Odd visual effed

I'm getting an odd visual effect in just one eye.

Most noticeable when looking at a colored bright light spot like the LED on the front of the TV etc.

Instead of the normal round image, I get a much bigger image of the same color,
with what is best described as radial lines from the center, in only one quadrant
total size about 10 times the image seen in the other eye.

The color makes not difference, get the same effect with red, yellow and green.

Noticed it first when driving at night, with the tail lights of cars where there are no street lights.

Presumably its a well known phenomenon but its a bit hard to google for.

 

Just noticed that I dont get that effect without my glasses, I'm moderately short
sighted and only get a focused image when about 6" from the object without glasses.

 

Salmon Egg wrote

I never do that. When someone proposes a particular cause, I can then
check the detail on the net and see if it matches in other respects etc.

It doesnt appear to be a cataract. Our phone service that can be
used to get medical advice pointed out that you should be able to
see a cataract by looking at the pupils in a mirror, and I cant see any
sign of a cataract in that eye and the lens looks identical in both eyes.

I do get a bit of an effect like that with the LED viewed thru the pinhole,
but I get the same effect with both eyes and dont see the radial lines
at all with the affected eye when using the pinhole. The pinhole does
act like a quite effective lens with my short sighted eyes.

That doesnt appear to be my problem.

Thanks for your comments and test.

 

Starburst:

http://www.123rf.com/photo_2986156.html

It's a deliberate graphic and photographic effect sometimes, as you can
see if you Google it.

I've mostly noted it *after* a cataract repair, so I don't know whether
it's abnormal for you *not* to have it in the other eye.

I was not too impressed with your telephone cataract "test". It's true
that advanced stages of cataract can be seen that way, but the earlier
stages, where you have still lost a lot of vision, can't.

We'll see what the pros on this group have to say.

 

I don't think self diagnosis is a good idea here. I advise seeing an
Otphamologist. Might be nothing at all. Might be a cataract, developing
a retinal tear or glaucoma.

 

I have a phone service like that with my health plan. It can be helpful
but the main idea seems to be to save the health plan money by the plan
member not going for a doctor visit. I am sure in some cases they can
eliminate a not needed doctor visit but in this case he should see an
eye doctor.

 

Thats not what I am attempting, it was a Sunday here when
I worked out what the effect was and I prefer to check out
the detail on the net before getting a professional opinion.

We have to get a referral from a GP for that an there isnt one in my
town, we get periodic visits from one, or at least used to 35 years ago,
dunno what happens currently, I notice that one no longer has an office here.

The optometrist will know and I trust him to be able to tell me if its
just another odd effect with the glasses with my eyes deteriorating
or whether an otphalmologist is needed. He was very helpful with
a previous effect of aging and can certainly tell me if its a cataract etc.

Yes, but presumably the detail of the symptom should at least rule some of those out.

 

Dan Abel wrote

It is quite close to that, but with the radials only in a single 90 degree quadrant
and quite pronounced lines, just 3, without the blurred bit in that one of yours.

Yeah, thats what I wanted, something I can google. Thanks for that.

OK, but surely the fact that I dont get that effect without the
glasses and with the pinhole makes it unlikely its a cataract ?

Yep. Thats was my intention, since it was a Sunday here.

 

Mike Tyner wrote

Its the only one we have available, provided by the state govt.

They did say I should see a doctor within 72 hours
and only made that comment when I wondered
whether is might be a cataract given my age etc.

No they didnt, they said to see a doctor within 72 hours.

Dunno. Dont have that handy. I havent needed new glasses
for something like 10 years tho I'm getting to the stage where
I should get a new prescription. I sit a long way back from the
monitor, in an arm chair, almost a meter back and can need to
move forward a bit to distinginguish between Arial 6s and 8s now.

Dont know how to specify that or how to measure it either.

Dont know that either, we dont get those routinely when getting new glasses.

I have been meaning to document that stuff, along with the other stuff like blood test results
so plan to get them from the optometrist when I see him about the effect I am getting.

I'm basically asking whether an optometrist is a good enough starting place
or whether I should make an appointment with the GP to get a referral to
an opthalmologist if that turns out to be what the GP considers is appropriate.

Presumably the optometrist should know. Thats why I asked here,
because it was a sunday when I originally posted and I assumed
that there should be optometrists reading here and maybe even
some other eye professional.

Surely the fact that I dont get the effect without glasses and with the pinhole is significant ?

 

My optometrist noticed my first cataract but that was in the USA. I
thought I needed a new prescription but he said he could not do
anything because it was a cataract. I would not begin to know anything
about optometrists and health care in Australia and others here might
not know either. Optometrists in Australia might do more, the same or
might do less than those in the USA.

At your age a cataract would not be at all surprising. Mine was a
surprise because I was only 40 at the time.

 

I have one with my health plan also. It's a good deal. The ER for my
plan is a half hour drive each way. No sense going there if I don't
need to.

Saves *my* time also, and if they don't need to "see" me, and can just
give me some quick advice, that's great. Plus I'm reassured that I
didn't just ignore whatever it was.

Don't know about there, but in the US, an optometrist *is* a doctor.
They don't have a Doctor of Medicine degree (MD), but attend a four year
post graduate course of study, and have a doctoral degree.

