yep. I said that. I left out that silicone stuff, though. Nice
rebound. Wanna have a beer? (burp)
> The reply by "doctor-my-eyes" is not correct, or at least we can not
> know if it is correct because we do not know what kind of contact lens
> you are wearing and how the fitting curve relates to your cornea curve.
> Further, a contact lens power on the eye is not mathematically
> equivelent to the spectacle power. For example:
> your glasses prescription is:
> R -4.00 -0.25 110>>>>> this relates to a theoretical contact lens power
> of -4.00 or -4.25, the higher power more likely if it is
> silicone-hydrogel type lens. That .25 difference may or may not matter
> in any event.
> L -5.00 -0.25 095>>>>>this relates to a theoretical contact lens power
> of -4.50 or -4.75, because as mentioned above *and* the fact that a
> spectacle lens power measured at 13mm in front of the eye needs to be
> adjusted to less minus power when measured at the cornea (like a contact
> lens) for the same net effective power.
Hi- thanks for the reply. The contacts in question are Optix O2.
My curiosity was really why the variation was in the opposite direction, i.e. the -4 for glass went to -4.25
for the contacts, but the -5 for glasses went to -4.75 for contacts. I would think they would both adjust in
the same numerical direction, but at the same time I don't understand the third number in the prescription
(the 110 and 95)
LarryDoc - 11 Jun 2005 01:40 GMT
> Hi- thanks for the reply. The contacts in question are Optix O2.
You're welcome. Silicone hydrogel indeed!
> My curiosity was really why the variation was in the opposite direction, i.e.
> the -4 for glass went to -4.25
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> third number in the prescription
> (the 110 and 95),
You'd think, but here's why and why not:
1. The vertex distance alteration in power occurs in powers above + or -
4.50 diopters at least in any noticable degree.
2. The "stiffness" of silicone lenses tends to create a plus lens tear
layer under the lens as the plastic vaults over the cornes apex. Hence
the corresponding increase in minus to neutralize the tear lens.
3. The third number in the rx is the astigmatism component, and it is a
minor amount and of little or not consequence due to the aspheric optics
and vaulting design of the lens.
Hope that answers your query!
--LB, O.D.