Mislabeled soft contact strengths?

Discussion in 'Optometry Archives' started by MS, May 25, 2009.

  1. MS

    MS Guest

    Has anyone else encountered this-soft contact lenses that do not seem to be
    the rx indicated on the package?

    I never encountered it before, but in a recent box of ciba focus night &
    days, two out of the six lenses seemed to be the incorrect strength, a
    little too strong.

    I am fitted monovision for presbyopia, and am very myopic. My left eye is
    fitted for reading, using a n&d -4.5 (very undercorrected from what I would
    need for max distance, to use that eye for reading).

    Recently it seemed to me like my presbyopia suddenly got a lot worse. I
    often had to use reading glasses over my monovision contacts. Then I
    recalled a few months ago having the same problem, switching to a different
    n&d -4.5 lens in my left eye than the one I already had on, and the problem
    was much improved. So, I tried that again last night, switched to a
    different one from the same box, and my near vision was much better.

    These lenses for the left eye were all from the same box, and the individual
    packaging all had the same specs on it. All I can figure out though, is that
    a couple of the lenses did not have the stated rx of -4.5, but were a little
    stronger, like -4.75. Not so different that I noticed it in putting them on,
    but enough to make reading more difficult.

    Again, i never recall this happening before this one box, but it is rather
    troubling, if two out of six lenses are not the stated prescription. Has
    Ciba's quality control been slipping lately? Has this happened to anyone
    else, with any brand lens?
     
    MS, May 25, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. MS

    The Real Bev Guest

    MS wrote:

    > Has anyone else encountered this-soft contact lenses that do not seem to be
    > the rx indicated on the package?
    >
    > I never encountered it before, but in a recent box of ciba focus night &
    > days, two out of the six lenses seemed to be the incorrect strength, a
    > little too strong.
    >
    > I am fitted monovision for presbyopia, and am very myopic. My left eye is
    > fitted for reading, using a n&d -4.5 (very undercorrected from what I would
    > need for max distance, to use that eye for reading).
    >
    > Recently it seemed to me like my presbyopia suddenly got a lot worse. I
    > often had to use reading glasses over my monovision contacts. Then I
    > recalled a few months ago having the same problem, switching to a different
    > n&d -4.5 lens in my left eye than the one I already had on, and the problem
    > was much improved. So, I tried that again last night, switched to a
    > different one from the same box, and my near vision was much better.
    >
    > These lenses for the left eye were all from the same box, and the individual
    > packaging all had the same specs on it. All I can figure out though, is that
    > a couple of the lenses did not have the stated rx of -4.5, but were a little
    > stronger, like -4.75. Not so different that I noticed it in putting them on,
    > but enough to make reading more difficult.
    >
    > Again, i never recall this happening before this one box, but it is rather
    > troubling, if two out of six lenses are not the stated prescription. Has
    > Ciba's quality control been slipping lately? Has this happened to anyone
    > else, with any brand lens?


    It ALWAYS happens with me, with every brand I've used and with every fitter
    I've gone to since 1998, when I started wearing contacts. I believe it has to
    do with manufacturing tolerances, and some of us require more precision than we
    can get. Perhaps half the lenses out of every box are just WRONG. When I keep
    asking for replacements, the fitters eventually figure I'm trying to pull some
    sort of scam -- although they can't figure out what it might be since I'm happy
    to return the bad lenses.

    The last pair I had I wore for over a year because I had no confidence at all
    that ordering a new box would fit. Turns out that was a good decision because
    my eyes have become LESS farsighted in the last year.

    Latest trial prescription (fourth) in this series, which I put on the first
    time half an hour ago:

    8.4/14.4 Frequency 55
    R +3.00 -2.25 x090
    L +6.00 -3.25 x080

    The right seems pretty good, and my left eye is such a bitch (I have a <deep
    breath> foveomacular vitelliform dystrophy in that eye) that as long as it
    gives me decent 3D vision I'm satisfied.

    --
    Cheers, Bev
    =============================================================
    "On the other hand, I live in California so I'd be willing to
    squeeze schoolchildren to death if I thought some oil would
    come out." -- Scott Adams
     
    The Real Bev, May 27, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. MS

    MS Guest

    I didn't ask for replacements. I guess I could have. Except i can't remember
    which online supplier i bought the last box from.Also, it would be kind of
    hard to send a loose soft contact in the mail as proof. So, as you say, they
    might think one is just making that up.

