 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Vision / June 2006contacts for my prescription
i had contacts about 8 years ago, it took 3-4 tries to get them right. blurry vision (especially in my right eye) was not uncommon. i'd like to get contacts again, and my prescription is: Right Eye: -4.25 x -3.25 x 20 Left Eye: -4.50 x -2.75 x 155 is it reasonable to think i can find a pair of toric lenses that allow me to have good vision? or will i be stuck with glasses? thank you > i had contacts about 8 years ago, it took 3-4 tries to get them right. > blurry vision (especially in my right eye) was not uncommon. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > thank you I havent seen torics that correct this much astigmastim but ive heard of special custom made torics correcting 5 diopters of astigmastim. If you are picky about vision you may want to consider RGP contacts. Glasses is fine if you dont mind the disortions due to your astigmastim. Lasik can greatly reduce your myopia and astigmastim but wont offer vision as good as glasses/contacts but itll help reduce or even eliminate dependancy on them with risks. Please disregard any posts by Ace. He's a retard who pretends to have knowledge in the eyecare field. > Please disregard any posts by Ace. He's a retard who pretends to have > knowledge in the eyecare field. Ignore this rude guy. I know what im talking about and I was the first to mention RGP contacts before everyone! >> Please disregard any posts by Ace. He's a retard who >> pretends to have knowledge in the eyecare field. > > Ignore this rude guy. I know what im talking about and I > was the first to mention RGP contacts before everyone! Ace, Since you're just looking for recognition and attention why don't you move over to Otis' site. It will be like a never ending group hug. -Quick > Ignore this rude guy. I know what im talking about and I was the first > to mention RGP contacts before everyone! What did you win? -MT > > Ignore this rude guy. I know what im talking about and I was the first > > to mention RGP contacts before everyone! > > What did you win? > > -MT some respect? I had my eyes checked and the doc ordered toric soft lenses. said it would take a few times to get it right, so be patient. don't have to order any boxes until they get it right. i hope it works out. my friend who does not have an astigmatism wore his "trial" pair for over a year. he's such a cheap a.s. are disposables really a ripoff? >> > Ignore this rude guy. I know what im talking about and I was the first >> > to mention RGP contacts before everyone! [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > some respect? > a.s. are disposables really a ripoff? No. Keratitis and ulcer cases go way down when lenses are replaced frequently. -MT >> > Ignore this rude guy. I know what im talking about and I was the first >> > to mention RGP contacts before everyone! [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >some respect? Go get that in the work world. Go get that from your (non-virtual) peers. Go try to regain that from your parents. From your laundry list of posts, it's clear you DON'T get that from them. But to CONTINUALLY play your "If I guess often enough (almost every time), eventually, I'll be right" game makes you an idiot. I can't imagine anybody here (but the insane Otis) respects you, Ace, so--if that's what you're looking for--maybe you SHOULD look elsewhere. >> some respect? > I can't imagine anybody here (but the insane Otis) > respects you, Ace, so--if that's what you're looking > for--maybe you SHOULD look elsewhere. No. It's pretty clear that Otis does not respect Ace. He simply uses him as a "straight man" here. If Ace would send Otis the $24.99 (for S&H) he might be able to buy some respect. -Quick >some respect? From whom? Since you phrased it as a question I guess we can all assume that you know you have no respect here... +++++++++++++ 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... > Ignore this rude guy. I know what im talking about and I was the first > to mention RGP contacts before everyone! I can just picture the retard stomping his feet while posting this. Probably holding his breath too >i had contacts about 8 years ago, it took 3-4 tries to get them right. >blurry vision (especially in my right eye) was not uncommon. Ask around for an optician who fits a lot of RGP lenses. They've got a breaking-in period during which you'll have to get used to having them on your eyeballs but your vision will be excellent. A well-fitted pair of RGPs can be worn for years with proper maintenance which IMO makes them a more frugal choice than disposables. And as others have already said, ignore Ace. +++++++++++++ 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... > i had contacts about 8 years ago, it took 3-4 tries to get them right. > blurry vision (especially in my right eye) was not uncommon. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > thank you Yes, you can get either soft disposable contacts or RGP contacts. Vision with the softs should be quite adequate, and with the RGPs should be very good. Without knowing any other details about you, I'd say most optometrists would probably suggest that you try soft lenses first as they are more comfortable for you and easier to fit for the optometrist. You definitely aren't limited to glasses! Dom >i had contacts about 8 years ago, it took 3-4 tries to get them right. >blurry vision (especially in my right eye) was not uncommon. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >is it reasonable to think i can find a pair of toric lenses that allow me to >have good vision? or will i be stuck with glasses? If you are an engineer, then the answer is NO. :) It all depends on your definition of good vision. "Good vision" is extremely subjective. Some people think having 20/20 vision with contacts isn't "good vision" because they see 20/15 with their glasses. Other people think 20/40 vision is good because that is what one needs to pass the DMV vision test. The other issue, besides "good vision" being subjective is your patience/frustration level and cost. To get the best possible vision with contacts, it may take several visits, lens swaps and progress checks. Not only will this possibly require a lot of visits to your eye doctor, you should expect his fees to reflect this fact. If you are able to tolerate both RGPs and SCLs, then you chances of success increase. If you can only tolerate SCLs, then your odds are not as good. Also, the likelihood of success for you diminishes the more picky you are about your vision, the less money you are willing to spend and the less time you are willing to devote into getting them right. [Prior to refractive surgery, my uncle had to be out of his RGPs for around 8 weeks. When he came in for a pre-op check, I asked him how he was seeing with his spectacles, he said that they were working great. His vision was 20/70 with them. I laughed to myself and thought "I wish every patient was like him. No matter what the results, he'll have 'good vision'".] cost was $70 for the exam, fitting, etc. it's already paid and i don't have to pay anything else. only to order the disposable contacts when they get it right (about $90 a box from what they quoted me). what's all this about additional costs? >>i had contacts about 8 years ago, it took 3-4 tries to get them right. >>blurry vision (especially in my right eye) was not uncommon. [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > thought "I wish every patient was like him. No matter what the > results, he'll have 'good vision'".] >>>i had contacts about 8 years ago, it took 3-4 tries to get them right. >>>blurry vision (especially in my right eye) was not uncommon. [snip] >> The other issue, besides "good vision" being subjective is your >> patience/frustration level and cost. To get the best possible vision >> with contacts, it may take several visits, lens swaps and progress >> checks. Not only will this possibly require a lot of visits to your >> eye doctor, you should expect his fees to reflect this fact. [snip] >cost was $70 for the exam, fitting, etc. it's already paid and i don't have >to pay anything else. only to order the disposable contacts when they get it >right (about $90 a box from what they quoted me). what's all this about >additional costs? Well, at least in my office, someone that may have to come back for 3-4 tries to get their contact lenses "right" because their history leads me to suspect they are going to be a more difficult or complex fit is going to be charged more than someone who would I suspect would be a simple fit. The more chair time a patient requires, the more that patient would be billed in my office. More time-consuming and complex problems cost more than trivial and simple problems. I think this should be intuitive. I realize you have already paid $70 for the exam/fitting/etc. (that is quite low at least in my area for a private practice OD), but what if you have to come back another 2-3 times like you had to 8 years ago to "get them right"? Your eye doctor will have to spend another 2+ visits with you, figure out what is going on and (potentially) order additional trial contact lenses. Perhaps your OD has a "flat fee" for eye exam, contact lens exam and follow-ups until he "gets it right" -- even on those he suspects may require a lot of chair time and hand holding. >cost was $70 for the exam, fitting, etc. it's already paid and i don't have >to pay anything else. only to order the disposable contacts when they get it >right (about $90 a box from what they quoted me). what's all this about >additional costs? My cost anticipated ownership for my new RGP lenses is about $8/mo for cleaning and soaking solution. My initial investment (after trying so many different soft toric lenses that my optometrist was ready to punt me into the next county) was $125 per lens, plus an $80 exam/fitting fee. My past experience with RGP lenses shows that unless I chip one (unlikely) I can expect the lenses to be good for me for at least five years. So that's a $250 investment plus 60*8 for solution or $250+480 = $730 + $80 fitting fee = $810 over the life of the lenses. Were I to "make do" with soft toric disposables (I'll wear spectacles before I "make do" with 15/20 vision, thanks) I'd have to drop $180 per year on the lenses themselves plus another $10/mo on solution. Over five years that'll be 180*5 = 900 just for the lenses, add an additional $600 for solution over that same period for a total of $1500. You should of course do your own cost-benefit analysis after deciding if soft toric lenses are adequate for your vision correction needs. +++++++++++++ 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... > >i had contacts about 8 years ago, it took 3-4 tries to get them right. > >blurry vision (especially in my right eye) was not