Re: switching from a lifetime of hard lenses/rpgs to soft lenseswith severe myopia

marcia_jay via MedKB.com schreef:
> I am considering switching to softlenses after a lifetime of hard lenses/RPG.
>

Why the switch, what kind of improvement do you aspect?

Jan (normally Dutch spoken)

marcia_jay via MedKB.com wrote:

> >marcia_jay via MedKB.com schreef:
> >> I am considering switching to softlenses after a lifetime of hard lenses/RPG.
> >

> >

> Message posted via MedKB.com
> http://www.medkb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/vision/200608/1

You need to realize that many people switching from
rigid to soft lenses have to get used to their vision not
being quite as "crisp" and many complain about this
difference in vision.

So if you're an engineer or something, I would not
recommend the switch.

frank

nor does it bode well for the use of bifocal RGPs, at least
simultaneous vision lenses.

your best luck will likely come with use of readers over distance
corrected contacts, or monovision. i agree that bifocal contacts will
give you some degree of blurring and that might be unacceptable to you
given your near requirements.

BTW, disregard the remarks of Ace. he is not a trained eye doctor so
his misunderstanding of RGP base curves, the interaction of lens
curvature and corneal curvature, and the difference between base curves
used for soft versus hard lenses renders his advise useless. he tries
to help but his understanding is limited to what he has read on the
internet.

knowing your RGP prescription is useful only if we also knew your
corneal K readings. I would assume that the doctor who fit you in
8.5mm diameter lenses might be fitting them steep to make them center
well and therefore must give you a compensatory higher minus
prescription. no matter, i am sure that you could be fitted in soft
lenses even if your prescription really is as high -12.00 D. whether
you believe that your hard lenses give you crisper vision as compared
to the soft lenses is something that you will need to experience for
yourself. It is indeed true that RGP wearers sometimes claim that
their vision is clearer than they could get in soft lenses. however i
have also had many RGP wearers who switched to soft lenses remark on
the improved comfort of soft lenses without noting any difference in
visual sharpness. its an individual thing.



Mike Tyner wrote:
> "marcia_jay via MedKB.com" <u25162@uwe> wrote
>
> > I'm an editor, so crisp could be important. When you say not "crisp" do
> > you
> > mean sort of blurry?
>
> Yes.
>
> > Let me put it to you this way, I have to be 100% sure of each letter I am
> > reading, that's what being an editor involves.
>
> It doesn't bode well for the success of bifocal soft lenses.
>
> -MT

your best luck will likely come with use of readers over distance
corrected contacts, or monovision. i agree that bifocal contacts will
give you some degree of blurring and that might be unacceptable to you
given your near requirements.


She already mentioned that reading glasses make her dizzy and caused
blurred vision after short use. You dont read what she says! The other
problem I see is why should she wear glasses all day which she hates
when she can just undercorrect herself with weaker contacts and be
glasses free?

why do you keep butting in Nancy? you don't understand presbyopia
being nothing more than a kid who has a fetish with vision problems who
likes to read things on the internet when they aren't eating
hallucinogenic mushrooms.

back to the subject, as you would also know if you had any clinical
experience, and would have even read if you read deeper into the
thread, is that dizziness with reading glasses when you first use them
is common in presbyopes. it will pass. simply start with the weakest
ones available and within a few days this common problem will go away.
so no-- it didn't ignor it. i just understood it.

and secondly,. are you really recommending that she wear undercorrected
RGPs in both eyes that are weak enough for her to read with? of course
you realize that she wouldn't see squat far away and wouldn't be able
to walk around her office building, drive, etc. comfortably. doesn't
that seem to you to be a rather inadequate solution?

=============
Ace wrote:
> your best luck will likely come with use of readers over distance
> corrected contacts, or monovision. i agree that bifocal contacts will
> give you some degree of blurring and that might be unacceptable to you
> given your near requirements.
>
>
> She already mentioned that reading glasses make her dizzy and caused
> blurred vision after short use. You dont read what she says! The other
> problem I see is why should she wear glasses all day which she hates
> when she can just undercorrect herself with weaker contacts and be
> glasses free?

I am just trying to help Marcia. Why dont we let her make her own
choices instead of you telling her what to do? Presbyopia is not a
problem for myopes unless they chose to be fully corrected. I am not a
high school student, I already finished college and have lots of
knowlege on optometry even though I never claim to be an optometrist.
She is going to give multifocal contacts a try it seems. If that doesnt
work, I suggest undercorrecting by about -2.5 diopters. This will let
her see perfect from 16 inches which is reading distance. She can get
-2.5 glasses for driving or seeing in the distance.

Look here, she is an editoral and spends most of her time reading and
writing! If she wants to be glasses free most_of_the_time, she needs an
undercorrection for near vision. I am not saying go in a blur, she can
get -2.5 glasses. If she were to correct for distance, she
would_be_going_in_a_blur for anything less than 2 meters away and would
need reading glasses all_the_time! She can wear distance contacts when
not working on her job. Her occupation requires good near vision.

