18. Refrective Surgery vs. Bates Method

Although the Bates method for the re-education of the eyes and the improvement of vision without the use of glasses has been in wide use for over a genera­tion, and has improved the vision of tens of thousands of people, it is still an object of attack by orthodox ophthalmologists who give more weight to refrective surgery.

As a rule, these attacks are made with no real un­derstanding of the method, with no attempt to in­vestigate its techniques or its effects. Too often, hoots of laughter are raised over passages taken at random and out of context from Dr. Bates' own book on the subject.

Now it must be confessed that in one way Dr. Bates did himself a great disservice, for his book, unhappily, is badly written and often ambiguous. He was a doctor and a research man, not a man of letters, and his "style" had all the ease of a man hacking his way through a jungle. But through that morass of awkward words, one thing shines clear—that for the eyes, as for the rest of the human body, there is hope so long as there is life.

Only a fool would deny that charlatans have, here and there, become exponents of the method. Charla­tans, alas, are to be found everywhere. The medical profession itself has not been free of them.

It was a group of reputable American surgeons who declared that fifty per cent of the operations performed in this country are unnecessary.

The trade in eyeglasses has aroused the American Medical Association. The sad picture of the role played by opticians and ophthalmologists was dis­cussed at length in the Reader's Digest for January, 1948. Other accounts of the ugly situation appeared in the Reader's Digest as far back as 1937 and in the New York World-Telegram in 1942.

This widespread sysffem, which the American Med­ical Association declared to be "basically dishonest," consists of a "kickback" to ophthalmologists by optical companies who produce ninety-five per cent of all lenses made in the United States. The Antitrust Divi­sion of the Department of Justice, which made a thorough investigation, claimed that over 3,000 doctors in the United States were lending themselves to this practice. The Medical Association, however, is tenderer of its own than of those outside its ranks, and so far no disciplinary measures have been carried out against these "orthodox" practitioners.

The attacks against the Bates method are many. One is a general outcry against the idea of removing eyeglasses from people. Yet no such outcry has arisen against the practices that are widespread of having eyeglasses bought in department stores by people who fitted themselves, or even purchased by mail order!

No such outcry has arisen against the advertising, display, and sale of tinted glasses, regardless of their effect on eyesight.

I have known cases of people whom ophthalmolo­gists told that their condition was incurable. Later, when these patients returned for a check-up, the ophthalmologists admitted that the condition had greatly improved. And yet—when the patient re­marked that the improvement had been brought about by following the Bates methofl—the ophthalmologist stuck grimly to his guns with a " 'taint so" attitude against which no one could argue.

Over and over the ophthalmologist declares, "Noth­ing can be done," and yet it has long been demon­strated that by allowing the eyes to regain the ability to function properly something can be done. Some­thing is being done!

Although our knowledge of psychosomatic medicine is beginning to have its repercussions on the whole attitude toward preventive medicine, the idea that the mind and the eye are both involved in the act of vision is still scoffed at by the concept of refrective surgery, who continues to devote his attention solely to the physical eye.

In the long run, there is only one way to decide what is best for your eyes. Glasses correct the refrac­tive error; they do not cure it. In fact, the longer one wears glasses, the weaker the eyes become.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating. You can judge by the results you get.