Eye Surgeons, Competing Teachers Try to Hide, Destroy Dr. Bates Books, Magazines

Dr. Bates inspecting Emily Lierman, Bates eyes. His wife, assistant in his Clinic, New York City.ARLTAfter Ophthalmologist Bates proved that his Natural treatments (without  eyeglasses, eye surgery or drugs) can cure many eye, vision conditions; myopia, presbyopia, astigmatism, cross-wandering eyes, cataract, glaucoma.., other eye doctors, surgeons that prefer to sell eyeglasses, eye surgery and drugs fought against him, tried destroy his method, hide it from the public. This has been occurring for over 100 years, possibly back when the first glasses were being sold and when honest eye doctors were investigating the theories ‘claimed as facts’ by eye doctors that prefer to sell glasses…

Read one of his experiences here from his book Perfect Sight Without Glasses;



SOME one – perhaps it was Bacon – has said: “You cannot by reasoning correct a man of ill opinion which by reasoning he never acquired.” He might have gone a step further and stated that neither by reasoning, nor by actual demonstration of the facts, can you convince some people that an opinion which they have accepted on authority is wrong.Dr. Bates

A man whose name I do not care to mention, a professor of ophthalmology, and a writer of books well known in this country and in Europe, saw me perform the experiment illustrated on Page 40, (Accommodation: Experiments on Animals) an experiment which, according to others who witnessed it, demonstrates beyond any possibility of error that the lens is not a factor in accommodation. At each step of the operation he testified to the facts; yet at the conclusion he preferred to discredit the evidence of his senses rather than accept the only conclusion that these facts admitted.

First he examined the eye of the animal to be experimented upon, with the retinoscope, and found it normal, and the fact was written down. Then the eye was stimulated with electricity, and he testified that it accommodated. This was also written down. I now divided the superior oblique muscle, and the eye was again stimulated with electricity. The doctor observed the eye with the retinoscope when this was being done and said: “You failed to produce accommodation.” This fact, too, was written down. The doctor now used the electrode himself, but again failed to observe accommodation, and

                                                                                                                           Discredited His Own Observations

 these facts were written down. I now sewed the cut ends of the muscle together, and once more stimulated the eye with electricity. The doctor said, “Now you have succeeded in producing accommodation,” and this was written down. I now asked:

“Do you think that superior oblique had anything to do with producing accommodation?”

“Certainly not,” he replied.

“Why?” I asked.

“Well,” he said, “I have only the testimony of the retinoscope; I am getting on in years, and I don’t feel that confidence in my ability to use the retinoscope that I once had. I would rather you wouldn’t quote me on this.”

While the operation was in progress, however, he gave no indication whatever of doubting his ability to use the retinoscope. He was very positive, in fact, that I had failed to produce accommodation after the cutting of the oblique muscle, and his tone suggested that he considered the failure ignominious. It was only after he found himself in a logical trap, with no way out except by discrediting his own observations, that he appeared to have any doubts as to their value.

Patients whom I have cured of various errors of refraction have frequently returned to specialists who had prescribed glasses for them, and, by reading fine print and the Snellen test card with normal vision, have demonstrated the fact that they were cured, without in any way shaking the faith of these practitioners in the doctrine that such cures are impossible.

The patient with progressive myopia whose case was mentioned in Chapter XV returned after her cure to the specialist who had prescribed her glasses, and who had said not only that there was no hope of improvement, but that the condition would probably progress until it ended in blindness, to tell him the good news which, as an old friend of her family, she felt he had a right to hear. But while he was unable to deny that her vision was, in fact, normal without glasses, he said it was impossible that she should have been cured of myopia, because myopia was incurable. How he reconciled this statement with his former patient’s condition he was unable to make clear to her.

A lady with compound myopic astigmatism suffered from almost constant headaches which were very much worse when she took her glasses off. The theatre and the movies caused her so much discomfort that she feared to indulge in these recreations. She was told to take off her glasses and advised, among other things, to go to the movies ; to look first at the corner of the screen, then off to the dark, then back to the screen a little nearer to the center, and so forth. She did so, and soon became able to look directly at the pictures without discomfort. After that nothing troubled her. One day she called on her former ophthalmological adviser, in the company of a friend who wanted to have her glasses changed, and told him of her cure. The facts seemed to make no impression on him whatever. He only laughed and said, “I guess Dr. Bates is more popular with you than I am.”

Sometimes patients themselves, after they are cured, allow themselves to be convinced that it was impossible that such a thing could have happened, and go back to their glasses. This happened in the case of a patient already mentioned in the chapter on “Presbyopia,” who was cured in fifteen minutes by the aid of his imagination. He was very grateful for a time, and then he began to talk to eye specialists whom he knew and straightway grew skeptical as to the value of what I had done for him.

