Presuppositions for an Integrated Approach to Vision Therapy
Vision care as we have known it is changing. The patient is becoming more knowledgeable, and the providers have access to new technology. The combination of these two variables necessitates a new paradigm of vision care. A method based on science, and yet one that is truly holistic in its depth, is needed. I have been researching such an approach during my clinical work and teaching in Europe. The KaplanEyeCode®-Perception Technology is such a system. The foundation is visual science linked to other disciplines related to the eyes. The need, as I see it, for an integrated approach to vision therapy is based on the following presuppositions:
a) The human being does not see with the eye, but through the eye.
b) What we see, and what we measure in the eye, is a reflection of the patient’s perceptions.
c) The human way of perceiving is based on two physiological components, called ‘looking’ and ‘seeing’.
d) The perceptions of looking are derived from focused light striking the macular of the eye. Seeing perceptions are activated by unfocused light reaching the retina.
e) The perceptual view through the right eye is genetically coded differently than through the left eye.
f) The diopters, suppressions, lack of visual acuity, eye diseases, phorias, and other eye findings are not problematic. Nor are they meant to be fixed.
g) The basis for seeing deeply, with awareness and being conscious, is determined by the level of integration between the right and left eye perceptions.
h) Normal ‘correct the refractive error’ glasses do not correct anything. They in actual fact relegate the viewer to perceptions of being a victim and without power to see differently. Generally these glasses imprison the person to more thinking than feeling.
i) Minus lenses that compensate for 20/20, or 100% vision, are a sympathetic stimulant, no different than a stimulating drug.
j) Plus lenses, or plus lens affects, prescribed correctly, can be a parasympathetic stimulant, a relaxant.
k) Glasses, without an integrated vision therapy approach, leaves the patient unresponsive to a self responsible system for their vision future
l) The iris of the eye holds valuable genetic information that forms the basis of understanding the personal perceptual coding system of the patient.
m) Every eye condition of refraction or disease is a view into how the patient is deviating from their fundamental perceptual EyeCode®.
n) All treatments for eyes need to consider where the patient is in their life cycle, that is, the variables before their current chronological age and the future.
o) The meaning of the EyeCode® matures into deeper interpretations with age.
p) During the patient’s life cycle, there is an automatic integration demand between the perceptions of thinking, feeling and emotion.
q) At the core of most vision problems is an inability for the patient being able to handle emotional incongruity.
a) The human being does not see with the eye, but through the eye.
b) What we see, and what we measure in the eye, is a reflection of the patient’s perceptions.
c) The human way of perceiving is based on two physiological components, called ‘looking’ and ‘seeing’.
d) The perceptions of looking are derived from focused light striking the macular of the eye. Seeing perceptions are activated by unfocused light reaching the retina.
e) The perceptual view through the right eye is genetically coded differently than through the left eye.
f) The diopters, suppressions, lack of visual acuity, eye diseases, phorias, and other eye findings are not problematic. Nor are they meant to be fixed.
g) The basis for seeing deeply, with awareness and being conscious, is determined by the level of integration between the right and left eye perceptions.
h) Normal ‘correct the refractive error’ glasses do not correct anything. They in actual fact relegate the viewer to perceptions of being a victim and without power to see differently. Generally these glasses imprison the person to more thinking than feeling.
i) Minus lenses that compensate for 20/20, or 100% vision, are a sympathetic stimulant, no different than a stimulating drug.
j) Plus lenses, or plus lens affects, prescribed correctly, can be a parasympathetic stimulant, a relaxant.
k) Glasses, without an integrated vision therapy approach, leaves the patient unresponsive to a self responsible system for their vision future
l) The iris of the eye holds valuable genetic information that forms the basis of understanding the personal perceptual coding system of the patient.
m) Every eye condition of refraction or disease is a view into how the patient is deviating from their fundamental perceptual EyeCode®.
n) All treatments for eyes need to consider where the patient is in their life cycle, that is, the variables before their current chronological age and the future.
o) The meaning of the EyeCode® matures into deeper interpretations with age.
p) During the patient’s life cycle, there is an automatic integration demand between the perceptions of thinking, feeling and emotion.
q) At the core of most vision problems is an inability for the patient being able to handle emotional incongruity.
Views: 9
Tags: Presuppositions, beyond2020vision, eyecode, eyecode.info, eyeconfess, eyes, integrated, lenses, myopia, nearsightedness, More…
Comment
-
Comment by Roberto Kaplan O.D., M.Ed. FCOVD on January 9, 2010 at 5:02pm -
Well, firstly Dominick, thanks for you appreciative comments. I recognise your need for science. I was in a similar position as yours for many years, in the ‘Holy Grail’ of Optometric Academia.
