Slashdot Mirror
Laser Vision Surgery for Developers?
cyclops asks: "I have been contemplating about going for LASIK surgery for a couple of years. I want to get rid of my dependency on glasses or lenses because I really find them cumbersome. The main thing that is stopping me now is that like you, programming is my livelihood and thus I spent a major part of my day staring into the monitor. I have readthat there is always a certain percentage of patients not regaining 20/20 vision but it's OK for them since most of them don't need that sharp vision during work. I am about to consult with a LASIK surgeon but I would love to hear anecdotal evidence about your experiences, to hear if it works out for you eventually. (I have stable myopia of -5.50 and astimagtism of -1.00 for 3 years already)." Ask Slashdot has handled this issue in the past in two previous articles: this one from 1999, and a related article from 2000. With at least 2 years since the last time this question was posed, how has medical technology improved in this aspect? For those unwilling or unable to take advantage of Laser Surgery, have other viable alternatives arisen in the past two years?
... a couple of the developers I work with have had corrective eye surgery and have wonderful things to say about it. One fellow even had the new LADIK procedure and was back at work programming the next day. Yes, there's always risks, but driving to work in a metropolitan area is probably less healthy in the long run.
I know this may seem difficult to believe, but bad vision is usually due to chronic tension in the muscles of the eyes. There are methods available to reduce your chronic muscle tension. There is a book about this; I will see if I can find the title.
Ever considered life as a bat? Well then you should consider forsaking your lousy eyes and getting Sonar!
To make a pun demonstrates the highest understanding of a language
Lasik can harm your night vision, among other things. For such a distance-specific task as programming, you're probably much better off with glasses (and much safer).
I don't know much about this site, but I'd just heard about it: http://www.lasiktruth.com/. Look around, I've heard a lot of bad stuff second hand about it.
+5:offtopic,but anti-American
There are reversable alternatives, such as Intacts, but they may not work with your degree of astigmatism.
from BABF13 - Bart to the Future Ralph: Mr. Flanders, your blindedid. Flanders: Yeah, I never shoulda had that trendy laser surgery, it was great at first, but at the 10 year mark your eyes fall out.
"Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
People will think you're normal, and women might even want to breed with you.
Bad idea, dude.
I've seen an actress (famous but I don't recall her name) who professes to have used this 'see clearly method' to dramatically improve her vision and her son's.
Is this a possible alternative? Even if it's not, how effective is this? Over the past 4 years, living in front of the computer, I've noticed a degradation of my vision. I want it to stop!
i stared into the fiber coming from our t3 drop, and my vision was miraculously cured. well, except for the one dark spot that has a burned in backwards "NORTEL" logo on it.
At present, opticians measure and correct defocus and astigmatism. The eye has many higher orders of aberration (spherical aberration, coma, trefoil etc), which are not measured and are not corrected. The problem is that, for laser surgery, the astigmatism and defocus are corrected over a small area of the pupil, smaller than the area of the dilated pupil. Outside this area, aberrations are exacerbated, and not currently measurable (although there is a lot of work in this area). Hence, if you have laser eye surgery, your corrected vision will (barring complications), be fine during the day or when in a brightly lit area, but vision may be worse than pre-correction at night. Doesn't sound too bad, unless you drive at night...
A friend of mine is a senior uni researcher in optometry. She's told me that the flap of cornea that they open up in order to do the surgery never heals properly and that even mild trauma is able to re-open the cut. This can result in infection, scarring and permanent damage. She wears glasses and preaches openly against this technology.
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
I don't know what the odds are that such a thing would happen for a given laser eye surgery. Personally, I think that if there is any chance at all that a cosmetic surgery will prevent me from doing serious computer work, then the cosmetic surgery is not worth it.
=Brian
There is nothing so good that someone, somewhere, will not hate it.
I just went to my eye doctor last week and asked about Lasik. HE wouldn't even recommend because he thought there was not enough case work on long term effects of Lasik. He was concerned about possible long-term corneal degeneration risks, since Lasik cuts away part of your cornea.
OTOH, I had previously thought that the biggest problem would be that some patients experience "halo" effects, especially at night. He said that was mainly due to other techniques based on RK, but not so much with Lasik.
BTW, as an optometrist, he was offered Lasiks for free, for himself, but didn't take it for these reasons.
There are 4 people in my office who have gone in for the surgury, and the three that got it done were back in action with 20/20 vision within a day or two. The one that didn't get it, the doctor flat out told her that her with particular eye problems, that it would not be a safe option. I think that most doctors would stay on the safe side when either recommending or not recommending that you get this surgury - even one bad surgury could be disasterous to their practice. I would say go with a doctor who is recommended by someone that has had the surgury done before, and if possible get a second opinion to confirm that the procedure will be safe.
Me, I wear glasses, ones with a pretty thick lens on the left at that. The frames get a little in the way of my peripheral vision. But I don't want Lasik. Why? Because of the failure rate--even if it's somehow down to only 1%, and I'm not sure it is.
Forget worrying about not achieving the 20/20 vision you want and that many people get from it. Worry instead about the real risk of corneal damage that will leave your vision worse than it was before, with permanent starbursts and haloes like you're looking through scratched, scuffed glasses all the time.
Will this happen to you? Probably not. In fact, if you have the sort of vision that Lasik corrects, you have a well over 95% chance of getting the great vision without glasses that you want. It's just that if you draw the short straw, you could find your ability to read a screen pretty thoroughly ruined, with or without glasses.
Weigh the benefits against the risks, and if you decide to do it, note that most surgeons have you sign a boilerplate contract that bars you from suing them if your vision is ruined. Who's the real winner?
Had the procedure done -- both eyes on the same day! -- and it was fantastic. My night vision was never very good, so I don't mourn the loss, and in fact, my depth perception has improved since getting rid of my glasses. After a year, I'm 20/20 in one eye, 20/15 in the other -- a vast improvement over my pre-surgery vision. (And my good eye now was my good eye then, too.)
I notice my eyes getting a little tired near the end of the day, which is normal for folks with naturally good vision. And I know that I'll need reading glasses eventually. Big deal. I can see my wife in the morning, swim with my kids, fall asleep while reading, wear decent sunglasses, etc... All trivial things when you've got normal vision, but oh-so-worth it when you've needed glasses for 20+ years just to find your frelling shoes.
Oh yeah, it's worth it. Find a decent surgeon -- research! ask questions!
My story is anectdotal at best, but I can't recommend the surgery strongly enough. I spend most days staring at the computer screen (I remember talking to my eye doctor suggesting that I spend 14-16 hours looking at the computer, he replied "in a week?", "No, a day..."). Both of my parents also had the surgery with success which gave me more confidence to have it.
I had laser surgery (LASIK) last spring. It was a fantastic experience. I basically have had contacts forever (-4.5 in one eye, -4.25 in the other, slight astigmatism in one but I don't know the number value for it). I went in for a consult and they deemed me an ideal candidate after checking my vision and doing some measurement of the size of my cornea (mine is thicker than average which is good for them because they effectively reshape your eye by getting rid of some of the cornea).
I went in for the surgery on an afternoon. I had both eyes done on that day. I basically sat in this chair and focused on a little red light. They put some numbing drops in my eyes and then lowered this eyeball sized tubish thing over my eye. It basically sucked onto and grabbed hold of my eye, then a blade comes out of that to slice a thin layer of the cornea. The surgeon then lifts up that layer and the world goes super foggy. I focused as best I could on the red light (with the sucker thing on my eye, I couldn't have moved it anyway). And they basically fired a laser at my eye for 50 seconds or so. Then they flipped the cornea layer back over my eye and the world became clear. They then did the same process for the other eye. It did not hurt in any way during the process.
When it was done, I could immediately see better but it did hurt to look at bright light so I basically got patches over my eyes and was driven home. I took some Tylenol PM and went to sleep with these plastic things covering my eyes to protect from rubbing during the night.
The next morning I drove back to the eye center without my glasses. At that point my eyes were about 20/40 or 20/30. I went to work that day as well so I basically missed an afternoon of work. I had to wear the eye covers at night for the next few nights. Over the next week or so as my eyes completely healed, my vision became 20/15 in both eyes. It has been that way ever since. I do notice slightly more haloing (halos around point light sources) at night but nothing that might not have been there before and I just didn't notice.
I can't recommend it strongly enough. Not having contacts has been a pleasure and the whole surgery experience was a breeze. The worst part of it was the anxiety as they did the surgery but it only lasts about 15 minutes and was well worth it.
Honk if you love Justice! -The Tick
I have keratoconus, which means I can't have lasik et al done.
If it's anecdotal evidence, conjecture, speculation, or just good old innuendo your interested in then Ask Slashdot is the place for you.
I'm with Brian Barsky's OPTICAL group at UC Berkeley. (http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/optical/ )
We are currently doing research on how to better describe the damage caused by laser surgery.
You see why laser surgery repairs correctable damage (damage that can be otherwise corrected with lenses)
it also causes uncorrectable damage... more or less a "corner" where the laser stops hitting the eye.
this "corner" gets more profound after the eye begins to heal from the surgery and tissue regenerates.
It eventually causes people to have intense glare from light sources on the side of their faces (i.e. headlights when you drive at night)
I would recommend NOT getting this surgery.
Unfortunately not too terribly much progress has been made in consistently describing this damage (reports cite perhaps 30th order zernike polynomials for approximation of these problems...which is not helpful at all in describing the shape of the corner)
We are hoping to better describe quantitatively the damage caused by this surgery.
Anyhow I suggest you use a reversible method for correcting your vision (eg glasses/contacts)
--Daniel
Vega Strike Lead Developer
http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/
I had LASIK 2 years ago and have no night vision problems. For the first couple months, there was a slight 'ghosting' effect around bright lights at night. That has completely disappeared. My night vision before the surgery was excellent and it continues to be so.
"The advanced societies of the future will be driven by competing systems of psychopathology." -JG Ballard
[Ned answers the door. He's wearing dark glasses and carrying a cane]
Ned: Jesus? Is that you?
Ralph: Mr. Flanders, you're blinded-ded!
Ned: Oh, yeah. I never should have had that trendy laser surgery. It was great at first but, you know, at the ten-year mark your eyes fall out.
http://www.snpp.com/episodes/BABF13How old is the one who has undergone the first LASIK operation? I'm asking this because it isn't very certain if there won't be implications, say, after 20 years.
I don't mind glasses but i'd love to "lose" my 5 (l) and 4 (r) degrees of myopia, however: who can give me solid advice whether this will be save in the very long run (more than a decade).
[offtopic comments: I've thought of the LASIK operation (in fact, in Crete is most of the research done, which is near me) and my parents have given me the green light&money for the operation, but i'll be staying with my glasses.]
Looking for people to chat about multicopters, coding, music. skype: gtsiros
If your eyesight is not good enough to be a pilot or ATCO already then you won't be allowd to after laser surgery either.
So I'd best stick to the BSD game ATC.
I would recommend LASIK for overall lifestyle improvement but not just to see a computer monitor better.
.5 diopter doesn't significantly worsen your distance vision, except at night, and it makes focusing close much more comfortable. Some people cannot attain sharp focus at night anyway, so what does it matter?
... one of the best things you can do is work in front of an LCD monitor instead. Makes a huge difference eyestrain-wise.
If you can't see what you're doing when you get out of bed in the morning (5 diopters is borderline for that) then LASIK will help you. My SO was about 8 diopters and it made a big difference.
The downsides aren't all that bad but there are tradeoffs. I have a 3-4 diopter correction and I have the option to work on a laptop without my glasses or contacts on. Also my vision corrects to 20/15-17. I would not expect such a good result from LASIK. My expectations would be more like 20/40 which would probably be significantly worse in dim light and better in bright light. If you can focus sharply in the dark now, you will probably lose that after LASIK.
I would not expect serious adverse health consequences from LASIK but they are possible.
I think that all in all LASIK will probably make it harder for you to stare at a CRT all day, but it may greatly improve other aspects of your life. Think about it carefully beforehand.
You might consider corrective optics that undercorrect your eyesight, specifically for working near CRTs. Being undercorrected by
Actually, I say working near CRTs
-joseph
I had the surgery about 8 months ago. I have 20/15 vision in both eyes now, and contrary to what some people have said, my night vision is fantastic. I couldn't be happier.
Even staring at a computer all day and half the night doesn't bother me.
About my only minor complaint, is that my eyes get a little dry, and I have to carry wetting drops with me. I understand that about a year post surgery, this goes away, and after 8 months, I need the drops less and less often.
I would highly recommend it. Just make sure you see a reputable doctor, and talk to some of his/her previous patients. That's what I did, and they were all quite happy.
It cost about $2800, but I would pay it again.
Cheers!
and call me in about 10 years.
Here's a somewhat dated (March 2000) yet still very relevant article on the subject.
On the pro side I'd say that you'll learn to type faster since you can't stare at the keyboard anymore. On the con side nobody will buy software from you since you don't look like a geek any more, but the babes will love you. Cheers, LB
I just had LASIK surgery on both eyes on Thursday. So far I have experienced no problems at all. Granted, my eyes weren't very bad to begin with. I have another friend who had his eyes done at the same clinic and he also has not experienced any problems. No sands, halos, night-vision loss, nothing. I think the key is to find a reputable surgeon and to follow all the post-surgery directions properly. It's a long healing process, so we'll have to see how mine go.
--
"Karma can only be portioned out by the cosmos." - Homer Simpson [1F10]
Though my glasses have never bothered me, I can certainly appreciate the view. Still, laser surgery seems like a lot of money and danger just to get rid of them.
I'm going to need a greater payback then 20/20; I'd better come out of that operation seeing in infrared.
---------
Launch all sig
His wife, however, and two other patients had their vision severely damaged due to a bad instrument. Since the surgeries are quick (just a few minutes), it wasn't noticed.
They only do one eye at a time, just in case of something like this. So, only one eye is affected. However, she can't sit in front a computer very long and is subject to severe headaches. Even with glasses, her vision in that eye is poor.
Is it worth the risk? Well, there is only one person that can answer that question: you. Personally, I'm willing to take it, but would rather go for intacts than LASIK because my night vision sucks ass as it is. Unlike my boss, who has good night vision even after the surgery, my night vision sucks ass without any surgery. Since I'm planning to get my pilot's license, I'd rather go for intacts.
My father had LASIK done a few years back, he is a coder (so am I) and has not had any issues with it.
From what I know he has not had any issues with the surgery and his eye sight.
I would say go for it. For the most part its a safe and harmless procudure. I personnaly dont need it, but know many people who have done it, are a VERY happy they did.
Ryan
Ortho-K. They are contacts that reshape your eyes. Eventually you only have to ear them at night or only once a week/month. Can give you better then 20/20, no side effects, reversible if desired, no risks really! I have too much astigmatism for it right now. But I'm waiting!
