How I keep my front sight Sharp and in focus at 50!!!

[Prdator]

Subjective experience is inherently a deceptive lens through which to make medical decisions (e.g. placebo effect).

This is why all clinical guidelines issued by all major medical professional associations rely on expert review of published clinical research, which ostensibly (by using large numbers of participants, a placebo treatment group, double blinding of patient/observer, etc) provides a more objective picture of the relative efficacy of a given intervention. Not only that, but because not all research is created equal, experts try to convey to clinicians reading their guidelines the relative quality and strength of the available evidence (usually on a grading scale from A-E).

So, how do I explain your experience? I don't have a great answer for you, and you shouldn't expect one - particularly in something as challenging as vision, which relies on self-reporting of your subjective impression of your visual acuity (vs something objective and quantifiable like blood pressure).

Maybe these exercises are improving your eyesight (per available evidence, this less likely). Maybe they are not, but you perceive your eyesight to be improved (placebo effect). Maybe you are experiencing an improvement in your vision for reasons unrelated (time of day/ambient light, relative degree of recent eye strain, etc) but you are attributing this improvement to the exercises. Who knows?

At the end of the day, I can't explain your subjective visual improvement and I certainly would not say that your experience is "wrong." Because these exercises cost you (presumably) no money and have effectively 0 risk of causing you harm, I would certainly not tell you to stop. However, I am sure you can imagine that if clinicians made all medical decisions based on a similar degree of subjectivity and intuition, we would hurt a lot of people.

Long story short: research can't explain everything, but it provides a degree of objectivity that can can tell us what is most likely. Most likely, your subjective improvement is due to a placebo effect. That doesn't mean your experience is "wrong," or that you are foolish for trying, or that there isn't a very small chance that it is helping you in a way inconsistent with available evidence.

LMAO... like all the other docs... hmm... never seen that before I don't know whats wrong with you.... story of my life...

[Prdator]

Ah Shit! I have been doing it wrong. I just put a bigger front sight on it.

Right!!!! LMAO... I did go to an Orange front.. LOL

[Clusterfrack]

I’m reluctant to believe in any medical claim without peer reviewed experimental support.

However, here’s my sample size of one experience. My vision used to be 20/15, and as I hit 40, it started to deteriorate. I was diagnosed with an astigmatism in my right eye. Then I got single vision glasses, then progressives. But I found that I hated wearing glasses. After 10 years of trying to make myself wear them, I said fuck it, and went stubbornly glassesless. After about a year, my eye dr. said there was no astigmatism and it must have been misdiagnosed. My front sight is crystal clear. I do need reading glasses to see small print in dim light, but that’s about it.

[JWinTN]

The company does provide some science literature, and they have some people with fancy degrees. PDF link: http://www.glassesoff.com/eyekonerd_research

[jtcarm]

My eyes are fine. It’s my arms that are too short.

[Spartan1980]

I’m reluctant to believe in any medical claim without peer reviewed experimental support.

However, here’s my sample size of one experience. My vision used to be 20/15, and as I hit 40, it started to deteriorate. I was diagnosed with an astigmatism in my right eye.

Pretty similar story here. I had great vision near and far until into my '30s when it very slowly started degrading. I put it off until well into my '40s and had no choice with my work, but I had to get some readers. From there it seemed the degradation accelerated and I became almost immediately dependent on them. Maybe coincidence but it feels real. I'm now well into my '50s and need 2.0 readers. For shooting a handgun I can get by with as low as 1.0 if I'm not keeping score at a match or something. My doc says my eyesight "really isn't that bad", but it's sure frustrating when you had all those years with killer vision.

IDK what it is, but I think there's something to @Prdator 's post. I can't discount it.

[Prdator]

As simple as it is to do, I cant believe that you could dismiss it with out trying it first. But im pretty open minded and I like to try new things.