multifocal contacts must look sideways to focus

Hi,
Is there a scientific name for this? I would like to be able to do more
research on why I must turn head sideways to focus in multifocal
lenses.

I have tried proclear compatibles multifocals, and frequency 55
multifocals and I must turn my head one direction to focus clearly for
near, and the opposite direction to focus clearly for far.

Any suggestions? I have also tried acuvue bifocal and it focuses
straight ahead , but must refocus with each blink.

At this time, I am wearing the acuvue oasys in the left eye and nothing
in the right, and would like to be able to wear a bifocal lens in the
right.

Thanks,
Chipster

maybe because of all those rings? I have also tried multifocals. They
are twice as thick and uncomfortable and when I focus on near, it takes
about 10 seconds to slowly become less blurry. I feel my eye straining
to accomodate and this is bad for my eyes. I tried monovision, didnt
like it either, I find I have to close my distance eye when reading or
that eye feels strained and aches and letters blur and run into each
other. Undercorrecting both eyes works well and its the best option for
me. It lets me see clear from near and intermediate and distance is
only a little blurry(20/70) so not bad. I am much happier with glasses
though.

chipster wrote:

> Hi,
> Is there a scientific name for this? I would like to be able to do more
> research on why I must turn head sideways to focus in multifocal
> lenses.
>
> I have tried proclear compatibles multifocals, and frequency 55
> multifocals and I must turn my head one direction to focus clearly for
> near, and the opposite direction to focus clearly for far.
>
> Any suggestions? I have also tried acuvue bifocal and it focuses
> straight ahead , but must refocus with each blink.
>
> At this time, I am wearing the acuvue oasys in the left eye and nothing
> in the right, and would like to be able to wear a bifocal lens in the
> right.

Perhaps they only rest in the right place when your eyelids are pressuring
them from the side rather than straight ahead. My guess would be poor fit.
How many have you tried? Nobody said it was easy!

--
Cheers,
Bev
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++
"The fact that windows is one of the most popular ways to
operate a computer means that evolution has made a general
****up and our race is doomed." -- Anon.

The Real Bev wrote:
> chipster wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> Is there a scientific name for this? I would like to be
>> able to do more research on why I must turn head
>> sideways to focus in multifocal lenses.
>>
>> I have tried proclear compatibles multifocals, and
>> frequency 55 multifocals and I must turn my head one
>> direction to focus clearly for near, and the opposite
>> direction to focus clearly for far.
>>
>> Any suggestions? I have also tried acuvue bifocal and it
>> focuses straight ahead , but must refocus with each
>> blink.
>>
>> At this time, I am wearing the acuvue oasys in the left
>> eye and nothing in the right, and would like to be able
>> to wear a bifocal lens in the right.
>
> Perhaps they only rest in the right place when your
> eyelids are pressuring them from the side rather than
> straight ahead. My guess would be poor fit. How many
> have you tried? Nobody said it was easy!

Are those ones that can be ordered with a near or distance
center? If so you may have been fitted with a modified
monovision solution.

-Quick

>How many have you tried?<

At first they tried the soflens, but I couldn't see my watch, the
distance was fine.

Then, proclear compatible multifocals, the frequency 55. These were
acceptable in distance and close, but had to turn head & look over nose
for best focus.

Then, acuvue - which focuses straight on, but not good for distance or
close, except for 2-3 seconds out of a minute.

Am wearing the acuvue oasys -1 in left eye, which is dominant. The
uncovered right eye is getting tired now, and tried wearing a -1.25 to
a meeting tonight, and reading glasses for taking notes.
Can't see the people who come up close to me, though, and that is just
sad.

Really would like to know what to do next.

Thanks,
Chipster