One day I met him at the home of a mutual friend, and in the presence of a number of other people he accused me of having hypnotized him, adding that to hypnotize a patient without his knowledge or consent was to do him a grievous wrong. Some of the listeners protested that whether I had hypnotized him or not, I had not only done him no harm but had greatly benefited him, and he ought to forgive me. He was unable, however, to take this view of the matter. Later he called on a prominent eye specialist who told him that the presbyopia and astigmatism from which he had suffered were incurable, and that if he persisted in going without his glasses he might do himself great harm. The fact that his sight was perfect for the distance and the near-point without glasses had no effect upon the specialist, and the patient allowed himself to be frightened into disregarding it also. He went back to his glasses, and so far as I know has been wearing them ever since. The story obtained wide publicity, for the man had a large circle of friends and acquaintances; and if I had destroyed his sight I could scarcely have suffered more than I did for curing him.

Fifteen or twenty years ago the specialist mentioned in the foregoing story read a paper on cataract at a meeting of the ophthalmological section of the American Medical Association in Atlantic City, and asserted that anyone who said that cataract could be cured without the knife was a quack. At that time I was assistant surgeon at the New York Eye and Ear Infirmary, and it happened that I had been collecting statistics of the spontaneous cure of cataract at the request of the executive surgeon of this institution, Dr. Henry G. Noyes, Professor of Ophthalmology at the Bellevue Hospital Medical School. As a result of my inquiry, I had secured records of a large numher of cases which had recovered, not only without the knife, but without any treatment at all. I also had records of cases which I had sent to Dr. James E. Kelly of New York and which he had cured, largely by hygienic methods. Dr. Kelly is not a quack, and at that time was Professor of Anatomy in the New York Post Graduate Medical School and Hospital and attending surgeon to a large city hospital. In the five minutes allotted to those who wished to discuss the paper, I was able to tell the audience enough about these cases to make them want to hear more. My time was, therefore, extended, first to half an hour and then to an hour. Later both Dr. Kelly and myself received many letters from men in different parts of the country who had tried his treatment with success. The man who wrote the paper had blundered, but he did not lose any prestige because of my attack, with facts upon his theories. He is still a prominent and honored ophthalmologist, and in his latest book he gives no hint of having ever heard of any successful method of treating cataract other than by operation. He was not convinced by my record of spontaneous cures, nor by Dr. Kelly’s record of cures by treatment; and while a few men were sufficiently impressed to try the treatment recommended, and while they obtained satisfactory results, the facts made no impression upon the profession as a whole, and did not modify the teaching of the schools. That spontaneous cures of cataract do sometimes occur cannot be denied; but they are supposed to be very rare, and any one who suggests that the condition can be cured by treatment still exposes himself to the suspicion of being a quack.

Between 1886 and 1891 I was a lecturer at the Post- Graduate Hospital and Medical School. The head of the institution was Dr. D. B. St. John Roosa. He was the 

                                                                                                                                  Man Not a Reasoning Being

 author of many books, and was honored and respected by the whole medical profession. At the school they had got the habit of putting glasses on the nearsighted doctors, and I had got the habit of curing them without glasses. It was naturally annoying to a man who had put glasses on a student to have him appear at a lecture without them and say that Dr. Bates had cured him. Dr. Roosa found it particularly annoying, and the trouble reached a climax one evening at the annual banquet of the faculty when, in the presence of one hundred and fifty doctors, he suddenly poured out the vials of his wrath upon my head. He said that I was injuring the reputation of the Post Graduate by claiming to cure myopia. Every one knew that Donders said it was incurable, and I had no right to claim that I knew more than Donders. I reminded him that some of the men I had cured had been fitted with glasses by himself. He replied that if he had said they had myopia he had made a mistake. I suggested further investigation. “Fit some more doctors with glasses for myopia,” I said, “and I will cure them. It is easy for you to examine them afterwards and see if the cure is genuine.” This method did not appeal to him, however. He repeated that it was impossible to cure myopia, and to prove that it was impossible he expelled me from the Post Graduate, even the privilege of resignation being denied to me.

The fact is that, except in rare cases, man is not a reasoning being. He is dominated by authority, and when the facts are not in accord with the view imposed by authority, so much the worse for the facts. They may, and indeed must, win in the long run; but in the meantime the world gropes needlessly in darkness and endures much suffering that might have been avoided.

Modern Day Attacks on Natural Vision Teachers, Authors

This problem continues in modern times. Recently a person ‘claiming’ to be an eye doctor has called me in the middle of the night 2x stating I must stop teaching people how to lower their eyeglass prescription and become completely free of the need to see with eyeglasses.  This occurred after 2 ladies with cataract had refused stronger prescriptions from the doctor. He inquired why and they told him they had learned how to improve their vision, stop wearing glasses from free training on the internet.

