|
Home > Archive > Lasik Eyes Surgery > November 2005 > My Lasik Experience
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
My Lasik Experience
|
|
|
| I had Lasik in April 2003. My 1st procedure went smoothly enough, but I
was slightly undercorrected which left me -1.00 in each eye ( my
original prescription was -6.50 in each eye) During the day I could see
very well, but my night vision was very ordinary. I had my enhancement
done in August 2003 using the LADARvision. Over the next 12 months, my
eyes fluctuated quite a bit, mostly in the morning and a little bit at
night. I had dry eyes for about 2 weeks after each procedure, but
Refresh eye drops worked beautifully until the dry eyes settled. I have
had no other complications. It took 12 months for my eyes to settle
completely, but it has been the most amazing experience for me. I was
in a position before my Lasik surgery where I could no longer tolerate
contact lenses due to recurring GPC. I did not want to wear glasses
exclusively - mostly due to vanity. I am thankful every single day that
I have had my sight restored. Lasik was not a 20 minute miracle for me
as it took 2 procedures and about 12 months to heal completely. I
currently am 20/20 in each eye.
My younger brother who lives in the United States had Lasik 6 months
ago and is also thrilled with his results. Lasik is still very uncommon
in Australia, but I am meeting more and more people who have had it
done with excellent results.
Linda
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-11-24, 5:58 pm |
| Thanks for telling us of your experience. It is good to see that you
did eventually get what you sought. LASIK is often more of a six-month
process than a 20-Minute Miracle...and you doubled that!
Glenn Hagele
Executive Director
USAEyes.org
"Consider and Choose With Confidence"
Email to glenn dot hagele at usaeyes dot org
http://www.USAEyes.org
http://www.ComplicatedEyes.org
I am not a doctor.
| |
| Sheila G. 2005-11-25, 1:06 am |
| Hi Linda,
Thanks for sharing your experience. My husband has Lasik the end of
October with no complications so far (not even dry eyes) except he has
noticed a difference in his night vision as was expected. He is in the
healing stage so it should only get better-he has no problems driving
at night so even if it doesn't get better he is in heaven.
He is going home for Thanksgiving and this will be the first time his
family has seen him without glasses in 30 years. He is a happy camper.
This is a guy that wore his glasses 24/7 except for sleeping and in the
shower. So far it doesn't look like he will need enhancement but
probably too soon to tell huh? He sees better than me now WITHOUT his
glasses. LOL, I do need glasses though. I've always had crappy night
vision but didn't know that I was seeing halos. Thought it was
supposed to look like that.
Sheila
(yep, that is really my real name)
Linda wrote:
> I had Lasik in April 2003. My 1st procedure went smoothly enough, but I
> was slightly undercorrected which left me -1.00 in each eye ( my
> original prescription was -6.50 in each eye) During the day I could see
> very well, but my night vision was very ordinary. I had my enhancement
> done in August 2003 using the LADARvision. Over the next 12 months, my
> eyes fluctuated quite a bit, mostly in the morning and a little bit at
> night. I had dry eyes for about 2 weeks after each procedure, but
> Refresh eye drops worked beautifully until the dry eyes settled. I have
> had no other complications. It took 12 months for my eyes to settle
> completely, but it has been the most amazing experience for me. I was
> in a position before my Lasik surgery where I could no longer tolerate
> contact lenses due to recurring GPC. I did not want to wear glasses
> exclusively - mostly due to vanity. I am thankful every single day that
> I have had my sight restored. Lasik was not a 20 minute miracle for me
> as it took 2 procedures and about 12 months to heal completely. I
> currently am 20/20 in each eye.
>
> My younger brother who lives in the United States had Lasik 6 months
> ago and is also thrilled with his results. Lasik is still very uncommon
> in Australia, but I am meeting more and more people who have had it
> done with excellent results.
>
> Linda
| |
|
| Sheila, how well do you see now? If you see well enough to legally
drive, you dont need glasses! As for night vision, blame them on high
order aberrations! I have more of those than the average person so im
only corrected to 20/30 with glasses and I see lots of little
starbursts around some lights with fewer large starbursts. I also see a
"glow" around lights, especially bright brownish lights. Nothing that
is delibating though. I do have really huge pupils so this explains
things. I wouldnt be a good candidate for refractive surgury plus id
still need reading glasses, everyone will eventrually, some much
earlier.
Thanks for sharing your experience Linda! Do you think the enhancement
was worth it or would it have been better to leave your -1 alone and
only need glasses to drive at night? That -1 would really help you out
once presbyopia starts. How well did you see without glasses before
lasik? With glasses? with contacts? Explain GPC. I too want to reduce
my dependancy on glasses and its not vanity, just convinence to not
need to depend on an external device and be able to wake up seeing well
 Too bad my huge pupils make me a poor candidate. I currently am
looking into ortho-k but I dont know if ill be a candidate for even that
| |
|
|
Ace wrote:
> Sheila, how well do you see now? If you see well enough to legally
> drive, you dont need glasses! As for night vision, blame them on high
> order aberrations! I have more of those than the average person so im
> only corrected to 20/30 with glasses and I see lots of little
> starbursts around some lights with fewer large starbursts. I also see a
> "glow" around lights, especially bright brownish lights. Nothing that
> is delibating though. I do have really huge pupils so this explains
> things. I wouldnt be a good candidate for refractive surgury plus id
> still need reading glasses, everyone will eventrually, some much
> earlier.
