A couple of days after I had mentioned my discovery of the relationship between tight neck muscles, attributable to bad posture, and compression of the nerves that control eyeball muscles, I worked out an amazingly complex set of eye exercises that dramatically reduced inner eyeball muscle tension or spasms.
These eye exercises are very difficult to describe, and even the video that I have made, doesn't really show how these are actually done, and what one actually experiences while doing them. But I've got to move on now. There will be enough time to explain and teach these things later. In the meanwhile I've uploaded the detailed solution here: http://eyestrain.sabhlokcity.com/2012/04/the-solution-to-terrible-eye-pain-and-eye-strain-from-excessive-computer-use/.
As a result of the two discoveries made over the past few days, I am now able to sleep without pain. I used to put all sorts of things into my eyes to try to relieve at least some pain before going to sleep. Often I masked it by applying heaps of balm and other things. That is no longer necessary. I do not even put ordinary eyedrops before going to sleep. Getting very close to normalcy, although I do get up with some residual soreness. While there remains some tightness and burning, this is at an extremely mild level compared to what it was just about 8 days ago.
It is clear by now that I do not have dry eyes. I do not have any inflammation of the cornea. I do not have any allergic problem. I do not have bacterial problems.
Doctors I have seen were merely making up these alleged problems since they had no capacity to think more carefully. I suspect there is no mention of this kind of problem in their textbooks, so to that extent I can't perhaps blame them. But I'd have expected them to show SOME curiosity. That's expecting too much from HIGHLY PAID doctors whose only focus is on their pocket.
Nevertheless, despite the presence of this hugely incompetent medical profession, and despite the absence of any medical science that deals with this particular kind of horrid pain, I have survived this torture, and hope to return to full normalcy in the coming weeks and months.
From my experience of RSI, such things can take weeks if not months to resolve, after the cause has been determined. Main thing for me is to continue to discover NEW eye exercises (never invented yet by man) to deal with muscles that are located BEHIND the eye and can't be massaged manually.
The $600 worth of Restasis is lying in my fridge. I’m going to have to destroy the packets, since no one will probably take these back (these have come all the way from USA under a special permission accorded by TDA of Australia).
Anyway I get to fight again.
One more time.
Against FALSE ideas – of economic "science", climate "science", and medical "science".
I'm currently reading a critique of Locke's Essay Concerning Human Understanding (haven't read the original essay yet, just reading its critque by Aaron, a book – freely available online – which I heartily recommend).
Locke's essay was pathbreaking in many fields including cognitive psychology, linguistics and epistemology. His essay, along with others like Francis Bacon's Novum Organum (and even Descartes's s Discourse on the Method), contributed to establishment of the institution of critical thinking, of which the scientific method is one component. I have TWO separate chapters on critical thinking in DOF - work in progress, though.
Without being able to think independently, and without knowing how to think, the West would never have broken free from the heavy chains of its bondage to the Church – which was (often) more intolerant and more violent than even the most fanatic elements of Islam today (I need not remind readers, for instance, of the total eradication – through massacre and deportation – of the Moors in Spain, for instance).
It is the process of understanding (a) how we acquire knowledge, and (b) how we should think in order to maximise knowledge, that marks the birth of the modern era.
Locke was a major contributor to the modern era from all angles. In particular, he denied the value of pure reason that is untested on the touchstone of experience and observation.
Note that similar thoughts had been expressed in ancient India by Charvaka, but unfortunately these thoughts soon disappeared in the sands of time. To Locke, therefore, all of us owe the origin of the modern society.
I cited an excellent article on the subject of knowledge (here) on FB recently, and wrote a comment in response to a discussion. Harsh Vora believes that my comment deserves its separate post. I have no objection to doing so, given FB's ordinary search feature. Also, what one writes on FB is lost forever. On the other hand, a good blog is likely to remain behind, and engage the wandering passerby in discussion well after one is dead and gone.
And so, for whatever it is worth here's the relevant extract of my very ordinary and routine comment on FB:
Sanjeev Sabhlok (linking to this article: http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2012/01/27/the-role-of-the-individual-in-science-and-religion/)
In science "nothing is gained by going to the older sources. Science advances and the older writings lose their pedagogical value. This is because in science, the ultimate authority is not a person, but observation."
