Page: 1 2
Myope5
Head Administrator
Registered: 05-2005
Posts: 816
Karma: 8 (+9/-1)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Are you over 35 and a low myope considering lasik? Think again!
I wish to post a follow up on this. I was reading another lasik message board where a bunch of people were unhappy with lasik. The problem? Yes you guessed it, loss of nearby vision, in some cases as far as 20 feet! We were discussing that for those over 35, if you are a low myope under -3 you may not want to bother with lasik to begin with, or youd be exchanging your dependancy on distance glasses for reading glasses and this will just get worse as presbyopia sets in.
Other options we discussed is monovision but some cant handle one eye being different than the other, I couldnt, put on one -3.5 contact lense and it was disorientating! Maybe if it was -1 difference it wouldnt be so bad. I am thinking of just putting the same pescription for both eyes, this will give me -.5 worse in the left eye which will help for near stuff but for distance I focus with both eyes so I see just as well.
Still others choose to be slightly undercorrected, this has two advantages, one is you save some cornea, this is very important for enhancements of any sort and also for reducing your risks of ecstia, reguardless how low they are, they will be even lower still. The more important advantage is greatly reducing the risks of being overcorrected which is a disaster especially for presbyopes, then everything 3 feet and less will be completely blurry with things 10, even 20 feet slightly blurry, worsening the nearer. Ask to be dialed in for an undercorrection of -1 to -1.5 in both eyes, if you later decide on an enhancement, its much easier to enhance undercorrection than overcorrection. If your eye heals slow or incorrectly, you might end up plano instead of hyperopic! Many choose to leave their undercorrection, either deleberate or by chance alone in order to preserve their near vision and reduce their need for reading specs. Distance vision less than 20 feet isnt a problem with a mild undercorrection and a thin pair of glasses can be used just for driving.
Those who are over 35 might want to consider a delebrate undercorrection in one or both eyes for the above reasons mentioned. Younger people sometimes dont bother and for more than one reason besides preservation of near vision. Sometimes they experience complications and fear an enhancement will just make it worse so they live with the undercorrection which in most cases isnt a big deal except for a thin pair of glasses for driving. Others do alot of reading or computer work and its their advantage they have residual myopia. Its better to wear distance glasses 20% of the time than reading glasses 80% of the time. I am one of those who does alot more close work than distance work and frankly I am happier with my old glasses than the new ones. I see 20/40 to 20/50 on the snellen chart but my eyes feel alot more relaxed, especially all the time I spend on the computer. The optomologist even said thats fine to wear older glasses around the house but reccomends I wear optimal pescription when I go outside. I feel I am fine with even those weaker glasses cause I am seeing 20/30 outside with those!
Its funny that there is actually many benefits to being slightly nearsighted, either naturally or undercorrected, be it glasses, contacts or lasik. In this day and age, more people than ever are doing lots and lots of close work reading and on the computer and you see better myopia than plano or worse, hyperopic. I think tests for near vision should be done as often as for distance vision with a snellen chart placed perhaps 12" from your face. Low to moderate myopes will see excellent, perhaps 20/10 to 20/50 on the near snellen chart with high myopes seeing 20/100 or worse since they are sooooo nearsighted even 12" is far enough to be blurry! Ematropes may become crossed eye and see double at such a close distance of 12" that they may register as perhaps 20/50. So much focus has been placed on the snellen chart you see from 20' away, we need one from a foot away!
|
|
5/13/2005, 2:13 am
|
Link to this post
Send Email to Myope5
Send PM to Myope5
|
Myope5
Head Administrator
Registered: 05-2005
Posts: 816
Karma: 8 (+9/-1)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Are you over 35 and a low myope considering lasik? Think again!
Karen.solley Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: South Queensferry, Edinburgh, Scotland
Posts: 2
Epiflap Lasek - 2 years ago now fuzzy right eye
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello, I had Epiflap Lasek in Optimax in Glasgow,Scotland, on both eyes on the same day, on 8th March 2003, and I am now having problems with my right eye becoming fuzzy, My prescription was -1.50 in both eyes before I had the laser surgery, my surgeon told me he would over correct so that I would be well into my sixties before I needed glasses, which I thought was fine, I am most disappointed now to be needing glasses again my prescription in my right is is now +1.00. My left eye is fine. I am going to see the surgeon on Tuesday 3rd May and I am hoping that he will give me more surgery. I had the Lasek done when I was 42 years old and people have said to me your eyes change when you are in your forties, if this was the case Optimax should not have done the Lasek surgery on me. Any advise that you can give me would be grately appreciated. Can my problem be rectified with more laser or will I be resigned to glasses again. Boots consultant for contact lenses is unsure if I can wear contact lenses after Lasek surgery, does anyone know the answer?