A friend of mine tried to have Lasik done... Apparently they shine a bright light in your eyes to dialate you pupils.
He had a seziure.
I won't be trying to do that any time soon.
There is a school of thought that says that vision can be improved by stretching the eye muscles. This is advocated by behavioral optometrists. The idea is that when you spend time focused at a certain distance, as so many of us do, our eye muscles tighten chronically. When this happens, the cornea and lens distort and vision problems arise. The problem is not helped in the long run by corrective lenses.
I believe some other behavioral optometrists have some other theories about "learning to see", etc.
I know this all sounds crazy, but my vision got worse every time I go in for a few months of really intensive coding. A few months ago, I was certain my prescription had gotten worse - I can usually tell because on top of not seeing distances clearly, I have headaches and feel sick a lot.
On a lark I bought a book (really, an ~80 page pamphlet) on eye exercises, and also a bigger one on behavioral optometry. I did the eye exercises they prescribed, and within a week or so I was seeing noticeably better.
Now, I believe behavioral optometrists would prescribe a regimen of steadily weaker corrective lenses, to exercise your eyes. I haven't gone that far yet, but I do have to say I was stunned by the marked improvement in my vision a few weeks of exercises got me. I've dealt with steadily worsening vision for the last 20 years, so I KNOW I am not imagining it.
I can just recomment LASIK surgery. I've had it December 1999, and it has been quite a success. I don't need glasses ever since.
My situation is almost the exact same as yours. My vision was about the same as well as the astimagtism. However I am sadly not a programmer, just a lowly sys admin :)
:)
It has been just over 2 years now since I had it done, and I think my vision is slightly below 20/20. Night vision is a little off (some halo/blurring) but nothing that would stop me from driving. Even staring at my monitor for 2 years hasn't done me too much harm.
I do have a couple of good suggestions for you though:
1) Choose a GOOD place (don't pick based on cheap price, it's your EYES and they don't grow back). I did my eyes at Herzig in Toronto. It cost me almost $5000.00 (CAN dollars, I think that's about $125 US ).
2) Get a place that has a lifetime guarantee. If it ever needs to be done again it's free.
3) If you live in Canada some of that cost could be covered. While it cost me $5000 I only ended up paying about $400. My current job uses a new Canadian benefits feature that allowed me to save my companies allocated funds into a special account where I saved it for 2 years and then paid using the account. None of that money was mine, it was the companies "virtual money" they gave me to "buy" benefits. Check into your work for something simular. It will help cover the costs of a higher quality place.
Personally, if I had to do it all over again I would. The procedure while it looks painful, isn't really too bad. The best way I can describe it is like being captured by aliens. Everything going blurry, then black, then you see blurry red flashing lights (which they make you stare it... Harder than it sounds when your vision is blurry)... My advice is go for it
... [Insert decent Sig]
--Had it done in late '99. My vision went from 20/200 to 20/15 and 20/20. Hasn't changed since. I have zero problems at night, no halo effect around lights (at least, no more than my friend who has natural 20/20.
I have had zero problems, but I made sure to select the most experienced surgeons in my metro area. I paid more, but man, was it worth it. I wish I had done it sooner.
I know 3 people well that have done it, and all are very happy.
Good Luck!
http://surgicaleyes.com
i d=1618&highlight=lasik for more info on what I went thru.
Wish I'd found that site before I had my eyes fubared.
Short version...its been a year+..I'm spending over $50 a week on eye drops due to major dry eye issues....reading which used to be a pleasure in my life is now a nightmare....most importantly, due to the dryness and constant tiredness of my eyes, long term comp work is flat out. Also, caffine is majorly restricted due to how my eyes react to it... Nightvisions pure hell.
So..if contemplating it....do ALOT! of research...any doubts, dont do it.
See also : http://www.martialtalk.com/showthread.php?&thread
Good luck
A professor I work with, Brian Barsky, heads up the OPTICAL research project at UC Berkeley.
Their latest work, "RAYS (Render As You See) is a system for "vision-realistic rendering" which can simulate the vision of actual individuals. Vision-realistic rendering is particularly interesting in the context of laser refractive eye surgeries such as PRK and LASIK. Currently, almost a million Americans per year are choosing to undergo such elective surgeries. RAYS could convey to doctors the vision of a patient before and after surgery. In addition, RAYS could provide accurate and revealing visualizations of predicted acuity and simulated vision to potential candidates for such surgeries to facilitate educated decisions about the procedure. Still another application would be to show such candidates the possible visual anomalies that could arise from the surgery (such as glare at night)."
replace 'berserkeley' with 'berkeley' to respond via email.
I've got one pair of eyes. Contacts are a daily annoyance, but with them my vision is perfect and I normally experience no discomfort. I'm not going to take the chance on permanently damaging my vision. Plus, contact lens developments such as hyper-oxygen transmissible lenses are allowing extended continuous wear (30 days), reducing the annoyance to a barely perceptible level.
Consequently, for me the risk is too high.
-Thomas
I was like -4.00 and -3.75. I had Lasik a few years ago. Now I see about 20/25 and 20/20. I have the halos at night.
I have to admit, initially I was somewhat disappointed because my vision definitely wasn't as sharp as it was when it was fine-tuned with my contact lenses. But to tell you the truth, now I don't even think about it. My vision is definitely "good enough" and I'm glad I did it. Being free of any vision correction is really, really nice. The halos at night used to be somewhat annoying, but I've pretty much gotten used to them and they don't bother me.
One big advantage is that my eyes don't get as fatigued from wearing contact lenses at the end of the day, and I find that to be an advantage in late night programming sessions.
For me, the positives outweighed the negatives, but unfortunately there's no way to really know for yourself without doing it.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
I'm a programmer. I had my eyes done about 4 years ago. I've had no problmes. I did get a 'starburst' on bright lights at night but it is actually milder than the same effect when I wore glasses.
I had the procedure mainly because glasses interfered w/hunting and other outdoor sports.
From what I understand- the greater the correction needed, the greater the risks. My vision was not too bad prior to the procedure and better than 20/20 in both eyes after it was done.
I would do it again in a heart beat.
.
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
18 months ago and have had better than 20/20 vision since.
my advice is to very carefully research your doctor and the equipment he uses. you get what you pay for, cheap prices usually means cheap service. much of the equipment they use can be looked up on the web (my doctor used a system developed by B&L, i could look up the stats and success & failure rate on B&L's web site as well as the FDA).
i'm very happy with having it done.
oh. i had it done at lasik plus.
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz
My girlfriend got it and she plays counter-strike a lot. Her eyes became a bit more sensitive to the brightness of the monitor. She either has to turn down the brightness or take periodic breaks. Your mileage definitely varies based on your age (mid-20s to mid-30s is recommended) and your eye-sight.
The new method uses computer assisted distorted mirror and lens technology to create a real time map of the retina for the shaping beam (also new).
The benefits? Try 10/20 vision. And unlike LASIK, this new method promises less irritation and actually improves your night vision instead of nearly erasing it.
For my money, near super-human vision is worth the wait... and the estimated 5k per eye price tag.
Try the new silicone contact lenses, currently made by bausch&lomb and cibavision.
:-)
You leave them in for 1 month at a time, no need to take them our when you sleep. Their oxygen permeability is similar to wearing no lenses at all, thus there is no risk of corneal anoxia.
I wear them, they are extremely comfortable, i don't even notice they are in.
If you are too lazy to change your lenses 12 times a year, then maybe you have other issues
About 8 months ago one of the local eye doctors started offering orthokeratology. I wanted to do this instead of lasik because I don't trust anything that has to do with cutting my eyes, the "oops, you know there is always a chance of something bad happening" factor bothers me. With orthokeratology, if you stop wearing the lenses, your eyes go back to how they were. This lets me have good vision with a minor inconvinience (less than wearing soft contacts) and give me the option of getting lasik when it is $50 an eye and there is no chance of anything bad happening.
My eyes started out at -6.5 / -5.5, which is at the far end for successful treatment. Important lesson, don't go from eyesight this bad to 20/20 in one step, use two different sets of lenses.
After about 6 weeks I had 20/20 20/25 without the lenses 20/15 with. Now I wear the lenses all day and night one day, leave them out the next. If I only wear them at night, after the second night I have 20/40.
I have no trouble working on computers all day, and I don't have to worry about losing a lens while rafting or diving. Getting dirt in my eye while biking though is a very interesting experience, one of the drawbacks of hard contact lenses.
Post-lasik, you may need correction for near vision. I have not had the surgery but my wife needed reading glasses after it was done (we are over 40). She was informed of this effect before-hand; as best as I can tell the effect is to shift your whole focus "up" +N diopters, so if you were a little farsighted before you will be more farisghted later.
My wife and three other friends who have had the surgery have reported no problems related to night vision and using a CRT. Another "husband-of-wife's-coworker" reportedly is suffering halos at night but as I hear it he went to the equivalent of "Akbar and Jeff's Lasik Hut". (This is not a procedure where you necessarily accept the low bid.)
I haven't had it done because of the near vision issues (even though I keep my CRT 2 1/2 feet away) and because I am -7,-8 diopter and the chances of still needing glasses after the surgery seem to still bein the neighborhood of 10% as far as I can tell.
Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
I had mine done about a year and a half ago. I was 20/600 in both eyes. I'm now 20/20 in one eye and 20/15 in the other.
I have noticed some decrease in night vision but my night vision was worse with contacts, and without them I couldn't see anything anyway. I also can't read a page of fine print half an inch from my eye, no loss there, and the doctor says I may need bifocals a few years earlier than I otherwise would have. I can still read fine print at six inches, and the joy of not needing glasses or contacts to function cannot be described to someone who can see "normally".
That said, if you can function without glasses, and only need them for driving, say 20/40 or so, I wouldn't do it. For me it was worth doing even if I didn't get 20/20 out of it since even 20/50 would have been a vast improvement.
Geez -4.5 -5 you guys are all blind. It's really hard to break the stereotype of all computer types are coke bottle lense wearing geeks when .. well generally they really are.
Beyond what you will find people already mentioning as risks associated with Lasik surgery, the real problem is that this is a relatively new technique in the medical world. Because the oldest patients have only lived with the procedure for less than a decade, thus there is no information on the long term effects of the surgery.
Even if you luck out and avoid any complications and end up with 20/20 eyesight, there is no garauntee that ten years or 15 years from now the procedure wont have adverse side effects. Sure you could say but thats so far down the line, but then again you only have one pair of eyes, and if you arent dying from wearing your glasses, hold out a bit longer till some long term patients are reviewed and the results of the procedure are re-examined.
However, if you take one quote away from this post, it should be this: This isn't like buying toothpaste. This is surgery. You will get what you pay for.
In other words, do your homework before even talking to doctors. Be aware that this is surgery, even if it is outpatient surgery. I ended up paying much more than the "average" rate because the doctor I chose had done over 10,000 procedures (successfully), and was an instructor of the procedure. If you can afford it, the extra money for someone really experienced in the procedure is worth it.
The consequence of the treatment is that he now needs to apply eye drops 4 times a day to stop the eyes drying out. As far as he is concerned this is a small price to pay. I'm not sure however, if I would be prepared to take on the burden of doing this for the rest of my life.
I have a pretty strong prescription for nearsigtedness and astigmatism(at like a 30 degree angle, wich makes things even more fun)
I switched to contacts last year and my normal vision is much better, however my low light went to shit. I have rather large max-dialation, so the lens's correctiveness doesnt cover my pupil in low light conditions(and having a thick lens doesnt help either).
If this is any indication of what LASIK is like.. forget it... I still revert back to glasses when doing night photography or volunteer security patrol.
Anyone know if the LASIK halo problem stems from the same reason of the Contact Lens halo problem(over large pupil dialation)?
The other fact is that I (nor anyone else) knows what long-term effects these kind of treatments have.
I only have one pair of eyes. Glasses and contacts alleviate my sight problems adequately without doing something intrusive or irreversible. I'll stick with my glasses and contacts, thank you.
When you talk with the surgeon, make sure that your target vision is 20/15 or better.
Your eye sight will deteriorate slightly with the healing process and over time.
So if you start with 20/15 you will end up with 20/20 over time. But if you start out with 20/20 you will end up with 20/25 or worse.
Most surgeons do this anyways, but you want to talk to him/her and make sure.
Good luck.
C.A.
"Whether you suffer from Glaucoma, or you just rented the Matrix, marijuana can make things fabulous, medically!" Homer J. Simpson
My wife, who also codes for a living, claims her lasik surgery was the best money she ever spent.
Her surgery was actually performed by Dr. Dell, Michael Dell's brother at the Texan Eye Center on South Mopac in Austin.
Once she was on the table, the whole shebang took less than 10 minutes. It has been about 18 months since her operation and she's noted no ill effects.
Peter
Downsize DC Today!
I strongly recommend having the surgery done at a reputable establishment -- I had mine done at a hospital, under the care of a staff doctor. The extra $500 is worth the extra security. I also recommend one eye at a time, at least 1 week apart. That's what I did, and while it's uncomfortable, it gives you extra peace of mind.
...and you have to weight those out.
I had LASIK done about 4 months ago (from 8 diopters worth of glasses) and for the last four months I've been kicking myself that I didn't do it long ago.
Of course, long ago the procedures weren't nearly as good. I evaluated it, and felt that I was going to a competent surgeon with a proven track record, and that I was willing to chance the risk.
Now that I live without glasses, I realize that, in my risk/reward analysis, I only gave the reward side about half the credit I should have.
btw, my vision was corrected to 20/20 and 20/25 instantly, and as everything healed is down to 20/15 and 20/20 (better than with glasses).
Steve
I basically sat in this chair and focused on a little red light. They put some numbing drops in my eyes and then lowered this eyeball sized tubish thing over my eye. It basically sucked onto and grabbed hold of my eye, then a blade comes out of that to slice a thin layer of the cornea. The surgeon then lifts up that layer and the world goes super foggy....
My brother had it done. He does not regret it, but he did say that the experience can be phychologically very uncomfortable. If you are the least bit squeamish about people playing with your eyeballs with scary tools and having your head and eyes locked into one position for a duration, then forget it.
They can't put you under anesthesa (sleeping gas) because you must keep your head and eyes still, and sleeping people tend to move both. Bummer.
Table-ized A.I.
I've been wearing CIBA Vision Focus Night and Day contacts for 2 years now. You can wear them for upto 30 days constantly. I've even been swimming in the sea and swimming pools with them; without goggles - hard to type goggles and not make it google ;-).
I believe they only just got approval in the US in the last 6 months or so. I live in California and asked my optomotrist about LASIK after having worn the CIBA lenses for about a year (I got my lenses from the UK and at that time had to order the next set my mailorder from the UK as well since they weren't approved in the US). This was the first time he had heard of the CIBA lenses and said that my eyes looked like they had never worn lenses and the risk of LASIK was considerably higher than wearing these lenses for the rest of my life.
