 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Diabetes / December 2006Worse than Outrageous
Went to the Walmart optometrist this morning for the annual eyeball review. Needed new lenses. Since the existing glasses weigh as much as a bowling ball on my nose, new frames would be beneficial. Look at the cost - $108 - new spring wire frames, very lightweight $210 - poly carbonate lenses, very lightweight $27 - tax $55 - exam _______________ $400 Totally Outrageous I've seen outrageous bills over the years, but, this one has to be nothing but pure gouging. Three years ago the exam, frames, and lenses cost about $225. That is an outrageous price increase in just a few years. The glass fitter gal said the frames would cost about $240 at any other local area optometrist in private practice. We all bitch about prescription drugs being way overpriced, but, the real profit is in frames and lenses. The damn things are nothing but pure profit. Oh W. Baker and Ozgirl, remember our thread a few weeks ago about the puff test? The results of the puff test this morning for each eye was 16, almost perfect. No sign of glaucoma. The dilation test showed no sign of retinography. He had one hell of a time putting those drops in my eyes. I forgot to ask him one question - does a frequent dry eye problem in one eye indicate a problem? _____________________________________ http://www.healthdiabeticsoftware.com/ Free > Went to the Walmart optometrist this morning for the annual eyeball > review. Needed new lenses. Since the existing glasses weigh as much [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > I forgot to ask him one question - does a frequent dry eye problem in > one eye indicate a problem? Do you have insurance? Many companies carry VSP which will cover the cost of glasses. You might check with where you work. Also, you really should see an opthamolgist or a retinoligist that specializes in diabetic retinopathy to get a full battery fo tests. The guy I go to is one of the best and charges about $225 for a comprehensive exam and again, much of that will be covered by most insurance plans. That's cheaper than your glasses. :) Best, Kurt > $400 Totally Outrageous Last time I needed new glasses, I got them home and played with the kids a bit. Younger Daughter accidentally knocked them off my face, jumped on them, and totalled the frame. I'd changed house insurance the week before, and the new insurance didn't cover glasses... I bought a new pair on the net, for almost exactly a tenth of the optician's price, and pretty well the same spec; still going fine 2 years later. You guys got anything similar to this outfit? http://www.glassesdirect.co.uk/release_000/?gclid=CMmBrYW4hokCFQJPQgodhTbpAA Nicky.  SignatureA1c 10.5/5.5/<6 T2 DX 05/2004 100ug Thyroxine 95/72/72Kg I don't know Bruce. My glasses and sight have stayed the same for the past 8 years. I am very careful with them, only using water to rinse them and cloth to dry them, no scratches or anything, but at that time...they cost $375.00. I do have tri-focals and the lens do change in the sun etc, but I don't think your cost is excessive. Well, let me take that back, I do think it's excessive for a bit of plastic, outrageous in fact, but comparable ballpark cost is not that bad. -- Cheri >I've seen outrageous bills over the years, but, this one has to be >nothing but pure gouging. Three years ago the exam, frames, and [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >profit is in frames and lenses. The damn things are nothing but pure >profit. >I don't know Bruce. My glasses and sight have stayed the same for the >past 8 years. I am very careful with them, only using water to rinse [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >-- >Cheri Much the same here. I have three - multifocal clear for general use and night driving, multifocal polarised sunnies for outdoors and day driving and "accent" graduated ones for reading and computer. In this country and climate - UV/polarised sunnies are a health requirement, not a luxury. They range in price from AU$350-$575, but my private insurance pays $200-300 depending on the situation. I tend to keep them a few years unless the scrip changes; about 50% of the time I can re-use the frame when that happens. VA insurance will pay for the next pair - but only at basic level. Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia. d&e, metformin 1000mg, ezetrol 10mg Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter. -- http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com/ http://loraltravel.blogspot.com/ latest: Epidaurus Couldn't help responding to this thread. This is worse! How about $838.00 to replace lens' in 2 of my own designer eyeglasses at a private place where, on 8/8/03 I paid $693 for a well known frame and got one pair free. That's with all the perks (coated, progressive, scratch & glare resistant, transition, etc.). I ran out of there fast. But now I know I can't rely on Walmart either. I have no insurance for eyeglasses. Only a small discount from AARP. A lurker just venting. (Still not familiar with proper procedure of posting here.) Dex'd '89 T-2 A1C 6.0 fighting for 5% club with your help Hi Norma, welcome to the group. Please come out of lurkdom and post often. :-) -- Cheri ~norma~ i wrote in message <529-457C11CA-111@storefull-3174.bay.webtv.net>... A lurker just venting. (Still not familiar with proper procedure of posting here.) Dex'd '89 T-2 A1C 6.0 fighting for 5% club with your help >>I don't know Bruce. My glasses and sight have stayed the same for the >>past 8 years. I am very careful with them, only using water to rinse [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >>-- >>Cheri > Much the same here. I have three - multifocal clear for > general use and night driving, multifocal polarised sunnies > for outdoors and day driving and "accent" graduated ones for > reading and computer. In this country and climate - > UV/polarised sunnies are a health requirement, not a luxury. > They range in price from AU$350-$575, but my private > insurance pays $200-300 depending on the situation. I tend > to keep them a few years unless the scrip changes; about 50% > of the time I can re-use the frame when that happens. So a spec frame costs about the same as a cheap bicycle, and even though it gets used much less harshly than a bicycle, it doesn't last as long. I'd be fascinated to discover why they cost so much, especially given the rather poor enginering and construction of the average spec frame, and amazed if the explanation didn't leave me disposed t outrage or laughtr, depending on how recently I've had to pay for one. SignatureChris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/] I guess they charge that much...because they can. You don't necessarily need a bike, but if you need glasses you need them. They do the same with dental and outrageous charges for repairing partial plates as well. My friend just paid $145.00 to have a plastic tooth reset. Ridiculous IMO. -- Cheri >So a spec frame costs about the same as a cheap bicycle, and even >though it gets used much less harshly than a bicycle, it doesn't last [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK >[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/] > to keep them a few years unless the scrip changes; about 50% > of the time I can re-use the frame when that happens. Sigh. Over here the strategy is to change the style every year. They don't carry any frame the exact shape as the one you have, and they (say they) can only make lenses to fit the frames they sell. SignatureWes Groleau Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it. -- Robert A. Heinlein >> to keep them a few years unless the scrip changes; about 50% >> of the time I can re-use the frame when that happens. > > Sigh. Over here the strategy is to change the style every year. > They don't carry any frame the exact shape as the one you have, > and they (say they) can only make lenses to fit the frames they sell. I go either to Walmart or Lens Crafters and the both have made lenses for my old frames more than once. They do charge a fee for resusing the frames and the agreement says they are not responsible if the frames are damaged in the process of fitting the new lenses. They have never daaged my old frames. I could give AGRA about style. In alt.support.diabetes on Mon, 11 Dec 2006 03:26:50 GMT in Msg.