Vision Freedom program by Brian Severson

[Sunniesdre]

Has anyone tried the Vision Freedom program by Brian Severson and had any
results -- or do you know of anyone?

Thanks.

[ArthurJ]

In article <19970914022...@ladder02.news.aol.com>,
sunni...@aol.com (Sunniesdre) writes:

>Has anyone tried the Vision Freedom program by Brian Severson and had any
>results -- or do you know of anyone?
>

Yes, I have tried (and have been trying) it since April '97. I am
near-sighted (myopic), 37 years old, and my vision was stable for at least
4 years prior to this experiment. I have indeed improved: from -5/-3.25 to
-3.8/-2.5 diopters (average vision), by my own measurement, however this
falls decidely short of Vision Freedom's (VF) claim that 20/20 is possible
in 6-8 weeks. Other relevant facts/opinions:

o VF's core contention is that certain unnamed eye muscles (by allusion,
the extra-oculars) can be trained to counter myopia. I find this credible
(though I question whether the extra-oculars are responsible) -- the
medical literature indicates that this ability, "negative accommodation",
is fairly common. However, in my personal experience and in my reading,
it's a small ability -- too small to compensate most myopes.
o I've been stable (not improving) for about the last two months.
o The improvement (mine) is partially lost if glasses are worn for close
work. (It can take days to recover; 6-8 weeks after I wore glasses for 4 days).
o I've corresponded with one other person using VF, who reports going
from -5.00D to -4.00D in about five months.

In short, while perhaps the system is not *entirely* bereft of merit --
gee, how shall I put this? -- let's just say I've not experienced the
dramatic improvements promised. I can't recommend it. This is not to say
I've abandoned my experiment -- I haven't. I continue to explore plausible
mechanisms to improve my vision, and, so far, rule them out one by one.
Perhaps in the future you'll see an enthusiastic post reporting my cure...
<grin>.

If you're interested in a rational treatment of the behavioral view of
myopia's genesis I highly recommend: "The Myopia Myth -- The Truth About
Nearsightedness and How to Prevent It" by Donald Rehm. The book's early
chapters describe the workings of the eye for the layman, then present a
lucid and compelling case for the behavioral theory of myopia, and explains
how to slow, halt, or even partially reverse myopia's progression. Some of
the latter chapters are unfairly critical of mainstream optometry,
reflecting no doubt the author's earnest frustration in dealing with said
institution, but the information in the book more than justifies its modest
cost. It's available for $15, postpaid, from the International Myopia
Prevention Assn., RD 5, Box 171, Ligonier, Pennsylvania 15658.

Regards,
James Arthur (not a doctor)

[olehippies]

ArthurJ wrote:
>
> In article <19970914022...@ladder02.news.aol.com>,
> sunni...@aol.com (Sunniesdre) writes:
>
> >Has anyone tried the Vision Freedom program by Brian Severson

> (though I question whether the extra-oculars are responsible) -- 4 days).

(snipped due to picky mail server)
My question is: How, if their main premise is "improving muscle
strength" (and I may be wrong about this, as I found it extremely
difficult to read their web pages) -- HOW can they assert that
*glaucoma* can be treated with their method? Glaucoma has nothing to do
with the EOMs, as far as *I* know...

fran

[ArthurJ]

Fran wrote:
>Message-id: <342373...@wclynx.com>

I assume that Mr. Severson, in claiming to cure myopia, also purports to
relieve its complications, and further, that glaucoma is such a
complication. While the hypothesis seems plausible to me I have no way of
knowing whether it's correct, and I certainly wouldn't rely on it one bit.
I consider Vision Freedom's claims in this regard, to be very ill-advised,
to say the least. "Dangerous" might be more apt. People with serious
medical conditions need to see doctors -- doctors aren't perfect, but
they're pretty darn good, and illnesses of the eyes are nothing to play with.

While I'm fairly well read on the topic of myopia, I know next to
nothing about glaucoma and would not presume to offer any advice. I offer
the following as information only. I've read ("The Myopia Myth") that
nearpoint stress (focusing on close objects) raises the intra-ocular
pressure considerably, and this increase can be a sustained one. One of
vision therapy's fundamental aims is the relief of nearpoint stress. I
don't know if this would affect glaucoma. Also, I'm on a mailing list
wherein I've heard two testimonials from people reported that vision
therapy (VT) techniques (not VF specifically) relieved their glaucoma.
They cited IOP before and after, but I don't recall the details -- sorry.
So, it (VT) might merit investigation as something you might experiment
with while under the care of a (real) doctor, but I'd be very very
cautious. Being rather adventurous, I personally would be inclined to
research and experiment to see if there were any mild measures that might
help, but never as a substitute for conventional care.

Best luck,

[brett....@gmail.com]

On Sunday, 14 September 1997 01:00:00 UTC-6, Sunniesdre wrote:
> Has anyone tried the Vision Freedom program by Brian Severson and had any
> results -- or do you know of anyone?
>

> Thanks.