Karen.solley
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Karen.solley
Find all posts by Karen.solley
Add Karen.solley to Your Buddy List
#2 29-Apr-2005, 11:44
Rebecca Petris
Director Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: UK (Sussex) and US (Florida)
Posts: 394
Re: Epiflap Lasek - 2 years ago now fuzzy right eye
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karen.solley
Hello, I had Epiflap Lasek in Optimax in Glasgow,Scotland, on both eyes on the same day, on 8th March 2003, and I am now having problems with my right eye becoming fuzzy, My prescription was -1.50 in both eyes before I had the laser surgery, my surgeon told me he would over correct so that I would be well into my sixties before I needed glasses, which I thought was fine, I am most disappointed now to be needing glasses again my prescription in my right is is now +1.00. My left eye is fine. I am going to see the surgeon on Tuesday 3rd May and I am hoping that he will give me more surgery. I had the Lasek done when I was 42 years old and people have said to me your eyes change when you are in your forties, if this was the case Optimax should not have done the Lasek surgery on me. Any advise that you can give me would be grately appreciated. Can my problem be rectified with more laser or will I be resigned to glasses again. Boots consultant for contact lenses is unsure if I can wear contact lenses after Lasek surgery, does anyone know the answer?
Dear Karen,
Welcome to D'Eyealogues. I am not sure there is enough information here to answer your questions but I will do my best and hopefully at least give you some more information to help discuss things further with your doctor.
First, although it certainly sounds as though you have been substantially overcorrected, you are only a month and a half into healing, so it's entirely possible your vision could change further; also, you should not get any more surgery for at least three months - but ideally much longer - after the original surgery, just to be sure.
Next, if your fuzzy vision is due exclusively to the +1 prescription, theoretically it can be corrected by glasses, a contact lens or more surgery. However, you have to understand that further surgery has NO guarantees and does pose risks. In general, people who have had laser eye surgery ought to be able to wear contact lenses afterwards, but you should seek specific advice from your surgeon or optometrist about how soon after surgery it is safe to do so.
Next, with respect to the post-40 changes in vision, it sounds as though perhaps you did not have a clear understanding of presbyopia before having LASEK. Presbyopia is the need for reading glasses which occurs naturally to everyone as a result of a loss of flexibility of the lens of the eye, which usually begins in one's 40's. The most important thing for you to understand about it is that when you become presbyopic, your eyes CANNOT be corrected for both near and distance vision - only for or the other - that is, even with a perfectly successful surgery a patient with presbyopia cannot see well at all distances. That does not mean you can't or shouldn't get laser eye surgery, but it means that you must understand the limitations of surgery. Laser eye surgery can either treat distance vision (and you wear reading glasses as needed - or will in the future if not already presbyopic) or if you get a treatment called monovision, you can have one eye corrected for distance and one eye for reading. This is something all patients should understand before surgery and patients your age or near it should always be given the option to get a monovision treatment.
At your low pre-operative prescription, frankly, it sounds like you might have been better off having only eye treated, not both, so that you could keep your reading vision intact and not need reading glasses. Unfortunately a lot of people don't understand before surgery that being slightly myopic is actually a good thing at that age in terms of avoiding readers.
If you get more surgery NOW, I personally think you may be disappointed, because even if you are successful reducing your +1 eye to exactly 0, you will probably still need reading glasses before long anyway as presbyopia sets in. Please have a discussion with your optometrist or optician about all your options. A contact lens in that eye is probably your best bet at least for the short term.
Kind regards,
__________________
Rebecca E. Petris
LaserMyEye, Inc.
Rebecca Petris
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Rebecca Petris
Send email to Rebecca Petris
Visit Rebecca Petris's homepage!
Find all posts by Rebecca Petris
Add Rebecca Petris to Your Buddy List
#3 29-Apr-2005, 11:47
Rebecca Petris
Director Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: UK (Sussex) and US (Florida)
Posts: 394
Re: Epiflap Lasek - 2 years ago now fuzzy right eye
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
p.s. I read your post a little too quickly and on a re-read am a little puzzled:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karen.solley
My prescription was -1.50 in both eyes before I had the laser surgery, my surgeon told me he would over correct so that I would be well into my sixties before I needed glasses
This doesn't make any sense to me. If it were the reverse I would understand it - i.e. if you were +1.50 and he was going to make you myopic so that you wouldn't need reading glasses. But overcorrecting you on the hyperopic side? I'm not sure what he's talking about here.
