What's wrong with bates method

Bates vision correction is a well-known technique for improving eyesight, alternative to the constant wearing of glasses. Some time ago I had a positive experience with this technique; and the more surprising was the fact that in Wikipedia this technique is considered unscientific, and the mention of the positive experience of its use in the discussion of one of the articles caused a sharp rejection and rejection .

On closer examination, the arguments to prove the unscientific nature of the method turned out to be a substitution of notions, a distortion of some facts, and an ignorance of others — this article will be devoted to them.


When it comes to "non-recognition by science", you expect to see a lot of scientific work from independent researchers, in which experiments on the effectiveness of the exercises and:

• there are measurements of visual acuity and other parameters of the eye, including ultrasound images, before and after exercise;
• experiments were carried out in different light conditions, including in open space;
• the experiments were carried out over a sufficiently long period of time;
• The groups include subjects of different ages, with varying degrees of visual impairment and different experiences of using exercises independently;
• control of the psychological state of the subjects;
• monitoring the effectiveness of exercises on reading unfamiliar text;
• statistical analysis of the results.

Nothing is even close. Instead, the indicated sources contain just a set of arguments, the style of the articles itself does not correspond to the scientific ones, and some authors allow themselves to go over to the person — in particular, one of the reference articles ends with the conclusion “A strange man — and a strange book”. Apparently, the author of the article is not aware that the “oddity” of scientists is rather the norm, and not a deviation, due to the specifics of their activities - and there are enough cases when strange and astrologic scientists make an invaluable contribution to science .

And since the full-fledged scientific studies of the effectiveness of the Bates method are simply absent, the “non-recognition by science” rather means “the non-recognition by the community of ophthalmologists and optometrists”; and a suspicious person may even suspect them of a material interest in attracting more potential buyers and, as a result, a loss of objectivity.

"Anecdotal" story with Huxley

The story when Aldous Huxley took out a magnifying glass to finish his report at a public speech is presented as widely known, "anecdotal" and defaming the whole system. Wikipedia indicates the date of this story - 1952, and if you look at the year of birth of Huxley - 1894 - then you can see that at the time of this story Haksley was almost 60 years old. It is rather strange to expect from a person 100% health at the end of his life.

Since Huxley took a magnifying glass from his pocket, it means that he was speaking without glasses. Following the link to the article about Huxley , we will see a photo of the young Huxley - with glasses, and with negative diopters. Apparently, some improvements in myopia still took place.

No less anecdotally it would be possible to present a situation when in the same Wikipedia in the article on laser vision correction two of the three doctors are wearing glasses. The reluctance to apply their own healing technologies on themselves is poorly consistent with the stated safety and expediency of such operations; and even if this fact is explained by the presence of contraindications, then 66% of contraindications are obtained, which exceeds 50% of a purely random “can / no” distribution. And at the same time - no mention of any contraindications or possible side effects - and there is only a link to a journal article with “pluses and minuses”.

Personal experience is not an argument

This argument contradicts the very concept of treatment. The patient does not care and should not be important in what way the doctor will cure him, and how exactly his doctor treated other patients, and how many other patients were before him. If the conditional doctor Lobanov cannot cure the patient, then the patient goes to the conditional doctor Romanenko, then to the conditional doctor Levin, and so on until Doctor House finally cures him. And it's not only in the different qualifications of different doctors, but also in the fact that doctors are also people, and they may also be wrong, be subject to various cognitive distortions, and just have a purely bureaucratic prescription for specific diagnoses to prescribe specific drugs.

An illustrative example here is the test of the drug Sildenafil, the therapeutic effect of which turned out to be somewhat lower than the expected scientific one, but which had an unexpected side effect. The creators of the drug quite quickly realized that the personal experience of patients is more important than their professional pride, called the drug Viagra and sell it not at all as a heart medicine (and not at the most humane prices). This story was reflected in the popular TV series "House MD" as an "anecdotal treatment" when the means for increasing male potency was assigned to a female patient.

I tried it myself / acquaintance - it did not help

The psychological factor is important not only in the method of Bates, but also recognized as medicine in general; proof of which is the existence of the placebo effect. Initially, skepticism and unwillingness to do regular and boring exercises can shift the meaning of classes from “getting results” to “proving no results”. The lack of a sufficient level of motivation can lead to a substitution of the quality of the exercises for their number, which will not give any positive effect and may even lead to negative results.

The Bates method also has contraindications in the form of tobacco and alcohol addiction. Alcohol and smoking themselves have a proven negative effect on vision; and no full-fledged physical development on their background is simply impossible.

No scientific evidence of method performance

If we change the wording from “Bates treatment” to “conducting an experiment on the effect of eye exercises on vision,” then numerous testimonies about the positive results of such experiments over the past hundred years have been drawn to evidence. Some cite and documentary evidence .

