NMT Treatments Have Helped Improve My Vision.

I first saw Lisa Forsythe for NMT treatments in September 2004 after the recommendation of my optometrist, Dr. Walter Chao, O.D. During the prior month, I was diagnosed with a vision disorder by Dr. Chao and another optometrist in the Washington, DC area. I was diagnosed with ‘inefficient vision’ which is a general term used to encompass the ICD-9-CM diagnoses listed below. Also listed are statements (appeared in letters) from these two optometrists that summarize the negative impact that my disability has on my reading.

The ICD-9-CM diagnoses:
378.43 Vertical heterophoria 378.83 Insufficiency of convergence 378.85 Insufficiency of divergence 379.57 Deficiencies of saccadic eye movements 379.58 Deficiencies of smooth pursuits 367.5 Accommodation inefficiency non presbyopia 368.20 Diplopia, intermittent

Doctor Comments:
“There is very poor ability to maintain single vision at a normal reading distance.”
“When the object of fixation is at 12 inches, the actual point of fixation is at 24 inches.”
“During pursuit movements a midline jerk, or transient fixation loss, occurs.”

“Todd’s history is fully compatible with someone who, despite the above anomalies, was driven to succeed. He has always required frequent breaks to sustain reading or deskwork, and learned to pace himself. For required reading he compensated by putting in extended hours.”

“It is unfortunately typical for a person with these conditions to remain undiagnosed. This is particularly common when distance and near acuities with either eye are 20/20 or better, as is the case with Todd. Regular eye examinations assessing mainly ocular health, acuity and refractive errors are unlikely to identify visual inefficiencies, but often instead have the undesirable result of convincing the person that the problem is not related to their vision. This undiagnoses individuals generally remain non-readers. When a person with these conditions reads, there is immense physical effort involved to keep the print single and focused. As the eyes move from fixation to fixation, as reading requires, the eyes will instead tend to aim beyond the point of fixation and misalign vertically. This leads to loss of place and skipping words. The larger the fixation, the worse the difficulty, so copying from text to paper, from booklet to computer form, or the board to the desk is markedly harder.” “It is not possible to truly demonstrate the effects of these conditions, but one can get a glimpse of them by taking a small-print passage, tilting it at a 45 degree angle clockwise with the top of the page closer to the face than the bottom, and then holding it close enough to the face to induce focusing discomfort.”

“The above inefficiencies require the patient to use excessive amounts of energy and time to overcome them. That is to fixate on print, keep it stable, single and clear.”


I am open-minded when it comes to medical treatments outside the scope of ‘traditional’ medicine. I believe there are medical abnormalities that traditional medicine cannot explain and therefore it is plausible that there might be treatments outside of its scope. As a result, I was open to Dr. Chao’s recommendation of NMT. Dr. Chao felt I could improve my vision through traditional therapy (vision therapy) but it would be a more lengthy process of 1-2 years and may not produce the long term improvements of NMT. Dr. Chao had previous success with NMT in several other patients. At the time of my diagnosis, I was in the process of applying to graduate school (MBA) and studying for the entrance exam so I was in a rush to have my vision corrected, or at the very least, improved. After 2-3 NMT appointments I noticed improvements; although the most noticeable improvements came after 6-8 appointments. It was typically easier to read within a few hours of treatment and there was noticeable improvement in the ease of eye movement. For example, I was able to circle my eyes and move them left-to-right (and vice versa) at an accelerated rate. As no surprise, I was able to read at a faster rate and longer duration. As verification, I recently spent the day reading a book and I was able to read 200 pages. This would have been impossible prior to NMT treatments. As further verification, when I took the graduate school entrance exam (GMAT), I was able to score high enough to get admitted to Oxford University in England. Granted other factors (.e.g. work experience, undergraduate GPA) are evaluated by the admission committee but the GMAT is unquestionably a significant factor. I am currently a student at Oxford and I just successfully completed my first year. I do notice that my classmates are able to read at a faster rate but I have noticed about a 50% improvement in my vision after the NMT treatments, which is significant. I have also undergone distal treatments while overseas. I have no idea how its works but undoubtedly my vision has improved.

The most significant improvement occurs several hours after a treatment but after that there is a slight decrease (several days later); however the drop off quickly stops and is at a point better than pre-treatment. I am not sure of the reason why this happens but perhaps I am straining my eyes from the significant amounts of reading I do for school

I have gone back to Dr. Chao for revaluation after the start of NMT treatments. He stated that my vision test (non-subjective) are noticeably better and in some areas significantly better. I still have ‘inefficient vision’ but it is less severe. In conclusion I believe the NMT treatments have helped to improve my vision and I plan to continue treatments until the improvement stops or my vision reaches a normal range. I would not be surprise if people with similar vision disorders had similar improvements with NMT treatments.

Sincerely,
Todd