that big to use two different lenses.

    Question : Am i doing the right thing ?
    Any help is welcomed. Thanks !

    • Hi Steven,

      It is my opinion that we should be told-of plus-prevention by all professionals, before we are put into that FIRST over-prescribed minus. But that is so much “spilt milk” – I know.

      I know this is DIFFICULT – and perhaps you wish to delay. But I would get a Snellen chart and set it up at 20 feet. I know the “shock” will be great. You might be able to see the 20/120 line or so. But if you are very serious – then that is how you “get started”. If you would do that much, and “come back” to us and tell us what you see – that would be a great help.

      I agree, that, except for distance, I would not wear a minus lens – if AT ALL POSSIBLE. It may be “too blurry” for you to do that. I can’t tell.

      I have found it IMPOSSIBLE to obtain any “reduced” minus from an OD – sorry to say. Personally, I use my own Snellen to judge the amount of minus (or plus) I might require. Then I go to Zennioptical and ORDER what I need – after checking my own Snellen.

      I have been truly amazed by some engineers, and their measurements. Be reasonable, and understand that “clearing” to 20/40 to 20/60 will be a slow process. But as an engineer, I prefer to do everything my self. Thanks!

      • Steven

        I used this Snellen chart:

        Squinting and waiting for a clear image i got : 20/70

        With eyes almost closed waiting for a clear picture i managed 20/50 maximum.

        With no squinting at all barely 20/200, maybe 20/100 in the morning.

        I am 24 almost 25 years old.

        Now my glasses are -3 left eye spherical -3.75 right eye spherical. And -2 both eyes cylindrical.

        What under corrective glasses should i use ?
        I was thinking -1.5 in both eyes spherical and removing the cylindrical all together.

        Thank you !

        • Todd


          For an accurate Snellen rating, keep your eyes fully open and observe under bright indoor lighting or daylight. And it is best to do this when you are not tired. It is important to use consistent observation conditions in order to accurately monitor your changes from week to week.

          For distance, shave 0.5 diopters off your distance lenses. Don’t worry about cylindrical. You can keep it the same or reduce it. Not a big deal.
          For reading and computers, put away your glasses and use your naked eyes. Sit as close as you need to “print push” and read at the edge of blur.

          Read the Discussion Forum (see link on the main page) for much more detail on this.


  3. Steven

    Hi Todd,

    I want to move as far away as possible from a potential retinal detachment, that is usually caused by severe myopia.

    1. On one hand, i want both eyes to become equal.
    Getting an equal prescription for both eyes, may keep the non-dominant eye in the “free ride zone” and then no progress would exist for the non-dominant eye. Correct ?

    That would mean the dominant eye will improve while the non-dominant will not, making the differences between the eyes larger.

    2. The cylindrical for astigmatism you say it’s not that important. I would rather eliminate it completely.

    3. Since i have -3 in the left eye and -3.75 in the right eye (i feel the -3.75 is over corrected; more like -3.50 would be the prescription), that would mean i should try a 2.50 for the left eye & 3 for the right eye.

    The thing is i tested the -3 i have for my left eye in my right eye and i can already see very well. In other words i feel i could go extremely fast to -2.5, -3.

    That is why initially i was asking for a much lower prescription. Because if i buy the -2.5, -3, I would probably be in a couple of days of print-pushing, already there.

    What do you recommend ?


    I am going to re-test my mother’s glasses that are i think -1.5 for both eyes. I will come back to you and tell you how they work for indoor activities like television and outside activities.

    I made an account on the forum. Waiting for approval. Thank you so much !

    • Todd


      I’ve approved your Discussion Forum account. I look forward to your contributions there!

      I’ve written quite a bit on the Forum regarding on how to deal with improving eyes that have differing degrees of myopia. Go to the Forum and do a search on the terms “anisometropia”, “patch” and “diffuser” and you’ll find some good discussion about that.

      If after reading that material you still have questions, then post them here or — even better — start a new thread on “anisometropia” on the Forum.



    • Hi Stephen,

      I totally support Todd in this work – and defer to him. But let me add my own suggestions.

      NEW GLASSES: Plan to get them from:

      Get the $7 glasses. I like to do my own checking – with my own “test” lenses. I would suggest ordering -2 glasses (for around the house use. I estimate this will give you “working” vision around the house (i.e., 20/50). You will need the -3 for driving a car. I also suggest using this Snellen, it is easy and accurate, and can be used at 10 feet – as it says.
      Judy click here, and then on “Display” several times to get the idea. Then set for 10 feet.

      In addition to the “convenient” -2 diopters for most use, I would order glasses with a -1.5 and -0.75 diotpers. You will use these glasses to fully check the amount of minus it takes to clear the 20/40 and 20/20 line. (The total charge will be $20 for these glasses.) If you have an “experimental mind”, and wish to make all your own measurements – this is the way I do it.


    • Hi Stephen,

      Subject: Why *I* got involved with the science of prevention.

      I also became seriously myopic BECAUSE the doctor I went to had the habit of vast over-prescription for me!! The link (Perkins Study) between serious myopia and the blindness created by wearing a strong minus is very REAL. (You will find that almost all ODs and MDs will deny it.)