    To me, two wrong ones in one box of six seemed like a lot. You write half of
    every box! A lot!

    These are major large healthcare companies. One would think they would be
    more careful about stuff like that!



    "The Real Bev" <> wrote in message
    news:j_cTl.10721$...
    > MS wrote:
    >
    >> Has anyone else encountered this-soft contact lenses that do not seem to
    >> be
    >> the rx indicated on the package?
    >>
    >> I never encountered it before, but in a recent box of ciba focus night &
    >> days, two out of the six lenses seemed to be the incorrect strength, a
    >> little too strong.
    >>
    >> I am fitted monovision for presbyopia, and am very myopic. My left eye is
    >> fitted for reading, using a n&d -4.5 (very undercorrected from what I
    >> would
    >> need for max distance, to use that eye for reading).
    >>
    >> Recently it seemed to me like my presbyopia suddenly got a lot worse. I
    >> often had to use reading glasses over my monovision contacts. Then I
    >> recalled a few months ago having the same problem, switching to a
    >> different
    >> n&d -4.5 lens in my left eye than the one I already had on, and the
    >> problem
    >> was much improved. So, I tried that again last night, switched to a
    >> different one from the same box, and my near vision was much better.
    >>
    >> These lenses for the left eye were all from the same box, and the
    >> individual
    >> packaging all had the same specs on it. All I can figure out though, is
    >> that
    >> a couple of the lenses did not have the stated rx of -4.5, but were a
    >> little
    >> stronger, like -4.75. Not so different that I noticed it in putting them
    >> on,
    >> but enough to make reading more difficult.
    >>
    >> Again, i never recall this happening before this one box, but it is
    >> rather
    >> troubling, if two out of six lenses are not the stated prescription. Has
    >> Ciba's quality control been slipping lately? Has this happened to anyone
    >> else, with any brand lens?

    >
    > It ALWAYS happens with me, with every brand I've used and with every
    > fitter
    > I've gone to since 1998, when I started wearing contacts. I believe it
    > has to
    > do with manufacturing tolerances, and some of us require more precision
    > than we
    > can get. Perhaps half the lenses out of every box are just WRONG. When I
    > keep
    > asking for replacements, the fitters eventually figure I'm trying to pull
    > some
    > sort of scam -- although they can't figure out what it might be since I'm
    > happy
    > to return the bad lenses.
    >
    > The last pair I had I wore for over a year because I had no confidence at
    > all
    > that ordering a new box would fit. Turns out that was a good decision
    > because
    > my eyes have become LESS farsighted in the last year.
    >
    > Latest trial prescription (fourth) in this series, which I put on the
    > first
    > time half an hour ago:
    >
    > 8.4/14.4 Frequency 55
    > R +3.00 -2.25 x090
    > L +6.00 -3.25 x080
    >
    > The right seems pretty good, and my left eye is such a bitch (I have a
    > <deep
    > breath> foveomacular vitelliform dystrophy in that eye) that as long as it
    > gives me decent 3D vision I'm satisfied.
    >
    > --
    > Cheers, Bev
    > =============================================================
    > "On the other hand, I live in California so I'd be willing to
    > squeeze schoolchildren to death if I thought some oil would
    > come out." -- Scott Adams
     
    MS, May 28, 2009
    #3
  4. MS

    Guest

    On May 25, 11:04 am, "MS" <> wrote:
    > Has anyone else encountered this-soft contact lenses that do not seem to be
    > the rx indicated on the package?
    >
    > I never encountered it before, but in a recent box of ciba focus night &
    > days, two out of the six lenses seemed to be the incorrect strength, a
    > little too strong.
    >
    > I am fitted monovision for presbyopia, and am very myopic. My left eye is
    > fitted for reading, using a n&d -4.5 (very undercorrected from what I would
    > need for max distance, to use that eye for reading).
    >
    > Recently it seemed to me like my presbyopia suddenly got a lot worse. I
    > often had to use reading glasses over my monovision contacts. Then I
    > recalled a few months ago having the same problem, switching to a different
    > n&d -4.5 lens in my left eye than the one I already had on, and the problem
    > was much improved. So, I tried that again last night, switched to a
    > different one from the same box, and my near vision was much better.
    >
    > These lenses for the left eye were all from the same box, and the individual
    > packaging all had the same specs on it. All I can figure out though, is that
    > a couple of the lenses did not have the stated rx of -4.5, but were a little
    > stronger, like -4.75. Not so different that I noticed it in putting them on,
    > but enough to make reading more difficult.
    >
    > Again, i never recall this happening before this one box, but it is rather
    > troubling, if two out of six lenses are not the stated prescription. Has
    > Ciba's quality control been slipping lately?  Has this happened to anyone
    > else, with any brand lens?