Remeber LASIK is major surgery and as always there is a risk of it going wrong.
I'm not sure if the CIBA lenses can help with the astigmatism you mentioned but it is worth asking.
I have gone back and forth over the past few years on if I should get LASIK. Although contact lenses are still a pain in the ass, lense technology has progressed enough to make wearing them pretty much worry free. I now wear lenses that I can leave in for 30 days continuously, throw them away, and replace them with a new pair.
eMelody Web Directory add your site today!
I'm a professional programmer and I just had PRK (similar, but not quite the same as lasik). I had it done 22 days ago. Here's my experience.
:).
immediately after: pain, good vision, more pain.
next three days: lots of pain, downed an entire bottle of vicodin during the first week to dull the pain. in fairness to the doctor, he did warn me that PRK was more painful than Lasik. I couldn't have Lasik because the epithelium of my eyes are too thin and besides Lasik leaves a flap in your eye that never fully heals. I'd rather deal with a few days of pain and then no flap, than less pain and a flap. Personal preference.
one week: pain gone. night vision definitely affected. starring and haze around headlights on the highway. day vision fluctuating a lot. sometimes 20/20 sometimes 20/25ish. discovered that i am now somewhat farsighted and cannot easily focus on objects that are near (~6" away). Fatigue plays a large part in how my eyes perform. When I get really tired my eyes stop behaving and I must stop what I am doing and rest.
three weeks (today): vision quite good. i believe i am corrected to 20/25 or better (still fluctuates). night vision has improved quite a bit. farsightedness effect is fading slowly. i am still on corticosteriod eye drops to fight scarring from imflammation, and the drops do affect my vision. should be off them in two weeks. doctor says my vision will continue to improve over the coming year.
bottom line: i'm glad I had the operation done. *it isn't perfect*, but then my vision with contact lenses wasn't perfect either (astigmatism wasn't corrected). *also contact lenses are not zero risk.* i've known people who've had nasty bacterial infections/scratched corneas from contact lenses and have lost vision in one eye from bad contact lense events. i feel that i was on a collision course to eventually have that happen to me. so this was preventative as much as anything.
if you want perfect vision, wear glasses. end of subject.
if you hate glasses and want freedom from them, then laser surgery is a good option.
i have faith that my vision will improve over the coming year. In six months to a year I believe my vision will be even better than it is now and it is already very close to perfect. But i won't bullshit you, the first few days after PRK were pure HELL and I did wonder if I'd just made the biggest mistake of my life. if i hadn't been so zonked on vicodin, i might have panicked. three cheers for modern pharmacology
bottom, bottom line:
I can program no problem although the damn steriod drops do cause my vision to flutuate (intraocular pressure rises when you use them). I've pulled a couple of all-nighters coding away with no problems. I don't believe laser surgery represents a significant risk to coding professionals.
best.thing.ever, 20/15 in both eyes and no regrets. BTW, my doctor said he's *never* heard of anyone going blind, and my night-vision didn't suffer either.
Stop pummeling me, it's really painful...
I hope she turned out to be as good looking as you hoped. A low pass filter does wonders for a woman's beauty and having it removed like that can be a shock!
-- SIGFPE
I'm heading into my second year after surgery. I still have 20/15 (left) 20/20 (right). I'm a developer as well, and I have no complaints. Night vision is fine (comparable to when wearing glasses...as far as 'halo's/glare goes).
Best thing I've done.
your vision is practically perfect. My left eye is -8.50, and my right is -8.00. Plus I've got a stigatism in both eyes. I don't care if it takes me away from coding for a week or two, as soon as my vision stops getting worse I'm going in for LASIK. (it's gotten worse every checkup for 12 years now)
Don't bother if your far/long sighted. In far sighted people the cornea is too flat, and the laser can't really cut away anything. In short/near sighted people the cornea is too curved, and the laser can be used to flatten it out. When I looked into having LASIK done, I was told that the results of having my (far sighted) vision corrected where typically not good, and a regression normally ocurred. Us far sighted people have it tough. Thick glasses etc. :(
I do not want discourage you but I would suggest that you excercise caution making the decision to undergo a surgery. This site is specifically devoted to the failures of LASIK. Also it has a collection of images of what a person can see if surgery fails one way or another. My own approach is that we are too dependent on our eyes for our everyday life to take such a risk.
I had a boss (newspaper publisher) who wore tremendously thick, uneven glasses (I think bifocals). He disappeared from the office for a week, and showed up the next Monday sans glasses:
"OK, before we start this week's meeting, I'd like to begin by saying, holy fucking shit, my vision is perfect. It was a scary surgery, you have to keep your eye perfectly still blah blah [outlines the whole process to us] but damnit, I can see without those fucking glasses. You have know idea what it's like for me to be able to just glance around from my computer screen to my papers out the windows without constantly adjusting the way I'm looking at everything.
"OK, the meeting. Eric, is that damned database finished yet?"
It's been about five years now, his vision still seems to be fine.
// I will show you fear in a handful of jellybeans.
"The main thing that is stopping me now is that like you, programming is my livelihood and thus I spent a major part of my day staring into the monitor. I have read that there is always a certain percentage of patients not regaining 20/20 vision but it's OK for them since most of them don't need that sharp vision during work."
You need 20/20 vision to write code? I manage to get by with 20/50 (corrected).. 20/20.. must be nice. As for glasses/contacts being too cumbersome.. I don't buy that for a second. LASIK is essentially a cosmetic proceedure since it doesn't enhance vision beyond the point of your best corrected vision. (It does slightly, sometimes.)
Here's a spoiler... You will die a lonely man.
I'd be careful about wildly comparing everythings "danger factors" with driving at rush hour. Especially eye surgery. It is morbid, but chances are high that in a car accident you either won't really have to handle the results or get over it rather quickly. In eye surgery however, you're quite unlikely to die if the surgeon hits the "disintegrate" button, but you'll probably be blind as a mole for the rest of your life. Now, I would think that most of us are at an age where it would be very difficult at least to adopt to a completely changed lifestyle, especially if your defect was rather minor beforehand (nothing really requiring glass bricks).
I don't want to say that eye surgery is a bad thing. It has its merit in repairing defects that are otherwise incorrectible. But if it's (ab)used as purely cosmetic surgery, then I think the dangers outweigh the use.
Also note that my sight is rather good (-1.0 on both eyes, with a nasty embryonal core in the left which makes me see double on this eye), and so I might be unqualified to say this. But what I know is that every kind of surgery has very real dangers and that it should be regarded as a last resort.
Fight hunger. Filet a politician and send him to a 3rd world country of your choice.
I had lasik eye surgery performed by Dr Noel Alpins at the Melbourne NewVision Clinic last January. Before the operation my prescription was -7.5 and -3.5 in my left and right eyes respectively with astigmatism in both. I now have 20/16 vision, which is better than 20/20 - I can read the lowest line on the optician's chart without straining. I can highly recommend this clinic.
The surgery takes about a minute and a half from start to finish, for both eyes. Your eye cannot feel anything during the procedure, all you have to be able to do is look at a little orange dot for about forty five seconds with each eye. After surgery, they tape plastic shields, a bit like large sun-glasses, over your eyes to prevent you from rubbing them. When you come back the next day they remove the shields and give you an eye test. You then have to take eye drops for the next fortnight or so.
Improvement in vision is immediate. The only artefact is that, at first, in situations of high contrast, such as bright lights at night or watching television in a dark room, you will observe some mild haloing (the effect is much less annoying than, say, a fingerprint smudge on your glasses.) The effect diminishes to nothing over the next four to eight weeks.
Risks: I was naturally very concerned about any risk to my eyesight. My prescription was sufficiently strong that I didn't want anything to make it worse. Dr Alpins explained to me that by having worn contact lenses for more than eighteen months (about a decade or so, in fact) I had already exposed my eyes to greater risk than would be the case for undergoing LASIK. The clinic aims to get at least 20/20 vision in each patient; they consider it a failure when somebody has to return three months later for minor corrective work to reach 20/20 (this happens in about 3% of cases, if I recall correctly.)
Finally, you can check Dr Alpins' publication list on the web and verify his claims to have invented a number of improvements to the technique over the last fifteen years that are now in use worldwide.
Going for surgery has had a marvellous effect on my life. It pays for itself every day by removing the hassle of glasses and contacts. It's especially good when you go swimming or clubbing or play sport and so forth. Magic stuff.
I have a stigmatism and fairly bad eyes. I don't think I've had 20/20 vision for years even with glasses or soft contacts. While I have trouble reading monitors and small type when programming, I don't have a huge problem. Breaks here and there pretty much offset any disadvantage.
Devin Naquin
I was nearsighted to the point where I couldnt see an inch away from me without glasses and had a stigmatism on my left eye.
:)
The day after Lasik I drove into the doc's office for the first followup and was pronounced 20/20
My next followup 30 days later I was 20/10
I have been 20/10 ever since and use computers at work and home daily.
My advice: GO FOR IT
Few things have been more satisfying then walking into the Secretary of State office, slapping my License down and saying "REMOVE THE VISION RESTRICTION!" Took their puny little test, aced it and trotted out with an updated license
I *REALLY* don't like the thought of sharp objects near my eyes. Just how do these procedures work, anyhow? I don't think I could have it done if I had to watch a sharp object cut into my eye...
Anyone care to explain how these procedures work?
Does anyone else find it ironic that the guy posing this question has the nick cyclops? If I were him, I would be very careful not to damage my lone good eye .)
All reported experiences will be positive, because those that got their eyes ruined can't read Slashdot.
Obviously you want good advice from a competent practitioner, and getting a second opinion is probably also a good idea. I'm sure the doctor can answer any questions relating to night vision concerns as well.
The question I would have is whether it has any impact on loss of depth perception. I've always thought if this process was reliable it would be good to get rid of the glasses, but now that I'm getting into the bifocal zone, I don't know that it would be as worthwhile. It would still be nice to only need reading glasses, but probably not if there was even a small risk of bad problems.
I had LASIK 2 years ago. I researched the procedure thoroughly and went to a top notch doctor (Barnett-Delaney in Phoenix). The procedure cost $4400, of which $3000 was paid for by my employer.
The procedure itself is a bit alarming but completely painless. The first week after the surgery, you feel like you've got a bit of sand in your eye. It's uncomfortable, but not painful. For the first week, you wear goggles when sleeping to avoid rubbing your eyes, which can reopen the incision in your cornea.
For the first couple of months after the procedure, I noticed a 'halo' effect around bright lights at night. Also for the first month, it was a bit difficult to get my eyes to focus for long periods on CRTs or books. For the first 6 months, my eyes were noticeably drier than usual. All issues resolved themselves completely. I now see 20/20 from both eyes with a small amount of astigmatism in the left eye. My optimal glasses-corrected vision is 20/10, so 20/20 actually took some getting used to! In other words, if I had had a completely optimal surgery, I would be seeing 20/10 right now instead of 20/20.
I'm still a software developer, and I still spend 10+ hours a day at CRTs and LCDs without any negative side effects.
The bottom line about LASIK is that it's not a sure thing. The vast majority of people get driving-quality vision (20/40) or better. If you need only a mild correction, your chances for 20/20 are even better. But things CAN and DO go wrong in a very small minority. The worst case scenario is getting an eye infection after the surgery (can blind you). You use antibiotic eyedrops for one week after the surgery to avoid infection. And of course there is always the risk of getting worse vision than you had when you started.
"The advanced societies of the future will be driven by competing systems of psychopathology." -JG Ballard
I'm not sure if you've already looked at the FDA's When is LASIK not for me? site but you'd better have a look at their suggested restrictions. Among them: your vision has not stabilzed yet and history of autoimmune diseases.
GMD
watch this
Due to the Fact that our Health Ministery moves faster tha the FDA, we have 4th generation lasers here, while in the US they have 2th Gen Lasers. I am also a computer type (Sysadmin, actually) and had the surgery in Aug 1998 with a Third Gen. Laser and can tell you this:
1.) I asked my doctor any and all things that could go wrong, no matter how slight the chance. Those include uncalibrated lases that can make the surgery worse, the blade cutting through your Iris, or simply a non successfull operation.
2.) My personal experience is that my eyes are dryer, reder, more prone to infection, and (and this is highly unnusual) I see a very big halo arround bright lights (varyes with dryness of the eyes, and has something to do with the way my tissue heals). By the way I went from 2.50 myopia one eye and 3.5 Myopia on the other with 1 of aftismatism in both eyes, to 0,25 miopia in one eye and 0,25 Hypermetropia in the other, 0 aftismatism.
3.) If I knew beforehand what would happen to me, I would have done the surgery anyway. It is great to be able to wake up in the morning and see the alarm clock without squinting (is that word correct?). To go to the beach and use real sunglases. To be able to look through the corner of your eye (babes, mostly), to see almost no blurr in the field of vision, and the way my overall apearence has got better.
For the details about your laser generation, procedure, and risks involved, ask your doctor, but is something I would recomend wholehartedly!
Sorry for the grammar!
*** Suerte a todos y Feliz dia!
Very true. Perhaps I should have clarified that my vision is terrible - ~3.75 and ~4.75 - and has slowly been getting worse all my life. In my case, the odds of coming out worse in the long run are fairly small. For someone with reasonable vision, no, gains from the surgery would not be worth the risk.
After considering it for about 3 years, I started funding my Health Care Reimbursement Account. I went to a surgeon recomended by a neighbour.
After the exam, he suggested I only get my dominant-and-worse eye done. I'm 39 and he said if I did both eyes, I would need reading glasses in about 4 years. By only doing one eye, the brain uses that one for distance and the other one for close-up.
5 minutes after the surgery, I went from 20/275 to 20/15. He said it was rare to be that good, but I'm happy!
Now 1 month later, my brain is -almost- used to how to process the signals.
At least go for the exam and talk about how the surgeon would do your eyes - every better go to at least two. Good luck!
I had the surgery this past February 1st, and was watching the Patriots beat the Rams on the 3rd with only slight cloudiness in my vision.
As your eyes heal, the blurriness goes away.
My vision was pretty bad - (-13.5 in both eyes). Now, I see 20/20 in both. I am a DBA/perl/java hack and stare at my 15' Thinkpad LCD all day with no pain or redness in my eyes.
I worried about night vision too but my night vision is now better than it ever was with contacts or glasses. No 'halos'. This has to do with your pupil size, and how the 'cut' is made on the cornea by the laser.
The whole operation takes about 5 minutes for both eyes.
Since I am *not* a surgeon (and therefore will not be taking your money/performing your surgery) please go to someone who is.
Reputable places offer a free evaluation where they can tell you whether you are likely to experience any of the undesirable side effects.
