Re: An eyes exam

[John Clement <clement@HAL-PC.ORG>]

Ok a little incoherence crept in.  As I recall 1 eye was 20/20 the other
20/15, but the combination of both was around 20/10 in the early 60s.
Unfortunately now I just manage to get 20/30 out of one eye without glasses,
but with I feel young again.  The combination of both is still much better
than one eye alone.  BTW presbyopia can be delayed 10 years with exercises,
but then it catches up as the lens hardens.

John M. Clement


>         With enough practice it becomes really clear.  There's no eye
> chart anywhere in sight, but I can somehow make out:
>                         AELTYPHEALT
> I think it's a question of motivation.
>                                         Regards,
>                                                 Jack
>
>
> On Sat, 29 Dec 2001, John Clement wrote:
>
> > Actually I discovered this in the early 60s by self testing my
> eyes with a
> > wall mounted eye chart.  At that time I had better than 20/20 and it
> > improved to around 20/10 on the chart.  I suspected, and still
> suspect that
> > in my case part of the improvement is due to canceling out some of the
> > effects of astigmatism.  Since each eye has a dramatically different
> > astigmatic correction, this is a distinct possibility.  Now
> with a bit of
> > presbyopia I find that my 2 eyes focus at slightly different
> distances, but
> > the astigmatism produces a broader range of focus.  Both eyes have
> > noticeably better focus than either one alone.  I believe in my
> case that
> > the improvement may have been a couple of lines or so.
> >
> > Incidentally the presbyopia caused the 2 eyes to fail to work
> together as
> > well.  As a result I had to get glasses when some music I was
> attempting to
> > read popped in and out of focus.
> >
> > I am surprised that the effect was discovered only in the 90s.
> I suspect
> > that there are probably prior reported observations about the
> effect, but
> > not necessarily with the degree of precision of the more recent
> findings.
> > Probably the early writings about this effect have been
> overlooked because
> > they are not in the medical journals.  Maybe someone on this
> list has come
> > across an autobiography or the writings of an older scientist
> who noticed
> > this effect.  I would not be at all surprised if Ben Franklin
> had written
> > about it.
> >
> > John M. Clement
> > Houston, TX
> >
> > > At 04:03 PM 12/29/01, you wrote:
> > > > During an eyes exam I recognized all letters in the first three
> > > > rows with the left eye but not the letters in the fourth row. The
> > > > same happened with my right eye. But all letters in the fourth
> > > > row became clearly recognizable when both eyes were open.
> > > > The doctor said that this is the synergetic (sp?) effect. I am
> > > > trying to reproduce this at home but it is not as dramatic as in
> > > > his office. Perhaps this strange effect is font-dependent or
> > > > illumination-dependent. Any comments?
> > > >  Ludwik Kowalski
> > >
> > >
> > > This URL leads one to expect an 11% or  a half  line improvement
> > > on a visual chart on average for binocular versus monocular testing.
> > >
> > > <http://www.lighthouse.org/research_acuity.htm>
> > >
> > >
> > > Brian Whatcott
> > >    Altus OK                      Eureka!
>
> --
> "But as much as I love and respect you, I will beat you and I will kill
> you, because that is what I must do.  Tonight it is only you and me, fish.
> It is your strength against my intelligence.  It is a veritable potpourri
> of metaphor, every nuance of which is fraught with meaning."
>                      Greg Nagan from "The Old Man and the Sea" in
>                      <The 5-MINUTE ILIAD and Other Classics>