LASIK? - Page 3

08-03-2004, 01:58 PM

On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 16:48:23 -0500, Jeff Williams
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>Mike wrote:
>
>> I have no problems wearing glasses, though I don't like contacts,
>> but I'd like to wear the rudy/oakley style sunglasses when cycling.
>> Has anyone had the LASIK thing? How did it go?
>>
>> Mike
>
>Don't know about Oakley, but Rudy Project does (well, did two years ago,
>probably still does) sell models that support prescription inserts. I
>suspect that they'd be much less expensive than LASIK. And probably
>less risky, too (yes, I'm aware that that is a sentence fragment).

Prescription inserts are just not an option for those of us who need
major correction.

I'm something like -5.50/ -6.00, and astigmatic (both eyes, different
axes!) There are *no* prescription inserts that would serve me, to my
knowledge. Wraparound style shades are not even remote possibilities.

I have regular (non wraparound) prescription sunglasses--polarized
lenses. They suit me well for everything I need to wear sunglasses
for (which ranges from Blues Brothers impressions to afternoon rides).
Stylish? Not in a strictly cycling/sporty sense, no. But they do me
all right.

I'd do contacts, but I'm just too damn squeamish. I don't like
sticking things into my eye & the additional hassle of caring for
them. Glasses are cheap & cheerful, for me anyway.

-Luigi

two wheels; four eyes.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
photos, rants, raves

08-03-2004, 03:43 PM

Luigi de Guzman wrote:

> I'd do contacts, but I'm just too damn squeamish. I don't like
> sticking things into my eye & the additional hassle of caring for
> them. Glasses are cheap & cheerful, for me anyway.

You get over that, honest. You don't actually touch your eye with
anything except the slippery wet lens, which doesn't hurt. Soft lenses
are more comfortable than RGPs but provide not-as-good vision (YMMV, of
course). It takes roughly three minutes to clean them at night and two
minute to put them in in the morning. Cleaning fluids from Target
shouldn't cost you more than $20/year. If you can be fit with contacts
you'll love them. Astigmatism can be a real obstacle to good fit (yeah,
guess how I know!), but when they're good they're REALLY good.

--
Cheers,
Bev
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Lottery: the closest thing we have to
a tax on stupidity.

08-03-2004, 03:43 PM

Luigi de Guzman wrote:

> I'd do contacts, but I'm just too damn squeamish. I don't like
> sticking things into my eye & the additional hassle of caring for
> them. Glasses are cheap & cheerful, for me anyway.

You get over that, honest. You don't actually touch your eye with
anything except the slippery wet lens, which doesn't hurt. Soft lenses
are more comfortable than RGPs but provide not-as-good vision (YMMV, of
course). It takes roughly three minutes to clean them at night and two
minute to put them in in the morning. Cleaning fluids from Target
shouldn't cost you more than $20/year. If you can be fit with contacts
you'll love them. Astigmatism can be a real obstacle to good fit (yeah,
guess how I know!), but when they're good they're REALLY good.

--
Cheers,
Bev
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Lottery: the closest thing we have to
a tax on stupidity.

08-03-2004, 03:43 PM

Luigi de Guzman wrote:

> I'd do contacts, but I'm just too damn squeamish. I don't like
> sticking things into my eye & the additional hassle of caring for
> them. Glasses are cheap & cheerful, for me anyway.

You get over that, honest. You don't actually touch your eye with
anything except the slippery wet lens, which doesn't hurt. Soft lenses
are more comfortable than RGPs but provide not-as-good vision (YMMV, of
course). It takes roughly three minutes to clean them at night and two
minute to put them in in the morning. Cleaning fluids from Target
shouldn't cost you more than $20/year. If you can be fit with contacts
you'll love them. Astigmatism can be a real obstacle to good fit (yeah,
guess how I know!), but when they're good they're REALLY good.

--
Cheers,
Bev
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Lottery: the closest thing we have to
a tax on stupidity.

08-03-2004, 03:43 PM

Luigi de Guzman wrote:

> I'd do contacts, but I'm just too damn squeamish. I don't like
> sticking things into my eye & the additional hassle of caring for
> them. Glasses are cheap & cheerful, for me anyway.

You get over that, honest. You don't actually touch your eye with
anything except the slippery wet lens, which doesn't hurt. Soft lenses
are more comfortable than RGPs but provide not-as-good vision (YMMV, of
course). It takes roughly three minutes to clean them at night and two
minute to put them in in the morning. Cleaning fluids from Target
shouldn't cost you more than $20/year. If you can be fit with contacts
you'll love them. Astigmatism can be a real obstacle to good fit (yeah,
guess how I know!), but when they're good they're REALLY good.

--
Cheers,
Bev
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Lottery: the closest thing we have to
a tax on stupidity.

08-03-2004, 03:43 PM

Luigi de Guzman wrote:

> I'd do contacts, but I'm just too damn squeamish. I don't like
> sticking things into my eye & the additional hassle of caring for
> them. Glasses are cheap & cheerful, for me anyway.

You get over that, honest. You don't actually touch your eye with
anything except the slippery wet lens, which doesn't hurt. Soft lenses
are more comfortable than RGPs but provide not-as-good vision (YMMV, of
course). It takes roughly three minutes to clean them at night and two
minute to put them in in the morning. Cleaning fluids from Target
shouldn't cost you more than $20/year. If you can be fit with contacts
you'll love them. Astigmatism can be a real obstacle to good fit (yeah,
guess how I know!), but when they're good they're REALLY good.

--
Cheers,
Bev
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Lottery: the closest thing we have to
a tax on stupidity.