__________________
Rebecca E. Petris
LaserMyEye, Inc.
Rebecca Petris
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Rebecca Petris
Send email to Rebecca Petris
Visit Rebecca Petris's homepage!
Find all posts by Rebecca Petris
Add Rebecca Petris to Your Buddy List
#4 18-May-2005, 06:27
Karen.solley Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: South Queensferry, Edinburgh, Scotland
Posts: 2
Re: Epiflap Lasek - 2 years ago now fuzzy right eye
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Everyone,
Well I went back to Optimax in Glasgow 2 weeks ago and the Optician said that my right eye now requires a prescription of +1.00, so I would need to purchase a pair or reading glasses. I would have rather had a contact lens, but this will not be suitable as it is only required for reading I would not be able to see distance. So I have been and bought myself reading glasses, it is only 2 years since I had my eyes lasered and I am now wearing glasses for 8 hours a day at my computer. So much for the surgeon telling me It would be years before I would need reading glasses. I suppose I am just unlucky as I am 44 years old, maybe it is not worth having your eyes lasered if you are over 40 because within a few years you will be wearing reading glasses anyway. In Optimax you are expected to drop your glasses into a clear jar because you wont need them, well I paid £300 for my glasses and I wish I had kept them as I could have saved some money on my reading glasses if I used my old frames. I asked for more surgery to correct my problem and they said it would be too risky, so I will just need to get on with wearing glasses again.
SO OLDER PATIENTS BEWARE YOU WILL PROBABLY NEED READING GLASSES WHEN YOU REACH 44 or 45
Karen.solley
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Karen.solley
Find all posts by Karen.solley
Add Karen.solley to Your Buddy List
#5 18-May-2005, 12:17
KevinO Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 87
Re: Epiflap Lasek - 2 years ago now fuzzy right eye
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe it wasn't mentioned because it's a "given" meaning anyone having laser surgery already knows that as the eyes change with age, presbyopia is expected. I expected to wear reading glasses eventually, but had the surgery because I'd hoped to be free from glasses during the day, when I was normally outside, working or jogging or whatever. I'm still in glasses, but with one bifocal and one trifocal lens, thanks to LASIK. Without LASIK, I would still be using glasses but my night vision wouldn't be screwed up.
|
|
7/15/2005, 3:29 am
|
Link to this post
Send Email to Myope5
Send PM to Myope5
|
Myope5
Head Administrator
Registered: 05-2005
Posts: 816
Karma: 8 (+9/-1)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Are you over 35 and a low myope considering lasik? Think again!
my comments: I got this excerpt from another forum. The guy who was -1.5 in each eye made a big mistake. He wasted $5000 and still needs glasses for near and possibilly distance too in a few years. I agree with the comment of having only one eye lasered or dont do it at all! I think all laser centers should be required to talk about presbyopia, period even if you are 25 because youll be needing reading glasses later on where if you didnt get lasik you wouldnt. Astigmistim is an exception because things are blurry from far and near to a lesser extent. However low amounts of astigmistim may be acceptable and hardly affect your vision, especially from near. Likewise, if you are a high myope, it wont matter much cause things will be blurry even from near unless were talking like 4 inches or something which would be a headache! However NO one over 35 who is a low myope should get lasik unless they very active in outdoor sports and rarely or never reads or uses the computer. If you do alot of reading or using the computer like this lady spent 8 hours a day, dont bother unless you have alot of astigmistim and/or myopia.
|
|
7/15/2005, 3:29 am
|
Link to this post
Send Email to Myope5
Send PM to Myope5
|
Myope5
Head Administrator
Registered: 05-2005
Posts: 816
Karma: 8 (+9/-1)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Are you over 35 and a low myope considering lasik? Think again!
RISK 18:It is possible that you may be corrected as desired for distance vision, yet have trouble focusing on print, text, computer or midrange objects closer than your fingertips for extended periods of time.
