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 / July 2008

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Understanding nearsightedness / farsightedness corrections

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
J - 22 Jul 2008 20:15 GMT
I've been nearsighted forever but recently I've required correction for
reading (I'm in my 40's).  So I currently have glasses with progressive that
does the trick.  I believe my correction is a -7 for distance and +2 for
reading.  Now there are times that I wear contacts (generally for playing
sports) that only have distance correction, and I'd tried some drug store
'cheaters' for reading under that condition.  Looks like something around a
+2 works.

I never really thought this whole thing through.  Last night I was wearing
my glasses (progressive) and decided to check out the reading glasses.  If I
remove my glasses and try the readers, my vision is worse.  Ah ha!  I think
I get it.  So if I wanted a pair of glass that were only for reading only -
say, for reading a book in bed - I would actually need distance correction?
And this distance correction would be something not as strong as my -7's?
In a sense, my distance correction causes my need to have near vision
correction?  Would my reading only prescription be something like -7 plus
+2, or -5?  If this is correct, I would expect my reading experience to be
better if I had a pair of reading-only glasses (because I wouldn't need to
look through the bottom of them, etc.)

Thanks.
Mark A - 22 Jul 2008 21:39 GMT
> I've been nearsighted forever but recently I've required correction for
> reading (I'm in my 40's).  So I currently have glasses with progressive
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>
> Thanks.

If your distance is -7 and your reading is +2 add, then the actual reading
area power on your progressives is -5.

These numbers may not be exact due to a number of factors, such as
astigmatism correction, but you get the idea.
Mark A - 22 Jul 2008 22:12 GMT
> Would my reading only prescription be something like -7 plus +2, or -5?
> If this is correct, I would expect my reading experience to be better if I
> had a pair of reading-only glasses (because I wouldn't need to look
> through the bottom of them, etc.)

You are correct, but you cannot buy minus lenses over the counter, you need
an Rx. This is because a minus lens is presumed to be for distance use and
it would be unsafe to drive a car with the wrong Rx (and if not corrected
for astigmatism).

If you explain what you want (a single vision pair of reading glasses) and
go to your OD, they will be glad to give you a SV Rx for that. I did that at
recently and the OD only charged me $37 for the exam (no pupil dilation, no
test for eye disease, etc). Make sure you measure your exact reading
distance with a ruler before you go to the OD and tell them you want a
single vision Rx for that exact reading distance.

If you recently had an exam, they may be willing to write you a reading-only
Rx based on your last exam, using the default reading distance (usually
about 13 inches).
Mike Tyner - 23 Jul 2008 05:40 GMT
That's how it works,  -7 +2 = -5.

The +2 part varies with age and with preferred working distance, for most
people 16 to 18".

-MT

> I've been nearsighted forever but recently I've required correction for
> reading (I'm in my 40's).  So I currently have glasses with progressive
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>
> Thanks.
 
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.