|
| Bassslapper:
> I believe my prescription pre-Lasik was -4.00 OS & -3.25 OD but I am
> not 100% certain. MY vision was more then "slightly blurry." It was
> blurry to where I could not recognize faces nor function well so do not
> assume you know what it was like for me, as I do not do the same
> regarding your perception of your uncorrected vision.
Reading below, you last believed it to be at -2.5 which was low enough
that you only wore glasses for driving. You *did* used to be -3.75 and
-4.25 but NVI reduced your prescription. You should have your
prescription records you got at your lasik clinic. Do you feel your
vision got worse between the time you used NVI and the time you got
lasik?
My prescription is -5 and -4.5, worse than yours has ever been. If it
was -2.5
id be much happier. I know exactly what -2.5 vision is and for the
matter, most other prescriptions. I have several pairs of older glasses
to test this out. I am not sure if ill even be talking about orthoK if
I was only -2.5 my dependency on glasses wouldnt be very high. At -1.5
id only depend on glasses to drive and maybe watch movies.
> And thank you, doctor, for settling the issue of presbyopia once and
> for all. Death and taxes are unavoidable facts. Presbyopia is a highly
> certain probability but not a definitive symptomatic malady for all
> people over 50.
I know what presbyopia is like and even more so under cycloplegia. It
becomes a problem for most people around the age 40 and I dont know a
single 50 year old at plano that could see squat from near. I am glad I
know what presbyopia is like, it puts me in the mindset and relization
how valuable my near vision is. I can simply take my distance glasses
off to read and eat. Yes im only 24 but presbyopia can happen well
before 40 and I know a bunch of people like that. One college
woman(about 20) wears progressives so she can see clearly to read, she
said her doctor prescribed them to her when she begin to have trouble
seeing from near. I told her I just take my glasses off to read rather
than get progressives.
> I hope you get the opportunity to try Ortho-K and that you share your
> experience honestly. I guarantee after the intital honeymoon is over
> you will be spewing venom at how annoying, inconvenient, and basically
> a waste it is. IMO, the rewards do not justify the hassles inherent
> with Ortho-K. Also, following your logic, if your were age 54 instead
> of 24 and did Ortho-K, you would need readers due to the correction of
> your distance vision with the Ortho-K. So that makes one stand to
> reason, again based on your logic, that anyone that has any form of
> distance correction to plano will need readers, regardless of the
> method of said correction. Ask an older myope to read something close
> with their glasses on and you will find it is more difficult, if not
> impossible to do.
If I can physically tolerate orthoK, the inconvinences is much
preferred to full time glasses wear. Its either glasses or orthoK with
todays techology. I would *not* need readers after orthoK because I
will still be mildly myopic. I however will need glasses for driving. I
read about 20x more than I drive so you can "see" its a good tradeoff.
Mild myopia will keep me out of glasses at least 90% of the time like
it did for you when you were -2.5(did your eyes get worse than that
prior to your lasik?) I was supprised when you first mentioned you got
lasik but I can see your reasons why, one of them comparing your UCVA
vs. whatever lasik gave you. In my case, ill be comparing against
orthoK and no I dont want to lose my near vision but orthoK cant and
wont fully correct me and(so) its a nonissue.
> There probably will be improvements on Lasik in a few years, just like
> ther have been improvements over thte past few years. Maybe after a few
> more years of aggrevation you will change your mind. Different people
> have a different balance of risk vs. reward. I finally made the
> decision after becoming as informed as possible so as to put myslef
> into the best position for success.
Lasik has a very long way to go. Theres 34 challenges to wavefront
lasik that need to be met for lasik to be good for "prime time"
Probably something else entirely will be out long before and lasik will
just get abandoned alltogether like RK did. Being informed does not
change the risks of lasik, it just lets you know and be aware of the
risks. I dont accept the risks of lasik, if this means I must deal with
glasses(or orthoK) for many, many more years, then be it. Way, way too
much to risk with lasik to the point glasses look very good in
comparsion. I guess you hate glasses ten times more than I do and you
are far more tolerant of risks.
> Since you mention cost, let's disect that as well. You say $4000. I
> paid $2300 net (insurance covered about $400). What do you think the
> cost of glasses, contacts, optometric visits, cleaning solutions and
> devices, and whatevere else required comes to over a long period of
> time? Ortho-K cost me $3600 by itself so I'd say an average cost of a
> $4000 investment is nothing compared to the cost of corrective eyeware
> and accessories over a lifetime. Assuming the need for readers, that
> cost is still much less then maintaining any form of contact lense.
Lasik here costs $4000 to $6000 for the "best" discount lasik would be
$1000 to $2000 but at higher risk and more damage to the eyes, you cant
place a price on your eyes. OrthoK is gonna cost around $1500 to $2000
initally plus $300 a year or every other year for new retainer lenses
because they wear out and my eyes may change a bit in that time.
I can get glasses on the net very cheap. I already know orthoK is gonna
end up costing more, but this is a fair price to pay for reduced
glasses dependency. When I have the money, why not? Even the price of
lasik doesnt dissaude me, its the risks and damage that does.
The below is what you said in previous posts before you got lasik.
Again I am supprised as you had expected to improve to -2 with NVI and
only need glasses for driving.
You should know your own prescription and your lasik surgeon(probably
one of his technicians/optometrists) should have told you when he
tested you prior to getting lasik. I have dug back in your posts and
found this:
I have done the same things you have and my behavioral OD thinks with
persistence we can get to -2.0 diopters. BTW, my clear point using a
ruler is about 15 inches. I am down to -2.50 and only wear glasses to
drive.
My vision flaots around -3.50 OS and -2.75 OD. My original
prescriptions for lenses had me -4.25 OS and -3.75 OD so something
positive has happened since I stopped wearing all forms of vision
correction back in May of 2005. I do exercises and attend therapy to
help with strabismus and focusing and maybe that has helped some with
myopia. My mindset without my glasses is that I can still see, just not
clearly at distances.
|
|