Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / General / Vision / September 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

can vision always be corrected by eyeglasses?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
ns666ns@yahoo.com - 08 Sep 2006 05:04 GMT
I went to see optometrist to do my eye exam, but right eye just can't
see clearly it seems with correction lenses (he said he doesn't know
why), my question is can vision always be corrected by eyeglasses? if
not, why?

thanks a lot!
Salmon Egg - 08 Sep 2006 05:39 GMT
On 9/7/06 9:04 PM, in article
1157688280.090269.285530@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com, "ns666ns@yahoo.com"

> I went to see optometrist to do my eye exam, but right eye just can't
> see clearly it seems with correction lenses (he said he doesn't know
> why), my question is can vision always be corrected by eyeglasses? if
> not, why?
>
> thanks a lot!

Even though I am not a health professional, I can confidently say that the
answer is a resounding NO!

First of all, there are conditions that have more to do with the
neurological aspects of vision that cannot be corrected that way. Retinal
problems are of that character too. Cataracts and other optical blockages
cannot be corrected.

What glasses can do is to compensate for imperfect optical systems of eyes
with clear optics. In many cases pinhole glasses can be used to distinguish
between what is correctible with lenses and what is not.

Another problem is that lenses will compensate only for simple optical
problems such as focus and cylinder. There also are higher order aberrations
that cannot be corrected because the lenses are too complicated to
manufacture. Even if an aberration could be corrected, turning the eye to
look into another directions makes such correction useless.

Bill
-- Ferme le Bush
ns666ns@yahoo.com - 08 Sep 2006 16:37 GMT
that makes sense, i tried to look through a small pinhole and my right
eye sees better than with my eyeglasses, I guess that means I don't
have vision problem other than the eye, should be correctable with
eyeglasses? (ignoring the higher order of aberration which should be in
the higher details)

> On 9/7/06 9:04 PM, in article
> 1157688280.090269.285530@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com, "ns666ns@yahoo.com"
[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]
> Bill
> -- Ferme le Bush
Mike Tyner - 08 Sep 2006 19:00 GMT
The pinhole is smart thinking. It proves your doctor should repeat the
refraction before deciding there's anything wrong with your eyes.

-MT

> that makes sense, i tried to look through a small pinhole and my right
> eye sees better than with my eyeglasses, I guess that means I don't
[quoted text clipped - 37 lines]
>> Bill
>> -- Ferme le Bush
William Stacy - 08 Sep 2006 17:35 GMT
Any time vision is not corrected with glasses, there must be an
explanation.  Him just not knowing is unacceptable and the reason must
be found.  You definitely need a 2nd opinion.

w.stacy, o.d.

>I went to see optometrist to do my eye exam, but right eye just can't
>see clearly it seems with correction lenses (he said he doesn't know
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
>  
Salmon Egg - 08 Sep 2006 17:58 GMT
On 9/8/06 9:35 AM, in article
xZgMg.16747$1f6.12959@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net, "William Stacy"
<wstacy@obase.net> wrote:

> Any time vision is not corrected with glasses, there must be an
> explanation.  Him just not knowing is unacceptable and the reason must
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>>
>>  

The important information left out by ns666ns@yahoo.com was how well he was
able to see with best correction.

Bill
-- Ferme le Bush
ns666ns@yahoo.com - 08 Sep 2006 20:01 GMT
ok my right eye can't read text on computer screen, either naked or
with current eyeglasses (which has very old prescription SPH= -2.50,
CYL= -1.25, AXIS=171), I want to get a new pair of eyeglasses, the new
optometrist gave me new prescription -2.25, -1.50, 170, which is about
the same as the old one, that's why I am concerned, and during the exam
process my right eye can't see well with his lenses... I just like to
know if this is the best optics can do or something I must investigate
more...

thanks

> On 9/8/06 9:35 AM, in article
> xZgMg.16747$1f6.12959@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net, "William Stacy"
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
> Bill
> -- Ferme le Bush
William Stacy - 08 Sep 2006 20:30 GMT
If you've developed cataract or something similar, it may not be
correctible without surgery, but you must find out and obviously this
doc didn't find out.

w.stacy, o.d.

>ok my right eye can't read text on computer screen, either naked or
>with current eyeglasses (which has very old prescription SPH= -2.50,
[quoted text clipped - 40 lines]
>
>  
ns666ns@yahoo.com - 09 Sep 2006 03:59 GMT
not sure if I have cataract but I doubt my eye has any illness since I
don't feel anything uncomfortable, it has been like that for many
years. maybe I should get a "comprehensive eye exam"? thanks

> If you've developed cataract or something similar, it may not be
> correctible without surgery, but you must find out and obviously this
> doc didn't find out.
>
> w.stacy, o.d.

--
Salmon Egg - 09 Sep 2006 04:25 GMT
On 9/8/06 12:01 PM, in article
1157742083.317489.45270@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com, "ns666ns@yahoo.com"

> ok my right eye can't read text on computer screen, either naked or
> with current eyeglasses (which has very old prescription SPH= -2.50,
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> know if this is the best optics can do or something I must investigate
> more...