In the US, ODs are trained to diagnose such things, so that's where I
would go first anyway. If something needs to be fixed surgically, I
will be referred to an ophthalmologist.

 

Charles wrote

It doesnt appear to be that different to the US tho mine
certainly does some work which is paid for by the health
service. The health service doesnt cover glasses etc.

Yeah, thats why I asked the phone service about that, and because my
neighbor who is only a little older than me has just had both eyes done.

It doesnt appear to be a commonly seen symptom of a cataract
tho and as you say, the optometrist will soon be able to tell me
if its a cataract with an unusual symptom too.

I think its unlikely to be a cataract because none of my ancestors
have ever had one and I havent worked outside much etc.

True.

 

Dunno, it appears from a net search to be an uncommon
symptom of a cataract, particularly the fact that I dont
get the effect with no glasses or with the pinhole.

And none of my ancestors ever had cataracts and most of them lived into their
90s, including my dad who was always remarkably similar medically to me.

I havent worked outside all that much either and normally wore sunnys when I did.

Yeah, readily treatable tho with significant downsides.

Yeah, its just a minor nuisance currently, just wondering why I get that effect.

Oh sure, I just prefer to know about the possibilitys before doing that.

I've had some situation where the professionals have fucked up spectacularly,
like the GP that somehow decided that I must have pancreatitus even when the
specific test for that said I didnt have that. It turned out to be gallstones which
are very common indeed.

 

Dan Abel wrote

And then there's the wait when you get there too. No wait with the phone service.

Yeah, and with some things like a significant fat burn I got
when roasting a leg of lamb, its much more convenient to
be told over the phone that all you have to do is keep it clean
than to fart around with the ER to be told the same thing.

Ours dont go thru medical school, those are called opthalmologists here.

Yeah, ours are too.

Yeah, thats what I plan to do, particularly as I dont get the effect without the glasses.

Yeah, me too. Tho I will presumably have to go to GP to get a referral first.

 

Well, there's a long wait here. Still, waiting at home on hold is
better than driving, then waiting, although last time I called, after a
half hour (the nurse called the doctor), I was told to go to the ER.

It's not medical school, although I understand that some classes are
conducted jointly.

My HMO requires a referral from an OD, not a GP. I'm sure they will
accept referrals from other doctors, but if you just go to the HMO and
ask to see an ophthalmologist, they will tell you to see an OD first.

 

I usually call my Doctor first. He actually calls back within in a
couple of hours if I leave a message. Like when I a sty in my eye he
told me what to do and it worked. Did not have to visit his office. The
phone line was not as helpful in that instance but they are good on
some stuff. Also he is part of a practice that has a Doctor on call.
Also off hours on Wednesday evening and Sunday there is a Doctor in the
office that will see me for a flat $60 fee if it is a minor problem and
not an emergency.

 

It can be caused by a blow to your eye years ago there are some drugs
like steroids than can cause cataracts. It is not just the sun or your
DNA.

 

Charles wrote

OK, never had one of those, havent even had a black eye.

Dont take any of those either. And havent seen that as a side effect
of anything I do take and have only recently after the heart stent ever
taken anything at all except an occassional asprin, and even then its
an uncommon year when I actually took any.

Sure, I said unlikely for a reason, not impossible.

 

Salmon Egg wrote

Yes, mine too, not so much a guess as I'm confident of that.

I'll only bother with an ophthalmologist if the optometrist cant
give me a reason that fits when I check it on the net etc if the
GP cant come up with anything obvious like the fact that its
a side effect of one of the drugs I am on etc. I did check
the medical literature when I started taking them and there
was no mention of anything like that in the medical literature.

Yeah, thats what I get from the net detail on cataracts including the official sites.

Sure, I was always going to do that if I couldnt get a convincing story off the net etc.

The problem with that idea is that I havent needed a new prescription for
something like 10 years now and I did get it checked only about a year
ago when I was getting that other effect where I was getting a double
image until I pressed down on one side of the glasses frame with my finger.
Thats when the optometrist took some proper photos of inside the eyes
and just said that a detached retina might develop and told me what
symptoms to look out for and to do something quickly about it if they did.

The main reason I asked here was because it was Sunday and I like
to know what the possibilitys are before consulting the professionals,
that usually is more productive than checking on the net after seeing
them because you can ask the professionals more useful questions etc.

I've quite often found that even the effective professionals can be a
bit odd at times. When I was getting a bit of arthritus in one of my
feet, the GP claimed that it was probably gout, but when I asked
why it wasnt arthritus, he just said that yes, it could be that too.

He was the one that worked out that I had gallstones after the
other GP decided I must have pancreatitus in spite of the fact
that the specific test for pancreatitus said that I didnt have that.

Yet another GP in the same practice kept telling a mate of mine
that his difficulty with swallowing was just psychological. Turned
out he had a massive growth in his chest that has just killed him.
And whats even worse, the GP's own wife had the same problem
earlier. I've found him quite reliable with the stuff I have consulted
him about, but thats a real worry and it makes sense to check up
on them with stuff that matters like eyes and what can kill you etc.

 

This medical stuff is really confusing to me. I was in the hospital
with pancreatitis last fall. I was in the hospital with gall bladder
problems a few months back. Now I find out:

http://www.medicinenet.com/pancreatitis/article.htm

"Acute pancreatitis is usually caused by gallstones or"