 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Vision / May 2006PLEASE HELP Problem with new glasses
In Feb. 06 I went to have my eyes examined because age is making it hard for me to see up close out of my glasses. My glasses are for distance. I am 45 (well, ok almost 46) and have been wearing glasses for distance since I was 23. The eye exam showed that my distance vision had improved some and that my close up vision wasn't what it used to be. I've been looking under my glasses or taking them off to see printed material. I usually only wear my glasses to shop, go to mass, and drive. I had never been to this OD b/4 but he was covered on my insurance. I was going to get my rx filled where I used to but decided get them at the OD office (eye doc and eyeglass place in one). The girls in the office talked me into getting progressive. I had great reservations but after two weeks decided to get them. They were awful. I could only see clearly out of a small portion of the glasses and driving was a nightmare. Peripheral vision was sickening. I went back. They said they would exchange them for a single or bifocal. I went w/the bifocal. Upclose was fine. Distance, however, was off. I called them after two weeks and the girl said I just needed to get used to them. I was still wearing my old prescrption sunglasses. I gave it more time but nothing changed. I went back for another eye exam. He said my eyes were dry and to use artifical tears for 2 weeks then come back. If nothing had changed, he would write a new rx. During the next week I noticed that when I looked directly through the glasses that things were just not clear but when I looked through them across my nose (head turned right) that things became sharp. I went back and told the doc. He said I was creating a myopia. He did his checking with the machine lenses stuff and wrote a new prescription. Things at 20/20 seem good, it was the distance stuff - like reading the grocery store signs, speed limit signs, road signs, etc that were not sharp). The girl at the front office said this was the last change they would make. They were going to charge me for a new rx, but being the vocal person I am said no way. I have had the new glasses for about 3 weeks. I am having the same problem as before, not quite sharp in the center but if I turn my head to the right it is much better. It is not as bad as the first rx the doc wrote but I am not satisfied. I have paid $175 out of pocket for the lenses. I made an appt. w a new doc for next week. I will have to pay the cost of the exam myself but for some reason the first doc's office never submitted the lens/frame stuff to the insurance co. So as of right now, I can still get new lenses. It will still cost me about $80 for the crizal coating plus the exam. Sorry this is so long but I am in need of advice. What is causing me to see less sharply out of the center of these glasses? Does the fact that they are bifocals have anything to do w/it? The bifocal part is extremely annoying and if I end up getting new lenses, I will get single distance and continue to look under my glasses for close up stuff. If the new doc says the rx is correct, could the manufacturer have messed them up? What should I do w/regards to the $175 I am out from the old doc? If I call them now, they will realize they did not submit the claim for the lenses and frames and will do so, causing me to have to pay out of pocket for any new lenses I may need. My insurance will only cover exams/frames/lenses every two years. Why can't I see right out of these glasses? Thanks for any help/advice/experience anyone can give. Jo What is your pescription? What you can do is read something as far away as possible with your single vision lens then do the same with the bifocals. Progressives may take some time to get used to, the upper half is for distance and the lower half for near, you need to look at the right segment for maximal clarity. Took my dad a week to get used to his plus progressives, ditto to my mom for her minus progressives. Taking your glasses off for near is another solution, something one of the old lady I know in person does. Another old lady just doesnt bother wearing distance glasses except sometimes to drive and shes between -1 and -1.5 Dear Jo, Subject: Lower-cost Lenses Jo> have messed them up? Otis> Probably. What should I do w/regards to the $175 I am out from the old doc? Otis> Probably. Otis> There are lower cost lenses on the "Net" for about $20 to $30 -- you might look at Zenni optical for a better price -- if these ODs keep on giving you "changed" prescriptions. After awhile they do "add up". Otis Jo- You just got the two least-valuable opinions on this forum. Wait just a bit. It can only get better from here.... Thank you Neil, I will wait for better advice. Jo well if you dont like what others say, do what you want, its your eyes. If you arent going to listen to anyone that says anything you disagree with, why bother asking unless the advice is something you are going to do anyway? Do whatever makes you happy, forget