      I may be “hyper” about plus-prevention (when you are at 20/50), but getting back to normal (at that point) is to prevent a very serious health risk.

      I deeply regret the “stony silence” you get from a professional, when you ask about the POSSIBILITY of prevention when you are at 20/40 to 20/50.

      We should be helping our children with prevention, and the ODs and MDs should be supporting us in this cause. We should be insisting that, when a child is taught to read (and still has 20/40 vision), that he 1) Sit up, eyes no closer than 13 inches, and 2) Wear a plus 2.5 diopter lens – possible at 20/40. Those people who we “look up to”, do not feel ANY obligation to help a child with prevention.

      This is why I support Todd and his obvious success. There is a need for this type of “change”, but to date, we are victims of people who wish to avoid responsibility to help us – in my opinion. This might not help you directly, but we should all have the motivation to tell the truth about this issue. Here is some more commentary on this tragic failure of the N.I.H., and the N.E.I.


  4. Shahbhaz Khan


    Plz help me how to recover my sight i have -1.50 on left eye and i have -2.75 on right eye how i recover this eye sight plz give some clues or any exercise i will do everyday i cant see names on green board.. plz help me how to recover my eye’s….

    • Todd

      Read the article…all the information is there. For more information, go to the Eyesight without Glasses on the Discussion Forum

  5. Shahbhaz Khan


    Ok, but can i get any exercise tips to do for recover -1.50 eyesight in left n right in -2.0 … am wearing glasses from last 3months ago…
    Is there is chance to recover my eyes???

    • Todd


      Of course! Many people have started with far stronger myopia than yours and reduced or eliminated the myopia. Read carefully through the post above, and the article called “Rehabilitation”. Go to the Discussion Forum — all the information is there. If you need more detail, buy a copy of The Secret of Perfect Vision by David DeAngelis and do the exercises.

      I can’t answer questions if you haven’t done the reading.


  6. Subject: Professionals who support prevention, who they are and how they can help you.

    There are indeed many ODs and MDs who are in fact hostile to prevention (in the 20/40 to 20/70 range, or -1/2 to -1.5 diopters). You are never told about the possibility of prevention, because these ODs judge that any discussion of this possibility if fraudulent – to YOU. Or they feel 1) you will not accept prevention, or 2) You will reject it, and blame THEM if you do not succeed.

    I object to these two ideas, and want my intelligence respected. I want to be challenged by prevention, and take responsibility – when success is most probable. While I am “not medical”, I do recommend medical people to help you. Here is an ophthalmologist who will face these issues with you. Todd did it “on his own”, but I truly recommend that you realize that not all medical people are hostile to prevention.

    Alex> Greetings,

    I am an ophthalmologist from Austria, practicing preventative and rehabilitation specialised ophthalmology for over 10 years – my father has also been in the same line of work for over 40 years.

    We have found that myopia can easily be prevented during childhood, and in many cases reversed during adulthood. While much of the direct impact comes from the use of the eyes, especially prolonged short distance focus, elevated insulin response triggers also aggravate myopia symptoms greatly.

    A good 30% of the success in vision rehabilitation comes from reducing the body’s exposure to sugars / simple carbohydrates. The impact of eliminating sugar from the diet on vision is nothing short of astonishing, especially when paired with a good rehabilitative program.

    I personally have overseen easily over 300 cases where adults with 20/70 vision have managed to get to 20/20 and even 20/10 without surgery.

    – Alex Frauenfeld
    Frauenfeld Vision Clinic | Preventative and Restorative Vision Care


    I am not involved with “money”, but I have no problem paying people for all the help they can provide.

    I do suggest that you have a clear goal (clear the 20/40 line and better), when you start working on the concept of prevention.


  7. Username

    Thanks for the reply earlier guys

    I’ve started giving print pushing a go, but is it bad for me to use + lenses/ no lenses for my myopic condition?

    Without glasses, I have to put my face at least 17cm from the computer screen to read clearly.
    Wouldn’t print pushing at such a close distance worsen myopia? I’m worried because my myopia originated from prolonged computer use at close distance

    Thank you in advance

    • Todd


      Here’s the difference between the close up reading that caused your myopia and the close up print pushing that will reverse it:

      – In normal close up reading, you are reading INSIDE your maximum focal distance, and thereby accommodating your eyes to axial lengthening
      – In print pushing, you are reading AT THE EDGE of your maximum focal distance, thereby stimulating your eyes to shorten axial length and increase their range of focus. With time, you will continue to push the reading material farther away, so the reading distances will increase.

      This is the same reason that your arm muscles will get stronger only if you lift weights at the edge of your ability. If you lift light weights, you may improve endurance, but you won’t induce muscle growth.

      To prove this to yourself, measure your Snellen rating before and after a week of print pushing. If you don’t improve, stop this method and you have lost nothing.


      • Username_

        Oh thank you Todd, I was pretty unclear and cloudy about it but now I understand it completely.