I bought it way back in the day and have had mixed results. I have been very gradually improving ever since. One thing which is hard is that the topic is very abstract and some of the ideas are metaphorical. "Strengthening" your muscles is not always the way to view it. "Reprogramming" your visual system is more like it. My myopia was completely cleared by the vision freedom system within a few months, I have wrestled with astigmatism and my progress is very slow. I think I was doing it wrong. I would recommend this system as well as studying the many bates method resources, they really do work.

[The Real Bev]

Are you telling us that you can cure the improper curvature of your
cornea with this method? Guffaw.


--
Cheers, Bev
"I don't care who your father is! Drop that cross
one more time and you're out of the parade!"

[brett....@gmail.com]

definitely. the visual system is capable of change, not just for the worse, and just because present medical theory does not understand this does not mean it is untrue. It is true that the pathological changes of the eye usually change only in one directly. this is largely because our interference in the feedback loop of the system forces deleterious adaptation. I see what Dr. Bates was saying when he said 'man cannot be convinced by reason of an opinion he did not use reason to acquire"

[Bob F]

On 12/3/2018 8:04 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 12/03/2018 02:42 PM, brett....@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Sunday, 14 September 1997 01:00:00 UTC-6, Sunniesdre  wrote:
>>> Has anyone tried the Vision Freedom program by Brian Severson and
>>> had any results -- or do you know of anyone?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>
>> I bought it way back in the day and have had mixed results.  I have
>> been very gradually improving ever since.  One thing which is hard is
>> that the topic is very abstract and some of the ideas are
>> metaphorical.  "Strengthening" your muscles is not always the way to
>> view it.  "Reprogramming" your visual system is more like it.  My
>> myopia was completely cleared by the vision freedom system within a
>> few months, I have wrestled with astigmatism and my progress is very
>> slow.  I think I was doing it wrong.  I would recommend this system
>> as well as studying the many bates method resources, they really do
>> work.
>
> Are you telling us that you can cure the improper curvature of your
> cornea with this method?  Guffaw.

I got tired of glasses, especially for skiing back in my 30's. I went to
a doctor that did biofeedback training and taught vision exercises. In a
matter of months, I could see fine without my glasses, and did not wear
any for decades. Several years ago I did start occasionally using
reading glasses for close work, and finally got prescription reading and
computer glasses this last year because of developing astigmatism
causing double vision. I am now 72 YO.

When I was younger, doing the near-far focus exercise could quickly move
my near focus from maybe 18" to 6" in 5 minutes of exercise.

Exercise sure worked for my vision.

[steve rekedal]

At the age of 48 I was a corporate pilot and wearing trifocal glasses. I used the vision freedom system to correct my vision to 20/20. I'm now 68 and do not wear glasses. My vision has deteriorated slightly in dim light. My secret was to open my eyes as wide as possible any time my vision was not perfect and within seconds my vision cleared, sometimes I would have to blink and then hold eyes wide open. It became a habit I never had to think about to do. When I started, my vision was 180/200 left eye and 200/200 right eye. At the beginning of my journey I could barely read the E at the top of the chart. At about 20 hours into the eye exercises I was trying to read as far down the eye chart as I could when I felt this pulling sensation in my right eye, the chart cleared to the 20/10 line. I felt a sensation like a needle going through my eye and it hurt so bad I had to close my eyes. That was the motivation I needed to know it works. It took a couple years to strengthen the eyes to not wear glasses at all. Wearing glasses will slow the journey. In dim light I now wear reading glasses. The system works but it takes a lot of motivation. How motivated are you?

[Bob F]

Impressive. My issue now is astigmatism. I can still read books or
computer screens, but my eyes definitely get tired faster, and keep
going blurry enough to narrow the vision field, so I have been using
glasses for those activities. I have not needed them for distant vision,
although for stargazing I definitely see a double image.

[The Real Bev]

On 01/08/2021 01:10 PM, Bob F wrote:
>
> Impressive. My issue now is astigmatism. I can still read books or
> computer screens, but my eyes definitely get tired faster, and keep
> going blurry enough to narrow the vision field, so I have been using
> glasses for those activities. I have not needed them for distant vision,
> although for stargazing I definitely see a double image.

It just gets worse the older you get. I hoped that the expensive toric
cataract lenses would take care of that as well as the extreme
farsigntedness, but it wasn't perfect and the macular defect in the
sharper eye is REALLY annoying!

Curiously enough, in spite of the fact that I've had a certain amount of
apparently-uncorrectable astigmatism which I only noticed when I was 36,
my eyes have never been tired and I've never had headaches. Just
double/smeared images. And the best part is that the smears are
different in each eye, making a circle into an X.

--
Cheers, Bev
I've had a Lucas pacemaker for years and have
never experienced any prob