 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Vision / May 2006First progressives for computer user
I need advice on brands and types of progressive lenses. My prescription for a first pair of progressive is as follow: OD: -1.25 (-0.75 at 90°) add +1.5 OG: -1.25 (-1 at 60°) add +1.5 I work about 6 hours on computer everyday. At the moment I use my distance lenses to read the screen of my computer but every time that I need to read a paper I have to take off my glasses (actually I have not much problem reading without glasses at a normal distance). From what I have understood, because of my heavy use of computer work, lenses with a wide intermediate zone would be appropriate in order to have all the computer screen in focus without having to move my head. I don't do a lot of reading. I would like one pair of glasses that I could use also for my everyday life (walking, driving,...).About sport activity my distance glasses should be OK I guess. Thank you very much for Help. Sandro your ADD cancels out the minus in your glasses so they are basically plano except the slight cylindar. How well do you see the computer screen without glasses? Should be almost perfectly clear and can save the hassles of computer glasses. If that wont do, get a seperate pair for the computer with only cylindar correction > your ADD cancels out the minus in your glasses so they are basically > plano except the slight cylindar. How well do you see the computer > screen without glasses? Should be almost perfectly clear and can save > the hassles of computer glasses. If that wont do, get a seperate pair > for the computer with only cylindar correction Without glasses I am able to read on my computer screen, howerver I have to make an effort because the vision is not very clear. The distance between my computer screen and my eyes is about 60 cm, to be able to read i need also to get closer (maybe 40 cm distance). Do you think that reading the computer screen without glasses is not easy for me because of my astigmatism? "Without glasses I am able to read on my computer screen, howerver I have to make an effort because the vision is not very clear. The distance between my computer screen and my eyes is about 60 cm, to be able to read i need also to get closer (maybe 40 cm distance). Do you think that reading the computer screen without glasses is not easy for me because of my astigmatism?" something isnt right. If you are -1.25 with -1 astigmastim, you have a spherical equivalent of -1.75 and can see perfect from 57 centimeters. If you need to be 40 centimeters, you are -2.5 diopters. Your glasses have an ADD of +1.5 which lets you see clear from 2/3 of a meter or 66cm If you can not see clearly from 2/3 meter without glasses, its logical your eyes are worse than -1.5 which is probably the case. You posted a pescription that may be outdated and your new pescription is higher. Sorry I forgot to say that the correction for the glasses that I have now (distance glasses) is different from my prescription. The correction for my glasses now: OD: -1.25 (-0.5 at 90°) OG: -1.25 (-0.5 at 60°) The difference appart from the ADD 1.5 is that my astigmatism got worse. Now about the distances that I gave in the previous post. I did not make any precise measurement so I just gave approximate values. I have just done some measurements now using my laptop screen: -Without glasses the distance between my eye and computer screen where I can see most clearly is 50 cm. -With my present glasses this distance is 80 cm. So in my previous post I Underestimated those distances. At work I guess that the distance from my computer screen is closer to 80 cm than 60 cm. Without glasses at 66 cm I can read the screen however it is not very clear. I don't know how to convert corrections from my prescription to distances as you did, but do you think the prescription is now in accordance with those new distances values? I must add that my prescrition is 6 months old now although I don't think that my vue has changed in 6 months. > "Without glasses I am able to read on my computer screen, howerver I > have to [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > posted a pescription that may be outdated and your new pescription is > higher. > your ADD cancels out the minus in your glasses so they are basically > plano except the slight cylindar. How well do you see the computer > screen without glasses? Should be almost perfectly clear and can save > the hassles of computer glasses. If that wont do, get a seperate pair > for the computer with only cylindar correction Hey, Ace? Why were these bifocals prescribed for the original poster in the first place? Could it be that he has near-point esophoria? Do you know? Did you ask?? Do you understand the implications of near-point esophoria and what complications *your* advice could cause him if this is the case? Even if it's not the case with Albert .... you are a walking (not that I think you get out much) example of "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing...." Albert- Take everything that Ace says with a liberal grain of salt ... and then ignore it. He's not an eye doctor, but he likes to play one from time to time. That's fine ... until somebody takes his advice. I am not a doctor and never said I was one. Bifocals may have been pescribed, probably because its easier than having to take your glasses off, putting them on, taking them off, repeat. You can switch focus from near to distance without having to touch your glasses. Its a convinence thing. However for prolonged reading or computer, its fine to take them off if you can see clear without them. > I am not a doctor and never said I was one. Aaaaand, of course, you never said you weren't one. For whatever reason, you seem pathologically unwilling to offer that up. > Bifocals may have been > pescribed, probably because Sure ... absolutely, they MAY have been probably prescribed because, blah, blah. But what if we're dealing with a near-point esophore? You didn't answer my question. What would the implications of your suggestions be IF the OP was prescribed bifocals in order to manage near-point esophoria (quite possible, by the way)?? Why doesn't it matter to you that the little posts that you make so that you can feel better about yourself might hurt other people? Why is your potential gain in self-esteem so much more important than the potential harm that you might cause. Why don't/can't/won't you simply preface your posts with "I'm not an eye doctor, but...?" People have done that on this forum for YEARS. There is NO DOWNSIDE in doing that. It shows that you care enough to express your limitations, and that opinion or anecdotal experience is all you have. If you have more ... like studies or proof ... then offer it up and cite it appropriately. This isn't a damned game, Ace. It's people's health and their lives. You're wrong WAY TOO often to be allowed your little hobby. http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct/gui/show/NCT00000128 http://bjo.