        I’ll report back in around 2 months to show results! =)

  8. Username_

    Sorry, another question

    Is it a must to push print with +lenses with -3.50, -3.25 or can I do it with the naked eye? Because I don’t think I’d be able to see anything with +lenses

    • Todd


      With any myopia above about -2, you are best off print pushing with your naked eyes. Once your myopia weakens to less than -2, you can begin to use plus lenses.


  9. nammi


    My age is 22… my eye sight of left eye is +0.75…n right is normal…i usually wear the glasses when i work with computers n while watching TV..Does this print pushing method is applied in ma case…?

    • Todd

      Yes. Read it and try it.

  10. Username_

    Hi Todd,

    I’ve been push printing for a week and within that time I think I saw a few centimeters further than I was suppose to! But my bragging isn’t the problem here, though I wish it was 😛 I can now see hope!

    I feel like the improvements have been reversed through overuse of the computer. As the usual guidelines say you should rest your eyes for 15 mins or so after each hour on the computer. (Please correct me If I’m mistaken) I’ve been push printing and then going straight on to my other activities for another hour (or slightl more) after push printing without rest.

    Is it more detrimental than good to push print for 2 hours or more without rest

    • Todd

      Hi User,

      That’s good to hear that you think you’ve increased your focal distance by a few centimeters. But it’s better to “know” than to “think”. Print out a Snellen Chart (or view one on your computer) by going to this website. Score yourself today and test again in a week. That’s the only way you will “know” if you are improving:

      Rest and frequent breaks are important. If you were trying to build muscle strength in the gym by lifting weights, wouldn’t you take breaks? Or would you lift continuously for 2 hours? Maybe you can eventually increase your sessions to more than an hour. But you are best starting with shorter sessions until you get used to it. Trust your sense of fatigue.


  11. Emir

    Hi there, my right eye is about 150 power, blurry at short range and even more blurrier long range. Left eye is only about 10 power but it has almost perfect vision. I think for few years I’ve been using my left eye for vision only. I’m 20 now and I’ve got this since 17 I guess. Also I have astigs.

    How do I tackle this problem?

    • Hi Emir,
      Let me clarify so I can understand. You say 150 power for right eye. I think you mean -1.5 diopters, but it might be +1.5 diopters. It is important to know correctly. You say left eye 10 power. Is that 10 diopters? Or is it 0.10 diopters? Todd has posted a standard eye-chart. I would strongly recommend you put is up at 20 feet (6 meters) and read it. You say ‘blurry for both near and far’. In general “blurry for far” is nearsighted. “Blurry for near” is “farsighted”. To sort this out it is necessary that you personally check your Snellen – in my opinion. Let us know.


  12. Shima

    I already read the articls , but i still dont understand what push print means ,is it squinting ur eyes till u can see it quite clearly?

    • Todd


      No squinting! Keep your eyes wide open. Print pushing is very clearly explained in the section “How to proceed” above. Read it. To recap, print pushing means (1) first bring your eyes close enough to the book or computer that you can see it in perfect focus; (2) then move back from the book or computer until the print just barely begins to blur; (3) read at this distance and blink every so often until the print clears up sharp again; (4) take frequent breaks; (5) periodically move back a small distance until you see a slight blur; (6) repeat this again and again; (7) eventually the distance will increase that you can read in focus

      This is all clearly explained in the article above. Read it carefully.


  13. BetterEyesight

    I read the blog and completely understand everything. I just want to see evidence of printouts of your eyesight measurements whenever you went to the eye doctor every once in a while, so I can see that Todd went from -3 to 20/20 in a certain amount of time. I want to see these people that claim that their eyesight got better, I want to see the print outs of their eyesight measurements everytime you got your eyesight checked and updated.
    My email is

    • Todd


      You are right to want to see evidence for a therapy or procedure before believing it or pursuing it. To my knowledge, there are no controlled studies that specifically look at print pushing as a therapeutic intervention, i.e. following the specific procedure advocated here or in David DeAngelis book, The Secret of Perfect Vision. However, in the bibliography of the DeAngelis book, there are 6 pages of studies demonstrating that myopia can be prevented or reversed using plus lenses, in both animals and humans; and the converse–that minus lenses accelerate myopia. A full copy of the book is linked here — go to pages 213-218.

      In your note you state that I went from -3 to 20/20. I never said that. Apparently Otis got that idea somehow — maybe extrapolating from the statement in my articles that I started out with strong myopia. (I asked him to correct that, which he has now done in the following note). However because I’m curious and should probably know what my original prescription was, I’ve asked my former optometrist (who I last saw maybe 10 years ago). He doesn’t have it on file, but will get it out of stored records, so I’ll know that soon.

      But I’m not sure how we could answer your question to your satisfaction without getting the cooperation of a professional opthamologist. The problem is that an OD typically makes a measurement of diopters in order to provide a prescription. This often will result in BETTER than 20/20 vision, because the OD wants you to see extra sharp. Typically, you will not be given a Snellen score. And yet at home, to track vision improvement, all we can do is record our Snellen score. We don’t have a Retinoscope or Auto Refractometer like the OD, so we cannot make a diopter measurement. The two cannot be precisely correlated.

