Is this a significant Rx change for 2 years?

Discussion in 'Optometry Archives' started by bugman1974, May 3, 2007.

  1. bugman1974

    bugman1974 Guest

    Every few years my distance vision gets a bit worse, and I usually get
    a new set of glasses with stronger Rx. I am 24, and thus far there is
    no sign that my vision is going to stabilize. Im a bit worried that
    if things keep going like this, I will eventually not be able to
    correct my vision.

    My previous Rx (from 2 years ago):
    OD: -2.25 (sphere), -2.00 (cyl), 114 (axis)
    OS: -1.50 (sphere), -2.00 (cyl), 077 (axis)

    My new Rx:
    OD: -3.75 (sphere), -1.75 (cyl), 119 (axis)
    OS: -2.75 (sphere), -1.75 (cyl), 081 (axis)

    Does the above change seem significant for a 2 year timeframe?

    bugman1974, May 3, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  2. bugman1974

    Guest Guest

    Relax, your vision will stabilize in a few years. I had the same
    changes from seventeen thru twenty eight. The only way you won't be
    able to be corrected is if you poke your eyes out.
    At your age, it is not a significant change.
    Guest, May 3, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  3. bugman1974

    cdavis Guest

    How do you know it will stabilize? How old are you and how long have
    you been stabilized?
    cdavis, May 3, 2007
  4. bugman1974

    serebel Guest

    Mid forties and since I was about twenty eight.
    serebel, May 3, 2007
  5. that is really not very unusual, rate of change will surely decrease.
    might not change anymore either.
    michael toulch, May 3, 2007
  6. bugman1974

    Guest Guest

    The above posts are a prime example of the danger of internet
    diagnoses. People should always be examined by a qualified physician
    directly. You'll always get conflicting advice over the internet.
    Guest, May 4, 2007
  7. bugman1974

    Dom Guest

    Yeah, it is significant, though maybe not actually alarming. You'll
    always be able to correct your vision but still it's not great to be
    increasingly myopic. Do you have a family history of myopia, or do you
    spend a lot of time reading or using a computer?

    Dom, May 5, 2007
  8. bugman1974

    bugman1974 Guest

    Both parents and sides of the family wear glasses/contacts.

    I spend a considerable amount of time using a computer. 8+ hours a
    day at work, and then several more hours a day at home. I can easily
    average 10 hours or more a day.
    bugman1974, May 6, 2007
  9. bugman1974

    otisbrown Guest

    Well, the explains it.

    otisbrown, May 12, 2007
  10. bugman1974

    Guest Guest

    What, no plus prevention on the staircase ?
    Guest, May 12, 2007
  11. No, but I can't avoid thinking one of the brats should have left a
    rollerskate there.


    2007 Pricelessware CD now available. 600Mb of the best of the best in
    Freeware. E-Mail me for details.

    .... There are rhythms in the world waiting for words to be written to
    Nicolaas Hawkins, May 12, 2007
  12. bugman1974

    serebel Guest

    Or maybe they did, maybe they did. :)
    serebel, May 12, 2007
  13. bugman1974

    A.G.McDowell Guest

    Practically, you have a long way to go before your myopia ceases to be
    correctable with glasses. I am now -18D or so, and beginning to find
    that opticians are having to work hard. I can read and drive perfectly
    well. (I am 44, having had glasses since 11 or earlier).

    Theoretically, I find this somewhat discouraging. A large modern flat
    panel display looks a lot less like near work than pen and paper.

    (1) Adjustable font sizes and large screen mean that a larger working
    distance is possible (extreme example: computer projector!)
    (2) Higher contrast possible than ink on paper.
    (3) Back lighting means it is always well lit.

    I think even (especially) the cynics will agree that there is an
    experiment waiting to happen here. I would bet money that if you did a
    big enough clinical trial on the effects of substituting good modern
    computer display screens for pen and paper you would find a
    statistically significant difference in favour of the computer screen.
    (I would NOT bet on whether it would be practically relevant). Those
    magic words (statistically significant) should a good number of
    whichever computer screen you happened to use in the study. Now consider
    that the Asian tiger economies are simultaneously centres of myopia,
    myopia research, and electronics manufacture.

    Question: can anybody think of a way of demonstrating this sort of
    difference with an animal model?
    A.G.McDowell, May 13, 2007
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.