>
> Thanks for sharing your experience Linda! Do you think the enhancement
> was worth it or would it have been better to leave your -1 alone and
> only need glasses to drive at night?
I had free lifetime care, so I absolutely wanted the enhancement done.
I wanted to be free of glasses and contacts completely.
That -1 would really help you out
> once presbyopia starts. How well did you see without glasses before
> lasik? With glasses? with contacts? Explain GPC. I too want to reduce
> my dependancy on glasses and its not vanity, just convinence to not
> need to depend on an external device and be able to wake up seeing well
I was -6.50 in each eye, so I could see very little without my glasses
or contacts. GPC is Giant Papillary Conjunctivitus which is seen
exclusively in contact lens wearers. It is an allergic reaction to
contact lenses and causes much the same symptoms as normal
conjunctivitus. No matter how careful I was about hygiene with my eyes
and lenses, it kept coming back. I spent a fortune in drops for this
condition.
> Too bad my huge pupils make me a poor candidate. I currently am
> looking into ortho-k but I dont know if ill be a candidate for even that
>From what I hear about OrthoK, don't bother!
Linda
| |
| Sheila G. 2005-11-25, 1:06 am |
| Ace, I probably see 20/40 but that is enough to cause squinting and
wrinkles. I don't know really-I need to have my eyes checked....I
learned about halos looking up Lasik, I thought everyone saw them!
I will not go down the surgery road but probably get glasses and
contacts.
That said. I can post John's pre-op numbers, you seem to be a Trapper
John M.D. wanna be.
Ace wrote:
> Sheila, how well do you see now? If you see well enough to legally
> drive, you dont need glasses! As for night vision, blame them on high
> order aberrations! I have more of those than the average person so im
> only corrected to 20/30 with glasses and I see lots of little
> starbursts around some lights with fewer large starbursts. I also see a
> "glow" around lights, especially bright brownish lights. Nothing that
> is delibating though. I do have really huge pupils so this explains
> things. I wouldnt be a good candidate for refractive surgury plus id
> still need reading glasses, everyone will eventrually, some much
> earlier.
>
> Thanks for sharing your experience Linda! Do you think the enhancement
> was worth it or would it have been better to leave your -1 alone and
> only need glasses to drive at night? That -1 would really help you out
> once presbyopia starts. How well did you see without glasses before
> lasik? With glasses? with contacts? Explain GPC. I too want to reduce
> my dependancy on glasses and its not vanity, just convinence to not
> need to depend on an external device and be able to wake up seeing well
> Too bad my huge pupils make me a poor candidate. I currently am
> looking into ortho-k but I dont know if ill be a candidate for even that
| |
|
| go ahead and get an eye exam. If your squinting and having trouble
seeing, you may be alot worse than 20/40 or have conditions or diseases
that result in poor vision. My brother is 20/60 UCVA and only needs
glasses for driving. I dont see 20/20 with glasses but I get along
fine. In fact I wear a weaker pair of glasses around the house that
gives me 20/80 vision but things from near are clear, such as the
computer monitor. If you do end up getting glasses, youll probably only
need it for driving and the occasional use. Around the house you dont
need correction. Yes you have it easy plus your myopia is your
friend and is why you can read without reading glasses.
Linda, were you like 20/600? How old are you, may I ask? Glad to hear
your free of glasses and of course contacts which were bad news for
you. I cant tolerate contacts either but am not a good candidate for
lasik(big pupils, mild dry eyes, mild presbyopia) I wont see as well
with lasik as I do with glasses. How well did you see with glasses
before lasik? I assume 20/25 due to the minification glasses produced.
Do you have any trouble seeing near? I do if I wear full power glasses
or contacts so id need reading glasses if I got lasik. Presbyopia
sucks, especially when im only 23!
| |
|
|
Ace wrote:
> go ahead and get an eye exam. If your squinting and having trouble
> seeing, you may be alot worse than 20/40 or have conditions or diseases
> that result in poor vision. My brother is 20/60 UCVA and only needs
> glasses for driving. I dont see 20/20 with glasses but I get along
> fine. In fact I wear a weaker pair of glasses around the house that
> gives me 20/80 vision but things from near are clear, such as the
> computer monitor. If you do end up getting glasses, youll probably only
> need it for driving and the occasional use. Around the house you dont
> need correction. Yes you have it easy plus your myopia is your
> friend and is why you can read without reading glasses.
>
>
> Linda, were you like 20/600? How old are you, may I ask? Glad to hear
> your free of glasses and of course contacts which were bad news for
> you. I cant tolerate contacts either but am not a good candidate for
> lasik(big pupils, mild dry eyes, mild presbyopia) I wont see as well
> with lasik as I do with glasses. How well did you see with glasses
> before lasik? I assume 20/25 due to the minification glasses produced.
