General reading on vision, correction, and contacts?

I am looking for recommendations for web sites where I can do some
general reading on vision, correction, and contacts.

I am 61. I started using reading glasses in my 40s and am now up to
about 2.50-3.00.

Up until recently, my distant vision was excellent. At my last eye
exam, I was told that I was not about 20/40 (I think) at distance and
marginal for passing the eye exam at the DMV. She put some glasses on
and I was amazed at how much clearer things were. I guess it
deteriorated so gradually that I didn't realize it.

Anyway, she gave me a prescription and I went to a local optician. We
have been talking about contacts.

We first tried monovision. I didn't get the exact numbers, but he put
the near correction in the left eye and the distance correction in the
right. This was great for reading, terrible for driving. We tried a
couple of different corrections and also reversing the eyes.

I don't think monovision is going to work for me -- unless I didn't
give it long enough to work. The close up vision was great -- no
reading glasses, but distance vision was much worse. Not only was
everything a lot blurrier, but I had a sense that there was something
in my field of vision that I couldn't quite see but was affecting the
vision. I'm guessing that was the other lens.

We then tried a couple of types of bifocal contacts. With these, the
sense of something in the way was gone, but overall, they were worse
than the monovision. Close was only marginally better than my naked
eyes and distance was slightly worse.

We are now trying only distance correction. This seems to help
intermediate vision (6-30 feet) somewhat, but I'm not sure yet if long
distance (100 feet+) is better or slightly worse.

The good news is that my eyes seem to tolerate the contacts well.

Thanks for listening...

--

Why not try a decent pair of bifocals? You might even like progressives...

What have you got against glasses???

w.stacy, o.d.

LurfysMa wrote:

>I am looking for recommendations for web sites where I can do some
>general reading on vision, correction, and contacts.
>
>I am 61. I started using reading glasses in my 40s and am now up to
>about 2.50-3.00.
>
>Up until recently, my distant vision was excellent. At my last eye
>exam, I was told that I was not about 20/40 (I think) at distance and
>marginal for passing the eye exam at the DMV. She put some glasses on
>and I was amazed at how much clearer things were. I guess it
>deteriorated so gradually that I didn't realize it.
>
>Anyway, she gave me a prescription and I went to a local optician. We
>have been talking about contacts.
>
>We first tried monovision. I didn't get the exact numbers, but he put
>the near correction in the left eye and the distance correction in the
>right. This was great for reading, terrible for driving. We tried a
>couple of different corrections and also reversing the eyes.
>
>I don't think monovision is going to work for me -- unless I didn't
>give it long enough to work. The close up vision was great -- no
>reading glasses, but distance vision was much worse. Not only was
>everything a lot blurrier, but I had a sense that there was something
>in my field of vision that I couldn't quite see but was affecting the
>vision. I'm guessing that was the other lens.
>
>We then tried a couple of types of bifocal contacts. With these, the
>sense of something in the way was gone, but overall, they were worse
>than the monovision. Close was only marginally better than my naked
>eyes and distance was slightly worse.
>
>We are now trying only distance correction. This seems to help
>intermediate vision (6-30 feet) somewhat, but I'm not sure yet if long
>distance (100 feet+) is better or slightly worse.
>
>The good news is that my eyes seem to tolerate the contacts well.
>
>Thanks for listening...
>
>
>

LurfysMa wrote:

>I am looking for recommendations for web sites where I can do some
>general reading on vision, correction, and contacts.
>
>
>
Oops. missed an opportunity for a rank plug on my sites. click on
http:/www.obase.net for some very general info.

>The good news is that my eyes seem to tolerate the contacts well.
>
>
>
That is good, but all cl wearers should have a decent spectacle backup.
Some docs *require* it.

So first get a decent pair of bifocals or progressives, and go from there.

w.stacy, o.d.

On Thu, 04 Aug 2005 20:00:03 GMT, William Stacy <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>Why not try a decent pair of bifocals? You might even like progressives...
>
>What have you got against glasses???

They bug me. I don't like anything anything on my body. I don't wear
any rings or a watch. (I used to go naked, but I kept getting
arrested. More recently, people have been throwing up!)

I want the solution that involves the least amount of hardware on my
body or in my pockets.