Their cataracts have shrunk, so the eye operation is no longer needed. The eye surgeons are angry about this. ‘Check the price of cataract surgery the doctors charge’.

A similar problem is caused by competitive Eyesight Improvement  teachers and authors. My computer was hacked many times by 2 competing authors, teachers in an attempt to hack, shut down the websites and bookstores of author Clark Night (Mary I. Oliver).  I have also been contacted a few times by other teachers that try to get me to raise my prices, not teach for free because this is lowering their sales. The competing teachers, authors charge hundreds of dollars for Ophthalmologist Bates Better Eyesight Magazines and do not want anyone else selling them. Many teachers charge $150.00 to $200.00 by the hour for training.  This is greed! I have a list of people that were blind, partially blind that these ‘famous’ teachers refused to help because the student is poor, on disability due to the eye problem. The teachers and eye surgeons would not even teach the students the basic information that can save their eyesight; “To stop wearing glasses. To palm, relax, to shift and learn central-fixation, how the central field functions”. This is so simple and is a human right for all to know! But the corrupt teachers charge over $100.00 for the first 1 hour lesson and hold back complete training, force the student  to pay more and more money by the hour.

Avoid teachers that refuse to give free help for advanced eye, vision conditions. A honest teacher will help you for free and will have written, provide a book and Dr. Bates Better Eyesight Magazines set for a low, affordable price.  Avoid teachers that charge hundreds for student training and thousands for teacher certification training. One woman teacher in Massachusetts, Canada (labels herself superior) raised her price for certification to over $5000.00 when she learned I teach for free. This was either greed or trying to get me to decide not to be certified, to cut out the competition. Another teacher lied and said they not longer train.

See honest and untruthful book reviews on Amazon by Competing Authors, sellers; http://www.amazon.com/Relearning-See-Improve-Eyesight-Naturally/product-reviews/1556433417/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?showViewpoints=1



Some 1 star reviews are by honest people that are just stating an opinion or do not understand the method correctly. Other reviews are by competing authors, teachers or eye doctors that prefer to charge a high price, hide Dr. Bates method.

Two honest teachers have offered to me train for free or very low cost. These two men are well know as being true to their students. Both provide low cost books with complete, very effective training. The dishonest $5000.00 teacher provides no books. Only expensive by the hour training. She has been teaching for many years. Why not write a book if she is the best? Preserve the method so all people can learn. Instead she has endorsed lasik which harms the vision, eyes health. Some people that were trained, certified by good teachers become greedy, corrupt and sell harmful methods; eyeglasses, contact lenses, ortho-k, referrals to lasik, plus lens anti-corrective method, colored and dark lenses, sunglasses, magic eyes artificial 3-D. All these impair the health of the eyes, vision and lead to sale of eye surgery.

I cannot find one teacher that knows more than I have learned from the well know honest teachers. So I have decided to stay with them. I continually learn more from these few, best teachers;

Thomas Quackenbush, David Kiesling, Janet, Carina, Goodrich, Doug Marsh and others listed on my website.

Clear eyesight, Healthy eyes is the birthright of ALL people.
(Dr. Bates always helped the blind, partially blind and others by setting a low price, providing free training.)

My favorite teacher is Thomas Quackenbush;  http://www.naturalvisioncenter.com/

Due to hackers trying to shut down my websites, break into GoogleBooks, my Amazon account, bookstores and un-publish/delete Dr. Bates Better Eyesight Magazines, books from the internet and in paperback;  I have created new websites with a better we server and hacker protection. Same protection has been added to Google and the Bookstores and Amazon has helped me.  See entire experience here; http://cleareyesight-batesmethod.info/id61.html

It seems heaven (and Dr. Bates) are watching over all this; Being forced to change servers has enabled me to learn Dreamweaver software and make the websites more professional, easy to work with when learning the Bates Method, Natural Eyesight Improvement. It’s still under construction. All books… for sale and free will be placed on 2 pages. Free training will be moved to the top of the navigation. A video will be placed on every page to quickly, easily describe each Natural Vision practice. Step by step directions. Will also do this for page 1-3 on each monthly 132 Better Eyesight Magazine issue. Videos will also be embedded in the PDF e-books.

Old server;  http://www.cleareyesight.info/


New;  http://cleareyesight-batesmethod.info/


Thanks to all the people that helped me learn Dreamweaver, HTML, picture, video embedding, website and bookstore backup, storage.

We are ready for the hackers! The sites will be back on-line in 15 minutes! Yeah!!

Evil never dominates forever. Good always prevails over evil.
Dr. Bates work is preserved in low cost paperback, free on-line and free in PDF E-books.  Learn and teach others. Carry, preserve and pass along the torch!

Clark Night


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s