 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Vision / April 2005low myopic prescription
here's something I was wondering about. At the local drugstores, you can easily buy different strengths of glasses for farsightedness (+.75 up to +3). They cost about $20 (at the most). Granted, these are for a large number of the presbyopic population. But, why can't the same be done for us in the minus world? We have to pay up to $200 for a low myopic prescription. Is it the that the material is different? More work involved in grinding the lens? And, why are frames so expensive if these other glasses can be bought for such a small amount of money? Dear Friend, If you are low on cash, this is a site where you can get your minus lens at a reasonable price. http://zennioptical.com/cart/home.php Enjoy, Otis > here's something I was wondering about. At the local drugstores, you > can easily buy different strengths of glasses for farsightedness (+.75 [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > work involved in grinding the lens? And, why are frames so expensive > if these other glasses can be bought for such a small amount of money? Reading glasses are made for close up work such as reading. If someone was to use off the shelf minus lens for distance vision (such as while driving) then the legal liability would be significant. This is especially true since most people have at least some astigmatism that needs correction. The frames that come with the drugstore reading glasses are not very high quality, but nevertheless it is true that the mark-up on frames in an optical shop is astronomical. This is especially true for "designer" frames.. When Lenscrafters offers 1/2 off sale on lenses (just about all the time), it is only available when you purchase a frame from them. Think about it. > here's something I was wondering about. At the local drugstores, you > can easily buy different strengths of glasses for farsightedness (+.75 > up to +3). They cost about $20 (at the most). Granted, these are for a > large number of the presbyopic population. But, why can't the same be > done for us in the minus world? Largely a question of volume. Everybody over age 40, including the myopes using contact lenses, needs low power reading glasses and the power range is quite limited (from about +1.00 to +3.00). Sixty to 70% of that population only need readers, no distance and many people who have expensive prescription lenses also have one or two pairs of readers scattered around the house and office as back up. Myopia, on the other hand, is only 20% to 25% of the population, the range of power is from -0.50 to -6.00 commonly and up to -10.00 or more. Dr Judy We have to pay up to $200 for a low > myopic prescription. Is it the that the material is different? More > work involved in grinding the lens? And, why are frames so expensive > if these other glasses can be bought for such a small amount of money? >> Everybody over age 40, including the myopes using contact lenses, needs low power reading glasses A generalisation which is just not true. My brother is 50 for example. I am 49. Neither of us needs low power reading glasses. I know people in their 60's who dont need reading glasses, and who have never needed glasses. >>> Everybody over age 40, including the myopes > using contact lenses, needs low power reading glasses [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I know people in their 60's who dont need reading glasses, and who have > never needed glasses. Yeah, it seems presbyopia does not affect everyone, even though conventional wisdom says it does. My mom(70) doesn't need glasses to read and she's plano. how certain are you that each eye is really plano without astigmatism? are her pupils very small? how big are her pupils? what size print can she read? how much light does she need to read it? how far away does she hold the print in order to make it out? > how certain are you that each eye is really plano without astigmatism? She was tested with an autorefractometer. > are her pupils very small? > how big are her pupils? No idea. > what size print can she read? > how much light does she need to read it? > how far away does she hold the print in order to make it out? She can read newspaper print at arm's length in normal fluorescent lighting. > A generalisation which is just not true. A generalization that is indeed quite true. There are scenarios when presbyopia doesn't affect people too much until their late forties or early fifties. As you have heard previously in this NG, a person can have some astigmatism which helps a significant amount with near vision without detracting seriously from distance. Also, a person can be just slightly myopic, perhaps in just one eye, that allows comfortable reading while still preserving good distance vision. Of course we all know about the effects of having small pupils. Another point, some people naturally use long reading distances where the effects of presbyopia are not obvious until later on. Some people use lots of light when they read. Some people don't read much so don't notice the effects. Some people know that near problems represent an effect of aging so they just deny it, either consciously, or subconsciously. I've had a lot of people of presbyopic age tell me they don't have any problems reading, and when you test them with a near-point card at 40cm, they indeed DO have a problem. Sometimes they act surprised. Sometimes they just smile at you sheepishly and say "well, its not too bad". >I've had a lot of people of presbyopic age tell me they don't have any >problems reading, and when you test them with a near-point card at 40cm, >they indeed DO have a problem. Sometimes they act surprised. Sometimes >they just smile at you sheepishly and say "well, its not too bad". > > I like to tell a story about a chiropractor who practiced next to me who claimed his vision was perfect due to his special treatments. I could tell by looking at him that he was over 50 yo, so I said "I think you probably have a problem at one distance or another with one eye or the other". He was vehement in denying it. So I gave him a quick, free acuity test. Sure enough, 20/20 in each eye at distance, but about 20/60 at near. I said "You can't read the small print". To which he replied "Yes I can". I said "ok read the last 4 lines on the card ". He replied "It's too small to be read!". I picked up a pair of loose + 2.00s and said "Here, read it through these". He read it and said "I don't need to read THAT WELL!". Denial is a large part of these presbyopes claiming perfect vision. w.stacy, o.d. >I've had a lot of people of presbyopic age tell me they don't have any >problems reading, and when you test them with a near-point card at 40cm, >they indeed DO have a problem. Sometimes they act surprised. Sometimes >they just smile at you sheepishly and say "well, its not too bad". > > I like to tell a story about a chiropractor who practiced next to me who claimed his vision was perfect due to his special treatments. I could tell by looking at him that he was over 50 yo, so I said "I think you probably have a problem at one distance or another with one eye or the other". He was vehement in denying it. So I gave him a quick, free acuity test. Sure enough, 20/20 in each eye at distance, but about 20/60 at near. I said "You can't read the small print". To which he replied "Yes I can". I said "ok read the last 4 lines on the card ". He replied "It's too small to be read!". I picked up a pair of loose + 2.00s and said "Here, read it through these". He read it and said "I don't need to read THAT WELL!". Denial is a large part of these presbyopes claiming perfect vision. w.stacy, o.d. You wanna know why they don't sell that sh.t? BECAUSE IF THEY SOLD THOSE, not only would lenscrafters lose money, rendering the optometrist's job USELESS, but they would make everyone's eyes more myopic. Just like how glasses made my eyes more myopic. I can't even see the computer screen without my glasses. This would raise people's awareness about myopia, and everyone would be myopic and eventually a lot of optometrists would get laid off. Everyone would go crazy and hate optometrists and SUE SUE SUE Walgreens for selling minus lenses, which little kids can use and destroy their eyes!!!!!!!!! >You wanna know why they don't sell that sh.t? BECAUSE IF THEY SOLD >THOSE, not only would lenscrafters lose money, rendering the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >hate optometrists and SUE SUE SUE Walgreens for selling minus lenses, >which little kids can use and destroy their eyes!!!!!!!!! Is there a way that you can quote the particular posting, or passage, to which you are replying? It makes it easier to follow the "conversation." Thanks! |
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.