# <_d4fh.930$IO5.377@trnddc01>, Wes Groleau <groleau+news@freeshell.org> wrote: > > to keep them a few years unless the scrip changes; about 50% > > of the time I can re-use the frame when that happens. > > Sigh. Over here the strategy is to change the style every year. > They don't carry any frame the exact shape as the one you have, > and they (say they) can only make lenses to fit the frames they sell. Where are you, Wes? SignatureDonnaB : ^> shallotpeel <*> Yahoo Messenger: shallotpeel http://www.amazingtunes.com/mrpresident "You're going to the cemetery with your toothbrush. How Egyptian." - Armand, The Birdcage (1996) > <_d4fh.930$IO5.377@trnddc01>, Wes Groleau <groleau+news@freeshell.org> >> Sigh. Over here the strategy is to change the style every year. >> They don't carry any frame the exact shape as the one you have, >> and they (say they) can only make lenses to fit the frames they sell. > > Where are you, Wes? Indiana. But I got the same story in New York. If I hear it again, I'll tell them I can find a more reasonable provider SignatureWes Groleau Genealogical Lookups: http://groleau.freeshell.org/ref/lookups.shtml In alt.support.diabetes on Wed, 13 Dec 2006 00:11:30 GMT in Msg.# <SyHfh.3748$LL4.366@trnddc04>, Wes Groleau <groleau+news@freeshell.org> wrote: > > <_d4fh.930$IO5.377@trnddc01>, Wes Groleau <groleau+news@freeshell.org> > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > If I hear it again, I'll tell them I can find > a more reasonable provider I've been wearing glasses since ... 1960 ... and I have re-used frames many many times & have never, yet anyway, been told that my frames couldn't be re-used for any reason except that the frames in question were not in good shape. And, even then, it was a recommendation, as in those cases, I was already concerned that the frames would have to be replaced & brought whatever the flaw was up to the optician. Just my own experience. And, that was several times in Brooklyn. I have other eyeglass experiences that would relate to this thread, but I was mainly just wondering if you were not in the US, when I had *thought* that you were. SignatureDonnaB : ^> shallotpeel <*> Yahoo Messenger: shallotpeel "Whenever someone annoys me, I create a file with his or her name on it and drag it to my Mac's trash icon. If I'm really angry, I empty the trash, and whoever was bugging me disappears into the void." - Margo Kaufman On 12/12/06 4:11 PM, in article SyHfh.3748$LL4.366@trnddc04, "Wes Groleau" <groleau+news@freeshell.org> wrote: >> <_d4fh.930$IO5.377@trnddc01>, Wes Groleau <groleau+news@freeshell.org> > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > If I hear it again, I'll tell them I can find > a more reasonable provider I had the same problem. I broke my glasses two weeks before my appointment with my ophthalmologist and no one wanted to do a repair. Couldn't be done, etc. etc. I finally found one who understood I didn't want to buy new glasses just before the doctor and managed a temporary repair. When I saw my doctor I complained and asked if there was some one he would recommend. He did!!! It turns out the ophthalmology department of the med faculty at UBC run their own optical store. No commissions for the staff and all the profit goes to eye research. They will even put new lenses in my 10 year old sun glasses. Guess where I go. I sure like the idea that my money goes for research. Maybe if you live in a university town with a medical faculty they might have a similar operation. Martha T2 Canada > When I saw my doctor I complained and asked if there was some one he would > recommend. He did!!! It turns out the ophthalmology department of the med [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > 10 > year old sun glasses. My local optician would put new lenses in my way-more-than-10 year old sunglasses -- but the lenses themselves would cost a boatload since they're *huge* -- think....thin frames with larger-than-JackieO-lenses -- but they were great for wearing in the Caribbean, & now I just use them occasionally to walk home from the ophthal's office when my eyes are dilated. bj > When I saw my doctor I complained and asked if there was some one he would > recommend. He did!!! It turns out the ophthalmology department of the med > faculty at UBC run their own optical store. No commissions for the staff and > all the profit goes to eye research. They will even put new lenses in my 10 > year old sun glasses. Guess where I go. I sure like the idea that my money > goes for research. I like that idea! But, .... I can get dental cleaning and other minor work done by students at the IPFW School of Dentistry for a very low cost. But I don't do it, and the reason is that if something comes up and I have to cancel (or I forget), it actually hurts the student's grade! Most unfair, but .... SignatureWes Groleau "There ain't nothin' in this world that's worth being a snot over." -- Larry Wall On 12/13/06 8:15 PM, in article Ud4gh.2720$IO5.32@trnddc01, "Wes Groleau" <groleau+news@freeshell.org> wrote: >> When I saw my doctor I complained and asked if there was some one he would >> recommend. He did!!! It turns out the ophthalmology department of the med [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > the reason is that if something comes up and I have to cancel (or I > forget), it actually hurts the student's grade! Most unfair, but .... I agree with your thoughts on using a the dental school. This is run as a business with fully qualified opticians (Is that an oxymoron?). There are no students involved. I guess you could describe it as a business owned by a medical school. Martha T2 Canada >I don't know Bruce. My glasses and sight have stayed the same for the >past 8 years. I am very careful with them, only using water to rinse [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >that back, I do think it's excessive for a bit of plastic, outrageous in >fact, but comparable ballpark cost is not that bad. Quite true, but look at the differential in cost of the exam vs the cost of frame + lenses. The exam is the meat and potatoes. Just think, you can buy a laptop pc for about $500. Look at the difference between between exam/frames/lenses and a laptop? This is totally absurb. A laptop has a lot of very complex components (though quite unreliable) and a pair of glasses are quite simple. The main difference is pure markup by the eyeglass industry. I would like to know the gross markup by the frame mfg and the lens maker. Walmart makes the lenses up in Fayettville. Just outrageous. : >I don't know Bruce. My glasses and sight have stayed the same for the : >past 8 years. I am very careful with them, only using water to rinse [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] : >that back, I do think it's excessive for a bit of plastic, outrageous in : >fact, but comparable ballpark cost is not that bad. : Quite true, but look at the differential in cost of the exam vs the : cost of frame + lenses. The exam is the meat and potatoes. Just [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] : know the gross markup by the frame mfg and the lens maker. Walmart : makes the lenses up in Fayettville. : Just outrageous. The low price (or sometimes even "free" price) of the exam is the come on to get you to go to that store. then they hit you with expensive glasses. Were these the only frames you could use or were there some at lower price? Wendy >: >I don't know Bruce. My glasses and sight have stayed the same for the >: >past 8 years. I am very careful with them, only using water to rinse [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >Were these the only frames you could use or were there some at lower >price? I hate to admit but I was steered into the situation. I wanted to get rid of those old metal frames. And I made a moment of it. Those old frames are heavy and drive me crazy. So the glass fitter gal took me directly to the lightweight titamium frames. It didn't take her long to convince me that the $108 frame was the greatest thing since canned budweiser. Same for the lenses. What can I say - sex sells, she was a pretty lil gal. >>: >I don't know Bruce. My glasses and sight have stayed the same for the >>: >past 8 years. I am very careful with them, only using water to rinse [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > budweiser. Same for the lenses. What can I say - sex sells, she was > a pretty lil gal. She probably did you a big favor, titanium frames last and last and.... You can probably just get new lenses for the next 5 years. >>Hi_Therre wrote: >> I hate to admit but I was steered into the situation. I wanted to get [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > She probably did you a big favor, titanium frames last and last and.... > You can probably just get new lenses for the next 5 years. I love my titanium frames. And they cost way more than $108, too. They're flexible, as well as lightweight. They bend instead of breaking if they get wronked around or something. bj > She probably did you a big favor, titanium frames last and last and.... > You can probably just get new lenses for the next 5 years. See my post about the style-changing strategy. SignatureWes Groleau The man who says, "I can do it!" may sometimes fail. The man who says, "Impossible!" will never succeed. : > She probably did you a big favor, titanium frames last and last and.... : > You can probably just get new lenses for the next 5 years. : See my post about the style-changing strategy. : The man who says, "I can do it!" may sometimes fail. : The man who says, "Impossible!" will never succeed. What you can never seem to get is a new FRAME if it breaks and you want to reuse the old lenses. They can always fit new LENSES into an old frame, as they work form blanks that have to be saped t fit the lframe whether new or old. Wendy > : > She probably did you a big favor, titanium frames last and last > and.... [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Wendy She's right about the form blanks and if you are using your old frames they can use your old lenses as the form blank to shape the new lenses. I've watched them do it at Lens Crafters. They put the form blank or old lens in a machine and it grinds the lens blank to that shape. Then with a little hand polishing around the edges, your glasses are ready in 1 hour if they have lense a blank for your Rx on hand. If you have metal frames, some jewelry repair shops also repair metal frame eyeglasses. They can make them as good as new. That might cost a lot less than new glasses. > "W. Baker" <wbaker@panix.com> wrote in message >> What you can never seem to get is a new FRAME if it breaks and you want to [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > hand polishing around the edges, your glasses are ready in 1 hour if they > have lense a blank for your Rx on hand. I'll take your word for it and go elsewhere the next time someone tries that line. SignatureWes Groleau After the christening of his baby brother in church, Jason sobbed all the way home in the back seat of the car. His father asked him three times what was wrong. Finally, the boy replied, "That preacher said he wanted us brought up in a Christian home, and I wanted to stay with you guys." > What you can never seem to get is a new FRAME if it breaks and you want to > reuse the old lenses. They can always fit new LENSES into an old frame, > as they work form blanks that have to be saped t fit the lframe whether > new or old. Very true. My glasses were less than 2 years old so I was hoping they'd have the same fame in stock, perhaps in a different color. Nope. They managed to put the lenses in a different frame but it's not a perfect fit and they don't want to stay secure. SignatureSee my webpage: http://mysite.verizon.net/juliebove/index.htm >>>: >I don't know Bruce. My glasses and sight have stayed the same for the >>>: >past 8 years. I am very careful with them, only using water to rinse [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] >She probably did you a big favor, titanium frames last and last and.... >You can probably just get new lenses for the next 5 years. I have never *sat* on my glasses. But, I've sat on many a sunglasses in the truck. > budweiser. Same for the lenses. What can I say - sex sells, she was > a pretty lil gal. When you go through the checkout line at the market, surely you've noticed all the women's magazines with covers that nonverbally imply, "Buy this magazine and read how you can look like this!" Well, on my last trip, I noticed a rag called "Men's Health" Was there a Charles Atlas type on the cover? No, it was a female in a very skimpy bikini. SignatureWes Groleau Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it. -- Robert A. Heinlein >> budweiser. Same for the lenses. What can I say - sex sells, she was >> a pretty lil gal. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >Was there a Charles Atlas type on the cover? No, it >was a female in a very skimpy bikini. I'm feeling better already. SignaturePeter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com > Went to the Walmart optometrist this morning for the annual eyeball > review. Needed new lenses. Since the existing glasses weigh as much [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > _____________________________________ > http://www.healthdiabeticsoftware.com/ Free Several years ago I had my glasses made with a pair of light weight titanium frames. These frames are still in excellent condition, I have had new lenses put in them 3 times since then. That is one way to save money and better yet, I don't have to break in a new set of frames. These fit and feel 100% comfortable. Reusing the frames and taking advantage of coupon deals from Lens Crafters has saved me big money, about half on my glasses. > Went to the Walmart optometrist this morning for the annual eyeball > review. Needed new lenses. Since the existing glasses weigh as much [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > profit is in frames and lenses. The damn things are nothing but pure > profit. Especially true, but you're paying that much for the fashion/convenience aspects. I highly suspect that with very-low end frames and very-low end lenses you would end up paying $50-$70 for the same frames/lenses. That said, my glasses are on my face all the time during the day, and I'm willing to pay a few extra bucks for extra features. I happen to like very generic frames, so I save a little bit there. But I also really really like non-reflective coatings on my regular glasses and polarized lenses on my sunglasses, and those do cost extra, and I ended up paying about $220 for my regular glasses and about $140 for a pair of Ray-Ban frames with polarized lenses. Tim. I go to an opthalmologist (?Spl) and get my glasses. My husband had a pair for about a year and our puppy chewed the arm off. He called the doctor and the glasses were replaced without charge. I understand that this is common in the US now for the seller to insure the glasses. Take care, Vickie B. >> Went to the Walmart optometrist this morning for the annual eyeball >> review. Needed new lenses. Since the existing glasses weigh as much [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] >up paying about $220 for my regular glasses and about $140 for a pair >of Ray-Ban frames with polarized lenses. The frames are plain Jane lightweight titanium wire frames. The lenses are simple polycarbonate. Regular plastic lenses cost $110, the thinner and lighter polycarbonate cost $110 extra. The glass fitter gal could not explain why the doubling of cost for the polycarbonate, other than a ridiculous markup. Yesterday we were looking at new laptops at Walmart for $500+. Somehow the comparison between the glass cost and laptop cost is just absurd. > The frames are plain Jane lightweight titanium wire frames. Which run $20-50 on discount web sites, depending on style. > The > lenses are simple polycarbonate. Regular plastic lenses cost $110, > the thinner and lighter polycarbonate cost $110 extra. The glass > fitter gal could not explain why the doubling of cost for the > polycarbonate, other than a ridiculous markup. This "upgrade" runs $20-40 on discount glasses sites. So basically, you paid a few hundred extra bucks to have a sexy chick sell you glasses. For that kind of money, you could have a sexy chick pop out of a cake, do a striptease and lapdance for an hour or so. But it's a good thing you didn't consider that as cake is not diabetes-friendly. >> The frames are plain Jane lightweight titanium wire frames. > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >do a striptease and lapdance for an hour or so. But it's a good thing >you didn't consider that as cake is not diabetes-friendly. Sounds quite right. Appears I may have been snookered. I can guarantee, it will not be the last time either. A pretty face turns most men into mush. _____________________________________ http://www.healthdiabeticsoftware.com/ Free >> For that kind of money, you could have a sexy chick pop out of a cake, >> do a striptease and lapdance for an hour or so. But it's a good thing [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > guarantee, it will not be the last time either. A pretty face turns > most men into mush. I *do* understand the concept that sex sells, just... if ya wanna buy sex, I don't see why you don't just go buy sex! And then buy eyeglasses as an entirely separate item. You'd probably come out ahead. >>> For that kind of money, you could have a sexy chick pop out of a cake, >>> do a striptease and lapdance for an hour or so. But it's a good thing [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > You'd probably come out ahead. Every man does not automatically think of sex when they see a pretty face or fine body. There are some, more civilized, men that can appreciate a pretty face or body for its beauty alone. > For that kind of money, you could have a sexy chick pop out of a cake, do > a striptease and lapdance for an hour or so. But it's a good thing you > didn't consider that as cake is not diabetes-friendly. Heh - coffee-on-screen warning required! Nicky. SignatureA1c 10.5/5.5/<6 T2 DX 05/2004 100ug Thyroxine 95/72/72Kg Hi_Therre wrote in message ... >Went to the Walmart optometrist this morning for the annual eyeball >review. Needed new lenses. Since the existing glasses weigh as much [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >I've seen outrageous bills over the years, but, this one has to be >nothing but pure gouging. . . . . I buy my glasses from the supplier that services my previous employer. Since the employer demanded 100% safety eyeglass use for all employees, (umm. . .no contacts allowed in chemical plants) they paid for active employees' glasses. Now that I am retired, I can use the same supplier and pay the same price. . . . .as can my immediate relatives. That said, my cost for wire frames with oversized "safety-rated" polycarbonate lens is USD $84. That amount represents a cost + profit figure for a bare-bones, low overhead operation supplying a superior product. (The Company supplies a rent-free, hole-in-the-wall for the vendor on Company property). Whatever you do, wherever you look, that's a figure that will be tough to beat but remains a viable target. Thinking about my situation, I really don't know if they check to see if customers are non-qualified walk-ins or actual retirees. I've been shopping there so long that we're on a first name basis. We don't need I.D. to enter the hole-in-the-wall but you would have to "be in the know" to be able to find it. FWIW, active employees "buy" their required glasses with a chit from their boss but they also can buy extra glasses (more stylish than the oversized varieties best suited for chemical plants) , prescription sunglasses, et al for cash. Again, I think it's no questions asked so a non-qualified younger-than-retiree might be able to walk in. I wonder if you can do some nosing around in your area. All they can do is say no. Thirty years ago, I did some nosing around for somebody who was paying top prices for glasses for a passel of kids. I was told that the laws which regulate eyeglass sales are a bit odd, and vary from state to state. Folks in our Texas division asserted that folks in their area could save half by shopping for glasses across a state line. (I can't remember whether the Texans crossed the state line or folks in states around them crossed into Texas) Regards Old Al >Hi_Therre wrote in message ... >>Went to the Walmart optometrist this morning for the annual eyeball [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] >whether the Texans crossed the state line or folks in states around them >crossed into Texas) I have serious doubts that anyone in town in cheaper. Everything medical in this place is higher than in Little Rock. I already paid for them, so I am stuck with them. To add insult to injury, they won't be ready until 12/19. Oh well. At least I can bitch about them being so overpriced. Is that your sock puppet on m.c.f-l griping about the very same subject, on the very same day? >Is that your sock puppet on m.c.f-l griping about the very same >subject, on the very same day? What is m.c.f-I? Never heard of it. > Went to the Walmart optometrist this morning for the annual eyeball > review. Needed new lenses. Since the existing glasses weigh as much [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > _______________ > $400 Totally Outrageous Heh! I got new glasses summer before last: bifocals, progressive, Transitions, anti-glare, super high index plastic, frameless.... total was over $900. Thank goodness I had a 25% discount, but still! Priscilla > Went to the Walmart optometrist this morning for the annual eyeball > review. Needed new lenses. Since the existing glasses weigh as much [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > _______________ > $400 Totally Outrageous <snip> I just stepped on my glasses. Don't ask me how because I had set them on my computer desk. How they got under my foot in my bedroom is beyond me. But... They are no longer. My new frames cost $188, but I've paid as much as $325 for frames alone. I didn't have much choice this time though. The glasses were less than 2 years old and I didn't need a new prescription. Since the lenses were still intact, I hoped to get them fitted into new frames. And now come to find out the only frames they had they would fit in are not a perfect fit. I accidentally bumped my head on the van door and that slight jar knocked the lenses loose. So now every few hours I have to keep checking them to make sure they're still intact. *sigh* Guess I'll be getting a whole new pair next time I go in. SignatureSee my webpage: http://mysite.verizon.net/juliebove/index.htm > I just stepped on my glasses. Don't ask me how because I had set them on my > computer desk. How they got under my foot in my bedroom is beyond me. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > keep checking them to make sure they're still intact. *sigh* Guess I'll be > getting a whole new pair next time I go in. A small touch of adhesive would fix that. I've sometimes had new specs where the lenses could be knocked out like that, and a small touch of breakable adhesive has kept them going for many years without any problems. SignatureChris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/] >> I just stepped on my glasses. Don't ask me how because I had set them on my >> computer desk. How they got under my foot in my bedroom is beyond me. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >breakable adhesive has kept them going for many years without any >problems. Superglue? > A small touch of adhesive would fix that. I've sometimes had new specs > where the lenses could be knocked out like that, and a small touch of > breakable adhesive has kept them going for many years without any > problems. If they're new, the vendor should replace or fix them. If they're old--well, I mixed up a bunch of clear epoxy and worked it into all the cracks with a toothpick. SignatureWes Groleau Truth often suffers more from the heat of its defenders than from the arguments of its opposers. -- William Penn > If they're old--well, I mixed up a bunch of clear epoxy > and worked it into all the cracks with a toothpick. I have been known to use duct tape in extremis : ) Nicky. SignatureA1c 10.5/5.5/<6 T2 DX 05/2004 100ug Thyroxine 95/72/72Kg > "Wes Groleau" <groleau+news@freeshell.org> wrote in message >> If they're old--well, I mixed up a bunch of clear epoxy >> and worked it into all the cracks with a toothpick. > > I have been known to use duct tape in extremis : ) I used cellophane tape until I had the time for the epoxy to set. But the epoxy is GREAT. Holds forever, very strong, and nearly invisible if you put it on carefully with toothpicks. SignatureWes Groleau Change is inevitable. Liberals need to learn that "inevitable" is not a synonym for "good." Conservatives should learn that "inevitable" is not a synonym for "bad." -- WWG > Went to the Walmart optometrist this morning for the annual eyeball > review. Needed new lenses. Since the existing glasses weigh as much [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > I've seen outrageous bills over the years, but, this one has to be > nothing but pure gouging. Hi, My last eyeglasses cost more than that. Partly because I really want my glasses to look really outstanding, but partly for practical reasons too. If I am going to have some apparatus hanging on my face in public, you can bet I want them to look really "stylin'" :-) This costs money. On the upside of that, people almost always ask me where I got my glasses and tell me how really GOOD they look. My current pair is 'Silhouettes' with no real frame to speak of, just really cool shaped lenses with a couple of wires. I almost look like I am not wearing glasses. I have had three friends go out and buy the same ones I have because they look so good. And they are still cutting edge style after 7 years. (my scrip hasn't changed, fortunately). They are incredibly light weight, and I often forget I am even wearing them. I always get the lenses made of Crizal, because it helps my night vision immensely. Unfortunately these lenses are more money than even the regular hardened ones, but they have the glare reduction and scratch proof, built right into the lens, not some icky coating that gets dirty easier or some such. I always used to get the coated lenses and they helped, but not nearly so much as this Crizal stuff. My lenses are as good today as they were 7 years ago when I got them. No scratches, and glare reduction to the max. Then I get progressive lenses because it gives me the most normal vision, and I can see at any distance with them. Driving and looking at directions or a map at the same time is so much easier that way, because you don't have to switch glasses to read it. This costs more money, but you save on reading glasses, and they aren't ugly like bifocals, cause there is no line. This adds to the cost. Then I get a separate pair of prescription sun glasses (also in the Crizal material), which increases the cost again. Most of the time I am driving in the daytime or watching TV at home, so the separate sun glasses and clear glasses works out well for me. Last trip which included all of this cost me about $700. (That was only for me, hubby got his from a different place and I forget how much it was.) I recently lost my prescription sun glasses, and we are both (hubby and me) due for new exams, lenses and frames, so I am going to probably end up spending a lot. I know it costs to get the good stuff, and yes, it is probably a big ripoff, but on the plus side, I haven't needed to replace my glasses in all these years and they haven't turned out to be weird looking or old fashioned after a couple of years either. Fortunately my scrip is the same. We are both going to go for exams from the Opthalmologist (a real doctor, not an optometrist) and get our glasses from a place that has a huge selection of frames which is separate. I know this is going to cost bigtime.... Insurance will help, but we will still bear the main cost. So about the ripoff.... Over the years I have tried some of the discount places and had very bad experiences with lenses that were wrong etc. I have also gotten the cheaper lenses, and been disappointed how scratched they got very soon. I can't see any way around it and think that the only thing to do is bite the bullet and play along..... but that is exactly what they (the eyeglass industry) knows too, and so they don't make it any easier. SignatureBest Regards, Evelyn (to reply to me personally, remove 'sox') > > Went to the Walmart optometrist this morning for the annual eyeball > > review. Needed new lenses. Since the existing glasses weigh as much [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > reading glasses, and they aren't ugly like bifocals, cause there is no line. > This adds to the cost. Crizal is actually the anti-reflection coating built directly into the lenses sold by several different high end lense manufacturers. It is vastly superior to previous AR coatings and is extremely scratch resistant. There is Crizal, Crizal D, Crizal Alize (Crizal A), and Crizal D Alize. This level of quality does not come cheap. For now, all other AR coatings are currently quite inferior. If you have a low power prescription, a quality AR coating might not be worth the cost. I use one of the recommended cleaning methods for high-index and Crizal AR lenses. Rinse lenses under warm, but not hot, running water to dislodge large particles. Wet hands, add a drop or two of dish detergent, work up a bit of lather with more water, and gently rub the lenses and frame with the lather. Rinse completely under the same water, shake off excessive water. Gently press a clean, lint free cloth or quality tissue to the lenses to absorb the remaining water. If necessary, gently and carefully rub with the cloth or tissue to remove any small water marks. Repeat if necessary. My Crizal lenses have no noticeable scratches after two years, and the coating cuts down enormously on the reflections for me. I do have to clean them 2 - 3 times a day due to my oily skin. Progressive lenses are a large additional cost, but when I finally needed that "reading" add on, after forty years of strong prescriptions worn daily, progressives were a far better choice than bi-focals or tri- focals, and I adapted to them within days. There are two main reasons for expensive eyeglasses. If you pick expensive frames to start with, it is going to cost you. For daily wearers, especially if you fall asleep with them on, titanium frames are astonishing rugged, as others have mentioned. They are on my wish list. Your prescription also determines your lense material, further driving your cost up. At the bottom is old fashioned glass, which many find too heavy. My first non-glass pair was CR-39 (a hard resin composite) back in the early 1970's. It is still recommended when safety lenses are required. Polycarb is lighter, and is what most of the chain stores such as Lenscrafters use (think featherweights). It has a worse abbe value (allows more distortions) than CR-39, but most people getting eyeglasses at places like these have a fairly mild prescription, so the distortion is not noticeable as far as they are concerned. Trivex is similar to polycarb, has a better abbe value, and is stronger than polycarb (good for safety or rimless glasses), and unlike polycarb, can be tinted. Most people with medium or stronger prescriptions go to "high-index" lenses, which can be much thinner than polycarb or Trivex, which helps offset their not so great abbe value. Think no more "coke bottle" effect. Usually they are described as 1.60, 1.67, 1.74, and depending on which country you live in, even higher. These are much more expensive than polycarb, which the chains push, and Lenscrafters quite often subcontracts out for these. No one hour wait for these babies, and no easy profit. Most chain store (Lenscrafters, Costco, Walmart) prescriptions are in the range of -2.00 to -3.50, and polycarb makes sense. If your prescription is -4.00 or better, most people are better off with high-index. They are more expensive than what many people with "average" prescriptions are used to because besides the material being more expensive to begin with, they require more experience to make, and even more experience to fit properly. Progressives are the most difficult to fit due to design constraints, and a miniscule error in fitting and centering the lenses to the frames can be real trouble. Pay what it costs for an optometrist or technician that has a lot of experience with this type lense. Google the group sci.med.vision, and check out: http://vision.about.com/od/contactlenseseyeglasses/a/lensoptions.htm http://www.eyeglasses.com/eye_glasses_lenses.page http://www.webmd.com/content/article/63/71997.htm Dennis (Type 2) -6.50 -1.25 x 008 (R) -7.75 -0.50 x 180 (L) High-Index 1.67, Progressive (PAL), Crizal AR lenses > Progressive lenses are a large additional cost, but when I finally needed > that "reading" add on, after forty years of strong prescriptions worn > daily, progressives were a far better choice than bi-focals or tri- > focals, and I adapted to them within days. Days? When I got mine I adapted within minutes! & I've loved them ever since. I have a friend who couldn't adjust at all & traded them in for regular bi-focals + a mono-pair for computer work. > There are two main reasons for expensive eyeglasses. If you pick > expensive frames to start with, it is going to cost you. For daily > wearers, especially if you fall asleep with them on, titanium frames are > astonishing rugged, as others have mentioned. They are on my wish list. I hope you get your wish. :-) I love my titanium frames. And when I first got them, Dad was still able to enjoy the joke about them -- he was a lifelong golfer. > Progressives are the most difficult to fit due to design > constraints, and a miniscule error in fitting and centering the lenses to > the frames can be real trouble. Pay what it costs for an optometrist or > technician that has a lot of experience with this type lense. Boy ain't it the truth that fit can make all the difference. I had one pair that just needed a slight bit of "angle" changed to get them just-right. You can't do that mail-order. I'm lucky that a very good optometrist shop is just a few blocks away, especially if new specs need some fit-tweaking. I can also drop in anytime to get any minor fixes made, & they have my records going back 20 years or more. bj > > Progressive lenses are a large additional cost, but when I finally needed > > that "reading" add on, after forty years of strong prescriptions worn [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Days? > When I got mine I adapted within minutes! & I've loved them ever since. So did I. The adaptation was so seamless that until I consciously looked out of the edge of the lenses I was convinced that I'd been given the wrong glasses! I wouldn't give up my progressives for *anything*! Signature"and the snark alert level has reached "fuschia"" ---zig zigalo homes in on the meat of the matter > > > Progressive lenses are a large additional cost, but when I finally needed > > > that "reading" add on, after forty years of strong prescriptions worn [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > out of the edge of the lenses I was convinced that I'd been given the > wrong glasses! I wouldn't give up my progressives for *anything*! Hear, hear! I adjusted to my first pair in about 20 minutes except for going down stairs. I *always* try to hold onto the handrail and NOT LOOK DOWN because I can get really disoriented as to distance. What was actually harder was getting used to my frameless lenses. They felt really odd for days, but I finally adjusted to there being no dark edges. I just love how they look, too! Priscilla >> > > Progressive lenses are a large additional cost, but when I finally needed >> > > that "reading" add on, after forty years of strong prescriptions worn [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >going down stairs. I *always* try to hold onto the handrail and NOT >LOOK DOWN because I can get really disoriented as to distance. I tripped in the store and landed on my face. The lineless bifocals really screwed up my depth perception. Hard to get used to. That was many years ago. >What was actually harder was getting used to my frameless lenses. They >felt really odd for days, but I finally adjusted to there being no dark >edges. I just love how they look, too! Frameless? > >What was actually harder was getting used to my frameless lenses. They > >felt really odd for days, but I finally adjusted to there being no dark > >edges. I just love how they look, too! > > Frameless? Yeah, you know, just ear pieces. Nothing around the lenses. Priscilla >> >What was actually harder was getting used to my frameless lenses. They >> >felt really odd for days, but I finally adjusted to there being no dark [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Priscilla Yes, I have the same kind. Nothing but a thin wire connecting the two lenses (and holding the supports that brace on the nose), and earpieces. They look great and interfere with ones (non-eyeglass wearing) appearance the least. SignatureBest Regards, Evelyn (to reply to me personally, remove 'sox') >> > > Progressive lenses are a large additional cost, but when I finally needed >> > > that "reading" add on, after forty years of strong prescriptions worn [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >> out of the edge of the lenses I was convinced that I'd been given the >> wrong glasses! I wouldn't give up my progressives for *anything*! > Hear, hear! I adjusted to my first pair in about 20 minutes except for > going down stairs. I *always* try to hold onto the handrail and NOT > LOOK DOWN because I can get really disoriented as to distance. Because I have very strong lenses there's a sharp and significant discontinuity in vision and apparent distance between the edge of my lens-corrdcted view and my direct uncorrected outside-the-specs view. Because a great deal of our rapid instinctive reactions to movement and balance derive from peripheral vision I've taken the deliberate policy of having as small lenses as I can possibly get, so that as much as possible of my peripheral vision goes past the edges of my spctacles into straight uncorrected vision. It doesn't matter that it's uncorrected, because peripheral vision is too fuzzy to need correction anyway. It gets very fast general impressions, the kind which make you duck appropriately when you see something coming at your head out of the corner of your eye. I do this because I wanted to avoid the problem of my instinctive reactions to peripheral vision getting messed up by switching between uncorrected vision, and the considerable and variable edge-lens distortion of my specs. So when I drop my eyes to look at the stairs when going down them I see them outside the bottom of my specs, unless I drop my head and catch them with my sharp central vision. So I can actually run down staircases two at a time if I keep my head up and balance and aim my feet with uncorrected peripheral vision. If I tip my head down to bring in the lens-corrected (and distance-distorted) view of the stairs I become too disoriented to move quickly. My instinctive reactions are confused and I have to move with conscious care. The same kind of thing applies when I'm dodging vehicles in rush hour traffic. Things I see out of the corner of my eye I see with uncorrected straight accurate peripheral vision, and react with appropriate judgment. Of course not everyone may be able to get their eyes to behave like this. It's quite possible that I can only operate this way because it's been my deliberate strategy since childhood, and my instinctive reactions to peripheral vision are long habituated to it. I had a feeling about this kind of thing as a kid, and formulated this kind of policy in these kind of terms in my mid teens, which was when I learned formally about optics and lenses. I do make a point of checking out my instinctive fast reactions to peripheral vision, and giving them a bit of regular practice, by deliberately running down stairs two at a time when I get a good clear opportunity, which I guess is probably at least once a week. I used to do it just for fun. Now I'm at an age where these kinds of things tend to go, especially if you don't use them. I'm a lot slower than I was, but I'm still one of the fast movers in heavily staircased environments like the London Underground. I note that martial artists enmphasize the importance for the fastest and most accurate reactions to incoming blows to use peripheral vision rather than central, because central vision works more slowly. The idea is to aim your eyes at a good central distant point and pay attention to nearby obstacles without moving your eyes. I've tried that when doing things like running for a bus in a crowded street and it seems to work. In other words, I suspect that the use of large spectacle lenses when the prescription is strong can give variable and disconinuous calibration problems to instinctive distance and direction judgments, which could lead to disorientation and instability when walking and especially running on non-flat surfaces. Just my personal speculation. SignatureChris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/] > I note that martial artists enmphasize the importance for the fastest > and most accurate reactions to incoming blows to use peripheral vision > rather than central, because central vision works more slowly. Hmmm - not to mention that they won't let you fight with your glasses on! I had a most hilarious bout on Tuesday against someone else who's blind as a bat without specs... we have no idea who won, because neither of us could see the scoring hand signals : ) I don't think I'm using my peripheral vision particularly, but I am getting in a zone I recognise from fencing as a kid, or playing bowls at international standard - I'm not thinking per se, but sort of extending my personal perception outwards, not focussing on points but being aware of everything around me. I dunno, maybe that counts as peripheral vision : ) Nicky. SignatureA1c 10.5/5.5/<6 T2 DX 05/2004 100ug Thyroxine 95/72/72Kg What kind of fight, Nicky? Visual tests reveal that I have definitely lost significant peripheral vision, I guess from the glaucoma, plus the inner one-quarter part of my left eye. Not a worry as long as it does not interfere with my computer or reading, and right now, the MG is already doing that, but some surgery down the road will help fix that when they raise my eye lids. Still got that good vision 'neath it all thank goodness!! > Hmmm - not to mention that they won't let you fight with your glasses on! > I had a most hilarious bout on Tuesday against someone else who's blind as [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Nicky. > What kind of fight, Nicky? I've started karate, which is great fun - not to mention a good workout. The kidlets have been doing it for years, but we had to change teachers; I came along as taxi driver, but ended up joining in. The last school was a non-contact one, but this lot do proper sparring and self-defence. Good thing atm - if you've seen the multiple murders on the news, they're happening right in our local area. The bodies have been dumped in areas we regularly walk in, I'm not doing my usual walking alone for miles - despite my sparkly new red karate belt : ) Nicky. SignatureA1c 10.5/5.5/<6 T2 DX 05/2004 100ug Thyroxine 95/72/72Kg : > What kind of fight, Nicky? : I've started karate, which is great fun - not to mention a good workout. The : kidlets have been doing it for years, but we had to change teachers; I came [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] : regularly walk in, I'm not doing my usual walking alone for miles - despite : my sparkly new red karate belt : ) : Nicky. I was wondering about you and your suffolk location when I saw an account of the ghastly Suffolk murders on the BBC TV news here in New York City. You are absolutel righ tto not do the walking. Hopefully, the karate will make up fo rthe lost exercise of walking and will continue to make you feel empowered(but, plsease not to brave so you continue to avoid dumb thing:-) Let's all hope they find the monster very soon. Wendy > Of course not everyone may be able to get their eyes to behave like > this. It's quite possible that I can only operate this way because > it's been my deliberate strategy since childhood, and my instinctive > reactions to peripheral vision are long habituated to it. I had a Defintely an individual thing. For me, the main thing about stairs is not any kind of vision, but just general spatial awareness. In other words, I just know where the steps are and where my feet are whether my eyes are open or closed, lights on or off at midnight. SignatureWes Groleau "Grant me the serenity to accept those I cannot change; the courage to change the one I can; and the wisdom to know it's me." -- unknown >> Of course not everyone may be able to get their eyes to behave like >> this. It's quite possible that I can only operate this way because >> it's been my deliberate strategy since childhood, and my instinctive >> reactions to peripheral vision are long habituated to it. I had a > Defintely an individual thing. For me, the main thing about stairs is > not any kind of vision, but just general spatial awareness. In other > words, I just know where the steps are and where my feet are whether > my eyes are open or closed, lights on or off at midnight. I take my hat off to you if you can run down the stairs two at a time with your eyes closed :-) SignatureChris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/] > I take my hat off to you if you can run down the stairs two at a time > with your eyes closed :-) I haven't tried it. I can go up two at a time in the dark. Probably pertinent is the fact that I got my first pair of glasses at age ten and I was 20/400 then. It takes a LOT of light to see the edge of a carpeted stair-step at 20/400. SignatureWes Groleau "Grant me the serenity to accept those I cannot change; the courage to change the one I can; and the wisdom to know it's me." -- unknown : > > Progressive lenses are a large additional cost, but when I finally needed : > > that "reading" add on, after forty years of strong prescriptions worn [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] : > Days? : > When I got mine I adapted within minutes! & I've loved them ever since. : So did I. The adaptation was so seamless that until I consciously looked : out of the edge of the lenses I was convinced that I'd been given the : wrong glasses! I wouldn't give up my progressives for *anything*! I have not tried the progressives as I ws told that they can reduce your peripheral vision. since all Ihave in my left eye is peripheral vision, tht didn't seem like a great idea. Dispite all my treatments, I still have wiggly vision with lines merging and letters dancing. I did test 20/50 in my right eye at the last visit wich is up from 20/60- at the previous one. I dont' know if I canexpect still writing over time and with treatments. Wendy, just grousing a bit. > When I got mine I adapted within minutes! & I've loved them ever since. > I have a friend who couldn't adjust at all & traded them in > for regular bi-focals + a mono-pair for computer work. That's me, too - I gave them 3 weeks' trial, and felt sick and headachy every day until I traded them in - never again. Nicky. SignatureA1c 10.5/5.5/<6 T2 DX 05/2004 100ug Thyroxine 95/72/72Kg > I use one of the recommended cleaning methods for high-index and Crizal > AR lenses. Rinse lenses under warm, but not hot, running water to [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > two years, and the coating cuts down enormously on the reflections for > me. I do have to clean them 2 - 3 times a day due to my oily skin. I keep a squeeze bottle of diluted dishwashing liquid (from what's left in the bottom of a bottle) next to the sink expressly for eyeglass cleaning. At work I use a drop from the bottle of dishwashing liquid in our little kitchen, but I much prefer the dilute solution because it's easier to rinse off. Priscilla, another oily-skinned myope On 12/11/06 9:07 PM, in article MPG.1fe802efd84263fe989680@pqnews.cogeco.ca, >>> Went to the Walmart optometrist this morning for the annual eyeball >>> review. Needed new lenses. Since the existing glasses weigh as much [quoted text clipped - 120 lines] > High-Index 1.67, Progressive (PAL), > Crizal AR lenses Several people have mentioned the high cost of titanium frames. I require frames of that quality because I have very acid skin and it corrodes ordinary frames quickly. My ophthalmologist won't allow me to have plastic lenses because I wear trifocals and he says the opticians can't place them accurately enough to get the lines in the right place. My optician suggested that I buy stainless steel frames. They are half the cost and have all the benefits of titanium. Those wanting titanium and unable to afford it might enquire about stainless steel. Martha T2 Canada > My optician suggested that I buy stainless steel frames. They are half the > cost and have all the benefits of titanium. Do they bend & twist? Are they as lightweight? bj >> My optician suggested that I buy stainless steel frames. They are half the >> cost and have all the benefits of titanium. > >Do they bend & twist? No. >Are they as lightweight? Stainless is heavier than titanium. On 12/12/06 12:17 PM, in article u7Efh.1793$HX4.1779@trnddc03, "bj" >> My optician suggested that I buy stainless steel frames. They are half the >> cost and have all the benefits of titanium. > > Do they bend & twist? > Are they as lightweight? > bj They are very lightweight, but they do not bend or twist like some do. Then I don't try to do that to mine! Martha T2 Canada >Several people have mentioned the high cost of titanium frames. I require >frames of that quality because I have very acid skin and it corrodes [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >cost and have all the benefits of titanium. Those wanting titanium and >unable to afford it might enquire about stainless steel. Stainless is heavier than titanium. Doesn't the weight of the frames drive you crazy? On 12/12/06 3:04 PM, in article l9dun2h4jglqlorh6taeqokoqtbu9dcb9i@4ax.com, >> Several people have mentioned the high cost of titanium frames. I require >> frames of that quality because I have very acid skin and it corrodes [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Stainless is heavier than titanium. Doesn't the weight of the frames > drive you crazy? My frames are extremely light. I can't feel any difference between these and the titanium ones I had. Martha T2 Canada >>Several people have mentioned the high cost of titanium frames. I require >>frames of that quality because I have very acid skin and it corrodes >>ordinary frames quickly. My ophthalmologist won't allow me to have plastic >>lenses because I wear trifocals and he says the opticians can't place them >>accurately enough to get the lines in the right place. >>My optician suggested that I buy stainless steel frames. They are half the >>cost and have all the benefits of titanium. Those wanting titanium and >>unable to afford it might enquire about stainless steel. > Stainless is heavier than titanium. Doesn't the weight of the frames > drive you crazy? My lenses have always been so much heavier than my frames that what the fram is made of oesn't matter a damn with respect to the weight of the spectacles. SignatureChris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/] > Went to the Walmart optometrist this morning for the annual eyeball > review. Needed new lenses. Since the existing glasses weigh as much [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > _______________ > $400 Totally Outrageous Last time we had eye exams, hubby and I took our prescription and ordered glasses online from zennioptical.com There's a lot of competing sites for cheapo glasses, I recall I shopped a lot before choosing. We each got 2 pairs for plus those clip on sunglass thingies - so 4 pairs of prescription glasses total - for less than half of what you paid for one pair. > Last time we had eye exams, hubby and I took our prescription and ordered > glasses online from zennioptical.com > > We each got 2 pairs for plus those clip on sunglass thingies - so 4 pairs > of prescription glasses total - for less than half of what you paid for > one pair. You're lucky if they fit properly. How do you put in your personal measurements (which you take how???) so that the new specs really fit you, with the lenses properly place, angled & adjusted? bj > You're lucky if they fit properly. > How do you put in your personal measurements (which you take how???) so that > the new specs really fit you, with the lenses properly place, angled & > adjusted? The only measurement they eneded was the distance between our pupils, which we each measured on the other. all the rest of that fitting stuff is generally done by a sales rep, who just sorts bends the frames a bit here and there. Not exactly a highly skilled technician, but the sales person. Frankly, for a savings of several hundred bucks each, I can adjust them to fit right just fine myself. > > You're lucky if they fit properly. > > How do you put in your personal measurements (which you take how???) so that [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Frankly, for a savings of several hundred bucks each, I can adjust them > to fit right just fine myself. That's fine if you have ordinary, single prescription lenses (no multi- focals or progressives), a low power prescription, and nothing fancier than simple CR-39 or polycarbonate (polycarb) lense material. I like to see a sales rep adjust high index lenses or bi-focals, let alone progressives! ;-) I am not knocking your choice, because it makes sense for you. If all you need is a Ford Focus to get around town, why bother with a F-150 with dual axels and a trailer hitch. Those that need something better pay the going rate. There is a highly respected independent in town tha |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message