Eyeglasses

On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 14:46:52 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

I would be concerned regarding the light issue while driving at night.
"Haloes" around lights at night is one of the symptoms of glaucoma in
the early stages. Corneal aberations and cataracts can also cause odd
effects with lights at night, so it might be worthwhile having things
checked out.

Halos can be an indication of several eye conditions. One of the most
serious is macular degeneration. Glaucoma is a minor problem compared
to macular degeneration. Minor, in that it is easier to control
and/or correct.

I made the point in an earlier post that I see an opthalmologist for
my eye exams even though my actual vision test and resulting eyeglass
prescription is done by an optomotrist in his office. This is a good
example of why.

The chain store optometrist may or may not make it sufficiently clear
that some problem discussed requires a consultation with a medical
doctor. Bring up halos, and he might say that you really should see
an opthalmologist. Is that suggestion given or taken seriously enough
that the patient makes an appointment? Or, is it disregarded as
"might be worthwhile".

However, if a medical examination is part of the process, a condition
is more likely to be caught in an early stage.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

TonyCooper wrote:
On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 14:46:52 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

I would be concerned regarding the light issue while driving at night.
"Haloes" around lights at night is one of the symptoms of glaucoma in
the early stages. Corneal aberations and cataracts can also cause odd
effects with lights at night, so it might be worthwhile having things
checked out.

Halos can be an indication of several eye conditions. One of the most
serious is macular degeneration. Glaucoma is a minor problem compared
to macular degeneration. Minor, in that it is easier to control
and/or correct.

I made the point in an earlier post that I see an opthalmologist for
my eye exams even though my actual vision test and resulting eyeglass
prescription is done by an optomotrist in his office. This is a good
example of why.

The chain store optometrist may or may not make it sufficiently clear
that some problem discussed requires a consultation with a medical
doctor. Bring up halos, and he might say that you really should see
an opthalmologist. Is that suggestion given or taken seriously enough
that the patient makes an appointment? Or, is it disregarded as
"might be worthwhile".

However, if a medical examination is part of the process, a condition
is more likely to be caught in an early stage.

Thanks, gents. I suppose this is something my newly about-to-be-acquired
Medicaid will not be covering....

--
John McWilliams

On 2009-04-09 17:34:17 -0700, John McWilliams said:

TonyCooper wrote:
On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 14:46:52 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

I would be concerned regarding the light issue while driving at night.
"Haloes" around lights at night is one of the symptoms of glaucoma in
the early stages. Corneal aberations and cataracts can also cause odd
effects with lights at night, so it might be worthwhile having things
checked out.

Halos can be an indication of several eye conditions. One of the most
serious is macular degeneration. Glaucoma is a minor problem compared
to macular degeneration. Minor, in that it is easier to control
and/or correct.

I made the point in an earlier post that I see an opthalmologist for
my eye exams even though my actual vision test and resulting eyeglass
prescription is done by an optomotrist in his office. This is a good
example of why.

The chain store optometrist may or may not make it sufficiently clear
that some problem discussed requires a consultation with a medical
doctor. Bring up halos, and he might say that you really should see
an opthalmologist. Is that suggestion given or taken seriously enough
that the patient makes an appointment? Or, is it disregarded as
"might be worthwhile".

However, if a medical examination is part of the process, a condition
is more likely to be caught in an early stage.

Thanks, gents. I suppose this is something my newly
about-to-be-acquired Medicaid will not be covering....

As one old fart to another, don't forget to get the supplemental coverage.

On a serious level, Tony is right. At our age, 60+ none of the signs
should be ignored. Get to a pro to get checked out.

My neighbor (68), just last week thought he was just a bit tired as the
vision in his left eye was a bit fuzzy. He thought all he needed was
some rest. The next day he had lost most of the functional vision in
that eye to "wet" macular degeneration
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macular_Degeneration . He sought help and
was treated with some shots into the eye, he was not very specific as
to the exact treatment except to say he would probably have to have
similar shots monthly for the rest of his life.
Unfortunately the prognosis for that eye is not good for recovering, or
salvaging what has been lost, only to arrest further degradation.
He has gained an awareness to value his right eye, which at this time
is not affected. He is not into photography, but flies RC helicopters &
planes, and is concerned over a lost of depth perception. He flew one
of his helicopters last weekend without incident, but remains worried.

That has been a lesson in awareness and the consequences of complacency for me.

Good luck.
--
Regards,
Savageduck

snip
I would never have an optometrist do my eye exam. I have them done by
an opthalmologist (an M.D.) because part of the process should be a
snip

I agree with Tony, an ophthalmologist should be your first stop.
Especially as you get older, your eyes change in funny ways and they
know how to spot degenerative diseases.

Besides, the last time I had gone to lenscrafters, the Doc said I was
blind as a bat. Never went back to them.

Cheers

snip
up I have always gotten the photo gray lens. In 2006 I tried the
plastic lenses, mostly because the Dr. finally convinced me to try the
new hi-refractivity materials to make the lenses look thinner.