Sudeep Shetty Pretty Interesting … If older source (science) are true we can pickup the basic from old source and always make it better and stronger …
Sanjeev Sabhlok Sudeep, in every science, the basics are automatically adopted into basic education. Aryabhata's work (zero) is taught in class 1, Newton's work in class 12 or first year BSc, Einstein's work in third year BSc (or earlier), and so on. By the time a person has finished graduation, he is now just about 30 years away from the frontier of knowledge. By the time post graduation is completed, he is 10 years from the fronter, and by the time PhD is completed, he is AT or beyond the frontier.
Therefore, except for the student who wants to learn the history of science, there is no value in going back to Aryabhata or Newton.
Only religion goes back to what was said thousands of years ago. That is because it ASSUMES that what was said is true. There is NO verification at any stage of the content of religious scriptures.
A number of issues have emerged among the comments made on this Facebook group in relation to the Ganesha play, but before I discuss matters related to freedom of speech, let me address one of the side issues related to the medical profession and medical science.
Sorry, I forgot, you do not believe in modern medicine or medical profession. You yourself have called names for medical profession, without you having any background in medicine or medical training. You are wrong there too. Your anecdotal experience does not prove a thing. Modern medicine saves lives and a few bad apples in medical profession do not render the whole profession useless or bad. Your Blog used hyperbole and gave an imbalanced view of the profession.http://sabhlokcity.com/2011/09/the-medical-profession-is-in-shambles-a-farce/ This blog of yours does not prove a point, just because you had the misfortune to meet a specialist who was not good enough. Exceptions do not become rules. [Source]
Having failed to find sensible information or analysis from the previous eye specialist I had been to, I decided to try one more. My aim was to get certain tests conducted – tests that, based on my research, are pivotal to the identification and hence resolution of the dry eye problem I developed last October.
I prepared thoroughly for the visit, having read about 10-15 journal articles, including skimming through key findings of the 170 page report on the world's latest academic workshop on this topic (linked here – 15MB). In other words, I was thoroughly prepared (my 2 page Word document for the visit attached).
The doctor started off by asking me whether I drink enough water each day.
What an IDIOT!
I tersely responded that there had been NO CHANGE to my water consumption in October 2010 when this problem started.
Then he said something inane about keeping the eyes away from airconditioning. I'm sorry, Mr. Doctor, but normal eyes (with good tear glands) are happily able to cope with airconditioning. This was some kind of quack, it seemed at first glance.
He then seemed to be interested in studying the BACK of my eye – but the back of my eyes is perfectly fine.
Politely I had to direct him to study my mebomian glands (MG) carefully which he did for a minute and declared them normal.
Not at all satisfied, I asked whether he could get a meibography and other tests conducted to determine the health of these glands. He said he was not familiar with the test. I showed him the extract from the world's latest workshop on the topic (I had taken the 170 page printout with me) but he seemed completely disinterested.
Instead, he showed me a visual image on his computer screen of the slit image (magnified photo) of my MG – which seemed normal at first glance, even to me. However, without detailed meibography it is impossible to confirm whether the MG have been permanently affected in any way.
More problematically, when I tried to explain the history of my case and what has worked and what has not, he kept interrupting.
In particular I've been applying antibiotics recently. That has significantly eased the possible bacterial load in the glands. In addition to applying Neosporin ointment (the tube in my possession is by now 15 years old), I had managed to get a prescription for a particular antibiotic (doxycycline 100mg) for a week from another doctor. But that (in my view – based on considerable review of the medical literature) is simply not enough to destroy all bacteria.
I asked this specialist, therefore, to prescribe low intensity antibiotics (doxycycline 20mg) for three months. He declined.
He finally gave me anti-inflammatory eyedrops and some diet supplements.
Very disappointing. $150 spent once again, to no avail. No test conducted. No antibiotic tried. Just more of the same (anti-inflammatory) which DOESN'T work in this case.
After visiting 4 doctors (including 2 specialists), 3 optometrists, and consulting with one Indian eye specialist over email, I'm BACK TO MY OWN RESOURCES – back to Dr. Google and electronic medical journal databases.
When talking to medical "specialists" I get the sense I'm talking to people who have CLOSED THEIR MINDS.
They are simply NOT interested in conducting appropriate tests. They make up their mind WITHOUT analysis. They don't even listen to the patient properly – despite the patient having studied this issue carefully for nearly one year.