Then you can make an informed decision.
I would get the most experienced surgeon you can find. Mine had done several thousand of these operations.
Good luck.
I went to The Laser Center in Houston, TX to have the LASIK procedure performed. It worked like a charm. I now have 20/15 vision and am never encumbered by those damn glasses. I highly recommend that you get it done.
There is one down side, though. Low light vision does suffer a little after the procedure. To me it seems like there are little halos around every light source.
Good luck to you, what ever you decide.
"Perl 6 will give you the big knob." -Larry Wall
None of the corrective surgeries available are approved for any class of aviation medical certificate.
This means if you have it done, you can *never* get a pilot's licence. If you currently have a licence, your medical certificate will not be renewed.
I was like -4.00 and -3.75.
Can someone explain what the numbers mean? Everyone seems to be saying their 2 numbers and my prescription has 6 numbers on the card...
He'll end up getting the high-tone, pimple-faced kid from the Simpsons.
"Uh-oh, Dr. Smith, I did it again."
Finally, math books without any of that base 6 crap in them.
Here is a detailed account of LASIK gone wrong, with a reference to a publication about shrinking optical zones due to LASIK: http://www.lasikdisaster.com/hugepupils.htm
An additional drawback to LASIK is the possibility of your cornea's epithelial layer flap (the area peeled down during surgery) coming loose upon impact.
no_sig
I'm from 5.0 diopters to 20/15 in both eyes. I've seen a couple of comments about the quality of the doctors, and couldn't agree more. My doctor told me that I would be taken through a number of tests, and told if I qualify. They can check for possible future night vision problems, or other complications. Ask for details on the number of patients they have rejected for the procedure.
OTOH - eye surgery is always getting better. It's like a calculator - you'll buy it when you need it, but the next model is always better...
Good luck.
But you would probably let someone who isn't a "real doctor" snip your foreskin off.
Good heavens Miss Sakamoto - you're beautiful!
That's the kind of downside risk you never hear about - HMMMM thanks !!!!
My cousin went to the most reputable surgeon in the city and things still turned out bad. After a half dozen corrective surgeries he still cannot work or drive - big lawsuit pending.
The risks with LASIK are small but real and need to be considered along with the advantages.
My programming text editor is still Wordstar in a DOS box. Full Screen.
"Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
I lost any hopes of getting LASIK done when I was watching a commercial for a local laser eye company. When they showed their "high tech" operating environment it had windows 98 running on the computer next to the chair/bed. Scared the jebus out of me.
I heard about this from a friend of mine at church. Apparently, it's sort of like "retainers for your eyes" in that you wear these contacts when you go to bed, take them out in the morning and you have perfect vision for the rest of the day!
No surgery involved and you can stop wearing them if it doesn't work out, so it's totally reversible and a non-permanent solution.
A google for Accelerated OrthoKeratology brings up a lot of info.
I definitely recommend taking a look into this!
I've seen a lot of posts with third (or more) person stories. I'm not sure how helpful that really is to perspective patients. This is a potentially serious procedure when you consider that you may end up worse than you started so it's probably best to talk to people who *gasp* have actually been through it themselves!
I started with a -12.5 myopia in my right eye and -11 in my left. I decided to have one eye done at a time (against the Dr's advice that I should 'get it over with at the same time'). I did the right eye as it was in worse shape with PRK (Lasik was too new at the time, about 6 or 7 years ago). It needed to be 'touched-up' twice more with PRK and then finally with Lasik. The Lasik was so much better in terms of lack of pain and speed of recovery.
I'm still not at 20/20. My eye Dr. disagrees in that I *can* read the 20/20 line but I have to struggle - that's not 20/20 to me. When I hit somebody crossing the street at night in the rain because I had to squint and double-check to see them I'll let him know that I think I'm still off a bit. I 'feel' like I'm at 20/30 or 20/35, a fra cry from the 20/1000 I started at (seriously), but you have to consider the fact that I was seeing an amazaing 20/15 with contacts before the surgery.
So, since I can no longer wear contacts, according to my Dr., I techincally have *worse vision* after the procedures than before I started. Yes, I can wear glasses and probably get back to 20/20 but I could have saved myself the money and 4 surgeries and did that in the first place.
I'm not complaining because it's great to wake up at night and actually be able to read the alarm clock or walk to the bathroom without fumbling around like an idiot, but this is something consider for those of you with very high prescriptions - it may take multiple procedures and after 3 or 4 you can't do it anymore (no more corneal thickness left to safely do it again).
Perhaps the technology has improved since my last procedure (about 3 years ago) but I'm sure the risk is still there that you will not have the same clarity as pre-procedure corrective lens vision.
As a computer science graduate student, I need to do a fair amount of coding myself. I have awful eyes and considered Lasik at one point. My final determination was as follows: With contact lenses I get a minor irritation (5 minutes) to take them out every day, and every now and then they need an eye drop or two to prevent dryness from staring at the monitors. As for Lasik, the loss of night vision alone seems worse than either of these two things, and there's always the oops factor. A mistake with my contacts will cost me 50 bucks to replaces while a Lasik mistake (rubbing your eyes the night after or a hungover tech) could last the rest of my life. The risks far outweigh the benefits, particularly since you have the who knows what happens in 10 years queston.
US Department of Transportation: Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR)
Subpart B - First-Class Airman Medical Certificate
67.103 Eye.
Eye standards for a first-class airman medical certificate are:
(a) Distant visual acuity of 20/20 or better in each eye separately, with or without corrective lenses. If corrective lenses (spectacles or contact lenses) are necessary for 20/20 vision, the person may be elegible only on the condition that corrective lenses are worn while excercising the privileges of an airman certificate.
(b) Near vision of 20/40 or better, Snellen equivalent, at 16 inches in each eye separately, with or without corrective lenses (&etc..)
(c) Ability to percieve those colors necessary for the safe performance of airman duties
(d) Normal fields of vision.
(e) No acute or chronic pathological condition of either eye or adnexa that interferes with the proper function of an eye, that may reasonably be expected to progress to that degree, or that may reasonably be expected to be aggravated by flying.
(f) Bifoveal fixation and vergence-phoria relationship sufficent to prevent a break in fusion under conditions that may reasonably be expected to occur in performing airman duties. Tests for the factors named in this paragraph are not required (&etc..)
-----
No mention in the entire FAR section, or in the Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM) about having had surgery in the past. If you pass the tests, then you can get your medical. If you get your medical, then you meet the qualifications.
If you are flying under a First Class medical certificate (Part 135 Regs) for an air-carrier, then you have to have your medical retested every 6 months anyway, so any degredation would hopefully disqualify you for a 1st class medical before it became dangerous.
A third class medical (for General Aviation flying, for instance) is even more forgiving that that.
If anyone knows of any documented reference against LASIK by the FAA, then let me know. I'd be interested to know where they keep undocumented medical rules like that. (Seriously.)
- PM
an aunt optometrist who does lasik, an uncle optometrist who works in the hospital, and another uncle who is a hotshot prof. of optometry. relatives w/ lasik.... zero
;-)
besides. crappy vision is a great excuse for xray specs at the beach
As always, asking here is fairly silly if you are looking for anything other than anecdotal evidence (though I know you said that was OK).
.00001% risk? Some of these risks however come from incompitent doctors, dirty or misaligned tools, and unkempt lasers. So again, I highly recommend doing your area research on doctors and facilities before jumping into the surgery.
However, here are some suggestions.
You've already checked out and presumably read the FDA site... good first start. I recommend spending another month or two reading up on the technology, especially where it concerns other people with similar vision.
You get what you pay for: If you want those 199.95USD eyes, then by all means, goto the cheapest surgeon in town. Otherwise, talk to area optometrists and cross-correlate their suggestions. Prices I hear from the cross-correlated docs in my area tends to be about approx 3000-5000USD.
Once you have a surgeon or three in mind, goto their offices, ask for their statistics. If they wont tell you a) how many surgeries they've done b) the results (probably statistically lumped) over the past few years, you probably don't want to use them.
Re: halo'ing. For one thing occurs in a fairly small number of people (check the FDA and LASIK group sites for this year's stats) and for most fades over time. Most people who DO experience halo'ing already had halo issue pre-surgery. Look at the numbers at 6, 12 and 18 months, instead of the immediate results.
Re:20/20. "not _regaining_ 20/20"?? 20/20 combined eyesight in new surgeries is not hovering between 99-97% of all surgeries. Note: this is combined vision, not individual eyes. people tend to see better combined than they do per-eye.
Re:abberation issues (from other postings). A large number of people now are getting surgery done by lasers that ablate the surface of the cornea out further than before 8-9mm IIRC, where the max distance used to be 5-6 depending on the lasers.
There is also a new method that is having better returns called 'Thin Flap Lasik' and you should look into whether or not it fits your risk profile.
There ARE risks. All surgery does. You have to figure out what level of risk you're willing to take, is 1-3% OK for you, or do you want a
Re: the horror stories. Keep in mind horror stories make the best news, so instead of gathering anecdotal evidence, look at the real results of the doctors and facilities you're thinking of using and being honest about them about your concerns.
Honestly, you sound like you need a little while longer to chew through things. Take some time. The procedures will only get better, and the options will only expand. It's taken me 4 years to decide to get the surgery once I have the proper funds, and in that time the percents for my range have dropped from 6% to 2-3% non-"perfect" numbers. Though thenumber for error seems to maintain at the 1-2% value.
As several other posters have commented, there are some real risks to LASIK. They may be rare, and you can dramatically lower your risks by paying a few more bucks to go to the guy who handles the people messed up by cheaper places. Also, you can improve your odds by wearing glasses for a couple weeks longer than required during the pre-op period - let your eyes get back to their natural shape.
However, I made my decision based on the risks associated with not having the surgery. My vision was bad enough that glasses weren't really an option because of the weight. The pre-op period was a nightmare. Without glasses, I was legally blind and outside of known environments functionally blind.
When I looked at the big picture - the increased risk of injury or even death because of blindness without glasses, the fact that I was largely incapacitated if I was unable to wear contacts for some reason, etc., I went ahead with the surgery.
Overall, I'm fairly happy with the results. I'm starting to have some problems reading very fine print (e.g., doing 2-up code listings), but I'm sure that's related to the fact I'm over 40, not because of the surgery. (In fact, I still have unusually good close vision for my age.) I seem to have more floaters than before, but that may just be my imagination since exams show nothing unusual.
And as others have pointed out, my night vision has gone to hell. But it took me months to figure this out, since it's so hard to find darkness in an urban environment. When I'm driving, the lights from my car's headlights or even a full moon (e.g., during a recent night-time drive across Wyoming and Utah) is enough to keep my vision in the corrected region.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
I've already replied to this thread, so I can't mod this idiot to troll. Will someone please do the honors? I can't believe he got to 3!
Good heavens Miss Sakamoto - you're beautiful!
Too lazy to log in:)
My LASIK Experience
I had LASIK done on January 3rd of this year. I wore thick glasses for twenty years. My vision before the surgery was 20/400+ (the doctor said "We don't have a measurement for you on this chart) or somewhere in the neighborhood of -10 or -11. In other words, I was pretty darn blind. Glasses were a pain in the rear since I also participate in a lot of sports on top of staring at a computer for 10 - 15 hours a day (9 hours at work, plus more at home).
Here's my results : Left Eye - 20/25, Right Eye - 20/20. Outdoors in natural light, I am extremely happy and see very crisp and clear. However, sunlight is brighter now and I have to wear polarized sunglasses if I plan on not running my car into something. I'm okay with that. At night, well, that ain't so grand. I see some pretty good starbursts and halos around objects. My wife drives whenever possible but if it's not raining at night, I can drive. Haven't tried to take my telescope out and do any stargazing since the surgery thought.
For the first few weeks after the surgery, I had to wear reading glasses and I had horrible headaches. I chalked this up to the fact that my brain was used to being able to see up close, but not far. Now it was reversed and I think it freaked out. After about three weeks, the headaches diminished and my up close vision became much, much better. According to my doctor, this happen because they 'over-correct' you and the eye takes a bit of time to heal back. My eyes do tend to get 'tired' near the end of a day if I've used them heavily.
My advice? Go into LASIK knowing the benefits and risks. Know that you can have halos. Know that your night vision might be blown to hell. Visit those sites that say "No" to LASIK and visit those ones that say "Yes" to LASIK. Go in for a VERY complete examination and have a list of questions available for your doctor. If you are not satisifed with their work (i.e. - Five minutes after looking into your eyes he says "Sure, you're perfect!"), get a second opinion elsewhere. My first exam took 45 minutes, my second took 2 hours. Don't go somewhere cheap.
If you are not willing to go into LASIK and be able to walk out after that surgery blaming no one for any problems, then LASIK is not for you.
I won't go into the risks of having LASIK or PRK done, as I'm sure the other thousands of positively and negatively biased replies here should cover that.
But.. If you get LASIK now and if it gives you 20/20 vision, what happens when you go back to work and continue staring at that monitor again? I think in your case, it might only be temporary as you continue to use a computer for long periods.
Remember that when you're in those marathon coding sessions, you are focusing on one fixed point for hours on end. Also, as studies have found, your blink rate decreases dramatically so your eyes aren't moisturized as well as they should be.
My advice would be this: Think very hard and read as much as you can about it.. And figure out what habits you need to change to avoid future eye-strain.
-Major Kusanagi, Section 9
Definitely shop for a doctor. Interrogate them as to how many patients they've handled with your similar circumstances, and what the outcomes were.
How many of them needed a followup adjustment?
How many had flap complications?
Will you yourself be performing the surgery, or will it be a trainee, under your instruction?
I considered price very last in my rating scheme. I wound up in NYC, and don't regret it at all. I couldn't identify a member of my family across a large room, and now I'm 20/20 , even better in one eye.
Programming is no prob. You can still use a special prescription to combat any eye strain.
I would caution that the recovery to full vision for programming purposes is really about two months, rather than the two weeks they suggest.
Be patient, and It'll be there.
- Freddy
I know five people who've had Lasik within the past three years. Three of them had great procedures and outcomes, and are very happy that they did it.
One person had a procedural problem where the microkeratome damaged the corneal flap while it was cutting it. This person was out of commission for several weeks, under strict order not to use her eyes for anything but basic life functions. No reading, no TV, no driving. As she said, "thanks goodness for books on tape." The outcome once she got past this problem was fine -- even though she's not happy with the procecure itself, she's very happy with the outcome.
The last anecdote is my sister, who is now blind in one eye after a rare (but not rare enough) complication called Diffuse Lamellar Keratitis, knows colloquially as DLK or as Sands of Sahara. The cause is foreign matter that is introduced between the flap and the underlying tissue during the procedure. This matter is sterile, so this isn't an infection. One of the dangers is that it's often mistaken for an infection and treated as such. This is critical, because time is your enemy if you have DLK. The cornea attacks the foreign matter, essentially destroying itself in the process, if not caught early enough. Most people come out of DLK just fine, as long as it's caught early. If your doctor doesn't know about DLK, turn around and leave.