DISCUSSION: One of the most common misconceptions about LASIK surgery is that the laser fixes vision problems for good and that there is no need for glasses afterwards for anything. Over the years if you are nearsighted you undoubtedly have thought how wonderful it is to be farsighted and have fantasized about ridding yourself of eyeglasses and/or contact lenses. Once you end up farsighted you will realize that farsighted people have their own problems. When you are nearsighted, you have eyes like magnifying lenses and you can look at the tiniest print and read up close easily; distance is blurry. When you are farsighted, distance objects are clear yet your eyes tire and strain to perform extended near work like book reading or computer viewing. Ask your doctor to demonstrate farsightedness by using eyedrops or contact lenses to make you temporarily farsighted before you decide on laser vision correction because it is not uncommon that people end up farsighted. If you are farsighted and are having Hyperopic (farsighted) LASIK, it is possible you hadn't worn glasses until later in life and are anxious to get rid of them, yet when all is said and done you may still need glasses for distance or reading.
For people over 40 years old, it is inevitable that after laser vision correction you will need glasses to read and see near objects unless you have MONOVISION laser. Monovision is when your dominant eye is corrected to focus on distance objects, while the non-dominant eye is corrected for near. Some people who do not want to wear glasses at all will opt for monovision LASIK. The authors of TheLaserSite recommend that patient's over the age of 36 ask their doctors to demonstrate monovision correction with free, trial contact lenses. It is important to understand that a natural decrease in the near-point focus of the eyes occurs around the age of 40. Laser close to the age of 40 will correct the distance vision, but problems at near will gradually increase. If you are under 40, your doctor can demonstrate what your vision at the age of 45-50 will be like. To do this, the doctor can put drops in your eyes that mimic "over 40" vision, and then can demonstrate how monovision correction will help you to see far and near without glasses or contact lenses post LASIK. Laser cannot correct the problems experienced at close range that occur after 40. If you are over 40 and need glasses to see far and take your glasses off to read, when the laser makes you farsighted, your eyeglass needs will flip-flop. Instead of needing glasses for distance, your distance will be better and you'll need to put glasses on to read. Aside from monovision you may choose undercorrection, in which case the laser will bring to around 20/40 for distance (slightly blurry) but you will maintain some near vision
|
|
7/15/2005, 8:54 am
|
Link to this post
Send Email to Myope5
Send PM to Myope5
|
Myope5
Head Administrator
Registered: 05-2005
Posts: 816
Karma: 8 (+9/-1)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Are you over 35 and a low myope considering lasik? Think again!
this was in another forum. I am pasting the answer here for your education
Q: had LASIK in April and was very successful getting -10.75 down to -1.75 in both eyes. My vision has not regressed since then and today I found out that I'm a great candidate for enhancement. The bad news is that I do not have enough cornea tissue so my doctor said I had to have PRK done instead. What are your thoughts and case study experiences? What should I expect in terms of "pain" compared to the painless and fast experience of LASIK? Is this something that I should pursue or should I just leave it alone and remain at -1.75.
A: What is your uncorrected vision now(possible 20/70?) and if you wear glasses sometimes, what do you get with them? Also dont forget the presbyopia issue that occurs at middle age. Youd be taking a risk with PRK and may be trading up for reading glasses anyway. Having a little myopia goes a long way for presbyopia. I know what presbyopia is like, I have a little presbyopia and things become somewhat blurry from near with glasses so I always take them off to read or eat and I use my old glasses for the computer. Youd be able to do all that without glasses.
Q: I had Intacs placed in my eyes about 5.5 years in December, 1999. I had mild myopia in each eye being -1.00 in the right eye, and -1.5 in the left eye. I thought the quality of my vision was very good at first with some glare and halos. It did fluctuate a lot within the first 6 months as my doctor told me it would. Sometimes there would be fluctutaion in the overall quality of my vision, some with glare and halos, and some with actual visual acuity. I was overall happy with the results because glare and halos seemed very minimal to almost none, and the quality of my vision seemed pretty good a whole year after the Intacs. At times during the fluctuation, my vision looked like it just had the potential to be absolutely great or even excellent. After it passed a year since the surgery, it seemed that fluctuation in my vision was very minimal to almost none, and I thought everything was just fine.