"I already finished college"

You have a four year degree???? My recollection is that you completed
2 years just recently.....................not four, nor do you have
specific training in the eye field...yes, you have a wealth of
information, and your are 'living' the Myope experience, but your
application lacks substance, something that would change with specific
studies in the field of optometry.....

If I am wrong, let me know, I can retract my incorrectness with a quick
apology.

Mr feathers
Ace wrote:
> I am just trying to help Marcia. Why dont we let her make her own
> choices instead of you telling her what to do? Presbyopia is not a
> problem for myopes unless they chose to be fully corrected. I am not a
> high school student, I already finished college and have lots of
> knowlege on optometry even though I never claim to be an optometrist.
> She is going to give multifocal contacts a try it seems. If that doesnt
> work, I suggest undercorrecting by about -2.5 diopters. This will let
> her see perfect from 16 inches which is reading distance. She can get
> -2.5 glasses for driving or seeing in the distance.
>
> Look here, she is an editoral and spends most of her time reading and
> writing! If she wants to be glasses free most_of_the_time, she needs an
> undercorrection for near vision. I am not saying go in a blur, she can
> get -2.5 glasses. If she were to correct for distance, she
> would_be_going_in_a_blur for anything less than 2 meters away and would
> need reading glasses all_the_time! She can wear distance contacts when
> not working on her job. Her occupation requires good near vision.

"marcia_jay via MedKB.com" <u25162@uwe> wrote in message
news:64b84c43bc0fa@uwe...

> Outside of the presbyopia situation, I am happy with my lenses. Oh, the
> bad
> thing is that they are about a million years old and I probably should
> replace them anyway.

If you are completely comfortable with your RGPs, why switch to soft? The
only reason to switch to soft would be for increased comfort. From what I've
read and heard, RGPs can usually give better vision.

There are many different designs of multifocal RGPs. Dr. Larry who writes
here is an expert on them, perhaps he will chime in. You can do a search on
this group (including years back) to find some info. One new design that
sounds promising is the Menifocal Z.

You need to be aware though, that any presbyopia solution that doesn't
include reading glasses, whether multifocals or monovision, is a compromise.
Neither distance or near vision will be optimal. You compromise the two in
order to have something that will work for both, that you can get by with
driving and reading, but not necessarily see well with near or far.

The only way to have good vision both near and far is to have your contacts
prescribed solely for distance, then wear reading glasses over them (you can
use the cheap drugstore ones) for close work. It's nice not to have to
bother with reading glasses, though, that's why many of us use these other
contact-only solutions. But you have to be prepared to compromise both near
and far vision, to find something that you can get by with both, although
quite likely far from optimal for either.

She is right, she doesnt want anyone arguing and just to try to help
her. We already know that she hates glasses, including reading glasses.
She needs a solution with contacts and monovision or multifocals are
the two best options. Another option as ive already mentioned is having
two pairs of contacts and swapping them for near or distance. Glasses
are more forgiving because they minify and make things appear further
away and that sliding the glasses down the nose trick works, ive done
it before and things clear up! Of course I usually just take my glasses
off as im -4.5 so I can read without correction without having to press
my nose into the book.

MS wrote:
> "marcia_jay via MedKB.com" <u25162@uwe> wrote in message
> news:64b84c43bc0fa@uwe...
>
>> Outside of the presbyopia situation, I am happy with my
>> lenses. Oh, the bad
>> thing is that they are about a million years old and I
>> probably should replace them anyway.
>
> If you are completely comfortable with your RGPs, why
> switch to soft? The only reason to switch to soft would
> be for increased comfort. From what I've read and heard,
> RGPs can usually give better vision.
> There are many different designs of multifocal RGPs. Dr.
> Larry who writes here is an expert on them, perhaps he
> will chime in. You can do a search on this group
> (including years back) to find some info. One new design
> that sounds promising is the Menifocal Z.
> You need to be aware though, that any presbyopia solution
> that doesn't include reading glasses, whether multifocals
> or monovision, is a compromise. Neither distance or near
> vision will be optimal. You compromise the two in order
> to have something that will work for both, that you can
> get by with driving and reading, but not necessarily see
> well with near or far.
> The only way to have good vision both near and far is to
> have your contacts prescribed solely for distance, then
> wear reading glasses over them (you can use the cheap
> drugstore ones) for close work. It's nice not to have to
> bother with reading glasses, though, that's why many of
> us use these other contact-only solutions. But you have
> to be prepared to compromise both near and far vision, to
> find something that you can get by with both, although
> quite likely far from optimal for either.

Bzzzzzt. I'm wearing RGP translating tri-focals. No compromises
for near, intermediate, or distance. Same as executive style
trifocal spectacles. I couldn't deal with soft multifocals at all
and RGP multifocals weren't much better. Monovision drove
me nuts when looking left or right.