But even the presence of scientific works with rigorous argumentation will not necessarily be evidence of something. There are many scientific papers about the safety and feasibility of GMOs - and yet, most people consider them dangerous and harmful, and in some countries the cultivation of genetically modified plants is prohibited at the legislative level.

The method cannot work, because Bates’s perception of the work of the eye is not true

Bates did not invent exercises for the eyes as such. They were known long before Bates and were part of various wellness practices, some of which are popular today - in particular, yoga. And this is understandable - in the absence of technologies for optical, pharmacological and surgical correction of vision, there are not too many options for what can be done with the eyes.

Bates separated the exercises with his eyes from everything else, gave them the most accurate names and tried to bring them under the scientific basis. Therefore, whatever the rationale for these exercises is, it cannot affect their effectiveness.

The situation in which some theories in science are accepted and then rejected is the norm, since science is constantly evolving, and scientific ideas about the world are only models that describe objective reality with varying degrees of approximation. In particular, the concept of the luminiferous ether has long been unscientific — but Maxwell's equations work in exactly the same way, regardless of whether to accept the existence of the ether or not.

At the same time, experiments that are not consistent with scientific theory — for example, EmDrive — are not presented as “unrecognized by science,” but as “science cannot explain.” Statistical rare events, such as ball lightning, are also not denied just because they "did not exceed the threshold of statistical significance."

No exercise can change the geometry of the eyes.

Regardless of the possibility of this - glasses and contact lenses also do not change the geometry of the eyes; and laser correction only provides a lens built into the eye without eliminating the true causes of myopia.

Exercises can remove only a spasm of accommodation, but no more than that.

First of all, it should be noted that the diagnosis of "accommodation spasm" was made by no means to everyone who was helped by the Bates method. The overwhelming majority do not even suspect the existence of such a phenomenon - it is mentioned in few places, including articles criticizing Bates method; and according to the results of measuring visual acuity, the patient receives a simple prescription indicating diopters. And if you take the infallibility of ophthalmology, the lack of diagnosis means the absence of the disease.

According to the article “How to determine the spasm of accommodation from myopia” , the appointment of negative glasses during tension or spasm of accommodation is contraindicated, since they will aggravate the muscle spasm and cause a transition to true myopia with negative lenses. Based on the causes of occurrence - excessive visual fatigue with a lack of lighting - a spasm of accommodation will inevitably progress; and it can appear even after the glasses have been prescribed.

Thus, ignoring the fact of accommodation spasm in combination with wearing glasses will inevitably lead to impairment of vision, and the treatment of accommodation spasm without giving up glasses is very difficult.

For the treatment of accommodation spasm, a course of eye drops relaxing the ciliary muscle and a recommendation to perform exercises for the eyes is prescribed; and surgical treatment is considered impossible. Some of these drops have a wide range of side effects and have mixed reviews from patients . Drops provide only forced relaxation of the ciliary muscle and can in no way guarantee its normal tone some time after the end of the course of administration.

Visual gymnastics, which is usually recommended, is the rotation of the eyes on the sides and the shift of the focus, then closer or farther away - in this case it has absolutely no meaning or effect.

Exercise vision can not improve it

There are at least two strictly scientifically based mechanisms by which vision improvement is possible through training. For clarity, they will first be demonstrated in relation to another organ of perception of information - hearing.

1. Feedback and inverse kinematics .
   
   When we hear an unexpected sound from somewhere at the side or from behind, our head involuntarily turns toward its intended source. At the same time, the position of the ears relative to the sound source changes, and accordingly the phase and amplitude characteristics of the signal that falls into each ear separately change. Due to this, the brain receives more information, allowing it to more accurately localize the sound source.
   
   When a certain number of such signals are exceeded, information overload occurs when it is impossible to precisely localize the position of each of them - and then the reaction to them stops altogether, and they themselves are generally perceived as noise with averaged localization.
   
   At the same time, the possibility of training to focus exclusively on hearing due to complete loss of vision is not questioned, and in some cases even makes it possible to move on a bicycle .
   
   Unlike the ears, the eyes have more opportunities for maneuver - reacting to the image, each of them can not only move independently, but also change the focus.
2. Convolution , inverse convolution , Fourier and wavelet transforms.
   
   The sound after its occurrence comes to our ears not in its pure form, but with a lot of reflections from other objects. This phenomenon in acoustics is called reverberation, and is mathematically described as a convolution of a signal with a transfer function. Our brain is able to separate the direct signal from the reflected one, which mathematically corresponds to the function of the reverse convolution, and much more difficult to implement.
   
   According to the reflected signal, the brain can evaluate the geometric properties of the room, and purposeful training of hearing by musicians allows them to decompose the musical signal into separate frequencies with a logarithmic scale (melody for notes, including simultaneously sounding), assessing at the same time the uniformity of this scale (temperament and tuning ) - that mathematically corresponds to the Fourier and wavelet transforms.
   