      You ask for “printouts” of eyesight measurments? There is nothing to print out at home. The instructions for a Snellen score are to read an eye chart at 20 feet in strong light until you reach the last line that you can read correctly. There is nothing to “print out”. Using the Snellen charts, my current Snellen is 20/20 in the right eye and 20/40 in the left. The net effect with both eyes open is 20/20, since the stronger eye will dominate.

      I cannot march into an optometrist and ask him to measure my Snellen score every week. I have to do it myself. If somebody wants to fund a controlled study to test this, then be my guest.

      So all you have access to are

      (A) the six pages of published studies in the back of The Secret of Perfect Vision.
      (B) numerous testimonials in the Discussion Forum in the thread entitled Eyesight without Glasses. There you will see at least 6 individuals who significantly reduced their Snellen scores
      (C) the article entitled How One Person Improved His Vision, about one teenager who reduced his Snellen Score from 20/40 to 20/15 using these methods

      Hope that helps.

      The other thing you can do is try this method yourself for a month. There is no downside and a lot of upside. It’s not like taking a drug that might have adverse side effects. What are you waiting for?


  14. Subject: A correction (on my part).

    I reported Todd vision at -3.0 diopters. I was in error in that statement. He stated that his vision was very poor, and he had a strong prescription.

    I consider normal vision to be an objective test I make of my own Snellen. I must pass or read the 20/40 line or better. Typically there is a difference of 1/2 diopter between both eyes. Thus one eye will be 20/20, and the other 20/40. The DMV test is with BOTH EYES OPEN. You always see with the better eye. SUCCESS is, to me, going down to the DMV and objectively passing their test.

    I have seen incredible over-prescriptions. If you have a -4 diopter minus lens, then, in concept you should not be able to see clearly beyond 10 inches. When a person with that prescription can read at 20 inches (-2 diopters), then he is profoundly over-prescribed. I think this was the case with Dennis. I have both his prescription (script), and his Driver’s license. It took him about three months to get to 20/40 or better. (But I think it was from an actual 20/60 on his Snellen.) Here is his statement:


    By Dennis Romich,

    My distance vision had been poor for many years. I had overheard Otis Brown discussing nearsightedness, and his suggested technique for restoring the myopic eye to normal. Without telling Otis, I decided to attempt to use the plus lens, and see what would happen, since the approach seemed reasonable and much safer than any other method.

    I obtained a plus lens at a local store without a prescription. The lens was a +1.5 diopter lens and is commonly sold as a reading glass for people who have lost their near vision.

    I had become nearsighted in grade school and was prescribed minus lenses which I dutifully wore all day long. As the years went by, my vision worsened, and the Doctor would prescribe stronger minus lens. My distance vision without prescription lenses was very bad through high school, college, and graduate school. The last professional check (Ophthalmologist) showed that my prescription was -4.5 diopters (Right eye) and -4.25 diopters (Left eye). This is approximately 20/320 vision using the Snellen eye chart. In some states, I would be classed as legally blind without my glasses.

    As I wore the plus-lens and did not wear the minus lens, I noticed that my distance vision began to clear. After several weeks, I purchased Otis’ book, and checked my eyes against the eye chart. They were 20/30, which means I will pass the standard driver’s license criteria of 20/40 or better without prescription lenses.

    Otis was surprised at this effect of the plus lens. He stated that most individuals could return their vision from 20/70 to 20/20, but he felt that returning vision from 20/320 to 20/30 was hard to believe. Since I have done it successfully, I have no doubt that other individuals who have a similar problem could obtain similar results using Otis’ recommended method of vision restoration.

    I am a registered professional engineer, and have a Master’s degree in both Engineering and Business Administration.


    • BetterEyesight

      Ok, so email me the prescriptions he had. I read Otis that you helped your Nephew clear his eye sight chart. You helped him get to 20/20. Anyone can say that. So, where is the evidence of him actually getting to 20/20. There is none. If there is please email me. You claim you have Dennis’s prescription script. Anyone can say their eye sight got better from the process, but could also be lying. I am not calling you a liar. BUt, where is the evidence to support your claim? Email me these scripts from the eye doctor. I am not going to lie, I did plus lense therapy for 2 months, thought I was out of -3 range. I go to eye doctor, my eye sight from last doctor was -3.25 in both eyes. Went to a new doctor after the 2 months, left eye went from -3.25 to -2.50. Right eye went from -3.25 to -3.75. Astigmatism went away. This is all good news and all. But why would right eye get worse and left eye get better. There could be a chance the 2 different eye doctors measured completely wrong. So, please email me these eye prescription print out. If you cant do that, then your claim for better eye sight could be false. A lawyer prosecuting attorney cant say “He committed the crime! HE killed her! HE did it!” The judge is going to say “Show me the proof” Same thing in this case. There are evil people out there that want to harm people. And this could not or very well be the case of this website. So, please email me your proof. Otis, and you say that your eyesight for seing far but your upclose vision is bad. But, you also claim you had 2 or 3 cataract surgeries in both eyes. I read cataract surgeries recover your vision and you pick whether you want far or close vision. If you choose far then your going to need reading glasses. If this is true, you would of picked far vision. So, anyone that claims their eyesight got better especially Otis and Todd and Shadowfoot, I would appreciate if you sent your eye sight print outs to my computer, with a signature from your doctor. Thank you.