I realize my anecdotes aren't a scientific sampling, but if you're contemplating this surgery, I urge you to get familiar with the possible side-effects, common and rare. Almost everything we do in life has potential downsides -- but realize that this surgey is 100% elective, not a treatment for a life-threatening illness.
Read as much as you can about side-effects: if some of them don't scare you, you're going into this procedure blind, and you may end up going out of it blind as well. As much as the local Corneas-r-Us tells you in their radio ads that this procedure is simple and takes only a few minutes, complication rates (according to my eye doc of 13 years) are still around 1% (I'm not clear on whether that means 1% for each eye, or 1% for each person). It's still not clear what, if any, are the long-term sideeffects.
Don't get me wrong: Lasik is a wonderful thing when it succeeds, as it does the vast majority of the time. As long as you're comfortable with the risks, the reward is pretty cool.
Canadas doctors have been doing it longer.. 10 years actually.. they have the newest equipment and their doctors are the doctors that train many of the other top doctors in other countries. The night vision is hardly a problem anymore with the new B&L laster due to the increased prodecure area on the eye. Above all else, it costs less. Im getting this done after knowing someone who recently went there and did this. He was close to legally blind in both eyes and now has 20/20 in 1 eye and in the worst eye, is now 20/30.
hey,
I had bad vision, large pupils, and an astygmatism. Had the surgery done last Christmas for $5000 total by one of the leading surgeons in the NYC area (Ken Moadel - highly recommended). I had great results.
1) Talk with an optometrist you can trust - preferably one that acts as your advocate, and not a salesman for the surgeon. They should measure your dialated pupil width in low light, in addition to other vision tests.
2) Don't walk, but run from any surgeon offering the service for less than $1000 an eye. It will most likely be a processing line rather than a professional surgery. Oh, and I've heard radio ads that promise 100% success results - only to define success at the end of the ad as 20/40 or better. I wouldn't let those surgeons near my eyes if you paid me a million bucks.
3) If your pupils are large in low-light situations, you will need to use one of the newest lasers available - which operates on a larger area of the cornea (up to 10 mm).
4) Astygmnatisms can be easily corrected with the newest lasers and mapping technologies (they take a topical relief map of your cornea to make know where and how much corneal tissue to burn off with the laser).
5) Most Flexible Spending Accounts (FSA's are usually part of your health benefits package) can now be used on the surgery. If the FSA limit doesn't cover the whole surgery - get the surgery at Christmas time, where the surgeon's billing staff can get creative, and bill you one half in 2002, and the other in 2003. (This is widely practiced, and most offices are very accomodating.)
6) The better surgeons will not try to over shoot the perfect vision mark for your eyes. If they get you at 20/40, they just use the same incision and do a light adjustment.
Good luck!
~ R
I can't speak for LASIK, but I had PRK surgery about 5 months ago (My cornea was a little too thin for LASIK). I work 8-10 hours a day in a callcenter where I have to look at a computer screen all the time. I am also a student so spend a lot of additional time looking at computer screens working on various papers and projects. My eyes sometimes get a little tired, and I have minor halos around lights when looking driving, but they are rather small. After about 2 weeks, when recovery was basically complete and everything was healed, I had no problems looking at a computer screen. After 1 week my eyes got tired a little bit quicker but I could still function to do my job. I have had no problems.
... which type is best for you must be decided by you and your doctor. Definitely look into PRK over LASIK. It was definitely a relief when I had this done to not wear contacts or glasses and always be able to see. I also see at 20/16 in both eyes now. This is slightly worse than what I saw with contacts (20/12) but not enough to harm me ... still better than 20/20.
On a slight side note, I would recommend PRK over LASIK in many ways. The laser for this is the same and it has exactly the same success rate, the only difference is that the initial recovery problem is a little longer and there is increased discomfort, but for me at least it wasn't all that bad. The advantage to this corrective surgery is that there is not a corneal flap cut so there is no chance for the flap to be dislodged later. Once the membrane over the corneal membrane has finished healing (2-3 weeks) your eyes are just as strong and resistant to damage as before.
Basically I highly recommend corrective surgery of some sort
Perhaps I should have clarified that my vision is terrible - ~3.75 and ~4.75M
At the risk of sounding the the old geezer rant...
I wish I had -3.75/-4.75 eyes. I'm a at -7.5 in one eye and -6.5 in the other.
Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
This class is usually referred to as 'elective surgery'.
Spin? Euphemism? I defer analysis.
On the plus side, surgery done properly DOES do a better job of correcting astigmatism than corrective lenses. If you are only astigmatic in one eye, consider having only that one eye done. RK 10 years after took my good eye and made it extremely farsighted and astigmatic, while it took my bad eye and fixed most of the astigmatism and made it only slightly farsighted. (Before RK both eyes were severly nearsighted.) If I had it to do over again, I'd only have one eye done.
One more thing: go to ALL your scheduled follow-up doctor visits!
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
Actually, most mohels are doctors who just moonlight as foreskin-snippers. It's one of the benefits of Jewish mothers pushing so many sons into doctoring.
As far as working on the computer, she wears her glasses, and she feels okay with it.
What it boils down to is: your mileage may vary. Bear in mind that you might not feel that you can get as good as your corrected vision back even with glasses, and that would be my concern if I was considering it. And if you're pushing 40, you're not going to be without glasses for long before presbyopia kicks in anyway.
Is this thing on? Hello?
Homer said it best:
"Less yappin more zappin!"
Oh, and watch out for those "add-ons"!
# Erik
During and before the surgery, she told me later she felt extremely shakey and not properly cared-for (this despite having some kind of mild sedative). The surgery did not go well. Her vision was not as good as it was before the surgery, and she still had to wear glasses. She also gained severe night vision problems, which made it dangerous for night driving (she stopped driving at night once she realised this). She was obviously very disappointed with this outcome, and Optimax suggested a retreatment (or 'Correction'). Erm, no, guys. You don't get a second try at this kind of thing. And I don't think my girlfriend is alone in her bad experience with Optimax.
She then visited Moorfields Eye Hospital (also London) and had an assessment with a view to joining the 'Wavefront' clinical trial they were carrying out.
Wavefront is a LASIK-like procedure, but instead of uniformly burning the front of the eye (hey, I'm not that technical, this isn't entirely correct), they shine the laser through a custom lens which is 'made to fit' the incorrect contours of your eye, and/or to fix the bad optics.
She had each eye done seperately (only one eye was included on the trial though, so she did have to pay for the other). She had her right done in June, and this went awesomely. I think she now has 20/15 vision (erm, or that 15/20? Eitherway, its meant better than 20/20). She had her left eye done in August, and on Thursday of this week she's going back for her 1 month checkup. This eye also went well. This is more than great, because in the procedure the surgeon had to perform a 'flap lift' whereby the literally lift the flap cut in the original surgery. Gah! I'm squeemish.
So, her vision is good. Night vision is useable, but I think she still has haloes and ghosting occaisionally.
My (layperson) advice would be, don't do it yet, wait for Wavefront to become mainstream. That is, if you can wait. If you can't, find a surgeon who you get along with, makes you feel at ease and keeps you informed. Remember, the surgeon does the surgery, not the flashy waiting area and graduate receptionists.
And, don't, whatever you do, go ahead if you ain't sure.
I work in a medium sized hospital in Canada, one things I have noticed is that one of the opthalmologists here who performs and advocates LASIK wears glasses, of course that might be that he isn't a candidate himself. But I did mention to another opthalmologist (different hospital) who is wary of the procedure and he told me he knows many opthalmologists who could have it done but won't, and some of them perform the procedures. The fact that many of the practitioners won't do it bothers me to no end, I wonder how many plastic surgeons who get botox injections.
I got LASIK in January of 2001. I have to tell you that it's the best money I've ever spent in my life. It took a whopping 90 seconds to do both eyes. The best part about the procedure was when I rolled over in the middle of the night and could read the clock on the nightstand. :-D
I spend 8-10 hours / day in front of the computer and I've had no problems whatsoever. The first week was a little fuzzy but my eyes healed right up.
All of the mentioned side effects like night blindness and Flanders' disease (eyes falling out) are pretty rare.
The only advice that I'd give you is to make sure that the doctor / clinic you want to go to is at least reputable. See if you can talk to people about their experiences and get their point of view.
Hell is other people's Perl. -- Linux Journal - Dec. 2000
[N.B. This is pure uninformed speculation based on my personal experiences]
I found that when I started working full time as a programmer, my shortsightedness started getting worse very quickly.
I reframed an old pair of (weaker) spectacles to use with the computer i.e. made some "reading glasses" (although, being -8.0 in both eyes meant that these were also short-sightedness spectacles; I can't read without my specs and I'm SHORT-sighted!)
My eyesight has stabilised and improved a little bit since doing this.
My theory is that our eyes evolved by looking at far away things, and that they're not suited to staring at an object only a meter away all day.
ISBM
ISBN
"If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he's sorely mistaken." Bush on bin Laden
I was considering Lasik but gave up on the idea after reading this . Basically, even with glasses my vision is too valuable to take such risks.
Dr. Mancie at Stanford, trained by the folks who made the machine. Interesting, my dad's a laser engineer, consulted with opitical surgeons for years, talked me out of earlier procedures (radial kar) 'cause the surgeons were still wearing their coke bottles.
Anyway, the folks he was working with started getting the lasik procedure done, so I went for it in june 3 years back, and it's been great, 20/20, since then. Dr. Mancie did it in one operation, went from really bad vision to 20/20 in one day, pretty cool. I spend about 6-7 hours a day doing multimedia programming, and if anything my eyes are much better for looking at a screen than they were with glasses or contacts, no blurryness, dryness headaches, no problem.
My GF had it done from a traveling Dr. 1 year ago, apparently the machines can get de-calibrated when moved, she had to go back for a second procedure, and still not quite there. So I'd recommend paying more for an established Dr. with a real (non-mobile) lab set up and plenty of experience (& references), myself.
I'd go for it, but there are even less invasive procedures coming, so if you are young and not too bothered by corrective lenses, you might want to look at some of these.
But YMMV. Good luck!
mmmm...maybe he's not a troll after all. People with something to say shouldn't post as AC's...
My brother has the op done about 18 months ago, and he swears by it.
Initially, he would get flashes of light during the night (or when it was dark), but that went within a month or two.
Problem is, he keeps bugging me to get it done. But I predmoninatley use computers (wheras he is a DJ), and my vision is far worse (about -5.0 in both eyes, plus astigmatism)... not only that but my level of shortsightedness is still getting worse and hasn't leveled off.
Plus, when you get to your 40's don't your eyes start becoming more long sighted?
If it wasn't for the astigmatism, then I could use contacts on a more regular basis. Because I have to use toric lenses, there is less oxygen getting to the eyes... so there goes being able to use the 1 month lenses which you don't have to take out. And the availability of coloured toric isn't as popular (and mucho expensive).
Are you local? There's nothing for you here!
Had a couple of my employees try this.
After wandering around for a few weeks bumping into things, they gave up.
Anyone ever get these excercises to actually go from bad vision (say 20/400) to 20/20?
http://faculty.washington.edu/vismatt/eyeknowwhy/
Do a search on the web for "eye know why" for more information about laser vision correction procedures and related complications. The bottom line is that the decision to go through this procedure is a very personal choice based on your own needs. Make sure you weigh both sides before choosing either. For me, simply being rid of glasses and contacts is not suffient to justify the risks associated. (For the record, I am effectively sightless without glasses). Until there is an effective way to recover from serious complication, I am personally unwilling to leave to chance something so vital.
I've been thinking of getting this procedure done as well, but haven't looked into too much. What's a typical cost range for having this done?
Quoth one silly person: Perhaps I should have clarified that my vision is terrible - ~3.75 and ~4.75M
:-)
And another: At the risk of sounding the the old geezer rant...
I wish I had -3.75/-4.75 eyes. I'm a at -7.5 in one eye and -6.5 in the other.
My eyesight was -8.75 and -9.0 before I had laser surgery done. It was well worth it for me -- but then again, the worse you start off, the less you have to lose, really.
Neither of you are that badly off -- the worse eyesight I heard of was my friend Sarah, who had -11.0 in one of her eyes, but who somehow managed rather well with contacts.
And bad eyesight doesn't make one a geezer: the fact that I'm turning into one is independant of that.
--
AC
As a software developer, I had similar doubts about the surgery. I finally decided to go ahead and get it done about 4 months ago.
The first few days were hard and I had to take the time off. Most doctors will say it's an in-and-out procedure where you can go to work the next day. I think this is true for most professions, but not for staring at a computer screen 8 hours a day. I took 2 days off from work and when I returned, things were still a bit blurry and I was sitting around 20/30 vision. Over the course of the next week, things slowly got better and by the end of a month I was at 20/25. This was a fantastic improvement for me, going from around 20/300, but things continue to improve. Right now, about 4 months later, I'm at around 20/22, and by the end of the year I should be at 20/20.
My advice for you is to go ahead and get it done if you can. Make sure it's done by a professional, local surgeon so that if you have any problems you can easily get in and not worry about travelling back up to Canada (or anywhere else they do it dirt-cheap) or something.
Best of luck.
I had the procedure done on my left eye a few years ago. All I can say is thank God I didn't do both eyes.
Before surgery, both eyes were correctable to 20/20 with contacts. Annoying but bearable.
Now, my left eye is slightly overcorrected (far sighted) and has irregular astigmatism. Basically, I can see double out of my left eye, with my right eye closed.
It is difficult to read small text on a computer monitor with that eye only. Luckily, my right eye is dominant. If I had done both eyes and they both messed up, I would be in trouble.
So, yes, 95%+ people have a great experience, are doing cartwheels of joy down the aisles. Good for them. 1 out of 20 of us do not have a good experience. Think about that before you let them perform an irreversible procedure to your eye.
Yes, I went to an experienced surgeon, name brand laser, etc., etc.
Beyond that, if you are nearsighted and don't suffer from stress-related vision problems, there is no way to "improve" your eyesight through eye exercises; eyes just aren't built that way. Most likely, the "improvements" you are seeing are the onset of presbyopia. Moving monitors further and further away is a common way of dealing with it. Most people get reading glasses when they reach the limits of their desk--it's more convenient. And, no, there is nothing to be done about presbyopia--everybody gets it sooner or later. Some people are just more willing to tolerate inconveniences for vanity--that's the only reason you don't see everybody over 50 running around with reading glasses.