28 years later, I categorise Science in three parts.
i) The conventional Science of proving something.
ii) Clinical Science of observation, measurement and interpretation, and lastly,
ii) The Science from Psychosomatic Medicine, Traditional Medicine, like Tibet, Ayrevedic (Indian) and Traditional Chinese Medicine.
My approach these days is to integrate all three of the above sciences. This was the rationale behind the posted presuppositions.The Science of proving is one way of understanding life. Another form is seeing into the invisible. This is also a science, just as is Eastern and Southern forms of Traditional medicines. Thousands of years of trials of what works and what doesn’t is also an experiment. As a clinician, my results from the past 40 years of doing integrated vision therapy on tens of thousands of patients are like a big clinical trial, that is science too, similar to the way most drugs are tested these days.
My findings.
1) When two parents conceive a child, this new being automatically inherits the combined DNA material from both parents. Within this genetic material are recorded perceptions of reality as well as illusion, passed down from the parent to child. Using the clinical science of observation, measurement and interpretation, I have documented in my papers and books the following:
a) Since patching in children, especially amblyopes, in direct patching of the good eye, I noted that most kids hate looking through the ‘bad’ eye. I began doing this same experiment on myself. On looking through my non dominant right eye I revisited many experiences of my childhood in relationship to my father. This right eye, brain location and associated pathways is confirmed in Traditional Chinese Medicine, as author, Govanni Maciocia points out in his 1989 book, ‘A Comprehensive Text for Accupuncturists. The late Optometrist, Marty Birnbaum, in one of his AOA published papers talked about hemispheric brain processing in relationship to eyes and visual style. Psychiatrist, Frederick Schiffer, presents convincing evidence of a brain localisation associated with a particular visual field stimulation and hidden emotion.
b) What needs to be investigated further is the deeper connection between perceptions while looking through the right and left eyes. In a clinical setting, I have my patients look through one eye and I ask them questions. The response to the same question seem to be different when looking through the left versus the right eye. Speculatively, it appears there is a personality difference in the view of each eye that Birnbaum and Schiffer also suggested.
2) Eye Diseases, like other body diseases are from a complimentary medicine point of view an out of balance state of the body. The human being has somehow deviated from their needed homeostatic balance. There are many authors, Medical Doctor, Deepak Chopra and others, who advocates this way of looking at diseases. Therefore, in the case of an eye disease, what becomes necessary is also to offer the patient guidance on how to return to a balanced way of living their life. The focus is not on fixing, but on finding out where is the patient not living in harmony with their unique way.
3) Normal correct the refractive error glasses only compensate for the blur. Behind the refractive error of the eye is a deeper invisible reason for the person’s unclearness. I documented in my book ‘Seeing Without Glasses’ (Simon and Schuster, 2002), a study where I showed how glasses for 20/20 in Myopia statistically increase the probability of binocular instability (Fixation disparity measurements). Clinical experience shows us that normal 20/20 glasses for Myopes, for example, most times leads to the need for stronger glasses in the future. Wrong medicine and not a deep enough diagnosis of the real problem.
4) A minus lens acting as a sympathetic stimulant is part of the basis for what I have described in number 2 and 3 above.
5) A patient coming for vision care usually expects the Doctor to take care of their vision problem. This model is becoming outdated as the consumer becomes more informed of vision care options. Self responsibility means that the patient themselves are fully involved in complete choices of vision care, that include an integrated approach to vision therapy. The end result is that the vision care practitioner becomes the support person for the patient who takes on the responsibility of their own visual well being. (As a side note, this is what is going to be needed if the new American Health Bill goes through)
6) My approach to looking at the Iris of the eye goes way beyond the classic Iridology concept. http://kaplaneyecode.ning.com/group/caseexamples/forum/topics/the-c...
Professor Eiberg from the Department of Cellular and Molecular Medicine in Copenhagen has confirmed the link between eye colour and a genetic DNA structure. The three primary physical characteristics of the iris can be clinically correlated to refractive conditions. (R.M. Kaplan EyeCode®2 Integrated Iris Analysis - Finding the real cause of Nearsightedness - International Journal Of Iridology, Volume 2 No 1, 2006.) http://www.beyond2020vision.com/EyeCode2IntegratedIrisInterpretatio...