>w.stacy, o.d.
>
>LurfysMa wrote:
>
>>I am looking for recommendations for web sites where I can do some
>>general reading on vision, correction, and contacts.
>>
>>I am 61. I started using reading glasses in my 40s and am now up to
>>about 2.50-3.00.
>>
>>Up until recently, my distant vision was excellent. At my last eye
>>exam, I was told that I was not about 20/40 (I think) at distance and
>>marginal for passing the eye exam at the DMV. She put some glasses on
>>and I was amazed at how much clearer things were. I guess it
>>deteriorated so gradually that I didn't realize it.
>>
>>Anyway, she gave me a prescription and I went to a local optician. We
>>have been talking about contacts.
>>
>>We first tried monovision. I didn't get the exact numbers, but he put
>>the near correction in the left eye and the distance correction in the
>>right. This was great for reading, terrible for driving. We tried a
>>couple of different corrections and also reversing the eyes.
>>
>>I don't think monovision is going to work for me -- unless I didn't
>>give it long enough to work. The close up vision was great -- no
>>reading glasses, but distance vision was much worse. Not only was
>>everything a lot blurrier, but I had a sense that there was something
>>in my field of vision that I couldn't quite see but was affecting the
>>vision. I'm guessing that was the other lens.
>>
>>We then tried a couple of types of bifocal contacts. With these, the
>>sense of something in the way was gone, but overall, they were worse
>>than the monovision. Close was only marginally better than my naked
>>eyes and distance was slightly worse.
>>
>>We are now trying only distance correction. This seems to help
>>intermediate vision (6-30 feet) somewhat, but I'm not sure yet if long
>>distance (100 feet+) is better or slightly worse.
>>
>>The good news is that my eyes seem to tolerate the contacts well.
>>
>>Thanks for listening...

--

On Thu, 04 Aug 2005 20:12:44 GMT, William Stacy <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>
>
>LurfysMa wrote:
>
>>I am looking for recommendations for web sites where I can do some
>>general reading on vision, correction, and contacts.
>>
>>
>>
>Oops. missed an opportunity for a rank plug on my sites. click on
>http:/www.obase.net for some very general info.

Thanks for that. I'll check it out in detail.

PS: The link will work better with 2 /'s

>>The good news is that my eyes seem to tolerate the contacts well.
>>
>>
>>
>That is good, but all cl wearers should have a decent spectacle backup.

"All"? There are NO exceptions to this rule?

>Some docs *require* it.

I would probably get a different doc.

>So first get a decent pair of bifocals or progressives, and go from there.

Why?

--

Bill Stacy, OD, wrote:

>>So first get a decent pair of bifocals or progressives, and go from there.

LurfysMa <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Why?

From a layperson's perspective, here's at least /one/ reason: contact
lens wearers may experience corneal edema, irritation, or other
overwear symptoms, or giant papillary conjunctivitis as a result of
wearing contact lenses.

For the most part, /any/ of these issues requires immediate cessation
of contact lens wear. You'd want glasses to get you through....

On Thu, 04 Aug 2005 21:34:38 GMT, Neil Brooks <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>Bill Stacy, OD, wrote:
>
>>>So first get a decent pair of bifocals or progressives, and go from there.
>
>LurfysMa <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>Why?
>
>From a layperson's perspective, here's at least /one/ reason: contact
>lens wearers may experience corneal edema, irritation, or other
>overwear symptoms, or giant papillary conjunctivitis as a result of
>wearing contact lenses.
>
>For the most part, /any/ of these issues requires immediate cessation
>of contact lens wear. You'd want glasses to get you through....

Sure. I can understand why a doc might recommend glasses as a backup
or for an alternative or to give your eyes a rest or just because they
have different optics. I was just teasing Dr. Stacy for saying that
absolutely everyone who has contacts has to have glasses. ;-)

In my case, my eyes are still OK for distance and I have several
hundred reading glasses for that! ;-)

--

LurfysMa wrote:

>
>Sure. I can understand why a doc might recommend glasses as a backup
>or for an alternative or to give your eyes a rest or just because they
>have different optics. I was just teasing Dr. Stacy for saying that
>absolutely everyone who has contacts has to have glasses. ;-)
>
>In my case, my eyes are still OK for distance and I have several
>hundred reading glasses for that! ;-)
>
>
>
I'm not one of those docs that won't fit contacts unless the patient has
a backup pair of glasses, but I can understand their position and have
been close to invoking that on occasion. But it's not what you think.
In your first post, you admitted to 20/40 vision unaided. I'll assume
you correct up nicely to 20/20 with the proper glasses or contacts.
Just because the DMV will allow you to drive with 20/40 vision doesn't
mean you should. I myself am now unaided 20/30 in one eye and 20/20 in
the other, but insist on my "perfect" 20/15 vision when I'm driving. I
don't care what the DMV says, I'm not about to sink to their standard of
adequacy. Plus I like some eye protection against all those 20/40
drivers out there...

Shields down, Scotty.

w.stacy, o.d.