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/84/8/890 so if im trying to understand, hes a child who got bifocals to slow down his myopia progression by restricting his accomodation demands? Why dont we let Albert answer why he was pescribed bifocals. > http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct/gui/show/NCT00000128 > > http://bjo.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/84/8/890 > > so if im trying to understand, hes a child who got bifocals to slow > down his myopia progression by restricting his accomodation demands? What?? > Why dont we let Albert answer why he was pescribed bifocals. I'm not even asking why Albert was prescribed bifocals. If you don't understand that, then you are in worse shape than I thought. Go back and re-read my last post ... slowly ... and maybe ten or twelve times. Stop posting about people's medical issues when you are woefully uninformed. If you *really feel* that you want to help, then at least have the *decency* to preface your posts with "I am not a doctor." You are wrong WAY TOO often. You are taking risks with other people's eyes and you are doing it just to pump your own self-esteem (to "feel useful"). >I am not a doctor and never said I was one. Bifocals may have been > pescribed, probably because its easier than having to take your glasses > off, putting them on, taking them off, repeat. You can switch focus > from near to distance without having to touch your glasses. Its a > convinence thing. It is exactly the case. > Why were these bifocals prescribed for the original poster in the first > place? They were prescribed because I was starting to have difficulties reading with my present glasses. Without glasses I can read. > Could it be that he has near-point esophoria? My doctor did not mention that term. > Albert- > > Take everything that Ace says with a liberal grain of salt ... I take anything that anybody says on internet with caution. I always try to do myself a little search to get confirmations. I know I can get the best information from my doctor, however I have to wait 2 months here before getting an appointment, so I am trying to learn something here. >I need advice on brands and types of progressive lenses. >My prescription for a first pair of progressive is as follow: [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >zone would be appropriate in order to have all the computer screen in focus >without having to move my head. You will most likely (depending on the work distance) use the distance portion of a progressive addition lens when looking at a desktop monitor. Eventually (2-5 years depending on the work distance) you will need a separate pair designed for computer use. >I don't do a lot of reading. I would like >one pair of glasses that I could use also for my everyday life (walking, >driving,...).About sport activity my distance glasses should be OK I guess. A general purpose PAL with a generous clear distance zone may be the best choice here. >Thank you very much for Help. >Sandro Your welcome. Robert Martellaro ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Optician/Owner Roberts Optical ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "If a million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing." - Anatole France > On Mon, 8 May 2006 23:22:06 +0200, "Albert" > <sandro.dalsecco@numericable.fr> [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > choice > here. I need a clarification here because I know very little about PAL. If I choose a PAL with a generous distance zone it will reduce either the intermediate zone (called corridor zone?) or the near distance zone or both. What is exacltly the benefit of this intermediate zone? I thought I could use it for intermediate distance (computer reading for instance) but maybe I missunderstood. If my PAL has a large distance zone then I will use it for computer reading right? So I will not need that intermediate zone. And I will use the near distance zone for reading. Is that correct? Can you give me some brands or models of general purpose PAL? Thanks again. Sandro >If my PAL has a large distance zone then I will use it for computer reading >right? So I will not need that intermediate zone. And I will use the near >distance zone for reading. Is that correct? Yes. However, because you are in front of a monitor for extended periods of time, you might feel more comfortable using a separate pair of glasses designed for your work distances. Nevertheless, I would hold off on the computer glasses until the vision is unacceptable and/or other symptoms are present. >Can you give me some brands or models of general purpose PAL? Zeiss Gradal Top, Shamir Genesis are good examples. Avoid "short corridor" designs (Ellipse, XS, Piccolo, Concise) and older "hard designs" (VIP, Super No-Line). >Thanks again. >Sandro Find an experienced optician- They'll get it right the first time. Robert Martellaro ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Optician/Owner Roberts Optical ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "If a million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing." - Anatole France I admit to being baffled by the content of this thread. My experience is the single-vision eyeglasses are quite good for computer use. They are the same eyeglasses which are good for reading. The trick is to get a small enough computer screen so it looks right at reading distance, (50 cm for add +2.0). When people see you with such a dinky computer screen on your desk, they will lose their respect and scorn you. So the Dr.s are right to put you in fancy glasses. People will look up to you in those, particularly if they look expensive and have a high-tech story to go with them. -- Dicky > On Tue, 9 May 2006 08:59:28 +0200, "Albert" > <sandro.dalsecco@numericable.fr> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Super > No-Line). Here in France opticians offer mostly Varilux from Essilor lenses. Do you know which model would be OK for me? Ipseo, Physio, Panamic, Comfort? By the way what means exactly "short corridor" design? Thanks again If you can see clearly from 50cm you are -2 but I guess your cylindar makes things a little blurry even from near so you have to get closer than usual to reduce the blur. I was correct about your reason for bifocals. Perhaps getting computer glasses JUST for your astigmastim will be more convinent than using bifocals and tilting your head up using the computer? I have a seperate pair of glasses I use for the computer :) If my vision wasnt so bad id forgo glasses for computer > I was correct about your reason for > bifocals. As I said ... it doesn't MATTER whether or not you were correct in this case. What matters is that you are making wild-a$$ guesses without any formal training to back you up, and with a batting average of less than .500 -- meaning you're wrong more often than you're right. I know this makes you feel special ... loved ... useful ... but you still haven't come up with a SINGLE VALID REASON why you won't simply let people know that you are NOT A DOCTOR. You're going to hurt somebody--somebody desperate for information that acts on the assumption that "we're all eye doctors here," little boy, and--with any luck--they'll seek vengeance on you. |
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.