    Nothing is 100%. I often find that if a patient has a bum lens from a
    box, all or several of the lenses in the box will have the same
    problem. No manufacturers are immune from this kind of problem.

    Return the box and the bad lenses if you still have them. Your fitter
    should be able to replace them and return the bad box to CIBA. CIBA
    wants to know about these kind of problems, they will use the lot # to
    track whether other lenses made that day had problems and they will
    review the qualtity control reports for that day.

    Judy
     
    , May 28, 2009
    #4
  5. MS

    The Real Bev Guest

    wrote:

    > On May 25, 11:04 am, "MS" <> wrote:

    ....
    >> These lenses for the left eye were all from the same box, and the individual
    >> packaging all had the same specs on it. All I can figure out though, is that
    >> a couple of the lenses did not have the stated rx of -4.5, but were a little
    >> stronger, like -4.75. Not so different that I noticed it in putting them on,
    >> but enough to make reading more difficult.
    >>
    >> Again, i never recall this happening before this one box, but it is rather
    >> troubling, if two out of six lenses are not the stated prescription. Has
    >> Ciba's quality control been slipping lately? Has this happened to anyone
    >> else, with any brand lens?

    >
    > Nothing is 100%. I often find that if a patient has a bum lens from a
    > box, all or several of the lenses in the box will have the same
    > problem. No manufacturers are immune from this kind of problem.


    That's somebody else's problem; all my bad lenses are different in a different
    way, as are all the "good" lenses, which are just acceptable rather than
    actually good.

    > Return the box and the bad lenses if you still have them. Your fitter
    > should be able to replace them and return the bad box to CIBA. CIBA
    > wants to know about these kind of problems, they will use the lot # to
    > track whether other lenses made that day had problems and they will
    > review the qualtity control reports for that day.


    Cooper basically told me to pound sand, they only talked to distributors. My
    fitter didn't want to bother. I changed fitters. The next one didn't want to
    bother either. Now my ophthalmologist is doing the fitting; if she finds
    something that works I'm inclined to order the lenses through her captive
    optician, with the understanding that I'm paying what I assume to be extra for
    the privilege of returning any bad lenses without hassle.

    --
    Cheers, Bev
    $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
    Polish loan sharks: they loan you money and then skip town.
     
    The Real Bev, May 28, 2009
    #5
  6. MS

    MS Guest

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    Return the box and the bad lenses if you still have them. Your fitter
    should be able to replace them and return the bad box to CIBA. CIBA
    wants to know about these kind of problems, they will use the lot # to
    track whether other lenses made that day had problems and they will
    review the qualtity control reports for that day.

    Judy

    ----------------

    I don't still have them. But if I did, how would one send a used soft
    contact in the mail? It would be completely dried and brittle when it
    arrives.

    Also, I bought through an online lens retailer. (I don't even recall which
    one.) If I sent them the box and bad lenses, i greatly doubt that they would
    bother to send it to Ciba. I don't know whether they would refund or give me
    credit (I kind of doubt it, although it's possible), but in either case I
    doubt they would bother sending to Ciba.

    I don't know if one can send mislabeled lenses directly to the manufacturer.
    But then again, how would one send them?
     
    MS, May 29, 2009
    #6
  7. MS

    Neil Brooks Guest

    On May 29, 10:08 am, "MS" <> wrote:

    > I don't still have them. But if I did, how would one send a used soft
    > contact in the mail? It would be completely dried and brittle when it
    > arrives.


    In which case ... they'd re-hydrate it with saline solution....
     
