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 / May 2007

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Prescription Question (old vs new)

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Roger - 27 May 2007 18:11 GMT
Could someone tell me how the reading portion of my new prescription
compares with the old one in terms of strength?

I had the new prescription made up and was totally unable to read with
the lower portion of the bifocals. Yet I can still read quite well
with the old ones.

I have been given conflicting stories and am unsure whether the
problem lies with the prescription or the lens manufacturer.

The two prescriptions can be view here:
http://geocities.com/rocurti/old_vs_new.jpg

Many thanks.

Roger
p.clarkii@gmail.com - 27 May 2007 20:51 GMT
> Could someone tell me how the reading portion of my new prescription
> compares with the old one in terms of strength?
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>
> Roger

there is very little difference in the reading power of your old and
new bifocals.  the small difference that exists is in the left eye.
how do you think your distance vision is in your new glasses?
do you feel like you have to hold your reading material further or
nearer to see it better with your new glasses?
is your bifocal height different in your new glasses?
Roger - 28 May 2007 01:50 GMT
On May 27, 3:51 pm, p.clar...@gmail.com wrote:

> > Could someone tell me how the reading portion of my new prescription
> > compares with the old one in terms of strength?
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
> nearer to see it better with your new glasses?
> is your bifocal height different in your new glasses?

Thanks for your reply. The distance part of the new glasses seems
fine, but the reading portion is blurred at any distance. Since you
confirm that the prescription for the lower part of the bifocals is
very close to my old glasses, I can only assume that there has been a
manufacturing error (one optician at the store thought this was the
case, the other - more senior - optician said he had tested the
glasses and they matched the prescription).

As far as I can tell, the bifocal height is the same in both pairs.

My old glasses date from 2001.

These new glasses resulted from a reassessment of my prescription by
the ophthalmologist. His first new prescription, filled by the same
opticians a month earlier, had a very aggressive reading portion,
which resulted in my having to hold reading material at a very precise
and close (and for me unnatural) position. That prescription was very
likely based solely on my age.

My plan is to accept a refund on the glasses from the opticians and
then to get a new prescription from an optometrist after asking
friends for their recommendations. I have little desire to go back to
the ophthalmologist or the same opticians. Meanwhile I'll continue
with the 2001 pair which are fine for reading but slightly too weak
for distance.

Again, very many thanks for your input and for your patience in
reading this rather confusing tale of woe.

Roger
p.clarkii@gmail.com - 28 May 2007 18:37 GMT
> On May 27, 3:51 pm, p.clar...@gmail.com wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 51 lines]
>
> Roger

i suggest that you take both pairs of glasses, and both prescriptions,
into the optometrist when you get your exam.  tell him precisely about
your troubles and what you would like your glasses to be able to do.
good luck!
Robert Martellaro - 29 May 2007 22:49 GMT
>Could someone tell me how the reading portion of my new prescription
>compares with the old one in terms of strength?
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>
>Roger

+5.25 +1.25 x 3
+5.75 +1.75 x 177
Add +1.75

Roger,

You said these are bifocals. I'll assume you meant with a line and not
progressive addition lenses.

Power on the vertical meridian is Rt +7.00D and Lt +7.50D. The clearest vision
for reading will occur if the base curve is about +10D (a bulbous looking lens
due to the steeper front curve) if the material is CR39, steeper if the index of
refraction is increased. See if you can determine the type of lens (the
material, base curve, and if they are aspheric) in the old and new glasses. For
example, if the new glasses are spherical polycarbonate on a +8D base curve, the
vision through the reading zone will be quite blurry due to power error and
oblique astigmatism, and from the high dispersion of this low Abbe material.

Unfortunately, there are not a lot of lens options with this Rx. In general, you
should ask for aspheric lenses to reduce the base curve, and if CR39 (Bristolite
and maybe Rodenstock) is too heavy then use aspheric mid-index lenses from Sola
(if the true curve of the +7.75D Spectralite is steep enough for the Lt eye) and
Signet Armorlite.  The optical centers need to be optimally located on both the
vertical and horizontal meridians, the bridge fit must be very good, and try to
use a frame that is somewhat round or symmetrical with 3mm or less decentration,
minimizing weight and thickness.

Hope this helps,

Robert Martellaro
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Optician/Owner
Roberts Optical
Wauwatosa Wi.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself."
- Richard Feynman
Roger - 31 May 2007 16:35 GMT
> >Could someone tell me how the reading portion of my new prescription
> >compares with the old one in terms of strength?
[quoted text clipped - 50 lines]
> "Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself."
> - Richard Feynman

Thanks for your reply. As a layman it's a little hard for me to grasp
the technical language, but I will take a copy of it to the opticians
when I have a fresh prescription and I'm sure it will be helpful. It
will certainly enable me to ask some relevant questions.

I really appreciate your advice and assistance.

Roger
Robert Martellaro - 31 May 2007 18:55 GMT
>Thanks for your reply. As a layman it's a little hard for me to grasp
>the technical language,

Sorry about that...

>but I will take a copy of it to the opticians
>when I have a fresh prescription and I'm sure it will be helpful.

That was my primary intention.

>It will certainly enable me to ask some relevant questions.

And hopefully make it easier for you to find a good optician.

Most folks find it hard to believe that we can have blurred and uncomfortable
vision with eyeglasses that measure exactly the way the Rx was written. Believe
it.

>I really appreciate your advice and assistance.
>
>Roger

Your welcome. Any other questions just ask.

Robert Martellaro
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Optician/Owner
Roberts Optical
Wauwatosa Wi.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself."
- Richard Feynman
 
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.