>>40840403
I looked into the "scientific" method of reversing myopia a few years ago

I haven't really improved my eyesight, but I never really put that much effort into doing the instructions or exercises.

What I did do was buy weaker lenses, for when I'm working on the computer, reading etc, which I wear 95% of the time, and I take them off when I'm reading and try to move the text further away.

Since I made the change, my short-sightedness was halted, and partially reversed. I went down 0.25 then 0.5 dioptres, but no further.

Whether this was a direct benefit is up for debate, since I am almost 40, and there is some argument to be made that with age there's a process of transitioning to old-sightedness, where it becomes more difficult to focus on things that are up close, so people get a temporary reprieve.

The fact that I put no real effort into doing exercises every day or making a proper effort makes me think there could still be something to it. I do think it's completely pointless to have your eyes counteracting long distance lenses when you are trying to see something a foot or so in front of your face. When your eyes have to do that constantly they have to adapt to it and you become dependent on glasses, and I really believe that happened to me when I was younger. I stopped it by ignoring what the optician said and buying weaker lenses.

When wearing lenses that are too weak I can see perfectly fine and never had any difficulty seeing the computer screen or my phone or anything in my own home (i.e. within 10 feet). So why punish my eyes and make them counteract stronger lenses?

I know that the next step is to keep weakening the lenses, trying to see beyond the comfortable range, etc. But unless I win the lottery and don't have to work there's no way I'll have the time and effort to waste on it.

Do I think it works? Yes, it probably does. It's just not practical to spend multiple years of your life to force your eyes to adjust when you have shit to do