what others say. Thats the best I can say. Its your eyes and only you know whats best for YOU by the way, I hate to say this but I think theres some rudeness here. I speak from the experience of my parents reguarding time to get used to progressives. You chose to listen or not to listen. Everyone can tell you the same story and if you dont like what you hear, you wont listen anyway even if its good advice! You havent even told your pescription! >by the way, I hate to say this but I think theres some rudeness here. I >speak from the experience of my parents reguarding time to get used to >progressives. You chose to listen or not to listen. Everyone can tell >you the same story and if you dont like what you hear, you wont listen >anyway even if its good advice! You havent even told your pescription! Shhhhh. She'll be okay. Don't take it so personally. She'll simply get MUCH better advice from any of the OD's on this board than from you or Otis. Easy there, Ace. It'll all be alright. No need to get so snippy toward her...... You stated your case. Once the doc's weigh in, she'll do what she thinks is best. Ace, did you even read my post? I don't have progressives. That isn't what my question was about. And I don't appreciate your insinuation that I am an old lady. > Ace, did you even read my post? I don't have > progressives. That isn't what my question was about. > And I don't appreciate your insinuation that I am an old > lady. Ace only advises. Ace doesn't see the need to read the questions (not that the advice would be any different or better). -Quick > You just got the two least-valuable opinions on this forum. Wait just > a bit. It can only get better from here.... I don't think that is quite fair. Otis' advice for considering Zenni is golden. But not for "progressives". Of course, you need a competent script to start. Good luck on that. One theory is that the eye-care professionals have learned that they get a lot of repeat business attributable to the vagaries of contact lenses, "aspherics", "progressives", eye potions and solutions, etc., and therefore vagarize scripts for simple eyeglasses. One possibility is to check a new script with a $19 single-vision pair -- those should be good for signs and distance detail during night driving. If good, you can go on to Zenni bifocals, or near-vision glasses, if needed. If not, heave a brick through the f.cker's store-front, and find another script writer. -- Dicky >looked directly through the glasses that things were just not clear but >when I looked through them across my nose (head turned right) that >things became sharp. I went back and told the doc. He said I was >creating a myopia. I'm wondering how a person might "create a myopia", honestly. I developed mine, I didn't set out one day to acquire short vision :P It sounds as if the optical centers of the lenses aren't in the correct place. I'm going to guess that your pupillary distance (distance between pupil centers plus displacement up/down/left/right) wasn't measured at the shop. Lacking measurements the dispensing optician will oftentimes put the OC in the center of the frames. If the frames are too big or too small for your face (ie, your pupils aren't centered in the frames) then the OC will be incorrectly placed for you. Likewise if you were mismeasured the same problem will happen. So, if you weren't measured that'll explain the problem. Go to a different optician and ask for the OC of the spectacles to be located, then ask the optician to measure you. Take the information back to the dispensing optician and smack 'em upside the head with it, then demand a refund and take your business elsewhere. Hopefully you paid with a credit card, hopefully you're documenting every visit and every conversation with every person you speak with at the shop so that you can dispute the charge with your card issuer and make it stick in the event the shop decides to dig in its heels. If you happen to have an add for astigmatism you should be able to locate the OC yourself: hold the spectacles up to a checked surface, when the meeting point of four squares present 90-degree angles that's the OC. I'm not sure if this trick works for spherical Rxs or not. Disclaimer: I am not an optician, an optometrist or an ophthalmologist. I have been wearing glasses for nearly forty years so I think I know a thing or three about how they work and how they ought to fit. +++++++++++++ Reply to the list as I do not publish an email address to USENET. This practice has cut my spam by more than 95%. Of course, I did have to abandon a perfectly good email account... Wooly, Thanks for the info. I do believe they measured me. They had me place my chin on a rest and look through a machine. The office girl did this, not the doc. She then focused the machine and took a measurement. She also measured the rx in the glasses. He did all the measuring w/the different lenses in the office. I don't think I have astigmatism because I am assuming he would have told me. But after my experience, maybe not! I thought it was odd