I've seen a ton of people asking about/posting
y .htm
h tml
about the See Clearly Method. It borders on
complete fraud. Here is some information
derived from a quick google search.
First, from their own disclaimer on their own
page:
"The See Clearly Method (tm) is an educational tool that teaches the user how to see more clearly, comfortably, and efficiently. It is not a medical or assistive device, nor is it a substitute for diagnosis or treatment by an optometrist or ophthalmologist."
This from http://www.allaboutvision.com/buysmart/see_clearl
"The instruction manual recommends personal affirmations to help you along. You might remind yourself, for example, "I am seeing better each day." If you're having any doubts, you might declare, "I can see without my glasses." For a vaguer standard of success, you could simply say, "I feel positive changes in my vision taking place.""
This from: http://www.fhradio.org/fm/archives/2003/2610(FM).
"The plain truth is that there is no scientific evidence that the "See Clearly Method" can actually improve your eyesight. Dr. Michael Earley, chief of the Binocular Vision Clinic at Ohio State University, has studied the "See Clearly Method" extensively. This professor of optometry -- from our sister institution in Columbus -- didn't mince words when he told a Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reporter last December about his conversation with a "See Clearly" representative: "Everything the . . . representative said was absolutely wrong. He gave me facts on the eye muscle pulling on the lens and that is absolutely backward. He was absolutely anatomically and physiologically wrong on everything he said.""
The long and the short of it is, they have paid
a considerable amount of money to have in house
testing done that says it works. Dubious sources,
no doubt paid by them, talk about how great it is.
The rest of the Opthamological world thinks they
are snake oil salesmen. You can find a ton of
people in news groups complaining that it does
not work, and they had trouble getting their
money back. I'm wondering if they'll have any
legal liability the first time someone is
driving and chanting "I feel positive changes
in my vision taking place" when they run
someone's kid over. I hope this helps.
The most important thing any republican needs to know.
Ever notice your opthamologist or optometrist wears glasses or contacts? Ask why HE never had it done. My optometrist gets more business from patients post-LASIK than from before.
When they can clone me a new eyeball and graft it to my optic nerve with 100% reliability, then I may go for it. Until then I'll stick with my crappy -8.5 and astigmatisms.
-----------------------
To understand recursion, one must first understand recursion.
In any event, the main difference between PRK and Lasik is that with PRK they don't slice your eyeball. No mechanical blade is used at all, it is entirely done by the Excemer laser.
This can prevent many of the nightmares associated with LASIK and long-term damage to the eye. Though I cannot speak for everyone, I personally have extremely good night vision with no flaring of lights at all. Additionally it was able to correct 4 diopter myopia to better than 20/20. My vision is actually closer to 20/10.
Not bad for someone who previous to the surgery couldn't read the dashboard of a car while sitting in the drivers seat without glasses!
Of course that is just my opinion, YMMV.
If anyone is interested in the surgery and lives in the Ottawa area I would recommend Dr. Denis Conrad - fantastic surgeon!
Laser MedCare (LMC)
o Dr. Dennis R. Conrad, M.D., F.R.C.S.(C.)
o 2430-6, Bank Street
o Ottawa (Ontario)
"They do not preach that their god will rouse them, a little before the Nuts work loose." Kipling, 'The Sons of Martha'
One of the biggest problems with LASIK is that there are currently no long-term studies on the effects of laser correction. We have great data from the first few years after the surgery, but we know almost nothing about what happens to these people as they age. The longest anyone has had laser surgery is still around 10 years. So, while you may have the information to make an informed decision for the next decade (trading peripheral and night vision for greater acuity and a small chance of eyesight damage), you have *no* idea what your vision will be like after that.
In the realm of what's new since 2000, wavefront adaptive optics correction for LASIK is now commercially available: www.allaboutvision.com/waveprint/waveprint_lasik.h tm. There is also a new method of removing the corneal flap using femtosecond pulse lasers (thus, no blade involved), but results are essentially the same. Wavefront AO (aka "Super Vision") is yielding results that are typically 100% 20/20, and usually (80%+) 20/15. This is approaching the expected human vision diffraction limit (believed to be around 20/8).
Suggesting an 'unbiased professional' seems to suggest you are considering only professional eyecare practitioners. Taking this as given, we next follow the implication that, as professional practitioners, they have a practice.
The next implication is that as a professional eyecare practice, every such practice will either offer laser surgery or it will not.
We will take your assumption that offering laser surgery implies a bias toward selling that service. We will also take the converse: that if that if laser surgery is not offered by the practice, there will be a bias toward not recommending laser surgery.
Finally, we arrive at the implication that all professionals work in practices which either offer laser surgery or they do not. Therefore we are forced to the conclusion that there are no unbiased professionals.
three points for a one line description of the only potential logical fallacy in the implication chain.
Oh, I wish I had sight that good. I don't have my Rx handy, but I've lost all sight in the old left eye. Didn't really need that periph. vision or depth perception anyway. And I have glasses that are about an inch thick (used to be 1 1/2, good 'ole technology). No chance of even getting a driver's license. Ahhh, what it would be like to see....
I had LASIK performed in June. It was like magic. You wake up the next morning and you can see perfectly. I had 20/20 vision in my left eye and 20/25 in the right the next day.
The surgery only takes about 20 minutes. I was a little disconcerted to get a whiff of vaporizing eye balls. I would say burning but my surgeon corrected me saying that they were actually vaporizing. They are very particular about their language. They have a little shop vac thing to suck up the smoke but it obviously didn't get it all.
I am now 20/15 in the left and 20/20 in the right. I have not had any problems and the flaps have healed to the point where my optometrist says that another doctor who did not know I had the surgery would probably not notice it.
I actually find that coding and reading are easier than before. I used to have a problem with headaches after long sessions in front of the computer. That has pretty much gone away. The laser corrects your vision more precisely than off-the-shelf lenses ever could.
They have refined the flap cutting techniques to minimize the halo effect that so many people complain about. I find that I only have trouble when my eyes are dry. Eye drops take care of that.
I chose my surgeon pretty carefully. He has performed over 7000 corrective surgeries since '95. His first patient does not need glasses to this day. He has trained many doctors to do the surgery and also does a lot of research in the area. He is a really sharp guy with a lot of practical experience.
I think that most complications from the surgery arise from the cutting of the flap. This seems to be the place where an experienced surgeon makes the biggest difference. I paid top dollar for the most experienced and qualified doctor that I could find.
In the end you just have to make the decision. I have been wearing contacts for over 20 years. That takes its toll on your eyes. I was starting to get some vascular growth in my cornea caused by such long contact use. My vision used to be so poor that even the newer lightweight lenses my glasses would leave dents in my nose after a few days of wearing them. I had to wear my glasses for a few weeks prior to the LASIK surgery and I thought that I was going to go nuts. I'm pretty active. I run, work out, surf, jet ski, etc. Glasses and contacts have always been a pain. LASIK has literally changed my life in that respect.
I saw that some people suggested getting one eye done at a time. Realize that you will have to wear your glasses with one lens between surgeries. I went ahead and had both done. Most people do. The probability of both of your eyes falling out is relatively small.
I would do it again in a second.
I had mine done in June and I'm quite satisfied with the results. My eyes were about as bad as yours, -5.50 in one eye and -5.25 in the other or so, but I don't have any astigmatism. Now, nearly four months after the surgery, I'm slightly far-sighted. The doctors seem to think this will correct over time and my vision will settle down to 20/20, but I'm VERY happy with it even as it is right now!
I've been really looking for that halo effect at night; I'd done my anti-Lasik research and was well aware of the risks. But since the surgery, every time I've pointed out halos to other family members (who've always had good vision), they see them as well -- so it's probably just a matter of not having noticed them before. IF there's been any increase in halo, glare, etc., it must be really slight.
The far-sightedness I'm experiencing is very minor - I can read maps, my watch, books, etc., but I do have to hold a book further from my eyes than I used to before the surgery, and I do notice that reading books tires my eyes more now than it did before. If the far-sightedness corrects as they expect it will, this will go away. If it doesn't, I'm at that age where people start to need reading glasses anyway, so it wouldn't be a big lifestyle change.
But you were especially concerned about computer use. So was I! I'm on the computer most of the day. Web browsing is a big part of my life and I would've been crushed if I'd had to give it up. I'm happy to report I'm on the computer 12 to 16 hours a day, and it doesn't bother me in the least. I haven't had to increase the font size on my screen or cut down my computer use a bit. That's not to say it will be that way for you -- that's why you have to really weigh the pros and cons before you make up your mind.
Like any other elective surgery, you always have to weigh the risks. Do all the research you can, ask as many questions of as many people as you can -- just like you're doing. Most important of all, make sure you don't go to one of those cut-rate places. The clinic I chose cost more than some of the others, but they also turn away a higher rate of potential clients. That's actually a good thing -- you don't want people taking unecessary chances with your eyesight just because they can't bear to miss out on a little profit. Make sure they spend enough time with you to discuss every aspect of the procedure, especially how they might address your astigmatism. Be very confident of their integrity before you commit to anything!
Personally, I'd do it over again in a heartbeat. It's so great to be able to see the alarm clock, not have to grope around for eyeglasses to find my way around the house, swim (and see where I'm swimming), shower and be able to see whether I missed any fluffy patches when shaving my legs (yep, done that), sit around in a room full of cigarette smoke without having my contacts dry out... you know what I mean. I walked in the rain a couple of weeks ago and totally did not mind getting wet because it was such a pleasure not having my contacts weld themselves to my eyeballs (all you soft lens wearers will know exactly what I'm talking about).
Just give it a lot of thought and, if you go through with it, make sure you have a good surgeon. Mine came highly recommended by my (former!) optician as the best in the area.
Good luck whatever you decide!
From the back cover:
It's a fairly well known book (was first published in 1919), and the excersises have helped a lot of people throw away their glasses. Including Aldous Huxley apparently.
The ISBN is 0-7225-3133-8
January 25, 1999:
... I can see! Two days ago, I literally could not make out distinct objects beyond about 18 inches, today I walked around
Manhattan without glasses and could see street signs from blocks away...
Two days ago I was:
OD -11.75, -1.5
OS -12.00, -1.5
Yesterday I had lasik at TLC Manhattan with Dr. Fox...
Today I'm around 20/30 or so, and 20/20 if I douse my eyes with eye drops... the vision is there, just not the crispness. (I still have some surface irritation, so that's clouding things a bit.)
But
This is way more than I expected... I had been expecting at least a week or so to go by before I felt comfortable driving, and while due to the post-op glare I'm not going to try night driving yet, I'm certainly fine to drive during the day. (Two days ago, sitting in the car without glasses I couldn't see the steering wheel, much less the road.)
February 9, 1999:
My screen is back to 1024x768 and normal fonts, though it's a bit blurry still. Significant ghosting at night -- night driving is not pleasant on unfamiliar roads as signs are unreadable until 2-3 seconds away at 55 mph.
Eye chart test says I'm 20/40 left, 20/80 right -- but that fluctuates every day. I am using Bion Tears every hour, and everything clears up quite a bit for a few minutes after putting those in. My Dr says that the surface of my cornea is extremely dry and not smooth and that is causing the blurriness. I'd have to say he's right, considering I can see nearly 20/20 for a few minutes after using eye drops. He says that as long as I keep using the drops for a few more weeks, the roughness will go away. My flaps were completely invisible by 1-week postop, with no wrinkles.
June 26, 1999:
Post-surgery:
OD plano, -0.50
OS plano, -1.00
Post-correction (same MD, 30 June 1999):
OD plano, 0
OS plano, 0
I've had serious problems with healing due to dry eye and my vision has been consistently cloudy. My co-manage eye doctor says my eyes are gunked up with sloughed-off epithelial cells. Dry-eye is made worse by my eyelids not closing all the way at night.
Although my eyes are technically zero sph/cyl, I get about 20/40 OD and 20/80 OS on the Snellen. Problems with photophobia since the June correction -- I need to wear sunglasses outside even in very overcast weather.
At no time since the original procedure in January has my vision been better than 20/40 for more than a day or two.
The dry-eye is treated with lots of drops (celluvisc) during the day, and Refresh PM at night with eyes taped shut. I've had significant improvement in the past week or so since I've started taping my eyes shut at night, but still no better than 20/40 or so.
My night vision is worse than 20/100.
December 28, 2000:
I wear glasses again. Thin ones, granted, and I don't always have to wear them -- in fact, sometimes I forget to put them on, and don't realize so until hours later...
... but wasn't the point of LASIK to not have to wear glasses?
I think the technology still has a ways to go before it's ready for primetime.
I still have NO night vision. I need at least a 25-watt bulb to navigate.
April 2001:
If I could go back in time and undo my LASIK, I would.
June 2002:
No change in my opinion.
I am legally blind, and I use glases and a magnifier to read.
Given the fact that I basically have 2 lenses in front of my eyes, wouldn't it be possible to achieve the same result with contacts + glasses?
has anyone ever done this?
This site has some relevant info.
I elected to have LASIK two years ago when my eyes no longer tolerated contact lenses very well. With a -10.5 correction required for each eye I didn't feel much like wearing glasses; I hadn't worn a pair in about eight years. My doctor wouldn't do both eyes at once, and had me wait a couple of months for a newer laser system to get installed (Technoloss, or something). The first eye went without a hitch, but I had to wait until a week ago to get the second done because of a Hodgkin's diagnosis and treatment in the interim. The doctor used a newer laser this time (Visitek S3 or something like that) and the procedure went very well.
Anyway, I stare at two monitors for about 12 hours a day and have much less eye-strain than before. I was able to work the next day after both treatments. I do have a bit of halo effect at night, but not much worse than I did with contact lenses. It certainly doesn't keep me from driving.
If you do get the procedure, make sure to follow the course of post-treatment eye-drops faithfully. Keeping your eyes moist and lubricated has an impact on the healing of the corneal flap. And take the time to look for a doctor you feel comfortable with. There are some LASIK 'mills' out there- avoid these at all costs.
To sum up, I'm glad I did it.
Yeah, it's emotionally kind of appealing to be "independent" of a piece of metal and plastic, but rationally, there is very little reason to. I wouldn't risk my eyesight on a procedure with no known long-term safety record.
I had PRK done in Canada 5 years ago.
Easily the worst decision of my life.
I have an off center ablation of 1.5 mm, so far beyond the normal range the doctors I have consulted afterwards routinely ask me how it was measured since it would be impossible to be off by such an amount.
I also have 8 mm pupils. Which does not help the situation any.
My poor brain has had a very miserable 5 years attempting to compensate for vision problems that vary with the intensity of the illumination.
However due to Canada's "lax" civil law restitution is impossible.
I firmly believe that without the "stick" that is the US legal system such mistakes are much more common in other countries than they are here. And of course if such a thing happened here at least you would get some compensation. Even though, in truth, there is little that could compensate for such a butchery.