7) This investigation needs to go further into the probability that using information from the Iris and considerations of refractive errors, children can be prescribed preventive programs that could even over-ride genetic predisposition. Our vision development programs could be enhanced to include perception coaching that draws of the probability that perceptions may influence individual cell activity. (Research of Dr. Bruce Lipton. The Biology of Belief: Unleashing the Power of Consciousness, Matter & Miracles Mountain of Love/Elite Books (2005) - Hardback - 224 pages - ISBN 0975991477)
8) Fundamental to the visual findings that we make is that each measurement is not just a static isolated finding of the eye. Each visual finding, like Skeffington taught in the 21 point analysis. There is a connecting message and inter-relatedness between the findings. By analysing individual findings, and combining this information a syndrome or EyeCode® for the person emerges. For example, in KaplanEyecode®, I combine the analysis of four sets of eye information, iris structure, diopters, eye disease diagnosis, case history and binocular findings and what can be seen is a perceptual style for the patient. This is what I call the the fundamental perceptual EyeCode"? I have documented this in my papers, some published in COVD Journal and my books.
References
1. Kaplan, R.M. Nearsightedness - Seeing Beyond The
Obvious - Part 1. J. Optom Vis Dev. 2003; 34 (1):24-30.
2. Kaplan, R.M. Nearsightedness - Seeing Beyond The
3. Glassner, B. The Culture of Fear, Basic Books, 1999.
ISBN 0-465-01490-9
4. Kaplan, R.M. The Power Behind Your Eyes, Inner
Traditions, Rochester New York, 1994
5. Kaplan, R.M. Conscious Seeing, Beyond Words, Hillsboro
6. Kaplan, R.M. Light, Lenses and The Mind. The Potent Medicine of Optometry. J. Optom Vis Dev. Fall, 2002; 22 (4)
8) Finally at the very heart of physical non-seeing is a deeper reason, that is probably emotionally based. This clinical observation, investigation and treatment approach is the basis for Psychosomatic and complimentary medicine that has a wider acceptance in Europe.
a) L. CHERTOK, MD Psychosomatic Medicine in the West and in Eastern European Countries http://www.psychosomaticmedicine.org/cgi/reprint/31/6/510.pdf
b) Psychosomatic ophthalmology. by T. F. Schlaegel Published in 1957, Williams and Wilkins (Baltimore).
c) Case reports on psychosomatic eye disorders by Peter Fenton Documenta Ophthalmologica Volume 81, Number 4 / December, 1992 http://www.springerlink.com/content/q723833478g87483/fulltext.pdf?p...
d) Psychological aspects of disorders of the eye A pilot research project Alexis Brook and Peter Fenton Psychiatric Bulletin (1994). 18, 135-137 135 http://pb.rcpsych.org/cgi/reprint/18/3/135.pdf
-
Comment by Randy Schulman on January 3, 2010 at 8:45pm -
Bold visionary statements but someone had to make them! I for one am very excited about the EyeCode and its implications for self-actualization and increased consciousness in the world.
-
Comment by Dominick M. Maino, OD, MEd, FAAO on January 3, 2010 at 4:12pm
-
Roberto....you know I appreciate all yo do...and you many, many talents...however when you say things like:
e) The perceptual view through the right eye is genetically coded differently than through the left eye.
I would like some science on that....what genetic code are you talking about?
f) The diopters, suppressions, lack of visual acuity, eye diseases, phorias, and other eye findings are not problematic. Nor are they meant to be fixed.
Eye diseases are not meant to be fixed nor are they problematic? I do not understand.
h) Normal ‘correct the refractive error’ glasses do not correct anything. They in actual fact relegate the viewer to perceptions of being a victim and without power to see differently. Generally these glasses imprison the person to more thinking than feeling.
This is an old discussion akin to discussing "how many angels fit on the head of a pin"! Please expand on this.
i) Minus lenses that compensate for 20/20, or 100% vision, are a sympathetic stimulant, no different than a stimulating drug.
Yeah...so? Again can you give me a reference. If it is as you say why is that important?
k) Glasses, without an integrated vision therapy approach, leaves the patient unresponsive to a self responsible system for their vision future
What is " a self responsible system for a vision future"? I know what the words mean...but have no understanding of the total meaning of this sentence.
l) The iris of the eye holds valuable genetic information that forms the basis of understanding the personal perceptual coding system of the patient.
If you mean iridology, well ... as far as the science on this goes....it doesn't seem to mean a whole lot. Jpw dp we use the genetics related to the iris to develop or understand the "personal perceptual coding system of the patient"?
m) Every eye condition of refraction or disease is a view into how the patient is deviating from their fundamental perceptual EyeCode®.
You got me on this one....what is a "fundamental perceptual EyeCode"?
n) All treatments for eyes need to consider where the patient is in their life cycle, that is, the variables before their current chronological age and the future.
YES!
q) At the core of most vision problems is an inability for the patient being able to handle emotional incongruity.
Whoa! That's a whole lot of responsibility to place on one aspect of an individual.
I do not understand a great deal about what your philosophy is....sorry about that.
© 2013 Created by Rebecca Sherry.
You need to be a member of Sovoto to add comments!
Join Sovoto