      • BetterEyesight

        Sorry I typoed, please send the eye sight printouts to my email not my computer with a signature from your doctor on that sheet.

      • Hi BetterEyeSight,

        Otis> Do you maintain a website? If you do, could you please post it?

        Better> I read, Otis, that you helped your Nephew clear his eye sight chart.

        Otis> No, I informed him that if he wished to AVOID GETTING A MINUS LENS – he had to always pass the DMV. Let me be clear – he MIGHT have chosen to NOT do that.

        In the research papers of Dr. Francis Young (and many bifocal studies) you find the natural eye GOING DOWN by -1/2 diopter per year for EACH YEAR IN SCHOOL.

        Thus, to be effective, the “plus” must be STARTED before the eye actually goes negative, or perhaps only slightly negative.

        He wore the plus through high school, college and graduate school. (It was always his choice – since he knew FOR CERTAIN what would happen if he did NOT DO THAT. The primate studies are totally convincing to us AS PURE SCIENCE – on that issue.}

        Thus my nephew’s success must be judged against the fact that we KNOWN that the “down rate” is -1/2 diopter per year – for an eye that is not protected with a plus lens.

        If he had not “kept after himself”, he would most likely have gone down by -5 diopters after 10 years in school and college.

        I informed him that if he did not want THAT to happen to his natural eyes – he would have the be in objective control of his distant vision.

        I truly never say ‘therapy’, nor ‘cure’. The intelligent decision and choice MUST BE PERSONAL.

        The objective measurement MUST BE BY THE PERSON HIMSELF. There is not need or reason to “involve” and OD in this process.

        An OD charges are typically $400 – $250 for the exam and $150 for the glasses.

        Why should he pay for that, when protecting your own distant vision (for life) only costs him the intellectual effort, a Snellen, and $10 for the plus lens whenever it is required. It was required – and he “kept at it”.

        Better> You helped him get to 20/20. Anyone can say that.

        Otis> No, I just helped him to understand what would happen IF HE DID NOT 1) Monitor his distant vision himself, and 2) Start wearing a +2 for all close work. The REST was totally UP TO HIM.

        Otis> Only he knows his own results.

        Otis> I did check both his Snellen (20/20 – objectively) and his refractive STATE, at 0.0 diopters (or so-called emmetropia}.

        Otis> So we are clear about objective scientific measurements of refractive status of the natural eye? Here is how I do it, objectively.

        I find this “classic” refractive measurement to be very accurate. If you do it yourself – you will believe your results.

        There is no need, nor any requirement that I pay someone $250 to do what I can do more accurately and repeatably myself.

        The other reason is that I find incredible OVER-PRESCRIPTIONS of from 1 to 3 dioters by ODs – typically. It is a waste of my time to rely or trust an OD in his office. I do it much more accurately myself.

        You can either believe this type of accurate, engineering measurement, or dis-believe it.

      • Todd


        I don’t know why you are demanding “proof”. Do you really doubt the results that dozens have posted here on this site and the Forum? And published in books and articles that I have cited. Why would people return month after month to post lies about their progress. I suppose we are all part of a big conspiracy to fool people!

        I have no idea why one of your eyes improved and the other got worse. Of course, you went to 2 different ODs. Maybe they used slightly different measurement methods. Or maybe your eyesight is variable from one day to the next.

        The information on this website is available for you to try for free. I make no money on it. But I have no interest in debating with people who challenge the credibility and integrity of others.



    Regarding> Why I personally check my refractive state – myself. Why I do not TRUST and OD to make any measurement of my refractive STATE.

    Here is another example of GROSS over-prescription. The man who over-prescribed by -4.0 diopters – got extremely UPSET. (Do you think you could get an ACCURATE measurement from the man?

    Note: If you, with your own Snellen can read the 20/40 or better with a -6.0 diotper lens – you don’t need a -10.0 diopter lens. Something is PROFOUNDLY wrong with this OD’s methods of measurement. That is why I do my own checking – and do not respond to people asking that I “TRUST” any OD in his office.





    I have retyped this letter from the original and changed the names. Jeanie’s daughter started out (at age six) with 20/50. She received a strong minus lens — even though 20/50 is acceptable for most children. After years of receiving minus lenses stronger than necessary, she received a lens increase from -6.0 to -10.0 diopters. Jeanie’s suspicion and response is described in the following paragraphs.


    Jenie> Here are copies of my daughter’s eye records and
    prescriptions. You will never know how grateful I am for you and
    Mr. Severson. When I stop and think of what could have happened
    to Shanna had I not found you — my blood starts to boil. I have
    come to realize that people never question eye doctors as they do
    medical doctors. We are all at their mercy and do not even know
    it. You have my permission to give my telephone number to anyone
    who you feel needs it.