I'm getting really upset at the monopoly of the medical profession.
The more I see of doctors, the less I respect the medical profession.
If only we could unbundle the servlces provided by this profession, things might get better – at least for INTELLIGENT patients capable of critical thinking. Tests should be readily available in the open market on payment. That way I wouldn't have to waste hundreds of dollars on stupid doctors but get myself tested fully – for half the time and money I'm spending on stupid doctors.
Medicines should also be supplied in the open market – WITHOUT REGULATION. At least then I could get the antibiotics I need.
(Of course, Australia is the backwater of the world where perhaps the tests which are widely available in USA are not even available. Open competition and trade would fix that.)
Looking forward to a trip to India to accumulate antibiotics
By now I'm almost 98% normal after having self-diagnosed and self-treated myself. But one thing I'll do is to get myself FULLY TESTED when I'm in India in February, and stock up on a lot of antibiotics.
Thank god for the relatively unregulated and chaotic Indian market where all medicines are readily available WITHOUT prescription. Of course I'll need to get some prescription made so that Australian customs won't make a fuss on my return.
A friend on FB asks:
Sir, I want to know your views on Tantric Vidya and Reiki. Is there any bit of truthness in them since you say nobody can't go against nature? Can a tantric really trouble somebody with his achieved power? Can a yogie awake different chakras in his body? Can somebody bring out his sukshma sharir(subtle body) out of his sthul sharir(gross body) through meditation?
Some people say they have experienced it. True?
You have written about almost every aspect of life on your blog and I read them to develop my knowledge(I am just 24 years old and doing post graduation in electronics and communication engineering) so I request you to enlighten all of your blog readers on these sensitive and sensational topics. I trust only your arguments on any topic.
I'm flattered that you "trust" my arguments on any topic.
Don't trust my arguments. Analyse them. Check them. Internalise them. As questions. Try to find fault.
I don't teach the answer. I teach the method.
Second, re: Tantra/Reiki – these claim extra sensory power.
ALL (and by that I mean ALL) claims of extra-sensory power are TOTAL BUNKUM.
This has been unequivocally proven by the Randi foundation (search the web). $1 million has been offered to ANYONE in the world who proves extrasensory or extranormal powers. For years now that money has been sitting out there without anyone having succeeded in proving such powers. Any tantric or Reiki practitioner is welcome to go to Randi and collect $1 million anytime. But they can't. Their claims are false.
In other words, Tantra and Reiki – to the extent these claim extrasensory or extranormal powers – are A HOAX.
However (and note this carefully!) to the extent their philosophy strenghtens anyone's capacity to heal (the mind-body connection is very deep), I have no comment to make. Some very unbelievable placebo effects have been proven to exist. The mind-body connection is real (after all, we are one organism, not two – no separation of mind and body exists in the human design).
Reiki Is Nonsense Stephen Barrett, M.D.
I was talking to a young niece the other day about Harry Potter. Now that all the books are read and done, and the movies watched and re-played, withdrawal symptoms are being experienced by billions of children, a vacuum of time that pleads to be filled.
Janet Albrechtsen did suggest that some good might come out of Harry Potter, beyond the positive role Rowlings' work has played in improving children's reading skills. I'm not convinced, though, that any good will come out of messing innocent minds with supernatural fantasies – although I have no objection to children reading anything and everything they can lay their hands on.
The way out of this quandary, I suggest, is for children to be introduced to Sherlock Holmes. Arthur Conan Doyle's nimble-minded detective had a fascinating way of demystifying things and advancing the scientific approach. Stories about Holmes always had three key ingredients, that:
a) everything has a cause which can be known through careful thought;
b) there are no ghosts (in stories where ghosts play a role – and there are plenty of such stories – human tricksters are always found in the end, trying to fool others); and
c) we must be energetic – even adventurous – in our search for the truth (recall the number of times Sherlock Holmes worked like a frenzied maniac to save lives).
These are essential qualities of the scientist. I gather that last feature is found in Harry Potter but not the first two. Hence Sherlock Holmes wins hands down.
Only scientists (not mindless believers in ghosts and goblins) can understand the value of liberty. If we train our children to believe in ghosts and goblins, they will become gullible enough to believe that government is good for them, and hence that more government (e.g. socialism) is even better!
Let's not create a gullible generation.