Very rarely, I would notice some big fluctuation and the quality of my euesight seemed to be poor, but I just thought it was that my eyes were tired and it would go away. And that's usually what happened. It went away. However, within the last 8 months, it seems my vision is fluctuating more and glare/halos come and go more often. Sometimes the glare and halos have been really bad, while other times they are not. I did some searching on Intacs, and I did read something about fluctuation in eyesight being one of the problems with them. My eyes by themselves have not changed at all since I got the Intacs because my vision has always shown capability to ve very good in many ways. If my eyes actually got worse, that wouldn't be the case. It just seems it may be the nature of the Intacs that vision fluctuation happens?? Also, in many ways, the quality of my vision is lax. But in other ways, it is pretty good or just fine. None of it has ever been bad enough where I was worried about vision impairment, but in too many ways, I am disappointed with the overall quality of my vision. I especially am disappointed with the quality of how well I focus on big textures with lots of details on freeway advertisement signs. I also think the quality of my vision is mediocre at best when it comes to how well I can see most signs on the road a long distance a way before I actually get close to passing them. I usually see blue licesne plates with white printing on them very well, and I see the words on the telivion well for the most part. I can read the 20/20 line on the Snellen chart when I go to the doctor. But does 20/20 mean much if the quality of your vision is lax in too many ways?? Is this kind of fluctuation with long term with Intacs typical?? It woul almost make sesne that it is because Intacs are designed to flatten the eye to correct myopia, that it's possible they may not always put the same amount of flattening preasure on it, thus causing these vision fluctuations I described??
Now my question is, would it be possible to have Intacs removed and then get Lasik?? How long would I have to wait for my eyes to go back to their normal shape after the Intacs removal in order for my eyes to be ready for Lasik?? Does the fact I've had Intacs in my eyes for 5.5 years make a difference?? Or would eyes almost always resort back to their original shape within just a couple of months after having something removed?? I ask this question because I didn't discuss it with my doctor today when I made an appointment with him in two weeks. But I would like to know the opinion on Intacs removal and then Lasik??
If I was a good canidate for Lasik according to a very well known and trust worthy doctor (which mine is), would having Lasik produce a stable and good quality visual result once the eye heals completely?? Isn't it true with Lasik that once the eye is completely healed, that the results are permanent without getting any enhancement procedures??
Here are my expectations for my eyesight:
See at least 20/20 with very good quality eyesight in almost all ways with 0 or almost 0 halos and glare. See with over all good solid eyesight with practically no or extremely slight halos or glare?? Is that a realistic expectation??
To add to what I have to say about my expectations with my eyesight after some surgery. This is of course assuming I'm a good canidate for another type of surgery.
I expect very good quality 20/20 eyesight with almost no visual quirks like halos or glare.
I don't expect it to be abolsutely excellent and perfect in every way shape or form. I expect at least good, but maybe not great quality vision.
But I certainly think the quality of my eyesight as it stands with Intacs now should and can definitely be quite a bit better than it already is, especially in the situations I described where my vision quality seems flaky.
Are those realistic expectations for refrative surgery??
A: If someone "must" have perfect vision, such as 20/20 or better and has very high expectations, that would make him a poor candidate. Lasik can NOT guarantee how good your vision will be. It could be worse than intacs, as good as intacs or better. Lasik is permaent too unlike intacs which is the reason why you went intacs in the first place.
Additionally, your pescription is very low and I wouldnt take the risks for only -1 diopters. You would be needing reading glasses when presbyopia sets in so youd trade your near vision for distance vision. With intacs you can have one or both removed and not need reading glasses. My brother is -1.5 and -2 and he does not wear glasses most of the time except for driving and in college classes to read the board if he sits in the back. You would have very little, if any dependancy on glasses with only -1 diopters.
In my opinion, one should not bother with lasik if they are less than -2 diopters because they arent very dependant on glasses to begin with and also because presbyopia comes in middle age. Having a little myopia goes a long way in not needing reading glasses or at least much later rather than sooner.
Read the Q and A carefully. Note that lasik is not reccomended for low myopes, especially if you are less than -2 diopters.
|
|
8/9/2005, 1:14 pm
|
Link to this post
Send Email to Myope5
Send PM to Myope5
|
terminator31
Registered user
Registered: 05-2005
Posts: 62
Karma: 4 (+4/-0)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Are you over 35 and a low myope considering lasik? Think again!
Some people like perfect vision. LASIK may not be a guarantee that they will have perfect vision, but it will most likely be a lot better than their current vision. I agree that it's not worth it if you're like -1 diopters. -2 would be a different story and LASIK is an option, but it is still not preferable because of all the risks related to LASIK.