08-03-2004, 04:27 PM

On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 17:58:27 -0400, Luigi de Guzman
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>I'm something like -5.50/ -6.00, and astigmatic (both eyes, different
>axes!) There are *no* prescription inserts that would serve me, to my
>knowledge. Wraparound style shades are not even remote possibilities.

Your situation sounds very similar to mine, only my numbers are in the
high -9s. This means you probably have had a prism correction in your
lenses since your were old enough to walk, too.

Aside from the Lasik question, make sure your doc checks carefully for
Lattice Degeneration, which is common in folks who are highly myopic
and astigmatic. You may save yourself the pleasure of having your
retinas detach.

Mine detached about 8 or 9 years ago. The surgery to fix them went
well, but the doctor's number one concern is that nothing is done to
pressure the eyes. For this reason, he expressly forbid me from ever
even considering Lasik. The pressure from the beam could be enough to
cause another detachment.

One bit of good news though is that I'm getting cataracts at an early
age. Why good news? There is a new product out called accommodative
implants. When they suck out your old natural lens, they replace it
with a synthetic lens that is designed to move like a natural lens --
plus they build your vision correction right into it. The downside is
that it costs about $18K/pair, can only be done in pairs, and
insurance won't touch it.

BLReed

To e-mail me, remove the obvious spam trap.
For collector coins and supplies at fair prices: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Cool things and Bust Coin Forum: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

08-03-2004, 04:27 PM

On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 17:58:27 -0400, Luigi de Guzman
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>I'm something like -5.50/ -6.00, and astigmatic (both eyes, different
>axes!) There are *no* prescription inserts that would serve me, to my
>knowledge. Wraparound style shades are not even remote possibilities.

Your situation sounds very similar to mine, only my numbers are in the
high -9s. This means you probably have had a prism correction in your
lenses since your were old enough to walk, too.

Aside from the Lasik question, make sure your doc checks carefully for
Lattice Degeneration, which is common in folks who are highly myopic
and astigmatic. You may save yourself the pleasure of having your
retinas detach.

Mine detached about 8 or 9 years ago. The surgery to fix them went
well, but the doctor's number one concern is that nothing is done to
pressure the eyes. For this reason, he expressly forbid me from ever
even considering Lasik. The pressure from the beam could be enough to
cause another detachment.

One bit of good news though is that I'm getting cataracts at an early
age. Why good news? There is a new product out called accommodative
implants. When they suck out your old natural lens, they replace it
with a synthetic lens that is designed to move like a natural lens --
plus they build your vision correction right into it. The downside is
that it costs about $18K/pair, can only be done in pairs, and
insurance won't touch it.

BLReed

To e-mail me, remove the obvious spam trap.
For collector coins and supplies at fair prices: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Cool things and Bust Coin Forum: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

08-03-2004, 04:27 PM

On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 17:58:27 -0400, Luigi de Guzman
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>I'm something like -5.50/ -6.00, and astigmatic (both eyes, different
>axes!) There are *no* prescription inserts that would serve me, to my
>knowledge. Wraparound style shades are not even remote possibilities.

Your situation sounds very similar to mine, only my numbers are in the
high -9s. This means you probably have had a prism correction in your
lenses since your were old enough to walk, too.

Aside from the Lasik question, make sure your doc checks carefully for
Lattice Degeneration, which is common in folks who are highly myopic
and astigmatic. You may save yourself the pleasure of having your
retinas detach.

Mine detached about 8 or 9 years ago. The surgery to fix them went
well, but the doctor's number one concern is that nothing is done to
pressure the eyes. For this reason, he expressly forbid me from ever
even considering Lasik. The pressure from the beam could be enough to
cause another detachment.

One bit of good news though is that I'm getting cataracts at an early
age. Why good news? There is a new product out called accommodative
implants. When they suck out your old natural lens, they replace it
with a synthetic lens that is designed to move like a natural lens --
plus they build your vision correction right into it. The downside is
that it costs about $18K/pair, can only be done in pairs, and
insurance won't touch it.

BLReed

To e-mail me, remove the obvious spam trap.
For collector coins and supplies at fair prices: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Cool things and Bust Coin Forum: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

08-03-2004, 04:27 PM

On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 17:58:27 -0400, Luigi de Guzman
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>I'm something like -5.50/ -6.00, and astigmatic (both eyes, different
>axes!) There are *no* prescription inserts that would serve me, to my
>knowledge. Wraparound style shades are not even remote possibilities.

Your situation sounds very similar to mine, only my numbers are in the
high -9s. This means you probably have had a prism correction in your
lenses since your were old enough to walk, too.

Aside from the Lasik question, make sure your doc checks carefully for
Lattice Degeneration, which is common in folks who are highly myopic
and astigmatic. You may save yourself the pleasure of having your
retinas detach.

Mine detached about 8 or 9 years ago. The surgery to fix them went
well, but the doctor's number one concern is that nothing is done to
pressure the eyes. For this reason, he expressly forbid me from ever
even considering Lasik. The pressure from the beam could be enough to
cause another detachment.

One bit of good news though is that I'm getting cataracts at an early
age. Why good news? There is a new product out called accommodative
implants. When they suck out your old natural lens, they replace it
with a synthetic lens that is designed to move like a natural lens --
plus they build your vision correction right into it. The downside is
that it costs about $18K/pair, can only be done in pairs, and
insurance won't touch it.

BLReed

To e-mail me, remove the obvious spam trap.
For collector coins and supplies at fair prices: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Cool things and Bust Coin Forum: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]