    Neil Brooks, May 29, 2009
    #7
  8. MS

    Dan Abel Guest

    In article <dMTTl.1528$>,
    "MS" <> wrote:

    > <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > Return the box and the bad lenses if you still have them.
    > I don't still have them. But if I did, how would one send a used soft
    > contact in the mail? It would be completely dried and brittle when it
    > arrives.


    > I don't know if one can send mislabeled lenses directly to the manufacturer.
    > But then again, how would one send them?


    My local drugstore sells contact holders for US$2.49 for a package of
    two. Each holder has a left and a right. I don't think you can beat
    that price.

    --
    Dan Abel
    Petaluma, California USA
     
    Dan Abel, May 29, 2009
    #8
  9. MS

    The Real Bev Guest

    Dan Abel wrote:

    > In article <dMTTl.1528$>,
    > "MS" <> wrote:
    >
    >> <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >> Return the box and the bad lenses if you still have them.
    >> I don't still have them. But if I did, how would one send a used soft
    >> contact in the mail? It would be completely dried and brittle when it
    >> arrives.

    >
    >> I don't know if one can send mislabeled lenses directly to the manufacturer.
    >> But then again, how would one send them?


    President.of.company at manufacturer.address. Include a letter. It probably
    won't help.

    > My local drugstore sells contact holders for US$2.49 for a package of
    > two. Each holder has a left and a right. I don't think you can beat
    > that price.


    They generally come free with brand-name cleaning solution. My fitters have
    always had a drawer full of them which they're happy to give away. I've got
    several dozen myself.

    --
    Cheers, Bev
    *****************************************************
    Nothing is so stupid that you can't find somebody who
    did it at least once if you look hard enough.
     
    The Real Bev, May 29, 2009
    #9
  10. MS

    Guest

    On May 29, 12:08 pm, "MS" <> wrote:
    > <> wrote in message
    >
    > news:...
    > Return the box and the bad lenses if you still have them.  Your fitter
    > should be able to replace them and return the bad box to CIBA.  CIBA
    > wants to know about these kind of problems, they will use the lot # to
    > track whether other lenses made that day had problems and they will
    > review the qualtity control reports for that day.
    >
    > Judy
    >
    > ----------------
    >
    > I don't still have them. But if I did, how would one send a used soft
    > contact in the mail? It would be completely dried and brittle when it
    > arrives.


    In solution in an old case (you do change your case every three months
    don't you?)

    >
    > Also, I bought through an online lens retailer. (I don't even recall which
    > one.) If I sent them the box and bad lenses, i greatly doubt that they would
    > bother to send it to Ciba.


    One of the pitfalls of ordering on line. In our office, if you bought
    them from us, we would give you single replacements for the bad ones
    and return the remaining to our rep.

    Dr Judy
     
    , May 30, 2009
    #10
  11. MS

    Guest

    On May 28, 5:39 pm, The Real Bev <> wrote:
    > wrote:
    > > On May 25, 11:04 am, "MS" <> wrote:

    > ...
    > >> These lenses for the left eye were all from the same box, and the individual
    > >> packaging all had the same specs on it. All I can figure out though, is that
    > >> a couple of the lenses did not have the stated rx of -4.5, but were a little
    > >> stronger, like -4.75. Not so different that I noticed it in putting them on,
    > >> but enough to make reading more difficult.

    >
    > >> Again, i never recall this happening before this one box, but it is rather
    > >> troubling, if two out of six lenses are not the stated prescription. Has
    > >> Ciba's quality control been slipping lately?  Has this happened to anyone
    > >> else, with any brand lens?

    >
    > > Nothing is 100%.  I often find that if a patient has a bum lens from a
    > > box, all or several of the lenses in the box will have the same
    > > problem.  No manufacturers are immune from this kind of problem.

    >
    > That's somebody else's problem;  all my bad lenses are different in a different
    > way, as are all the "good" lenses, which are just acceptable rather than
    > actually good.
    >
    > > Return the box and the bad lenses if you still have them.  Your fitter
    > > should be able to replace them and return the bad box to CIBA.  CIBA
    > > wants to know about these kind of problems, they will use the lot # to
    > > track whether other lenses made that day had problems and they will
    > > review the qualtity control reports for that day.