    Shanna received the new contacts on August 5. She puts in
    -10.0 Diopter and is able to see — she says one mile down the
    road. I immediately told her to take them out. After begging my
    optometrist to please give me information to stabilize her vision,
    he becomes EXTREMELY UPSET. I then went to the libraries and book
    stores looking for information but I found only William Bates’
    name. I then ordered his book. Next I found Mr. Severson and
    finally you in the back of his book. After reading your books I
    immediately knew I had the wrong optometrist — so I nicely asked
    his assistance in obtaining a -6 Diopter lens for studying. The
    doctor reluctantly gave them to Shanna, telling us to use them for
    STUDYING ONLY. I then confirmed the focal status of Shanna’s
    eye’s, by assisting her in checking her vision against the eye
    chart — both inside and outside.

    8/26/95 20/20 -8.0 RE -7.5 LE
    8/26/95 20/100 -6.0 RE -6.0 LE (Provided for reading)
    8/31/95 20/40 -6.0 RE -6.0 LE
    9/26/95 20/20 -6.0 RE -6.0 LE (See the -10.0 D script – below)

    Since she was seeing so well on 9/26/95, I told her to remove
    her contacts and then come back outside. Without ANYTHING on she
    stood 20 feet away and could focus on the 20/70 and 20/50 line for
    about 2 or 3 seconds — then she said it would flash or float

    An Excessive -10 D Prescription?

    Prescription by Dr. Bob Smyeth, Optometrist, Dated 8/5/95:

    Patient: Shanna Brave, Birth Date, 3/2/82:

    8/5/85 20/20 -10.0 RE -9.5 LE (Prescription)
    In subsequent conversations with Jeanie, she stated that her nine year-old son was just starting into nearsightedness, and that she would do everything in her power to help her son with the proper use of the plus lens — to avoid the catastrophic situation that had developed with her daughter. Jeanie wondered why this knowledge is not made generally available to the parents of young children.


    This is a result of typical over-prescription policy. I do NOT keep track of these people – there is no reason for me to do so.

    My interest was to help my Nephew avoid this “minus-lens TRAP”. To avoid it, he had to UNDERSTAND that NO OD WOULD, or COULD ever help him with true-prevention. This is because he knew that NO OD has the time to discuss true-prevention with you.

    In my opinion, any use of the minus – it deadly – if your goal it to keep your Snellen clear for life, and refractive status close to zero.

    • BetterEyesight

      Explain this to me then. Why do you say over prescriped minus lense would make your eyes worse? I believe that. BUt it is contradicting yourself to say to put on a plus, thats a pair of glasses you do not need. It would make your eyes worse if putting on negative lenses would make your far distant vision worse. So, saying negative lenses do make your far distance vision worse, plus lenses would make your up close vision worse. Saying plus lenses dont make your up close vision worse is saying negative lenses dont make your far eye sight worse.

      • Todd

        Better Eyesight,

        There is no contradiction. Minus lenses induce myopia. Plus lenses on a person with normal eyesight would induce hyperopia. But because they apply the OPPOSITE optics of a plus lens they will begin to compensate and reverse myopia in someone with myopia. This is simple physics.

        I’m assuming here that the person with myopia has good vision — more than is necessary. Wearing the plus lenses for a long time might begin to diminish near vision — but only AFTER the person has lost their myopia.

        Of course, there is a condition known as presbyopia, where both near and far vision get worse due to stiffening (loss of elasticity) in the crystalline lens. Print pushing in BOTH directions can help with that to some degree, although if you have truly lost focal range due to aging of the eye, there’s not much that can be done about that.


      • Hi “Better Eye Sight” and Group,

        I know that no one will EVER answer YOUR questions to YOUR satisfaction. But for others, I will respond to some questions I have had developed over the years.

        1) How accurate is an OD’s measurement in an office.

        Answer: VERY POOR. I have seen variations of from 1 to 4 diopters. I have just posted examples of this “over-prescription” habit. This is why I suggest the person get a Snellen chart and objectively check himself. ( I also use trial lenses – as I have demonstrated. )

        2) Why do they over-prescribe the eye?

        A: a) They are in a hurry. b) The “public” does not understand anything but the crude impression a “minus” has on your distant vision. c) Unless very-wise, few people will take the time to “commit” to wearing the preventive plus when they still have 20/40 to 20/60 vision.

        3) Does the minus have an effect (objectively) on all eyes.

        A: A profound effect – as pure science. To me this is the FINAL SCIENCE of all natural eyes. You can “argue” with it – but this is why the “minus” while impressive, is the “wrong solution. Animation of the effect:

        Thus, when Todd states that the minus is a “poor idea”, he has science to back up his statement.

        4) What is the effect of long-term near on the refractive state – of all natural eyes.

        A: The above video shows that the natural eye is “adaptive” to changes in its environment. Thus putting the eye in a “cage” results in the eye “adapting” to long-term near, and taking on a negative STATE. The two issues are TIGHTLY connected.

        5) Why does not an OD tell me this.

        A: Because he assumes you will not understand these issues – and besides he is “busy”, and his life does not involve “preventing” anything – because he never gets paid for it. This is why I do my own checking, and refraction. Here is a humorous video that shows WHY an OD is “tied up” and can not be of help to you. Perhaps this explains the “curt” answers to your questions – when you ask, “does the minus cause negative status”?