   Blur and increase the clarity of the image correspond to all the same operations convolution / reverse convolution. There is no reason to believe that the brain's ability to analyze acoustic data is not applicable to the analysis of visual data.

Thus, we can conclude that the scientific ophthalmologists are simply new to math and neurophysiology.

In fact, this is just a “flash of good vision” and a placebo effect.

If eye exercises can increase the frequency and duration of these flashes and gain at least partial control over them, this already confirms their effectiveness. Even the short duration of such flashes is enough to navigate in open space - to recognize the number of an approaching tram / bus or the price on the price tag in the store - since it is not necessary to see them as clearly as possible all the time they are in sight. When reaching a certain length of time, the “flash of good vision” ceases to be a flash by definition and is transformed into a “short-term improvement in vision”.

The mention of the placebo effect is generally incorrect. The use of placebo in clinical trials is designed to cut off situations in which the recovery of subjects takes place in a natural way, without any pharmacological effects. Since, in the Bates technique, the effect factor is exercise, placebo should exclude these exercises. Thus, a correct experiment using placebo should look, for example, like this:

1. The first group does eye exercises,
2. The second group watches football on TV, which improves vision due to (supposedly) special coating.

And if the second group can demonstrate an improvement in vision, this will be the placebo effect.

If there is an effect from exercises, then it is only temporary.

Whatever the duration of the effect of the exercises - it is still longer than that of glasses. Glasses do not improve vision at all - it’s just a tool that helps to see, and lacking a residual positive effect - just like a wheelchair only helps the patient to move, and doesn’t "correct cerebral palsy" at all.

The effect of pharmacological drugs in many cases is exactly the same temporary - and patients with chronic diseases have to take them on a regular basis, rather than once. However, the short duration of effects from pharmacological drugs is not considered a basis for denying their effectiveness and expediency.

Danger of solarization

The danger of solarization is argued by clinical cases of visual impairment due to the unprotected viewing of a solar eclipse, in which the fact of the eclipse acts as a motivation for such an experience. Refer to the article "features of light damage to the retina" :

“In normal life, damage to the retina by sunlight does not occur, because the eye is protected by an effective antioxidant system: pigments of the type of kinureins, which are localized in the lens, melanin in the choroid and retina absorb ambient radiation and dissipate the damaging energy. During a solar eclipse, an intense light beam of the blue part of the spectrum (400-500 nm) enters the eye, while the final product of photolysis of rhodopsin (retinal) acts as a photosensitizer, catalyzing the transfer of photon energy to the oxygen molecule with the formation of singlet oxygen, which causes pathological oxidation processes photoreceptor membranes »

As you can see, the danger is not the sunlight itself, but a change in its spectrum due to an eclipse.

Now we turn to the book "Improving the view without glasses" of the Soviet edition:

“Several technicians of solarization performance were recommended. Initially, Bates advised to look at the sun with open eyes. However, some ophthalmologists, including Bates followers, expressed doubts about the safety of such a solarization technique, fearing possible burns of the macula in strong sunlight. Therefore, another technique was proposed. ”

Originally - this is 100 years ago. Inappropriate to ignore 100 years of experience in the development of methods.

"In some cases, especially in the presence of opacity in the cornea, modern authors also recommend looking in the mornings and evenings at the sun with open eyes"

The contemplation of the sunset and the sunrise has been practiced exclusively from an aesthetic point of view since the beginning of mankind’s existence, and it continues to be practiced even now .

“It is undesirable long-term performance of solarization in the hot sun for a long time. The intensity of the sun's radiation depends on the climate and on the season. The duration of solarization is not regulated. You must be guided by the degree of comfort of your state "

As can be seen, the danger of abuse is realized.

“The most effective, safe and pleasant technique of solarization performance should, apparently, be considered the technique proposed by K. Hackett. She recommended doing solarization always with closed eyes. ”

And in such a formulation, solarization, on the contrary, reduces the risk of sunburn, prompting the practitioner to look at the sun exclusively through closed or half-closed eyelids even in everyday life.

Here it is necessary to make one important remark. Denying the effectiveness of the technique and presenting the solarization exercise exclusively as an unprotected sun viewing, scientific ophthalmologists form a distorted view of the essence of the exercise, thus putting all those who decide to try the Bates method directly after reading Wikipedia and not studying the primary sources in danger. On the other hand, the equalization of the harm caused by light from a solar eclipse with the usual light, they hide the danger of a solar eclipse in general for everyone.

The desire to look at the sun arises in some people and without any connection with the Bates method, for example , and for some even becomes the meaning of life .

Probably, some purely internal reasons contribute to this, so a human need for sunlight may well exist.