Anyway, I would still recommend that people get the surgery done, even though I personally have had a horrible experience. Constant headaches, a total inability to concentrate, and sad night vision.
Although to be frank I still believe that PRK is a better procedure than Lasik. A trained chimp should be able to perform PRK. Lasik is actually complicated. So many things can go wrong with Lasik, although commonly they do not. However, PRK does destroy the bowman's layer. It is unknown what the long term effects are of destroying this layer.
But I came out of the surgery being able to drive without glasses the next day, and with a perfect 0/0 correction left eye (seeing 20/10: better than my eye doc with his glasses) and about -0.7 nearsightedness in the right eye: a perfect bifocal, important since I hit 40 this year.
Would I do it again? Absolutely. Will you get the same results? Only your doctor can tell (or maybe guess).
The main thing was after 10 years of glasses and 20 years of contacts, I wake up in the morning and can see the individual leaves in the tree outside my window. And instead of the once-a-day horror when some crap would get behind my lens, I have about a once a month piece of junk in my eye. Absolutely worth the trade.
I do not notice any night loss. Perhaps that's because my doc used the machine that makes an extremely wide cut... I know that some of the "cut-rate" docs have simpler machines. That was an initial concern of my eyedoc, which is why he hesitated recommending me. But my night vision is amazing, and I confuse my students when I can read their monitor text from 6 or 7 feet away.
My eyes are just as good today. Actually, I haven't even gone in for an eye exam for two years, because they're just working! It's truly a miracle.
The new surgery being touted by Bausch & Lomb is called Zyoptix. You can read about it at www.zyoptix.com. Basically, more tests are performed on your eyes than with LASIK, since each person's eyes are unique, and the eye surgeon can cater each surgery to one's specific problems. I'm from Rochester, NY, the home of B&L, and about 200 people in the area have received the treatment. Besides having their vision corrected, many have been endowed with "Superman Vision"...in essence, the surgery improves one's eye sight so much, that your eyesight becomes better than 20/20, usually 20/15 to 20/10. Moreover, the aberrations in your eye are mostly corrected, which allows light to pass through unimpeded, enabling you to see in the dark better, and also to see colors more vividly.
I'm 23 and have thought about the procedure, but it's generally recommended that males receive eye surgery when their 28 and older (23 and older for females), due to the fact that our eyeball keeps changing.
Zyoptix has begun to be performed in Europe, and I can only imagine that it will make its way over here soon too, once it receives FDA approval. If you're thinking about LASIK, perhaps you should hold off and wait for Zyoptix, since it's quite an improvement over the former's technique.
I was looking into Lasik. My optometrist recommended new contacts instead.
Apparently, (IANAOD) my old Focus contacts used a material that was a high percentage of water (70%?) in order to facilitate oxygen transfer. [College Biology factoid: your corneas are the only part of your body besides the lungs that breathe by exchanging oxygen directly with air.] Apparently, Bausch and Lomb developed a new lens material that requires a lower percentage of water (30%?) because they transfer oxygen so well. Up to 4x as well as my previous lens's material. Because of the low water content, they don't dry out as easily, and because of the high oxygen transfer, you can leave them in for up to 30 days at a time.
Personally, I have to take them out about every 2 weeks on average because of Foriegn Object Disorder. I also have about -3.75 power lenses with a minor (-.50) astigmatism. So, YMMV.
Bah weep granah, weep ninny bong!
Lasik was one of the best things I have ever done. I had it done about 4 years ago now. My vision is not perfect - my astigmatism was to great to be fully corrected, however, I can now do things. Especially after I changed my asthma medication as well. It has opened up sport - I play squash now. It has improved my self image - don't feel quite so geeky, [should I say that on slashdot?]. It has also lowered things to carry - phone, keys, wallet, glasses, glasses case with prescription sunnies, etc etc
I have noticed haloing at night - or in my case, more 'starring' from light sources. I havent really noticed a loss of night vision - an earlier poster mentioned that it is hard to find true darkness in an urban environment, and I have to agree. I have also had to learn to focus a slightly different way - your eye has learned to get the best image it can - it needs to learn a slightly new way.
I had my eyes done 2 weeks apart. Did one eye, went out, gave it a chance to heal up, and provided good diagnosis on that one, proceed with second eye. The operation takes about 20 minutes, including prep time. I turned up, and was given some valium to keep me calm. After that kicked in, a nurse scrubbed my face to remove any loose particles in order to prevent contamination. They take you in, and lie you back under a monster of a machine.
The keratomy [slicing of the eye] is the scary bit. The doctor warned me that I would lose my vision for a moment as my retina detached while the machine was sucking for the slice. The eye is marked at 4 cardinal points before the slice, and these have to line up after the flap is put back down, in order to ensure it is where it should be. The laser buzzes, there is a smell of burning hair, and then they tidy back up. All good.
They check things after 15 minutes, and I had some contamination under one flap - a tiny piece of something. In that case, they put you back in, lift the flap, and clean it again. It was fine after that.
Some panadeine forte that night, and next morning - feels a bit like sand in your eye - and a clear hard eyepatch taped to your face so you dont scratch, or deform it in your sleep. A few checkups, and done.
Yay me!
There is a surgery, don't remember what it's called, that takes and freezes your cornea, after removal, and then reshapes it. Then your cornea is re-implanted into your eye. Your cornea then acts as a pair of glasses but you never take them off. I suppose that if your eyes have been stable, this could be a route for you. I'm not sure of recovery times from this surgery. I first heard of this surgery 3 to 5 years ago and I'm not sure if any more progress has been made since.
They slice a flap out of your eye and flip it open to reveal the material underneath, which they "fix" with the laser. When the flap is closed, it heals almost immediately
Here's the catch: it NEVER heals completely. Think of a deep cut on your skin that looks like it has healed, but breaks open again. The trouble is this: Let's say that ten years after the surgery, you get shot right in the eye with a high-pressure water gun or fire hose or something. Or you get socked in the face in a barroom brawl. Or a ping-pong ball hits you pretty hard. Hell, all it takes is a good smack during a pillow fight. Before LASIK, your eye will likely hurt like hell and the vision will go white for a while, and you'll get a black eye and that sucks. But after LASIK, that flap can break off completely. Obviously, if that happens, you can kiss your vision in that eye goodbye.
And that doesn't account for errors during the surgery. What if the surgery machine runs Windows?
This is my point: BE GRATEFUL FOR WHAT YOU HAVE. Many people cannot see jack. You at least can see, so yeah, it's a little blurry and glasses tend to fog up and contacts need to be replaced every few days, and it's a real hassle but WHAT IF YOU COULD NOT SEE AT ALL?! I'm sure you'd give give away everything you have to get vision that's half as good as what you have now. Do not be greedy because, yeah, the risks are low but do you really want to take them? I say f.u.c.k. that.
I had problems wearing contacts, and I was fed up with trying to keep glasses clean enough to SEE. I had lasik on 9/20 at about 4pm. At 8am on 9/21, my vision was 20/30. By 9/27 I was 20/20. I have no side effects as of today (The first 3-4 days where kind of blurry,) no night vision loss. It was a wonderful procedure and I'd do it again in a heartbeat.
I have it too, just in one eye. So that means no LASIK? fine by me.
I do not fear computers. I fear the lack of them. Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)
My vision isn't too bad, and I don't wear glasses except to view presentations at a distance, so take this with a grain of salt. I wouldn't allow any surgical procedure to be done on myself until I knew what the effects were going to be 10, 20, and 50 years down the line. LASIK hasn't been around long enough for me to think it's a reasonable thing for someone to do.
-NotJeff
ack.. I'm at -9.5 and -10.5, and i've been thinking about lasik/ladik for a few years. My Optho had it done and she loves it. Of course, she was a perky -2.5/-3.0, so what does she know..
Support FSF: Stop thinking with your wallet, and think with your imagination. (cc/non-commercial)
So my guess is the description of the work they are doing is accurate, and there probably is some kind of consistent damage patterns with LASIK, though some people may never notice them.
My aunt and uncle both had LASIK and they have complained about the halos at night and generally poor night vision that has resulted. Also the results aren't always perfect 20/20 in both eyes when things heal.
Apart from the question of risks and benefits to your vision in the short-term, there is also the question of how well Lasik holds up over the long term. You might ask your surgeon what he or she knows about the incidence of complications or degradation of vision ten or twenty years down the road?
For elective surgery like this, I would wait until there was at least a good statistical base of 30-40-year postoperative outcomes before I would be comfortable with the idea that I had even a clue about the risks involved. In other words, I will not consider this procedure for myself, but my children may be able to make informed decisions when they grow up.
Check in to a procedure called intacs. It's for nearsighted people only. What they do is slip a transparent ring into your cornea to deform it into the right shape. It is supposed to be easily removable (not 100% reversable, since few surgeries are that) and it won't blind you in a worse case scenario.
They are more expensive though.
Waht about drieness?
The problem is that the myopia surgery goes only on one part inside of the eye pupil. they make a circle inside the pupil so as part of it sees well, and the other part, that stays outside the perimeter of this circle remains 'blind'. :)
during the day, when the pupil closes, you see very well. but at night, when it opens to gain light, you may have some problems, because part of your eye would see well, and the other part won't.
this things they don't talk about. so as if you have like 5 of myopia, u WILL feel strange. if u had like 2 or 3 of myopia u'd feel less the difference.
sorry 4 my bad english
I've been using those Accuview bifocals since they were first on the market. My optometrist thought I was crazy because I was only 22 at the time when I came in and asked for them. However, my prescription had been increasing slowly for several years because lots of close up computer work kept making my eyes worse. The only alternative was not using as much correction which would give me blurry distance vision.
I like the bifocals. I've had them over 3 years now. It's a little less blury than my glasses (single focus) or what I would get with standard contacts, but not much. Plus it's MUCH more comfortable when staring at a monitor. My eyes don't get sore after a long day. Basicly I gave up 20/10 and got about 20/20 and alot more comfort versus a standard prescription, but I think it was a pretty good deal.
Some people (like my mother) can't get their brains to adjust to seeing multiple images at once though, so it's not for everyone. I saw everything in twos and threes for about five days after I first got them, but it was only bad for the first two.
I'll probably take a look at laser surgery again once they have another generation of improvement. I'm not happy with the number of people who have bad experiences or nightvision problems, so I don't feel comfortable with it right now.
Introducing the new Occam Fusion! Now with sqrt(-1) fewer blades!
I know someone that writes software at the place that makes the software that drives the lasik machines.
The staff gets discounts, blah blah blah, yet they still wear glasses, from the cheif architect on down.
If they don't trust it, should you ?
Personally, I intend to do it eventually, but only _after_ my friend gets his eyes done.
If you wear contact lenses, there is a small chance you may permanently screw up your eyesight due to a scratched and/or infected cornea. The risks of serious negative outcome associated with LASIK are smaller than the normal risks associated with contact lenses, so people who wear contacts now are probably on net helping their odds of keeping decent eyesight if they get LASIK.
Me? I got LASIK a few years ago. Best $4400 I ever spent. The main caveat I might add is that for a computer geek sometime it sucks to have "normal" vision. Back when I was nearsighted it was possible for me to read ultra-fine print. I could print program listings 8 or 16 pages to one side of a laser-printed page and still read it. I could squint a bit and easily make out individual pixels on my Newton or CRT monitor - often useful when doing graphic work.
Now, my vision is just normal. Meaning I no longer need glasses to read stuff 20 feet away, but the flip side is I can't take them off to read stuff 2 inches away. Sometimes I miss that ability.
I play Nerd-Folk!
Not without complications. They'd still do it again because their sight was really bad to begin with but it's enough to put me off.
Three words: Tear duct plugs.
If you think looking for your glasses is a pain, just wait until you start losing those little guys.
i was thinking of this too very recently. after visiting several sites and finding user surveys very +ve, i thought, this was a way to go. then i saw some more -ve websites (didn't bookmark them), which talked about the actual statistics of results (how many patients went back to doctor etc.) and it showed that majority of people had problem with LASIK. the website/s also concluded, that most people don't want to appear stupid and hence call the results good and recommend to others too in the process. after checking out this, i decided against it. btw, a very good friend of mine who is a doctor had LASIK about a year and she recommended me, but now i am doubting her too!
Here in the Great White North a person who has had laser eye surgery cannot join the RCMP due to loss of nightvision and other compilications involved in the LASIK process.
Like yourself, I'm a developer who's been myopic (-3.0) for about half my life and wanted to do something about it. I was looking at LASIK and PRK, and was very close to doing it, when I found this site: http://www.surgicaleyes.com. I recommend you read some of the stories there and think again, carefully, very carefully, before you go ahead.
What I did was post there and ask if there were any known alternatives, and lo and behold, a person recommended a method called Ortho-K (http://www.ortho-k.net), which I've happily gone with instead. Basically it means that I wear contacts during the night and have perfect vision during the course of the day. And it's fully reversible, and can be adjusted as your eyes change with age (try and do the same with LASIK!). The fact that my optometrist offered either that I'd be fully satisfied with the outcome, or a full refund didn't make things worse, exactly. I'm very happy, and I've been using this for about a month now.
My vision is easily 20/20 these days, but I've learned that that doesn't necessarily mean that I have a good quality vision. I have had days when I have had a fair bit of ghosting, and in poor lighting I experience too significant starbursts. I have just had small modifications made to my lenses to compensate for this, and my optometrist is quite optimistic about improving this considerably.
Now that I've had the chance to "toy around" with my vision and have seen some of the effects that can result from it, there is no way in hell that I'd use something as permanent as LASIK, with little or no way of adjusting after the deed is done. The prospect of coding in braille is not one I'd look favorably upon.
Ok, I'm going to detail all of my experiences with Lasik for all you people. Maybe it will help some of you deceide.
About a year ago I had Lasik done in both eyes. I had -1.5 and a -3.5 prescription. I had worn glasses for about 5 years and had worn contacts for the past 5 years. My wife had a worse prescription, ie.. about a -4 in both eyes and also had severe astigmatism.
My surgery was done all at once. My wife had to go two. The first surgery for her corrected her astigmatism, completely. Except for a very small almost unmeasurable amount, she has virtually no astigmatism now. The second surgery corrected her near-sitedness, like mine. We both were very light sensitive for about 2 weeks and were EXTREMELY so for about 2 days. We both had to wear goggles to sleep for 2 weeks and to keep the cats out of the bed for 2 days.
Our results after the surgery are as follows: I see 20/15 now and she sees 20/20. We both are somewhat light sensitive but I am no more than I was when I was wearing contacts. We both also see slight halos at night but it is no worse than it was when I was wearing contacts, maybe a little bit better.
I hope that this helps.
