Some people soil silicone hydrogel contact lenses (SHCLs) faster than
regular soft hydroxyethylmethacrylate (HEMA) contact lenses.

And they, in general, are harder to keep lipids off of and can become
hydrophobic easier than soft HEMA-based contact lenses.

If you consistently experience this problem with daily cleaning with
something as good as MIRAFLOW, then this particular type (or perhaps
all SHCLs) aren't "for you" (i.e., your tear chemistry isn't ideally
compatible) and perhaps you should stick with HEMA-based SCLs.

I have a few patients like you.  I had one that would soil Acuvue
Advance in 2-3 days that had no problems with Acuvue 2s -- this was a
patient whose 2 week old Acuvue 2s looked like they were 2 months old
instead.  I tried Ciba O2Optix the following year which worked well. I
tried Acuvue Oasys earlier this year and she didn't like them as much.
Go figure.

However, because of the overall health benefits of SHCLs versus SCLs,
I inevitably think it is worth trying them out on all patients who are
candidates for them.

Are you wearing the Purevision toric?  You may ask for a trial of the
Acuvue Advance for Astigmatism.  Some silicone-hydrogels depend on a
surface treatment for wettability.  The Advance and Oasys have an
additive that is present throughout the lens.

But, yes, I agree with the anonymous poster who said that some
patients' tear films do not do well with silicone-hydrogel materials.

DrG