And I kind of disagree with you on the presbyopia issue. Myopia does not mean that you won't have presbyopia. Let's take me and you for example. I can see things clearly from a really close distance (2-3 inches). You, however, need a few more inches to see things clearly. Exercising/improving presbyopia is quite possible, and it does not mean that you will get myopia. IMO, myopia and presbyopia are two very different things and I would rather have the latter, because for me it would be much more convinient to be able to see in the distance without any trouble, and to wear glasses for reading because reading is not a process that involves any major movement.
Also, presbyopia doesn't always set in when you are 40-45 (as they say). My dad didn't need reading glasses until he was 63. I just tested his near vision, and he can still see well from about 12 inches (he's 66 now).
So yeah, if I were you, I wouldn't worry about presbyopia and think that if you have myopia you won't have presbyopia, because that is untrue. My mother, (after TONS of stress and some bad vision habits) has a little myopia, (around 20/40) and NO, that does not help her presbyopia. (she's 57 now)
You should just exercise your eyes, and if you want to do something about presbyopia, do the exercise where you focus on something far away, and then on something really close.
|
|
8/10/2005, 12:21 am
|
Link to this post
Send PM to terminator31
|
Myope5
Head Administrator
Registered: 05-2005
Posts: 816
Karma: 8 (+9/-1)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Are you over 35 and a low myope considering lasik? Think again!
myopia is like build in reading glasses. It wont help "cure" presbyopia, but it "masks" it. I know you can exercise your myopia and presbyopia but ill just get banned from that lasik forum if I go off topic and start telling everyone not to get lasik but do eye exercises. Remember, those people come to lasik because they dont believe in natural vision improvement.
Its a fact that people lose their ability to accomodate at any age but it usually does not become a problem till you get to around 30. Then at 35-40 they have so little accomodation left its a real strain to see from near without reading glasses. Instead of having to bother with reading glasses, some choose monovision or just keep their myopia alone.
Even if we ignore the issues of presbyopia, being -1 diopters just is NOT bad enough to take the risks of lasik. Almost everyone with -1 is 20/50 and many of them are 20/40 meaning they are legal to drive. What the heck is the point getting lasik if you dont really need glasses to begin with? Ok so you might get slightly better vision. 20/40--->20/20 is a small improvement. 20/200---->20/20 is much bigger. However the risks are viturally identical for both cases.
Also its a fact that the xtreme myopes are the happiest with lasik while the low myopes are very strict, they expect perfect vision or they !@#$ how much lasik sucks! I will countinue to dissaude lasik to anyone under -2 and in some cases -3
|
|
8/10/2005, 2:19 am
|
Link to this post
Send Email to Myope5
Send PM to Myope5
|
Myope5
Head Administrator
Registered: 05-2005
Posts: 816
Karma: 8 (+9/-1)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Are you over 35 and a low myope considering lasik? Think again!
BooYeah
Newbie Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2
Re: MY eyes getting worse
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I relate! I had Lasik surgery performed in March of 2002 (I was 23). My RX before the surgery was -2.50 (left) -1.50 (right). I came out of surgery seeing 20/15 and was so excited! That lasted for maybe one week. I was seeing between 20/30 - 20/40 6 months after.
Now, three years post-op I am back in glasses. -1.00 in both eyes. My night vision still sux. I always wondered if this is normal after Lasik to have such a regression?! My eye doc says yes. I am a healthy person, do not smoke, exercise regularly. The only thing I could possibly think of is herbs and vitamins causing my eyes to return to the way they were. I am bummed because I know contacts are just around the corner again. Lasik was such a tease!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
BooYeah
View Public Profile
Find all posts by BooYeah
Add BooYeah to Your Buddy List
Check out our new Health Guide for valuable health and disease information, news, and tools for managing your health.
#7 Report Bad Post 09-13-2005, 09:06 AM
IwishIwereaman
Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 31
Re: MY eyes getting worse
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HA, sorry booyah. Tease is a good word!! From high, to low. good luck. I take vitamins, don't think that cutting it, but they can't hurt nothing. Maybe some kerotene or something, I think thats good for eyes. There is supposed to be work outs u can do for ur eye muscles to make them better. Like you have to work ur regular muscles to get full potential..well..its worth a shot i guess..good luck
IwishIwereaman
View Public Profile
Find all posts by IwishIwereaman
Add IwishIwereaman to Your Buddy List
#8 09-14-2005, 01:47 PM
myope33
Member Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 67
Re: MY eyes getting worse
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
hey booyeah, if your only -1 you should be 20/40 if not better and able to do everything including drive without glasses. You can always get an enhancement. If you do so, maybe wavefront prk? Many people experience regression, some after years. Your eyes would have gotten worse anyway with or without lasik. -1 really is a very mild pescription, my brother is that with mild astigmastim and almost never wears glasses. Lasik has worked for millions. Not everyone ends up with perfect vision at any time period. The lasik ADs I read say "an option to reduce your dependancy on glasses* they never at any time claim perfect vision. Many do get perfect vision however but everyone becomes alot less dependant on glasses, exactly the objective lasik was designed to do!