> Do you have any trouble seeing near? I do if I wear full power glasses
> or contacts so id need reading glasses if I got lasik. Presbyopia
> sucks, especially when im only 23!
I have no trouble with distance or close up vision. The only time I had
a bit of trouble with close up vision was in the first few days after
my 1st Lasik procedure. I only know my original prescription as -6.50.
I don't know what that correlates to, but perhaps Grant knows. I see
just about the same as when I wore glasses and contacts with the added
benefit that my eyes are no longer sore from the GPC. I should also add
that my hayfever is more bearable now that I do not also have contact
lenses to deal with.
Regards,
Linda
| |
|
| -6.5 diopters would correlate to 20/600 if your correctable to 20/20. I
wish I could see well from near, but id need reading glasses if I got
lasik. I can see why you had trouble the first few days, its due to
overcorrection then you regressed. Did the glasses minification have
any factor?
| |
| Ragnar 2005-11-25, 5:57 pm |
| There is no direct correclation between refractive error and snellan
scores, however you are correct in the general correlation.
Astigmatism is largely to blame for the lack of a direct correlation.
Also, the natural, accomodating, focusing crystalline lens can make it
seem as if someone's vision is better than it is.
A related experience I had in the past is one that an optometrist
should be able to explain. Before LASIK, I wore contact lenses. With
them, I could see clearer out of them if I concentrated on objects.
What is stranger is if I concentrated I could make my vision go
completely blurry as if my contacts were not in. I am not able to do
that with my eyes anymore since LASIK.
One thing that is constantly overlooked in this newsgroup is that
vision isn't just a matter of the eyes. At least 60% of the active
areas of the brain involve processing visual input Even a perfect eye
can be blind if the brain is not processing the information from that
eye. This happens fairly often with "lazy eye". If not treated
before about the age of 13, a lazy eye will be ignored by the brain
for the rest of one's life and can't be turned back on. Conversely,
the brain can pick and interpret data so that "bad" data is ignored.
The brain can be fooled in many ways regarding color, movement, etc.
Glasses, tiny contact lenses, and LASIK (which involves only half a
millimeter of the surface of the eye) are merely the tip of the
iceberg in vision. There are over 100 distinct structures in the eye
that make vision possible, and there are millions of parts (rods,
cones, etc) that are necessary for viewing color and movement and
shapes.
On 24 Nov 2005 22:14:29 -0800, "Ace" <acemanvx@yahoo.com> wrote:
>-6.5 diopters would correlate to 20/600 if your correctable to 20/20. I
>wish I could see well from near, but id need reading glasses if I got
>lasik. I can see why you had trouble the first few days, its due to
>overcorrection then you regressed. Did the glasses minification have
>any factor?
| |
|
| You are right, too many factors to percisely pinpoint diopters vs.
20/xx However for myopia, theres a good guide that closely correlates
for the average person. -6.5 diopters is going to be worse than 20/400,
that much is pretty much a given. I recall in an army message board
where you have to be 20/400 to pass as V3(now its 20/200) and there
were people asking stuff like "im a -5, will I make v3" Only two people
over -5 made v3, both -5.5 and I bet they were also seeing better than
20/20 with glasses in order to still see 20/400 with this much myopia.
Astigmastim blurs about half as much as myopia. Hyperopia blurs as much
as myopia for any that doesnt get accomodated. a +4 can be 20/20 if he
can accomodate all +4 diopters. If he can accomodate +3 then the +1
will make him 20/40 just like a -1
The brain is responsable for thinking about vision and processing
visual info. Did you know 2/3 of the human brain is responsable for
this?
| |
| Ragnar 2005-11-27, 10:59 am |
| yes.. most of the brain is involved with vision... which implies that
if someone had permanent brain damage from being beaten to a pulp for
running his mouth too much in a bar in Tampa, that his vision might be
affected also.
On 26 Nov 2005 18:15:22 -0800, "Ace" <acemanvx@yahoo.com> wrote:
>You are right, too many factors to percisely pinpoint diopters vs.
>20/xx However for myopia, theres a good guide that closely correlates
>for the average person. -6.5 diopters is going to be worse than 20/400,
>that much is pretty much a given. I recall in an army message board
>where you have to be 20/400 to pass as V3(now its 20/200) and there
>were people asking stuff like "im a -5, will I make v3" Only two people
>over -5 made v3, both -5.5 and I bet they were also seeing better than
>20/20 with glasses in order to still see 20/400 with this much myopia.
>
>Astigmastim blurs about half as much as myopia. Hyperopia blurs as much
>as myopia for any that doesnt get accomodated. a +4 can be 20/20 if he
>can accomodate all +4 diopters. If he can accomodate +3 then the +1
>will make him 20/40 just like a -1
>
>The brain is responsable for thinking about vision and processing
>visual info. Did you know 2/3 of the human brain is responsable for
>this?
|
| |
|
|