Substitution of real treatment with imitation of it by useless exercises

The Bates method is by definition aimed at people who already wear glasses. At the time of Bates (early 20th century) there were no operations to change the lens or laser welding of the retina. The lasers themselves were not there yet. First, the man put on glasses, and then went to Bates to remove these glasses. It is even possible that Bates himself prescribed these glasses a little earlier.

Exercises for the eyes are not a sect. They do not oppose themselves and do not prohibit the use of any achievements of modern medicine, including optical lenses, eye drops and surgical operations. While complaints of pain in the eyes of the glasses are often enough to answer it to include in the lists of frequently asked questions in optics stores. Thus, the desire to replace the official treatment with an alternative one is caused by the imperfection of this very treatment, and not at all by the promotion of non-drug methods.

Only evidence-based medicine can be trusted.

Evidence-based medicine is primarily a statistic. If, as a result of clinical trials, the drug showed a positive trend in conditional 95% versus its absence in the remaining 5%, then there is a statistical significance and the drug is indicated for use. From the point of view of the patient, this means the following - well, if he fell into this 95%. Sadly, if he got to 5% and medicine was powerless. It is doubly sad when a drug with 5/95 effectiveness could help him, but is not available due to insufficient statistical significance.

The fact that evidence-based medicine should be treated with caution may be the fact that one of the most famous drugs of our time, heroin, is a product of evidence-based medicine, developed as a safe analgesic, including part of children's cough syrups; and was used in medical practice long enough to produce a whole generation of opiate-dependent citizens. In addition to drugs, other, much more harmless drugs can also cause an unexpected dependence.

We can also recall another interesting tool of evidence-based medicine - lobotomy, which at one time was widely used to treat schizophrenia. Now it is no longer considered scientific. But, unlike the Bates method, she has no fans left. No one writes books about the miracle of healing with a lobotomy with recommendations for its self-realization. After a successful lobotomy treatment, no one set up a clinic where he began doing a lobotomy to everyone else, contrary to the scientific community. No one contrasts it with antipsychotic treatment.

Vision correction is not the only case when there are alternative methods for solving problems with health and well-being. Let's look at some of them, in which the benefits of scientific treatment methods are not obvious.

Complaint: problems with pressure.
Doctor: prescribes drugs to normalize / increase / decrease pressure.
Alternative: temporarily abandon coffee and black tea.
Rationale: Pressure problems are caused by caffeine abuse .

Complaint: allergy.
Doctor: prescribes antihistamines.
Alternative: stop taking drugs from the previous recommendation of the doctor.
Rationale: Allergies are a side effect of these drugs.

Complaint: problems with the digestive tract.
Doctor: prescribes drugs to improve digestion.
Alternative: change the diet; start cooking yourself.
Rationale: problems with the gastrointestinal tract are caused by unbalanced nutrition. Self-catering will ensure an individually tailored diet.

Complaint: overweight.
Doctor: prescribes fat and appetite suppressant drugs.
Alternative: do fitness / yoga / sports / walk / ride a bike.
Rationale: physical exertion will burn off excess fat and shift calorie consumption towards strengthening muscles and other organs.

Complaint: loss of interest in life and the desire to die.
Doctor: prescribed antidepressants or immediately placed in a psychiatric hospital in order to avoid suicide.
Alternative: jump out of a plane with a parachute or from a bridge on a bungee.
Rationale: the feeling of free flight will help to feel the desired closeness of death. An adrenaline rush will have an antidepressant effect. A sense of relief after landing will help rethink the value of life.

Conclusion

According to the article “Researchers' Views on the Mechanism of Accommodation in Myopia” , none of the existing theories, including the Helmholtz theory, can fully explain the mechanism of accommodation and its violations; the possibility of changing the length of the eye by reducing the ciliary muscle is also recognized. The article “Once again on the accommodation of the human eye” describes physiological contradictions, according to which the ciliary muscle cannot play a key role in the accommodation. Thus, the opposition of Bates’s method to the scientific cannot be correct, if only because there is simply no consistent and consistent scientific theory of accommodation at this point in time.

Bates method is not a magical elixir when you can do something, immediately get the result, and save it for the rest of your life. From the desire to start to get the first positive results can take a long time. Exercises need to be made part of your life and practice constantly. It takes time, strength, motivation, self-organization and self-discipline.

The Bates method can be interesting to those who want to go on the path of self-improvement, start to play sports, get rid of alcohol, tobacco and other addictions. In this case, relaxing exercises at the workplace will replace trips to the smoking room with colleagues, and the desire to admire the sunset will motivate cycling out of town.

The Bates method does not make sense for all those who do not have problems with wearing glasses / contact lenses and are satisfied with the current state of affairs. In this case, it is more reasonable for them to leave everything as it is, and the free time from systematic visual exercises to spend on writing more valuable than this article.

PS KDPV in the original resolution .