Re: Question About "Add" Value
You are accessing this site in a read-only mode. For full access to all member benefits, including message posting, please login or register. Registration is completely free, simple, and takes only a few seconds.
Login |
Free MedKB.com registration |
Whole discussion thread
The message you are replying to and its parents are listed in the reverse order with the most recent posts first. This might not be the whole discussion thread. To read all the messages in this thread please click here.
Re: Question About "Add" Value
| Rich | 26 Jun 2006 01:56 |
> Dear Rich, > [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >> >> Allen To all that responded to my original question, I thank you. To the optometrists on the board, I did just visit one & had my eyes examined. My question was just a technical question & replies from both professionals & "buffs"(for want of a better term) were helpful. The reason I asked was that I had been prescribed progressive lenses with the aforementioned prescription after stating that I spend all day on a computer at work, not to mention a couple of hours at home. I currently had a prescription pair of glasses from another optometrists 4 years old(unknown diopter powers & I had forgotten them at work before my appointment with the new optometrists). I had told the former optometrist(from another state) that I primarily need them for computer use. He prescribed a bi-focal with an intermediate power on top for the screen & lower for reading. To this day, the prescription is perfect for my needs. The single power intermediate is not quite strong enough for me to read paper documents, so I need the bi-focal. I can get by with a single lower power reading glass(which I did when these frames broke)but prefer a stronger bi-focal. The problem is that the new optometrist told me progressives were just what I needed for computer use, to read with & to correct the slight fuzziness I have at distance. No sooner did I sit down in front of a computer when I realized that they were functionally useless for me at work. I am a mail service pharmacists who sits at dual 17" LCD monitors with an image of a prescription on the left screen & various data on the right(patient profile, what the tech entered for the prescription, etc.). This requires constant checking back & forth with some speed for efficiency) to make sure the data-entry matches the prescription. With the older bi-focals all I needed to do was move my eyes back & forth. The progressives had such a narrow intermediate field that it not only took constant head movements to acquire sharpness but it also slowed me down to the point of uselessness. I usually ended up just tilting my head all the way back to read the screen through the near area & not the intermediate. However, after research, I discovered that only near vision progressives are appropriate for use on a computer & I liked the progressive for walking around, so I went back & changed them to transitions(I live in Arizona, very sunny)& decided to order a new 2nd pair of inexpensive computer-use bi-focal on-line to replace my old one(frames 10 years old, lenses 4 years old, scratched with a slight crack from trying to pop them back into a slightly bent frame). Hence, my questions about how to order the "add" value. I'm just surprised that the computer screen appears clear at 26" through the 2.5 diopter lowest part of the progressives. I suppose I should take them to another shop to confirm the correctness of the new prescription & obtain the powers of my old bi-focals. I welcome any insights on my saga & any flames for posting a needlessly unsolicited long post.
Thanks again,
Rich
|
| otisbrown@pa.net | 26 Jun 2006 01:10 |
Dear Rich,
Please disregard Allen's postings.
He thinks you are intellectually incompetent -- and I would bet that you are not.
To much "paternalism" here. AFTER you have done these simple checkes YOURSELF -- you can go back to your OD, and talk to him/her about them.
Think for yourself.
Otis
++++++++
> > You might take you glasses off and check this. If at 20 inches > > the reading is blurry, then you will need some "plus" to read. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Allen |
| A Lieberman | 26 Jun 2006 01:05 |
> You might take you glasses off and check this. If at 20 inches > the reading is blurry, then you will need some "plus" to read. Dear Rich,
Please disregard Otis's postings. He is not in the medical profession and not in any position to give medical advice like above.
Thank you!
Allen
|
| otisbrown@pa.net | 26 Jun 2006 01:00 |
Dear Rich,
I will make this statement as an Engineer.
I do not know how old you are, but your refractive state is +0.5 diopters as you state. The "range" of accommodation (stop-to-stop) reduces as we get older. If you "range is 2.5 diopters (let us say), then you can see clearly through a +0.5 diopter lens, down to about a distance of about -2 diopters. ( -2.0 diopters is a distance of about 20 inches -- or normal reading distance.)
You might take you glasses off and check this. If at 20 inches the reading is blurry, then you will need some "plus" to read.
You can obtain a "simple" plus in the drug store off-the-shelf.
You might try a +1.25 diopter lens, and see if that meets your "near" requirements.
And further, you might check your distance vision on my site:
www.myopiafree.com
on Eye-Chart #2 and determine your visual acuity with no plus.
These are easy checks, and do not require OD involvement.
Just "fun" things to do.
To further respond:
> Thank you for the reply. If I were to get bi-focal glasses for computer > use, the prescription would be something like OD, OS 1.5, add 1.00 & > that would yield a 2.5 diopter lower lens to read with? Otis> If you Snellen is good, then you need to obtain a "weak" plus, so that reading or the "computer" are comfortable for you.
Otis> Only YOU can check this -- if you wish.
Best,
Otis
> Thanks, > > Rich |
| Rich | 25 Jun 2006 21:08 |
>> Greetings, > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >> Rich Thank you for the reply. If I were to get bi-focal glasses for computer use, the prescription would be something like OD, OS 1.5, add 1.00 & that would yield a 2.5 diopter lower lens to read with?
Thanks,
Rich
|
| otisbrown@pa.net | 25 Jun 2006 20:53 |
> Greetings, Is it 0.5 + 2.00=2.5 diopters
Otis> That is correct.
(I am not an OD -- but I think they will agree.)
> Rich |
| Rich | 25 Jun 2006 20:11 |
Greetings,
I am primarily Presbyopic & my prescription I OD & OS +0.5; add 2.00. I have progressive lenses & my question is about the reading strength of the lenses. Is it 0.5 + 2.00=2.5 diopters or just 2.00 diopters at the bottom of the lens. Thanks.
Rich
|
Quick links:
|
|
|