I would think this is exactly the situation for which pinhole glasses would
be useful. If you can see clearer with them than without, that would be an
indication that the prescription is not correct or that there are
uncorrected aberrations that ordinarily cannot be corrected with
opthalomological lenses.

Bill
-- Ferme le Bush
John H. - 10 Sep 2006 01:20 GMT
All well and good William but I am a person who for 5 years has
struggled with visual problems and 3 specialists, including the best in
my state, have found no solution. I do have a complex ocular pathology
but it is extremely frustrating to have lost 5 years because of an
iatrogenically induced pathology. One specialist I saw was an oxygen
bandit, total waste of planetary resources, but the others have been
brilliant - especially at the teaching hospital. Sadly their brilliance
has provided no solution but the prevailing view is that my problem is
neurological; particularly as my visual acuity fluctuates wildly
through the day. While I only have finger vision in my right eye, I
have 6\5- in my left eye. The strong vision in my left eye is not that
surprising, early childhood monocular deprivation can result in
hyperacuity in the remaining eye, most probably through a rewiring of
the V1(read a fascinating study on this sometime ago). My pathologies
arising from botched surgery are:

third nerve palsy
ptosis (left eye)
exotropia (right eye)
optic nerve damage (right eye)
probably diffuse frontal lobe damage as a result of post surgical
bleed.

So I would suggest that the individual get a second opinion, no luck
there, off to a neurologist but I would also suggest that an answer is
not always forthcoming. Give the bods a break, this is very difficult
stuff ... .

John.

> Any time vision is not corrected with glasses, there must be an
> explanation.  Him just not knowing is unacceptable and the reason must
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> >
> >  
Dan Abel - 08 Sep 2006 20:38 GMT
> I went to see optometrist to do my eye exam, but right eye just can't
> see clearly it seems with correction lenses (he said he doesn't know
> why), my question is can vision always be corrected by eyeglasses? if
> not, why?

No, for many reasons.  Depending on how bad your corrected vision is,
"doesn't know why" is not an acceptable answer.

Somebody here should be able to tell you what is worth following up on
and what isn't.  My vision wasn't correctable with glasses and I had
surgeries in both eyes.  This required a referral to an eye MD.

Signature

Dan Abel
dabel@sonic.net
Petaluma, California, USA

TimR - 09 Sep 2006 11:39 GMT
Might want to see a good eye doctor.

A couple of years back my vision got fuzzy.  I went to my eye doctor
thinking I needed a new prescription.  She diagnosed corneal edema
instead.  Salt drops took care of it and my vision cleared without a
prescription change.
otisbrown@pa.net - 09 Sep 2006 15:10 GMT
Dear Tim,

I monitor my vision -- as much as possible -- because
of my concern about developing a detached retina.

So I saw the same thing, sligh blur that could not
be cleared with a minus lens.

The use of a "pin-hole" showed a clearer image.  The
"image" was "double", and it was the
same thiing, "Edema".

The first check is with the minus lens -- to see if
the image can be cleared witha minus.

If that does not work, then use a pin-hole.
(Verification by the OD).

Then the ophthamologist did checks for retinal tears,
"floaters", (previous incipient detachment and laser
surgery), and then the assessment.  It was
an excellent job by these professionals.

Best,

Otis

> Might want to see a good eye doctor.
>
> A couple of years back my vision got fuzzy.  I went to my eye doctor
> thinking I needed a new prescription.  She diagnosed corneal edema
> instead.  Salt drops took care of it and my vision cleared without a
> prescription change.
William Stacy - 09 Sep 2006 18:02 GMT
I agree. Someone's got to get to the bottom of it.  BVA less than 20/20
always demands a reason.

w.stacy, o.d.

>Might want to see a good eye doctor.
>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
>  
Ace - 10 Sep 2006 01:06 GMT
> I agree. Someone's got to get to the bottom of it.  BVA less than 20/20
> always demands a reason.

There always is a reason. My BCVA isnt 20/20 either and my right eye
doesnt correct as well as the left. Reason is spectacle minification,
some irregular astigmatism and lots of high order aberrations. Get a
topography to prove this like I did.
ns666ns@yahoo.com - 10 Sep 2006 05:12 GMT
I try to find a good optometrist, but strangely I can't find any info
of my last optometrist on the web, don't they have to have license and
get some degree/education?
thanks
William Stacy - 10 Sep 2006 05:19 GMT
> I try to find a good optometrist, but strangely I can't find any info
> of my last optometrist on the web, don't they have to have license and
> get some degree/education?
> thanks

Yes they do.  Find your state's board of optometry and ask for the
public info on him/her.  No problem, and yes, we do have to have a
license and a degree!

w.stacy, o.d.
Dan Abel - 10 Sep 2006 06:23 GMT
> > I try to find a good optometrist, but strangely I can't find any info
> > of my last optometrist on the web, don't they have to have license and
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
> w.stacy, o.d.

At least in the US.  In some other countries, you can practice medicine
with a BA.  I don't know about the license part.

Signature

Dan Abel
dabel@sonic.net
Petaluma, California, USA

 
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



©2010 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.