        I do not disparage ODs in there office. But they have run-up a loan of $ 200,000 and must pay it off. This creates “office myopia”, where they simply don’t have time for prevention. If you want that, you will have to “DO IT YOURSELF”.

        That is what Todd did (with great insight and fortitude). These are answers that satisfy my questions.

        But, because the OD is “to busy”, you can not expect them to be able to converse with you about these questions and answers.

        You must be smart enough to figure this out for yourself.

        Keeping your distant vision as PASSING the REQUIRED DMV test does take a great deal of personal resolve, and effort. It is like “weight loss” or “weigh control”. If you have the motivation and insight for it – you can protect your distant vision through the school years with a plus. If you lack the insight and fortitude – then you will lose your distant vision. Science shows WHY this happens.

  16. Todd,
    My last post from “Ares” got lost.

    This is a test.

  17. Posted by Otis:

    Statement by Ares:

    Hi Todd and Otis,

    thanks for your replies and sorry for taking so long to acknowledge.
    I must say your site has been inspirational for me as prior to coming across it and researching further on the net,
    I was not aware that myopia can be reversed … and it has given me great hope.

    I am writing to tell of my progress, as well and am going to be a bit long winded and taking the long description approach for the benefit of other newbies like me. So here goes…

    Last Saturday I received my undercorrected glasses from zenni and started to use them immediately.
    I left out the astigmatism corrections out so they are just plain undercorrected by -0.50 diopter. My prescription is -3.25

    I noticed that after almost a whole day of wearing them I felt a bit dizzy in the evening. The same for the following day.
    The days afterwards were better although naturally I did not feel as comfortable as normal correction glasses.
    Also when it starts to get dark vision worsens obviously and I change back to my normal correction glasses.

    My general comment is that for close work I do not notice the difference. But vision starts to blur slightly at a distance of several feet and blurring increases as distance increases and so on.

    Prior to getting my undercorrected glasses, I started to print push by reading books with my naked eyes. Also since my work consists of staring at a computer monitor daily, I started doing half an hour or a bit more daily working without glasses. To do this, I had to stand my monitor up to get it as eye level as possible as well as getting it as close as approx. 14 inches in front of my eyes to be able to work at all.
    I also started to drive without glasses but only in strong sunlight as well as generally spending a few random stretches of time daily without glasses.

    Needless to say, this is not comfortable and I start to catch myself leaning in towards the monitor or gradually pulling the book closer to my eyes. Alas my commitment towards doing all this naked eye work started to lessen.

    That is why I thought that wearing undercorrected glasses all the time will address the problem “almost” effortlessly!

    Otis, good points about measuring and keeping track of my Snellen. That is next on my agenda.

    After all of this, what I do not understand is why don’t you recommend using the undercorrected glasses for close work as well? The way I see it my eyes are still focusing through reduced lenses all the time, thus forcing them to improve hormetically, no?

    My main concern here is not to be comfortable per se but to not worsen my myopia by doing things incorrectly.

    I will go through the site again to try to understand better what I did not get the first time round 🙂

    Thanks again for your time.


  18. Mohammad Asrar

    Hi sir,

    I read the above article.Sir i have a fareye-sightedness of -1.50 in left eye and -2.75 in right eye from last six months I am wearing a glass of -1.25point in left and -2.0 in right eye.On dec 1st i knw about the Bates method. I found bates method website and read the articles In Bates method there are only 5 excercises in that no.4 and no.5 are far- eyesightedness excersise.. i want to know that is that exercise are helpful to recover my far eyesightedness eye’s??

    Thank you!

    • Todd

      Sorry, I’m not very familiar with the Bates method or specific exercises. You might want to consult one of the Bates Method websites. For the best eye exercises, I would recommend that you buy a copy of The Secret of Perfect Vision, by David DeAngelis, or link to it here.

    • Hi Mohammad Asrar,

      I have done a considerable study of Dr. Bates and his “methods”. I admire the fact that he attempted the world’s FIRST preventive study in 1912. He might not have had the “right ideas” – but I always admire a man who will ATTEMPT a solution with a large group of young people who have from 20/40 to 20/70 on their Snellen eye-chart.

      From your “prescription” for -1.5 diopters – you are NOT far-sighted”. You are NEAR sighted. I do not advocate “exercise” – since these are so poorly defined – as to have no meaning. My “exercise” is to 1) Look at a quality Snellen chart. 2) Check to see which line I read (say 20/60). 3) Avoid wearing a minus lens, and 4) Wear an anti-prescription (plus) lens for all close work. 5) Keep on doing this, until I objectively pass the 20/40 line (required for driving) on my own Snellen chart.

      My Commentary> Much as Bates suggested (clear off pseudo-myopia, 20/40 to 20/60), you can do it with a “anti-prescription” lens, or “exercise”. But you must get a Snellen, and DO YOUR OWN CHECKING to verify success. Very few people seem to have the motivation to make that type of commitment – to produce successful results.

      If you wish to review an EXPERT Bates site I suggest you read this one:

      I wish you good luck on your efforts to clear your Snellen chart back to 20/40 or better.