when he said I was "creating a myopia". He said that the prescription wasn't strong enough and that I was increasing the strength by looking through the far sides. I tried doing this with my old prescription and it is all completely the same. If anything, it gets slightly blurry when I look out the edges. The ONLY reason I even went to the eye doc was because I was tired of looking under my glasses and thought maybe bifocals would help. Ok, I also hated my frames :) If it hadn't been for that, I wouldn't have gone. I'm not having any problem w/my current glasses. The doc said my rx had changed a little, the girl in the office said it changed a lot. ???? When I originally got the progressive (aside from maybe being someone who could not adjust to them) of course I couldn't see well out of them because the first prescription was wrong! I asked the office girl if they just re-do the progressive lenses and she said that they make a whole new pair because progressives are made differently. But since I am still having the exact same problem w/the bifocals, I am wondering if they didn't just use the same b-focal lens and just re-do them (don't even know if this is possible). I've been wearing glasses for about 25 years and this whole experience is a first. They also took pictures of the insides of my eyes, even though I signed a form saying I didn't want this. Since it was a new doc, I thought that the pictures he took were something that was part of their particular routine. After talking to the people at the place where I had gone in the past, I learned that they have gotten many patients from the other doc with all the same complaints. The people at the old place said that if a customer/patient just wasn't happy w/their glasses then they would be returned, including the insurance part, so they could go somewhere else. At the new doc, on the bottom of the receipt, it says that all custom glasses and contacts sales are final. Well duh, of course glasses and contacts are custom but if something is wrong they should fix it, no matter how long it takes. At one point, when I was deciding about the bifocals after the progressives the girl said she wasn't sure if the bifocal would fit in the frame. I said I would pick out another frame -- she said no, that sale was final. Yes, red flags were going off in my head but I still thought they would fix the problem. Yes, I did pay for everything via credit card, which I promptly paid off! This was two months ago and I don't think I can do anything about that money now. I will ask the doc next week about the measurements, as you posted. I don't know my prescription (since I had them do the glasses, I didn't ask for a copy). Can I get it off the glasses myself? Thanks for your help. Jo Sure sounds like you've got a QUACK, which is unfortunate. Go in, speak rationally, give them an opportunity to refund your money. If they won't make you happy tell them you'll file a complaint with your insurance provider, with your credit card issuer, and with the state board of optometry in your state. Any one of those threats ought to get their attention, the prospect of all three organizations landing on them at once ought to make them fall all over themselves to make things right. Make noise about small claims court too. Hell, make noise about a class-action suit of some sort if you can get the old place to hook you up with the unhappy refugees. And be prepared to spend more money at the old place to have correct spectacles made. +++++++++++++ Reply to the list as I do not publish an email address to USENET. This practice has cut my spam by more than 95%. Of course, I did have to abandon a perfectly good email account... Hi Jo... > In Feb. 06 I went to have my eyes examined because age is making it > hard for me to see up close out of my glasses. My glasses are for [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > The girls in the office talked me into getting progressive. I had > great reservations but after two weeks decided to get them. All makes sense so far. > They were awful. I could only see clearly out of a small portion of > the glasses and driving was a nightmare. Peripheral vision was > sickening. Sounds like a problem either with centration (alignment) of the progressive lenses (more likely), or maybe with adaptation (less likely) or a combination of both. I went back. They said they would exchange them for a > single or bifocal. I went w/the bifocal. Upclose was fine. Distance, > however, was off. I called them after two weeks and the girl said I > just needed to get used to them. I was still wearing my old > prescrption sunglasses. I gave it more time but nothing changed. Distance vision in a bifocal should be clear pretty well straight away. After two weeks there's no more 'getting used to them'. > I went back for another eye exam. He said my eyes were dry and to use > artifical tears for 2 weeks then come back. If nothing had changed, he > would write a new rx. It's true that dry eyes can cause vision to fluctuate and be hazy but your description of your problems doesn't seem to match this as a cause. Did the artificial tears help you see more clearly? If not, then dry eye wasn't the cause of your problem. During the next week I noticed that when I > looked directly through the glasses that things were just not clear but > when I looked through them across my nose (head turned right) that > things became sharp. This indicates that the centres of the bifocal lenses are not aligned with your eyes. It also suggests that your lens material may be polycarbonate plastic or some other lower quality optical material (google 'abbe value') - but this second point is a guess on my part. I went back and told the doc. He said I was > creating a myopia. He meant that when you look through a lens off-centre, distortions inherent in the lens create a different focus - usually detrimental but in your case advantageous due to the fact that the central focus isn't right to begin with. He did his checking with the machine lenses stuff > and wrote a new prescription. Things at 20/20 seem good, it was the > distance stuff - like reading the grocery store signs, speed limit > signs, road signs, etc that were not sharp). > > The girl at the front office said this was the last change they would > make. Sounds like she is blindly following company policy but she isn't realising that you have had a genuine problem right from the start and you're not trying to take advantage of them. They were going to charge me for a new rx, but being the vocal > person I am said no way. They were going to charge you? Unbelievable. Don't they have any kind of warranty, or after sales service? I have had the new glasses for about 3 weeks. > I am having the same problem as before, not quite sharp in the center > but if I turn my head to the right it is much better. It is not as bad [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Sorry this is so long but I am in need of advice. What is causing me > to see less sharply out of the center of these glasses? Combination of either (1) wrong Rx to begin with, (2) polycarbonate or high index material, and/or (3) mis-alignment of the optical centres of the lenses. Does the fact > that they are bifocals have anything to do w/it? Probably not - bifocals are pretty straightforward to manufacture and get used to, especially compared to progressives. The bifocal part is > extremely annoying and if I end up getting new lenses, I will get > single distance and continue to look under my glasses for close up > stuff. Getting single vision lenses and looking underneath them is always an option, but progressives are the ultimate solution to give you the most versatile vision (and of course they have no annoying line). However progressives must be made precisely and are not forgiving of any error in the measuring and manufacturing process. I ALWAYS recommend progressive to my patients (rather than bifocals) because I know my staff have the expertise to make them accurately. If they're not made accurately then you'll experience narrow zones of clear vision. By the way, if you are a computer user, forget bifocals, progressives are better (or take them off). If the new doc says the rx is correct, could the manufacturer > have messed them up? Well yes but the other doctor's office should have detected this in their routine checking and rejected the lenses before they were ever given to you. In theory. What should I do w/regards to the $175 I am out > from the old doc? Best to ask your new doc after you've worked out what the original problem is. But to me the glasses don't do the job you bought them for so that's surely grounds for a refund. If I call them now, they will realize they did not > submit the claim for the lenses and frames and will do so, causing me > to have to pay out of pocket for any new lenses I may need. My [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Jo It sounds like you picked the wrong eye doctor! Please don't be put off progressives (or bifocals) as they can be very useful; it sounds like your problem is with the eye doctor and his office rather than the type of lenses. The moral of the story is to go to the place you trust rather than the place that's cheapest! PS: Please take the advice of both Otis & Aceman with a grain of salt - they probably mean well but are full of misinformation & half-truths. Dom Dom, Thanks so much for the info you gave me. I think I am going to go to the new eye doc (I've been to them b/4) and see what he says about the rx. I will decide what to do w/the old doc after I know if I need new lenses. Either way, I will be in contact w/the old doc. At the least I feel they should refund my out of pocket expenses. If I end up needing new lenses, I will get the old ones and return them and ask for a refund. I doubt they will give me one because on the bottom of the receipt it says that all custom eye glasses and contact sales are final. I don't want to go back to this doc because I've been there three times. He wants nothing to do w/the office end of things. I don't necessarily think the