I hate the Hyper index lenses, The prism effect that they produce is
awful.

Cheers

On 2009-04-09 19:16:22 -0700, "Martin Riddle" said:

snip
up I have always gotten the photo gray lens. In 2006 I tried the
plastic lenses, mostly because the Dr. finally convinced me to try the
new hi-refractivity materials to make the lenses look thinner.


I hate the Hyper index lenses, The prism effect that they produce is
awful.

Cheers


That may be true for some, however with my high cylinder correction the
weight saving and move from radical thickness changes at the lens edges
is a winner for me.
Also I perceive a better correction (for my particular astigmatism) and
have never experienced the "butterfly" effect others notice.
They work for me.
--
Regards,
Savageduck

"Martin Riddle" wrote in message
...


snip
I would never have an optometrist do my eye exam. I have them done by
an opthalmologist (an M.D.) because part of the process should be a
snip

I agree with Tony, an ophthalmologist should be your first stop.
Especially as you get older, your eyes change in funny ways and they know
how to spot degenerative diseases.

Besides, the last time I had gone to lenscrafters, the Doc said I was
blind as a bat. Never went back to them.

Cheers

Errr.....Was that because you couldn't find your way back?

"Savageduck" wrote in message
news:2009040919272584492-savageduck@savagenet...
On 2009-04-09 19:16:22 -0700, "Martin Riddle"
said:

snip
up I have always gotten the photo gray lens. In 2006 I tried the
plastic lenses, mostly because the Dr. finally convinced me to try
the
new hi-refractivity materials to make the lenses look thinner.


I hate the Hyper index lenses, The prism effect that they produce is
awful.

Cheers


That may be true for some, however with my high cylinder correction
the weight saving and move from radical thickness changes at the lens
edges is a winner for me.
Also I perceive a better correction (for my particular astigmatism)
and have never experienced the "butterfly" effect others notice.
They work for me.
--
Regards,
Savageduck


Well that’s good to hear. In my case looking out the edge of the lense
produced a red shift in one direction and a blue shift in the other
direction. Was enough to bother me, perhaps others would not mind.
I all depends upon your particular astigmatism.

Cheers

Paul Furman wrote:
...
The last set was uneven for left & right for a reading
distance of what I'm now told is tested at 16-inches, this exam came out
the same for both eyes. Testing them now... looks like the right eye is
not as sharp at that 16-inch distance... hmm... OK that's my first
intuitive test, now I see that tilting up fixes the problem in the right
eye but not symmetrically.

Here's the (confusing) data...

OK I figured out the scam, they just threw a generic number at me
because they have to stock all those quirky numbers to supply 1-hour
service. Their 'lab' just cuts the frame shape, the 'blanks' have the
prescription set already. I went back & asked for a redo. They obliged
but were grumpy about it. What are the odds they have 070/020/100 in
stock versus the 025/000/000 crap I was given 2 days ago? I'd be willing
to bet what I got doesn't meet the spec on the scrip.

The guy in the white coat balked at my questions & whined about how he's
seen engineers with too many questions & how I didn't need to worry
about the math & the numbers on the scrip. I'm normally extremely polite
& mild mannered and I maintained that but the hell if I ever give those
morons any business again! The asshole redid my scrip by only replacing
the numbers on one eye. My old scrip had astigmatism corrections for
both eyes, not just one. The right eye was wrong on distance but both
were wrong & he screwed me on that. We'll see if I get a better scrip &
test on what I was given from someone else & try to demand a full
refund, probably too much hassle. Arrrrgh!

They said there's a 90 day guarantee, and as I recall I did get my
lenses replaced on that the first time because I scratched them up
pretty quickly... sweet deal... I did pay a bit extra for scratch
resistant coating on that if I recall correctly.

The tinted (auto-adjust sunglasses effect) option is supposed to include
scratch protection and UV. Others commented about that, it is a minor
darkening but I have been completely without sunglasses for 3 years and
appreciate the slight improvement, even if it is slow to adjust
(shooting dark shadow scenes on a bright sunny day or suddenly walking
indoors). I don't want another pair of sunglasses to lose. Perhaps they
are BS-ing about the scratch coating... why don't people just be honest?


--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam

Savageduck wrote:
Martin Riddle said:

up I have always gotten the photo gray lens. In 2006 I tried the
plastic lenses, mostly because the Dr. finally convinced me to try the
new hi-refractivity materials to make the lenses look thinner.

I hate the Hyper index lenses, The prism effect that they produce is
awful.

That may be true for some, however with my high cylinder correction the
weight saving and move from radical thickness changes at the lens edges
is a winner for me.
Also I perceive a better correction (for my particular astigmatism) and
have never experienced the "butterfly" effect others notice.
They work for me.

What is hyper-index, plastic lightweight? I have a small correction, not
thick. That would suggest real glass if I'm interpreting the comment
correctly.

--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam