 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Vision / January 2005Two pretty different prescriptions in 8 months.
I'm 49, I got a prescription done in April 2004 and was recommended bi-focals. However I never went through with it and stuck with my old reader and distance glasses. I got a voucher for a free eye test which was a day ago. When I comared them I was suprised that the sph has changed so much. Frankly, with the 1st test I did feel had a lot more time getting it 'right' than the rushed job I felt I got from the second. I wondered if anyone would care to comment. Is it likely that my sph number would go down on 2nd test? These are the two results. Apr 2004 R S+2.75 C-1.25 Axis95 Left S+3.75 C -1.75 Axis 65 Near +1.5 Jan 2005 R S+2.50 C-1.25 Axis107 Left S+3.25 C -1.75 Axis 63 Near +1.5 > I'm 49, I got a prescription done in April 2004 and was recommended > bi-focals. However I never went through with it and stuck with my old > reader That's not a big change, first of all. Second, the entire population is shifting in the same direction at age 49, some of them very rapidly. Third, "taking your time" is sometimes prone to error, just as much as the "rushed job." IOW, the first refraction may be _underdone_ rather than the second one _overdone_. Finally, the real test is - does your distance vision seem blurred with the second refraction. If not, it's "right." -MT, OD > I'm 49, I got a prescription done in April 2004 and was recommended > bi-focals. However I never went through with it and stuck with my old [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Jan 2005 R S+2.50 C-1.25 Axis107 Left S+3.25 C -1.75 Axis 63 > Near +1.5 >> I'm 49, I got a prescription done in April 2004 and was recommended >> bi-focals. However I never went through with it and stuck with my old [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > -MT, OD I'm I right in thinking the 2nd prescrition show my eyes have ''improved''? > I'm I right in thinking the 2nd prescrition show my eyes have > ''improved''? Yes, and I'm totally off-base. I misread the dates - I should never answer a question before coffee. In that case, yes, unless you have diabetes it isn't common to "improve" and the second refraction is suspect. -MT >> I'm I right in thinking the 2nd prescrition show my eyes have >> ''improved''? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > In that case, yes, unless you have diabetes it isn't common to "improve" > and the second refraction is suspect. Thanks Mike! I usually blame the beer! These two refractions are really not that different. The reduced plus sphere power is easily tolerated and sometimes even preferred by farsighted middle-aged patients when you do a refraction. The question really is, how do you "see" with the glasses on. Many people can see 20/20 quite well over a range of lens powers, particularly someone who is farsighted (plus sphere power) like yourself. If you can see equally in the distance with both prescriptions, and have no difficulty seeing at near with them either, then they are both fine. ================= > I'm 49, I got a prescription done in April 2004 and was recommended > bi-focals. However I never went through with it and stuck with my old [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Jan 2005 R S+2.50 C-1.25 Axis107 Left S+3.25 C -1.75 Axis 63 > Near +1.5 > I'm 49, I got a prescription done in April 2004 and was recommended > bi-focals. However I never went through with it and stuck with my old reader > and distance glasses. I got a voucher for a free eye test which was a day > ago. When I comared them I was suprised that the sph has changed so much. > Frankly, with the 1st test I did feel had a lot more time getting it > 'right' than the rushed job I felt I got from the second. > I wondered if anyone would care to comment. Is it likely that my sph number [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Jan 2005 R S+2.50 C-1.25 Axis107 Left S+3.25 C -1.75 Axis 63 Near > +1.5 You didn't mention your habitual distance srx (the one you're currently wearing). It ain't a large difference between the two but the initial exam could possibly leave you slightly over-plussed. frank >> I'm 49, I got a prescription done in April 2004 and was recommended >> bi-focals. However I never went through with it and stuck with my old [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > It ain't a large difference between the two but the initial exam could > possibly leave you slightly over-plussed. You may be right. Just got my distance glasses checked and they said Right s2.5 and left s3.00 >>> I'm 49, I got a prescription done in April 2004 and was recommended >>> bi-focals. However I never went through with it and stuck with my old [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > Just got my distance glasses checked and they said > Right s2.5 and left s3.00 Thank you everyone for your help. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.