[1][2] In 1952, optometry professor Elwin Marg wrote of Bates, "Most of his claims and almost all of his theories have been considered false by practically all visual scientists.

In July 1919, Bates began publishing Better Eyesight, "A Monthly Magazine Devoted to the Prevention and Cure of Imperfect Sight Without Glasses".

Bates rejected this explanation, and in his 1920 book presented photographs that he said showed that the image remained the same size even as the eye shifted focus, concluding from this that the lens was not a factor in accommodation.

"[14] Laboratory tests have shown that the human eyeball is far too rigid to spontaneously change shape to a degree that would be necessary to accomplish what Bates described.

[15] Medical professionals characterize refractive errors as consequences of the eye's shape and other basic anatomy, which no evidence shows any exercise can alter.

Bates characterized this supposed muscular tension as the consequence of a "mental strain" to see, the relief of which he claimed would instantly improve sight.

However, he reported that some of his patients experienced "illusions of lights and colors" sometimes amounting to "kaleidoscopic appearances" as they "palmed", occurrences he attributed to his ubiquitous "strain" and that he claimed disappeared when one truly relaxed.

In fact, even in conditions of perfect darkness, as inside a cave, neurons at every level of the visual system produce random background activity that is interpreted by the brain as patterns of light and color.

[19] While Bates preferred to have patients imagine something black, he also reported that some found objects of other colors easiest to visualize, thus were benefited most by remembering those, because, he asserted, "the memory can never be perfect unless it is easy.

"[10][21] Skeptics reason that the only benefit to eyesight gained from such techniques is itself imagined, and point out that familiar objects, including letters on an eye chart, can be recognized even when they appear less than clear.

[2][3][6] In his magazine, Bates later suggested exposing only the white part of the eyeball to direct sunlight, and only for seconds at a time, after allowing the sun to shine on closed eyelids for a longer period.

[23] Posthumous publications of Bates' book omitted mention of the supposed benefits from direct sunlight shining on open eyes.

[10] Most subsequent proponents did not stand by Bates' explanation of how the eye focused mechanically,[10] but nonetheless maintained that relieving habitual "strain" was the key to improving sight.

One witness testified that he had been almost blind from cataracts, but that after working with Corbett, his vision had improved to such an extent that for the first time he could read for eight hours at a stretch without glasses.

At the age of 16, Huxley had an attack of keratitis, which, after an 18-month period of near-blindness, left him with one eye just capable of light perception and the other with an unaided Snellen fraction of 10/200.

[27] In 1939, at the age of 45 and with eyesight that continued to deteriorate, he happened to hear of the Bates method and sought the help of Margaret Corbett, who gave him regular lessons.

"[28] Describing the process, Huxley wrote, "Vision is not won by making an effort to get it: it comes to those who have learned to put their minds and eyes into a state of alert passivity, of dynamic relaxation."

He expressed indifference regarding the veracity of Bates' explanation of how the eye focuses, stating, "my concern is not with the anatomical mechanism of accommodation, but with the art of seeing.

Ophthalmologist Walter B. Lancaster, for example, suggested in 1944 that Huxley had "learned how to use what he has to better advantage" by training the "cerebral part of seeing", rather than actually improving the quality of the image on the retina.

[4] In 1952, 10 years after writing The Art of Seeing, Huxley spoke at a Hollywood banquet, wearing no glasses, and according to Bennett Cerf, apparently reading his paper from the lectern without difficulty.

[32] The heavily advertised "See Clearly Method" (of which sales were halted by a court order in November 2006, in response to what were found to be dishonest marketing practices)[33] included "palming" and "light therapy", both adapted from Bates.

[37] Some eye conditions may naturally change for the better with age or in cycles (ophthalmologist Stewart Duke-Elder suggested that this happened with Aldous Huxley's keratitis[38]).

No evidence was found that such techniques could objectively benefit eyesight, though some studies noted changes, both positive and negative, in the visual acuity of nearsighted subjects as measured by a Snellen chart.

They found that "As yet there is no clear scientific evidence published in the mainstream literature supporting the use of eye exercises" to improve visual acuity, and concluded that "their use therefore remains controversial.

Writer Alan M. MacRobert concluded in a 1979 article that the "most telling argument against the Bates system" and other alternative therapies was that they "bore no fruit".

In regards to the Bates method, he reasoned that "If palming, shifting, and swinging could really cure poor eyesight, glasses would be as obsolete by now as horse-drawn carriages.

"[43] Philosopher Frank J. Leavitt has argued that the method Bates described would be difficult to test scientifically due to his emphasis on relaxation and visualization.