dave's blog

Question from a FitEyes member: Hello. I am impressed with the enormous amount of knowledge some of you have about glaucoma. You can teach the doctors a few things. I was diagnosed with glaucoma two years ago and as all of you am looking for ways to get better.
Can anyone tell me what happens to dead optic nerve cells? Does the body flush them away or do they remain in their shriveled state?
There also must be millions of stunted, dormant," hibernating" optic nerve cells, for otherwise how can microcurrent bring them partly back to life? This procedure is available in Germany but is expensive and seems to last less than a year.
I would like to believe in resurrection for the only alternative is stem cell therapy which is probably a dozen years away. I would appreciate any information.

I read in a book today that modern scientific explanations of disease are essential for healing.

That made me think for a moment. Here is what I came up with:

Dr. Kondrot recently enticed FitEyes members with some interesting observations about what he called grounding and its effects on intraocular pressure. He also wrote about earthing and shared this video of his patient, Peter Abilogu, a professor of African Dance, performing in his office.

A FitEyes member asked:   

Optic nerve cells require vitamin C in order to function properly. Henrique von Gersdorff, Ph.D., a senior scientist at OHSU's Vollum Institute and a co-author of a new study showing how essential vitamin C is in retinal nerve cells had this to say:

We found that cells in the retina need to be 'bathed' in relatively high doses of vitamin C, inside and out, to function properly.

When thinking about the fundamental principles of health, I have to wonder how effective any pill (homeopathic or vitamin or other) can be for a chronic disease like glaucoma that takes decades to develop.

In another thread on glaucoma, emotions, stress and NTG, Dr. Ritch said:

Pigmentary dispersion syndrome is associated with perfectionistic, detail-oriented, high stress people.

No herb or vitamin pill is going to change those traits. (Even psychiatric medicines won't fundamentally change them -- only suppress them, at best.) The research from psychoneuroimmunology (see Dr. Candace Pert's work) shows that these personality traits turn into biochemical molecules in the body -- powerful chemicals that are more potent and more abundant than most pharmaceutical medicines --- and that come in a endless supply day after day. We wake up every morning and never forget to put on our personality. When we do so, our body is flooded with the biochemical signature of that personality. Any pill we take does little more than put a small dent in that massive stream of internally manufactured biochemical compounds. 

Think about that while reading this quote from a book by respected neurosurgeon Norman Shealy, M.D.**

Perhaps the best work in this field has been done by Dr. Caroline Thomas of Johns Hopkins Medical School. Her prospective studies of medical students have shown a high correlation with personality. Relatively specific personality quirks or defects predispose one to high blood pressure, tuberculosis, heart attack, cancer or suicide. These traits are present twenty to thirty or more years before the onset of disease. It appears that our “life script,” meaning our unconscious decisions regarding how our life will play itself out, provides a long-term attitudinal precursor of illness.

I wasn't familiar with that research in any detail, and I'm not relying upon it -- but this is essentially the same conclusion my own personal research on intraocular pressure led me to, and it is a core message of FitEyes because it conforms to time-tested principles of more than one traditional system of healing.

Here's the succinct way I like to state it (based on Ayurveda):

Consciousness structures the physiology.

Our habitual thought patterns, emotional patterns and lifestyle habits shape the form and function of the material structure of the body over time. We become physically who we are emotionally and psychologically. This is the most fundamental and powerful force shaping the development of any condition in the human body. Given that fact, how can we expect some little pill that we take to radically alter these long term trends?

Recently we had a discussion on the FitEyes email list about experimenting with glaucoma medications. As part of that discussion, people expressed that they were horrified or fearful. At least one person responded by advocating a prudent stance. I certainly do not disagree with the advice given. In fact, I think everyone who responded to the original post was in agreement that the thing the original questioner contemplated was totally inappropriate for the person's skill level. So that was the end of that discussion, rightly so.

This captures a lot of what glaucoma means to me. Iti captures my experience of the initial bitterness of glaucoma eventually becoming sweet. Glaucoma positively changed me to my core. Glaucoma has enriched my life beyond anything I could ever have imagined. By the way, Joanna Macy is worth reading.

We can also, potentially, install light sensors onto the spare neurons in blind people, converting the spare neurons into a camera so they can send info to the brain. We've done this in mice.

 A FitEyes.com member asked the following question:

 A new FitEyes.com member wrote:

Hello, I have a query I would like some advice on.  I have only just joined and this is all a new area for me so please forgive me if i'm covering old ground.  I was diagnosed with early stage Glaucoma in one eye this week.  I have been given Xalatan drops to take.  I am loathe to take these because of the side effects.
 
Do I need to take these?  Are there other alternatives and methods?  Any advice would be much appreciated.
 
Thank you

From a reader:

The doctor looked at my self-tonometry eye pressure data I brought with me. But he did not give my data much credence. He said if the  intraocular pressure readings are ever high then that shows that they do go that high. He is quite intimidating.

The assumption by the doctor is that he must target his treatment at the maximum intraocular pressure peak no matter how short it lasted, or how infrequent it is or what caused the IOP to rise.

Ophthalmologists are not yet familiar with the concept of the ocular white coat syndrome (white coat ocular hypertension). Our self-tonometry data may show that our IOP is lower outside the doctor's office than inside the office. Many of us believe this is an important consideration and a few doctors are starting to pay close attention to this information.

But reading your doctor's intimidating response gave me an idea...

On the FitEyes email list we had an interesting discussion. I would like to share my response.

Here are my thoughts on this topic of altering IOP without medications:

Sometimes I wonder where all my time goes. I know I volunteer a lot of time to FitEyes that is unrelated to working with my clients or doing other things I "have" to do. So I did a quick check of where my time went on my recent "day off." Here's what it looked like:

1 hour emails (mostly related to FitEyes)

1 hour discussing new FitEyes website work with a developer

3 hours researching backup and storage solutions for the FitEyes website (long overdue)

1 hour to get a replacement computer part