    >
    > Cooper basically told me to pound sand, they only talked to distributors. My
    > fitter didn't want to bother.  I changed fitters.  The next one didn't want to
    > bother either.  


    Did you buy the lenses from the fitter? If not, the fitter is not
    going to deal with lenses purchased elsewhere.

    Now my ophthalmologist is doing the fitting;  if she finds
    > something that works I'm inclined to order the lenses through her captive
    > optician, with the understanding that I'm paying what I assume to be extra for
    > the privilege of returning any bad lenses without hassle.


    It isn't a "privilege", it is one of many services that the on-line
    places don't provide so don't include in the markup.

    Judy
     
    , May 30, 2009
    #11
  12. MS

    The Real Bev Guest

    wrote:

    > On May 28, 5:39 pm, The Real Bev <> wrote:
    >> wrote:
    >> > On May 25, 11:04 am, "MS" <> wrote:

    >> ...
    >> >> These lenses for the left eye were all from the same box, and the individual
    >> >> packaging all had the same specs on it. All I can figure out though, is that
    >> >> a couple of the lenses did not have the stated rx of -4.5, but were a little
    >> >> stronger, like -4.75. Not so different that I noticed it in putting them on,
    >> >> but enough to make reading more difficult.

    >>
    >> >> Again, i never recall this happening before this one box, but it is rather
    >> >> troubling, if two out of six lenses are not the stated prescription. Has
    >> >> Ciba's quality control been slipping lately? Has this happened to anyone
    >> >> else, with any brand lens?

    >>
    >> > Nothing is 100%. I often find that if a patient has a bum lens from a
    >> > box, all or several of the lenses in the box will have the same
    >> > problem. No manufacturers are immune from this kind of problem.

    >>
    >> That's somebody else's problem; all my bad lenses are different in a different
    >> way, as are all the "good" lenses, which are just acceptable rather than
    >> actually good.
    >>
    >> > Return the box and the bad lenses if you still have them. Your fitter
    >> > should be able to replace them and return the bad box to CIBA. CIBA
    >> > wants to know about these kind of problems, they will use the lot # to
    >> > track whether other lenses made that day had problems and they will
    >> > review the qualtity control reports for that day.

    >>
    >> Cooper basically told me to pound sand, they only talked to distributors. My
    >> fitter didn't want to bother. I changed fitters. The next one didn't want to
    >> bother either.

    >
    > Did you buy the lenses from the fitter? If not, the fitter is not
    > going to deal with lenses purchased elsewhere.


    Yes. They replaced perhaps 6 of the 12 lenses I bought from them and then drew
    the line. They weren't willing to deal with either their distributor or Cooper.

    Had I been less willing to accept less-than-optimal vision ("Big deal, so I
    have to be a LOT closer than normal people in order to read the signs on the
    freeway, I can always just go to the next off-ramp and turn around...") they
    would have replaced MORE lenses.

    The randomness is what bothers me -- getting one that works well is accidental
    and non-reproducible.

    >> Now my ophthalmologist is doing the fitting; if she finds
    >> something that works I'm inclined to order the lenses through her captive
    >> optician, with the understanding that I'm paying what I assume to be extra for
    >> the privilege of returning any bad lenses without hassle.

    >
    > It isn't a "privilege", it is one of many services that the on-line
    > places don't provide so don't include in the markup.


    Then I expect EVERY wrong lens to be replaced without question. I've never
    hidden the fact that I'm a bitch to fit, which they should be able to see for
    themselves just by looking at the prescription.

    --
    Cheers, Bev
    -----------------------------------------
    "Not everyone can be above average so why
    shouldn't we be the ones to suck?"
    --Anonymous School Board Member
     
    The Real Bev, May 30, 2009
    #12
    1. Advertisements

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Tomlev
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    539
    LarryDoc
    Aug 5, 2003
  2. joe son
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    418
    joe son
    Sep 27, 2003
  3. Throw Away

    Non-Disposable soft contact lenses

    Throw Away, Dec 13, 2003, in forum: Contact Lenses
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    331
    Dr. Leukoma
    Dec 14, 2003
  4. petey
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    418
    LarryDoc
    Oct 28, 2004
  5. Replies:
    38
    Views:
    1,366
    Ragnar
    Jul 7, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page