You could also leave your -1 pescription alone so you dont end up needing reading glasses in middle age. I am -5 and half blind without glasses. Everything more than 9" becomes blurry so I only read and eat without glasses(and shower and sleep but thats obvious lol) I would LOOOOOOVE to be a -1 again! That was my first glasses pescription back at 12 and there was hardly any blur! When/if I get lasik, my goal is to have 20/100 vision or better, correctable to 20/25 or better. I also dont want to be overcorrected or experience other adverse effects. I dont mind some undercorrection because of the presbyopia issue plus I do alot of computer work
my reply is directly above. She probably shouldnt have gotten lasik in the first place being less than -2 in one eye at least.
|
|
9/14/2005, 2:24 pm
|
Link to this post
Send Email to Myope5
Send PM to Myope5
|
Myope5
Head Administrator
Registered: 05-2005
Posts: 816
Karma: 8 (+9/-1)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Are you over 35 and a low myope considering lasik? Think again!
This dude is -1.25 and -.75 and hes been wearing glasses and contacts for 10 years! I was like this is ridicilious! Hes gotta be one of the pickiest person ive ever seen! I see he does play lots of sports and is an athlete which can partially explain why he must have perfect vision or he will be at a disadvantage, no matter how slight be it. Ive seen one baseball player who was 20/30 get lasik and become 20/15. He didnt need lasik in a million years but was looking for every legal advantage he could get. This seems unwise to take the risk on your eyes for such little gain. What if his vision became worse? He would have to retire then.
Anyway I can see how picky he was so I suggest he get lasik on just the -1.25 eye and sure enough please leave the -.75 alone as its near plano and not worth the risks! Maybe his dormant eye is the -1.25 which would result in 20/50(if 20/20 bcva) so although a small blur, it is just enough to annoy some people, especially those who do alot of distance seeing. His contacts irritate his eyes. Well he *can* go ahead with lasik given the circumsences but should only get the -1.25 done!
edit: here is a link to the origional forum where he posted. Note that this is a lasik forum and NOT my forum, I did NOT make that one. Greg is a doctor and he agrees with ace reguarding lasik for such low pescription. He also mentions needing bifocals if he were to get lasik.
http://www.asklasikdocs.com/forum/Preop/892.html
Last edited by Myope5, 10/12/2005, 3:29 pm
|
|
10/11/2005, 6:51 pm
|
Link to this post
Send Email to Myope5
Send PM to Myope5
|
Myope5
Head Administrator
Registered: 05-2005
Posts: 816
Karma: 8 (+9/-1)
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Are you over 35 and a low myope considering lasik? Think again!
more advice:
I urge you again to seriously consider why you want lasik if you are less than -2 of myopia. This goes doubly for those middle age people entering their presbyopia years or anyone with presbyopia. The best you can achieve is trading your distance glasses for reading glasses. There is monovision but its not right for most people and very annoying to only see clear in one eye at a time. My mom takes monovision well but is still annoyed but its the only choice if she wants to wear contacts without carrying reading glasses at all times which is even more annoying. You low myopes have built in ability to see from near, all you have to do is remove your glasses or look under them. None of the hassles of reading glasses! Myopia will become your friend when presbyopia sets in!
Note: If you have more than -1 diopters of astigmastim or severe myopia of at least -6 diopters or hyperopia, it may well be worth looking into lasik cause youd be dependant on glasses for all distances. Those with -2 or even -3 diopters of myopia with little to no astigmastim can see well or very well from near.
I am not bashing lasik nor will I stop you from getting it, but I just want you to seriously consider it if you have a nominial pescription.
|
|
11/11/2005, 1:03 am
|
Link to this post
Send Email to Myope5
Send PM to Myope5
|
Add a reply
Page: 1 2
You are not logged in ( login)
|