      • Mohammad Asrar

        ok Otis sir i will try my best.But sir am confused that you are saying i have near sighted.But I am not able to see clear distant objects.In my class room from last benches to the board i can’t see the clear word’s what is written on the board.So i want to know sir what is myopia and hyperopes.

        Sir anti-prescription lens are so neccessary to use or not.Because i want to do only “excercise”

        Thank you sir

        • Hi Mohammad,

          From a long time ago, medical doctors stated that 1) If you can see clear (far and near) you have “emmetropia”. If you can not see “far”, i.e., you can not read the 20/50 line on a Snellen chart, you are called “NEAR-sighted” – meaning that you can see OK near, but not OK far. The standard process is, when you can read the 20/50 line, but not the 20/20 line, is to hold up a -1.5 diopter lens to determine if that clears the 20/20 line for you.

      • Shaker Shoheb

        Ok sir can i take plus lense glasses for my eyes??? And what number it should be??

        Thanks for the reply..:)

      • Mohammed Asrar

        Hi otis sir,

        Sir i have doing exercises from last 1mnth in my left eye there is lot of change but there is no change in right eye. I am able to see distant objects clearly with left eye but not with right eye.Sir i want to do both eyes sight equal it is possible sir.

        Final word sir., i dont know much more about lenses So i want to know that what is anti-prescription plus lenses can i know details about this and i want to see image of anti-prescription plus lense because of clear idea. After clearation of that am going to buy plus lenses.

        Thank you sir in Advance..:)

        • Todd

          Shaker, Ayaan, Mohammed, and others:

          I cannot continue to answer specific questions about particular prescriptions for myopia and hyperopia. This is not a medical advice site, and I am not in the business of giving medical advice. The purpose of this blog and article are to demonstrate how the principles of hormetism apply to vision improvement. If you read through the hundreds of comments above, you will see that I have answered similar questions before. And there are numerous related discussions on the Discussion Forum. I have also provided numerous references to books and scientific articles that provide further elaboration.

          If you read through the post and the comments with an understanding mind, you will be understand the principles of vision improvement and will be able to answer your own questions.

          Thus, I have decided to close any further comments to this article. For those wishing to discussion further, you can go to the Discussion Forum and add to the conversation there:

          Discussion Forum: Eyesight without Glasses


  19. Subject: How to avoid the problem of gross over-prescriptions.

    Perhaps the OD is “too busy” to be accurate. Perhaps he had a “bad day”. Who knows the reason. From the above posts, I see a lot of excessive minus prescriptions. But the “average person” never checks! Here is an ophthalmologist who argues (as I do) that you should START by doing your own checking – as I do it.

    I don’t know whether, Todd was “over-prescribed”, but the wise “end result” must be that you objectively read the 20/40 line on your own Snellen chart. Most people believe that if they do “exercise” at home, that – somehow – the OD will verify you “improved” your vision.

    Because of these OD accomplish incompetent measurements, I think that is a mistake to rely on THEIR measurements. It is a very expensive ($250 exam, and $150 for glasses), and often in error.

    I strongly support Dr. Frauenfeld’s advocacy that you have the education to take personal responsibility to objectively double check your visual acuity yourself.

  20. Shaker Shoheb


    I have a eye sight of -1.50 in left eye and -2.75 in right eye .Which number of +plus lens i have to take?For my both eyes..

  21. Ayaan Khan


    I completly understand the above article.I have a nearsightedness of -1.50 in left and -2.75 in right.Can i wear plus lens glasses to improve my near sightedness ?And which number should i used for both eyes +1or +2 lens glasses or spectacles..

17 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Health286 | I have 20/30 Vision and was prescribed glasses, how could I improve my nearsightedness naturally? 04 03 13
  2. Hormetism. Time to get the strongest eyes! :) | Thuan's Corner of the Web 14 03 13
  3. “Professor” D | BJ Thoughts... 22 03 13
  4. Next Goal: -4.00 | Improving Eyesight Naturally 25 03 13
  5. Improving myopia? | Mark's Daily Apple Health and Fitness Forum page 07 07 13
  6. Frauenfeld Clinic in Austria and Alex Frauenfeld don't exists | Mark's Daily Apple Health and Fitness Forum page 24 02 14
  7. Is Nearsightedness a Reversible Condition? 28 08 14
  8. Improving your eyesight naturally? - 04 04 15
  9. Eye focusing exercises: Pumping between near & far focus | Spiritual Cookie 02 10 15
  10. Push Printing eye focusing exercise | Spiritual Cookie 02 10 15
  11. 14 Ways to Help You Look Primal | Mark's Daily Apple 08 06 16
  12. 14 Ways to Help You Look Primal | Eat Yourself Skinny 08 06 16
  13. 14 Ways to Help You Look Primal | Health ,Beauty and Lifestyle 09 06 16
  14. Push Printing eye focus exercise | Spiritual Cookie 03 08 16
  15. Diet To Improve Weak Eyesight Care | How To Cure Eye Sight 12 03 17
  16. long slow walks - Anthony Mychal 20 06 17
  17. Starting my eye-improvement journey – Edmond Chen 02 07 17