uncommon. [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > thought "I wish every patient was like him. No matter what the > results, he'll have 'good vision'".] Maybe he cant be corrected anywhere near 20/20 or even 20/40? If he said his glasses were working great then I assume he didnt see much better with RGP contacts because if he did, he would notice how much blurrier his glasses were vs. RGP contacts. Soft contacts should give you equal or better vision than glasses. If not then you have the wrong pescription contacts and/or some peice of junk excuse for contacts and should switch brands. I see every bit as good with soft contacts compared to glasses and in fact a little better because theres none of the minification and disortion. Its common for high myopes to gain a line with soft contacts vs. glasses because glasses minify and make that line too small. soft torics are inferior to RGPs for astigmastim. My friend wears those and is annoyed by the blurry vision when her torics rotate. Also they dont seem to correct astigmastim as well as glasses. Finally toric contacts are thick and uncomfortable. Shes had enough and is getting lasik and hoping for the best. [snip] >> [Prior to refractive surgery, my uncle had to be out of his RGPs for >> around 8 weeks. When he came in for a pre-op check, I asked him how [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Maybe he cant be corrected anywhere near 20/20 or even 20/40? You think so, huh? :) * I think it's a much more likely story that his glasses prescription was way off and that he was able to be corrected to near 20/20. >If he said his glasses were working great then I assume he didnt see >much better with RGP contacts because if he did, he would notice how >much blurrier his glasses were vs. RGP contacts. You think so, huh? :) * I think it's a much more likely story that he is extremely UNpicky about his vision and that he saw much better with his RGPs than his glasses. >Soft contacts should give you equal or better vision than glasses. You think so, huh? :) I think it's a much more likely story that it depends. Patients with spherical prescriptions should get vision equal to their glasses. Patients with astigmatism may (or may not) get far superior vision with their glasses than any soft toric lens. >If not then you have the wrong pescription contacts and/or some peice >of junk excuse for contacts and should switch brands. I see every bit >as good with soft contacts compared to glasses and in fact a little >better because theres none of the minification and disortion. Perhaps a better statement might be "soft contacts lenses give you and a lot of patients vision equal to or better than your glasses" rather than a "Soft contacts should give you equal or better vision than glasses."? >soft torics are inferior to RGPs for astigmastim. Another blanket statement. :) If they are "inferior" why do they exist? Perhaps a better statement would be "soft torics are inferior to RGPs in certain cases"? >My friend wears those and is annoyed by the blurry vision when her >torics rotate. "My friend wears RGP and is annoyed by the comfort of them." >Also they dont seem to correct astigmastim as well as glasses. Finally >toric contacts are thick and uncomfortable. People tell me all the time their soft toric lenses correct their astigmatism as well as their glasses do and that they are comfortable. >Shes had enough and is getting lasik and hoping for the best. Sheesh. * The patient you are referring to was MINE. He was MY uncle and I was HIS eye doctor. I KNOW what was going on and that should have been obvious from the post, so your guesses and hypotheses above are wildly illogical. Anon E. Muss wrote ... to our loveable Aceman: > so your guesses and hypotheses above are > wildly illogical. And ... just like his mentor/paramour, Otis, Ace will never let the facts stand in the way of a good story. Hey, Ace: feel free to get some Thorazine from Otis and join him in a heavy dosing regimen. > Maybe he cant be corrected anywhere near 20/20 or even 20/40? If he > said his glasses were working great then I assume he didnt see much > better with RGP contacts because if he did, he would notice how much > blurrier his glasses were vs. RGP contacts. And you know this how? Guessing or just making it up from scratch? > Soft contacts should give you equal or better vision than glasses. You know this from your extensive (n=0) fitting experience? Guessing or just making it up? I >Its common for > high myopes to gain a line with soft contacts vs. glasses because > glasses minify and make that line too small. You're sure of this? You learned this where? > soft torics are inferior to RGPs for astigmastim. Sometimes yes, sometimes no. I'm glad your experience on this subject is so concise. >Finally, Sadly, not likely really and truly "finally" for mushroom man Ace, but I digress...... > toric contacts are thick and uncomfortable. That's why millions of people in hundreds of countries suffer daily from the experience. > Shes had enough and is getting > lasik and hoping for the best. Perhaps a quick trip to nearby casino is in order here. If luck is there for her, then perhaps it will seep over to the laser surgery table. Gee, you're so much fun, Ace. I'm so glad I de-activated my kill file filters, at least temporarily. __LB, O.D. |
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
|
©2009 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.