problem is the doc, but rather the office people and the manufacturer. At one point I asked the office girl of they could have made a mistake in making them and she flippantly said not possible. My impression is that the office girls (I think one of them is married to the doc) are SALES people first and foremost. My husband had his eyes checked there as well. He doesn't wear glasses but like me, the up close stuff isn't as clear. The doc said over the counter reading glasses w/be fine for now but the office girl tried to talk him into progressives!! I wish I had just paid out of pocket for an exam at the old place to begin with and had gotten my glasses there too. Unfortunately, I am very put off by the progressives. My sister-in-law has them and says she can only see out of one specific place on her glasses. Everything else is off. Maybe in a few years when I get my eyes checked again (at the old, trustworthy, competent place!!) I will consider progressives. As for now, if I need new lenses I am going to get a single, distance lens and just look under them if needed. Where I need them the most is grocery shopping or mass -- looking distance then at a list or music. I wear rx sunglasses about 90% of the time. They are the best. I don't know how people can drive w/out sunglasses!! As for tv, being at home and stuff I don't wear them; I never have. Sometimes it's nice that things are quite clear -- then you can't see how messy the house really is!! Thanks again for everyone's help. I will let you know what happens. As for now, I'll just use my old glasses. Jo > [ ... ] > By the way, if you are a computer user, forget bifocals, progressives > are better ... Nope! Depth of field and residual accomodative amplitude favor single- vision eyeglasses for computer use (Zenni's are good). Only a very small portion of "progressive" lenses is right for the computer, or other desk work. With the single-vision close-work eyeglasses you can see anything on your desk, including the computer display, no matter how you hold your head. Well, if you are totally presbyopic, and require a huge 36" display on the other end of your huge mahogony desk, you might need bifocals with add+1 uppers and add+2 downers, but with those you could also see what the crowd at the bubbler is up to, and, in a pinch, drive by day. Actually, bifocals for computer use are a bad idea, because you have to hold your head at an unnatural angle. Same, no doubt, for "progressives", though I cannot speak from personal experience about that. My lady has several pairs of "progressives" that she does not use, but she does not tell me exactly why. -- Dicky Dicky, It's funny you should comment about progressives and computers. The sales girl at the glass place kept pushing the progressives on me because they have the intermediate field for computers. She kept telling me this over and over, despite the fact that I told her no less than 6 times I don't need any glasses for the computer and that I don't wear glasses at home. That wasn't the reason I tried the progressive. I was concerned about the line in the bifocal interferring w/my vision - and it does - but am very leery about trying the progressvie again due to my experience. While I think the idea of progressive lenses is great, I don't like having to hold my head or turn my head just so in order to see out of the relatively small viewing field. I'm more comfortable turning my eyes instead. Of course, if I had the right rx w/the right progresssive and just got used to them, I'm sure I'd like them just fine. Jo > Dicky, It's funny you should comment about progressives and > computers. The sales girl at the glass place kept pushing the > progressives on me because they have the intermediate field > for computers. Ordinary single-vision reading glasses can be quite good for computers as well as for reading*, for folks who need them. You should bake a special pie for the girl at the glass place. > [ ... ] > Of course, if I had the right rx w/the right progresssive and > just got used to them, I'm sure I'd like them just fine. If you had some ham, you could have a fine ham sandwich, if you had some bread. -- Dicky __________________ * Of course, they are not too good for lookin' all 'round the office while you are s'posed to be lookin' at you screen. > Ordinary single-vision reading glasses can be quite good for > computers as well as for reading*, for folks who need them. > You should bake a special pie for the girl at the glass place. Dicky and I like single vision glasses. Most older people don't. It's a personal preference thing. > If you had some ham, you could have a fine ham sandwich, > if you had some bread. > > -- > Dicky  SignatureDan Abel dabel@sonic.net Petaluma, California, USA > Dicky and I like single vision glasses. Most older people don't. It's > a personal preference thing. Speak for yourself. I don't like eyeglasses or any other kind of eye prosthesis, intervention, or eye guk. However, given human condition and the situation with human eyes, I feel that some choices are more reasonable than others. With regard to "older people", they, in general, like most everybody else, don't have the slightest friggin' idea how their eyes work, or don't work, and can be baffled and buffaloed by most any smooth-talking operator with a fancy, expensive, high-margin, often-hazardous, solution to the simplest of their visual problems. Regarding the adaptation of presbyopic eyes to close work, like reading and computer-screen viewing, I feel entirely competent (though neither OD nor MD), to shout from the housetops that reading glasses are the simplest, cheapest, and most obvious solution. -- Dicky > > Dicky and I like single vision glasses. Most older people don't. It's > > a personal preference thing. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > and the situation with human eyes, I feel that some choices are more > reasonable than others. I think it's obvious that *no* glasses are best. My comment was simply meant to convey that if you *have* to wear glasses, most people with presbyopia prefer multifocal glasses. > With regard to "older people" "Older people" is a code phrase for "presbyopia". > Regarding the adaptation of presbyopic eyes to close work, like reading > and computer-screen viewing, I feel entirely competent (though neither > OD nor MD), to shout from the housetops that reading glasses are the > simplest, cheapest, and most obvious solution. Works for me. Works for you. Of course, we both have IOLs due to cataract. Not everybody does. For a presbyope with myopia or hyperopia, reading glasses may not do the trick. My wife could use reading glasses, but she doesn't want to be carrying around multiple pairs of glasses and swapping them in and out. So she wears progressives. It's kind of funny, really. For 35 years, I wore glasses almost every waking moment. My wife didn't wear glasses at all. Now, she puts on her glasses when she gets up and doesn't take them off until she goes back to bed. I don't normally wear glasses anymore, due to the IOLs. I only wear them for close work. SignatureDan Abel dabel@sonic.net Petaluma, California, USA This is why some of us work hard to create an experience that dissuades patients from seeing "...the doctor on my insurance plan." It appears the patient education and the post-sale service were lacking. Don't write off progressives, yet. If your first car was a lemon, would you stop driving? Your visual needs may require a reconsideration in the future. (Re: single-vision reading glasses): > Works for me. Works for you. Of course, we both have IOLs due to > cataract. Not everybody does. For a presbyope with myopia or [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > around multiple pairs of glasses and swapping them in and out. So she > wears progressives. My wife, Mrs. Adams, has a couple of expensive eyeglass pairs that she does not use. I thought they were progressives, but it turns out that one pair are simple reading glasses she got for computer use. Here are the details -- see if you can make any sense: Here basic script is +3.75 +3.75 Add 2.0 The script for "computer glasses" is: +6.00 +6.00 She is an proud person who has a large computer display screen which sits a bit beyond her reach on a huge fancy table. I asked her about the examination for the "computer glasses" and she said the "doctor*" repeatedly and rapidly asked "which is best, this or this", and she got confused. I have tried to explain to her, from 8th-grade general science, about how focal length is inversely related to lens power, and about how a one-diopter lens is one with a focal length of one meter, and how one inch is equivalent to 2.54 centimeters, but she did not take that course, and inversity is offensive to her. So we never even got so far as the significance "add number", which I have been told by some "doctors*" is a subjective thing, anyway. So, like your wife, Mrs. Adams prefers the same pair of eyeglasses for all tasks, which eyeglasses happen to be "add 2.0" bifocals. Though she needs to sit before the computer with her head at an awkward angle, she says the bifocals give her a less blurry image of the computer screen than do the computer glasses (which actually have much fancier frames). My dinky little CRT screen sits at 20 inches from my face, and my "add 2.0" (Zenni) reading glasses work quite perfectly, for that, and most everything on my desk, which is actually quite narrow. In a pinch, I can use Walgreens readers, but that is a matter of dumb luck because my implant surgeon was having good days when he did me. Also, for that reason, I can see everything else in the room quite sharply by peering over my narrow readers. -- Dicky ______________ * I don't always actually know who is a doctor. Usually, around here, the phoropter flip-floppers are mostly home-grown techs. Neither of two excellent phoropter jockeys I have known were doctors of any sort, and the absolute worst one was. (That was the one who prescribed "add 2.0" for one eye, and "add 1.5" for the other.) |
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.