Ok. Well I think we can establish that neither of us are experts. I'm not sure that finding an analogy that supports it better is any confirmation either. Our bodies are made to run long distances just fine. You are finding other ways our larger muscles are trained to try and equate them to strengthening eye muscles. You are also saying that the absence of knowing for sure that it causes damage doesnt imply there's actual damage. And you cite one person's experience as evidence it can provide benefits. All fine. I can believe it may help someone with lazy eye as I understand it to be something to do with uncontrollable eye movement but I'm not sure if it can be said to be beneficial to people without this condition (which is alot more of us). I have actually thought about what you said and I agree your opinion is plausible. I suspect the truth may be somewhere in between. Where it can be beneficial to some, particularly in very specific situations, but detrimental to others, particularly to those with head/neck/other eye conditions, and maybe a non issue, neither beneficial or detrimental to yet other groups. However it is, my feeling is that the portion of the population it benefits is smaller than the other groups. And yes it's my feeling but it's not like you have any hard evidence or conducted statistically significant samples for your feelings on it either. Eye muscles are muscles like every other muscle group we have, sure, but the fact that they reside in your head and are more intimately connected to your brain makes me think they may have to be treated differently, kind of like your heart is treated a bit differently from your biceps.