"An Ye Harm None, Do What Ye Will" Wicca Rede
I work for the leading Laser Vision correction Provider in North America (I probably shouldn't mention the name due to legalities). I speak to hopeful/fearful/previous patients everyday. I'm slightly biased, but have heard almost exclusive good things about the diferent procedures we offer(LASIK,PRK,CUSTOM LASIK,LTK...)I am in Canada so we happen to have access to newer technology then the United States (no FDA). There are many horror stories out there due to "Budget Surgeons/Medical Centers".
I would like to put this forward for all of you looking into having your eyes done.
Please check:
1. What the price includes (pre-post op care,medications,lifetime commitment..)
2. Surgeon credentials (MD,at least a couple thousand procedures..)
3. Company Reputation - I've seen many places come and go.
4. Laser Types - Each eye is unique, we offer at least a few types of lasers in each of our centers.
Ask us a famous golfer did!
I'm going next week for my first appointment about getting this done. I know 4 or 5 people that have already had it done and they tell me to go do it RIGHT NOW.
A little tip my HR person told me.... Set up your flexible spending account to get the surgery next year. I plan to get mine done in January. This way the money you use for the surgery is pre-tax! Plus, the money gets taken out of your check throughout the year. You get the surgery done with pre-tax money "financed" throughout the year with no interest. Sounds great to me.
I went to the "choo of ptometr at the niversit of aterlo" to get sized-up for laser surgery. They said that I was a good candidate and gave me the go-ahead.
I am somewhat uptight about my eyes, so I did some research beforehand. I wrote down the manufacturer and model of the laser apparatus that they were using. This made them very uncomfortable and suspicious. Then I looked up the federal documentation on what exactly they intended to do to me.
In short, they lied about their equipment and they lied about my suitability for the surgery.
#1 The LASIK machine that they were using was old. It was a cast-off from some American clinic. It was so old that the computer could not adjust for random eye movements. They replaced this old machine a short while ago. If you were part of the tracking study, then they used the new machine on you.
#2 My eye was too big for the old machine by two or three millimeters.
My advice to you:
Before you have the surgery, remember that there are no long-term studies about what LASIK does to your eyes. The first patients will not be turning 50 or 60 for another few decades.
In Canada, LASIK is classed as a cosmetic procedure, so the government doesn't do their usual protective thing. The doctors that do this are in it for the money. Buyer beware. Dealing with these guys is uncomfortable if you are used to safe socialist medical treatment.
I've stared at computer screens (or televisions in the day of C64) from the age of 10. I now work with computers and play games at home, that's 11+ hours a day.
My script was -4.5 left eye, -4.75 right eye with an astigmatism.
Had the surgery (both eyes, same day, same red dot) at age 24.
4 1/2 years later, my eyes operate exactly as they did 2 days after surgery, which is to say, amazingly.
My left eye has very crisp vision, my right eye (that had the astigmatism) is a not quite perfect, but a far sight (pun intended) better than wearing glasses.
Reading glasses are hereditary in my family, so I see this as a 14 year investment (till age 40) of not having the hassle of wearing glasses.
Note however, my surgeon did indicate I was in the perfect category for the surgery.
Good luck, whatever your decision is
Lachlan
I'm not surprised so many /.ers fear Lasik. I mean think about it. There's no telling what OS those machines use. I think it's high time we all got together and started a Linux Lasik project. Imagine the possibilities of Open Source vision correction. The high price of this procedure would be eliminated. The Lasik corporation would no longer have a semi-monopoly on services. There would be home Lasik kits in no time!
I can't use my server (CRT monitor) while wearing my glasses because of focusing problems. My vision is too good. I can't help but focus too well, seeing individual pixels from up to 4 feet away at 1280x1024 on a 12.1" viewing area.
Without my glasses I have no trouble, a side effect of having one eye with 20/20 vision and one eye that's near sighted.
If you have trouble try turning anti-aliasing off and using an LCD monitor. The scan lines(which I see on most monitors) can't be seen on an LCD because of its lower refresh rate. Older LCD monitors blur too much, but my iBook's screen has no such effect and is truly a pleasure to use.
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
www.lasikdisaster.com
before you jump into eye surgery, visit the ones on "the other side" who fell through the cracks:
http://www.surgicaleyes.org
A cardiologist friend still calls it "radical keratotomy" and says he'll believe in it "when the bastards start doing their wives and mistresses." Well, they've been doing their wives and mistresses for years now, both eyes at the same time.
I had both eyes done (LASIK) at the same time about 5 years ago (and I'm neither someone's wife nor mistress).
It takes a certain leap of faith to allow someone to slice up the only pair of eyeballs you're ever going to have. My outcome was good, and I don't regret having it done.
Well, I do regret it occasionally. During boring meetings I used to be able to take off my glasses and let the world fade out. Can't do that anymore.
What I tell people--
Find someone who does the procedure A LOT. Ask if they turn people away as unsuitable for LASIK. If the answer they give you is NO, look for someone else -- LASIK won't fix everything.
You need to be satisfied knowing that:
You may end up with 20/40 vision (most practitioners won't do touch-ups if you are 20/40 or better).
You'll never be able to wear contact lenses again in your life (LASIK alters the cornea).
LASIK won't protect you against presbyopia (loss of accomodation in the lens as we grow older) so you'll probably end up using cheesy reading glasses eventually.
The creases on the sides of your head from wearing glasses most of your life will probably never go away.
Most insurance plans classify LASIK as cosmetic, and don't cover it. CHeck into prepaid medical plans that let you set aside pre-tax dollars to pay for medical procedures.
I'm very glad I did it. People who haven't worn glasses all their lives don't understand how incredibly fucking amazing it is to be able to see leaves on trees, or your own toes in the shower without wearing glasses!
I've been thinking about this too - being so damned dependent on glasses. I don't know about the rest of you folks, but I can't wear contacts and work on a computer (I know, I know, we blink less while staring at the monitor) - so I've been looking for alternatives.
This one seems promising, though there's only 4 years of clinical testing (in Canada, at least). Basically, it is a contact lens, surgically implanted into your eye, made of a pig collagen tissue. It's completely reversible, so you should be safe from most goof-ups. And it's out-patient.
BUT - big caveat here, I don't know too much about this procedure, yet. Anyone else hear of it?
Here's a good head's up: www.canoe.ca/Health0107/25_collagen-cp.html
Cleaning is a once-a-day ritual and solutions (in the UK) cost me £10/$15 per month (prices should be less in the US). If you do have glasses and feel uncomfortable with them, contact lenses are well worth considering - the biggest downside I have found is if any grit gets in your eye, it can stick to the lens making it difficult to remove.
I say, "Don't let them operate on anything that they cannot replace if they mess it up!" Your eyes are too delicate and too valuable to mess with. Deal with the glasses - I do. Once you have the procedure done - there is no going back, nor can they fix a mistake. You are dealing with a device that needs to make laser guided incisions with micrometer precision on your EYES! Don't do it. I have heard of horror stories: starry vision, constant watering/itching, etc. Are contacts really out of the question?
I had the surgery done about 2 years ago. With heavy astigmatism in both eyes, the left able to see at 20/70 and the right at 20/800. I know that for me wearing glasses all the time would give me severe headaches after staring at the screen for hours on end. Not to mention the annoying habit of rubbing my nose raw. I can tell you now my vision is 20/20 in the left and 20/40 in the right. My night vision has not really been affected at all and I stare at a computer screen for 12-14 hours a day. I still go swimming and skiing without any problems. The doctor has a hard time finding the flap that they cut in my eye.
It pretty much boils down to the surgeon. Ask yourself these questions:
1.) How many surgeries has he done
2.) How many of those surgeries were successful
3.) What school did he go to?
4.) How long has he been practicing?
5.) When was the last time the laser was calibrated?
In the end, it's your eyes and they don't have a convenient replacement procedure for them yet. Are glasses and contacts too uncomfortable or inconvenient for you? Will you want to have the surgery again in ~20-30 years? (It may be necessary to have another surgery down the line)
For me it was worth it and I have not experienced any negative side affects from it since it has been done.
BTW, it's really cool when they fold the flap back during the surgery. Your vision just turns into blobs of multi-colored jello =)
For all the things I have not the power to change.....
consider that glasses are a cheap proven technology.
Eyes change and so can glasses.
myopic mike
If you already use "hard" contact lenses(aka Rigid Gas Permeable) then ignore this post. I bring this up because "contacts" for many people means "soft contacts." In fact, recently when I was cleaning my hard contacts here at work someone said "I didn't know they still made those." If you have only used the allegedly comfortable soft contacts, you should know more about the other contacts. Disclaimer: IANAO (I Am Not An Optometrist)
Soft Contacts are a very fine mesh that holds your tears into a properly shaped lens. So if you don't blink enough, or have dry eyes, they don't work very well. So they are very poor for watching a movie or staring at a computer screen. They are great for sports or other active pursuits, because you blink more during those, and the larger soft contacts stay put on the front of your eye better than hard contacts. Soft contacts are also safer if you happen to take a poke in the eye. So they are great for basketball, bad for coding.
Hard contacts form a much smoother front lens, so they pretty much always give better vision than either glasses or soft contacts. I get better than 20/15 from my hard contacts while just managing 20/20 from glasses or soft contacts. Hard contacts are not so dependant on moisture so they are just fine for staring at a computer screen, which is what I do for 8-14 hours a day. Hard contacts also tend to hold your eye in shape and prevent your vision from getting worse. Hard contacts are also the cheapest choice, because they last much longer than soft contacts. The drawback of hard lenses is that your eyelid can catch the edge of the lens, especially if your eyes are dry or if you are doing something active, and flip the contact out of your eye or de-center it. And by de-center I mean push it off your iris and onto the white of your eye, which is rather uncomfortable. Which brings up the main reason few people wear hard contact lenses: comfort. They take some getting used to. Some people give up after a day or two because their eyes hurt. But if you don't give up, your eye de-sensitizes. At first, if your contact de-centers, it makes you want to claw your eyes out, but after a time, one feels no pain, and can just push the contact back into place with their finger, without the aid of a mirror.
Its true that I can't see past the end of the bed when I wake up in the morning, and I have to clean my contacts every night, but I don't think that it is cumbersome. I might get eye surgery/replacement in 15 or 20 years when they can guarantee me 20/15 vision without loss of night vision, but for now I'll stick with hard lenses most of the time, and soft lenses for sports. I think it is that loss of night vision part that scares me the most.
Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
Heh, it looked ok before I hit submit....maybe I should get my eyes fixed? :)
I was going to do it. Then I realized that if I do I won't be able to read a book without glasses when I'm old. My nearsightedness will be taken away, but I'll still get the other affliction that is related to getting older. I'd prefer to be able to read a book/screen without glasses 'till I die.
I have thought about laser surgery - the costs:
~2000 / eye = 4000 (no, you don't want to go with the _cheapest_ eye surgery, fer christsake, its your EYES!)
Daily contacts = $340 / yr
Thus, I get ~12 years of daily contacts for the price of the surgery. No risks, no loss of nighttime vision / astronomy skills etc. (yeehaw, the skies will be clear tonight!) No worries about infection etc.
So, why would I go through the pain/cost? Granted, I only have -2.75 vision and no astigmatism etc. but for me its a no brainer...
Anyhow I suggest you use a reversible method for correcting your vision (eg glasses/contacts)
Contacts can also damage your eyeballs if you are not careful (about leaving them in too long). A friend of mine is a surgeon who does, among other thing, organ transplants (legit ;). She says that they don't take corneas from deceased people who have worn contacts most of their lives because the contacts can have a significant detrimental effect upon the cornea. Then again, that might have to do with older contact lenses when the technology wasn't as good.
The results for me have been very bad. The surgery induced irregular multiple-axis astigmatism, that can not be compensated with corrective lenses. The doctor was certain that he could touch it up, and that procedure made it worse.
Now, in dim light I see four images superimposed on top of each other. This makes large objects blurry and indistinct. Small objects like stars are replicated. Neon signs are a tangle of replicated letters. The crescent moon has multiple points. And anything less than bright sunlight is "dim" enough to trigger this problem.
This site (http://faculty.washington.edu/vismatt/eyeknowwhy) explains that happened:
This story (http://www.usatoday.com/life/health/vision/lhvis0 06.htm) from a couple of years ago outlines the risks:
Before I started the LASIK dance, I used glasses that were very thick, but they gave me perfect vision. Now, I only need thin lenses, but they can't fully correct what LASIK did to me.
I would consider the technology to be immature and advise most folks to wait until the results are more predictably good.
There are some bad decisions that we make that we aren't often reminded about. Every day, I see reminders all around me of how LASIK ruined my vision.
Astronomy isn't fun any more; I don't even look up at the night sky. I can't see my wife's face by candle light. My daughter's volley ball games are blurry. I don't enjoy movies as often as I did before.
Not a day passes that I don't regret having LASIK. I would much rather wear glasses, but they can't help me now.
I had completely awful vision (contacts were -15 diopters or something like that) and bad astigmatism. My vision is as good as it ever was with glasses or contacts and I don't regret it one bit. I sit at my computer for at least eight hours a day and have done that continuously for at least two years.
I would definitely recommend that you not go cheap on this, though. I've had some friends who went to the $499/eye places and they had a much harder recovery and some minor visual artifacts for awhile. On the other hand, I spent about $1,500 per eye and went to the most reputable group of surgeons in Arizona (Barnett Dulaney Perkins). I was back to work on Monday and have had no problems in the three years since.
If you want some technological assurance, find a surgeon who uses LADAR which is an eye-tracking guide for the LASIK surgeon. You move your eye and it compensates.
... that the ablative zone is larger than your pupil when it is dialated to the maximum or you will get odd light based artifacts when the area around you is dark.
Shadus
I spoke with my optomitrist fisrt and had him suggest someone. In my area he suggested a company called Image plus and they were great. I had spent some time with the surgeon before it was done and he was really helpfull. My eysight was not quite as bad as yours but he did an excellent job. He took a lot of time to answer any questions. He was even willing to tell me a lot about the equipment. He was willing to go into some more technical detail it seemed. He was able to improve my vision beyond 20/20 to 20/15 and things have been great ever since. I even got them to do a video of my surgery. I have it posted at http://www.ringwraiths.org/laser.html along with some other info and how to contact me. If you are interested in more info my email address is on the website and the url to the place where I had it done. I had a little discomfort immediatly after surgery but have not regreted it one bit.
Get Lasik Surgery now, and we'll throw in a free pair of Ray-Ban sunglasses and piano lessons... ;)
I had laser surgery and now 20/20 vision. 2 things to consider:
1 How old are you? Young eyes are stronger and will more easily adapt. If a 20-year old and a 50-year old have exactly the same vison, and go through exactly the same procedure, then the 20-year old is more likely to reach 20/20 vision.
2 If your eyes are getting worse for every year, then they will probably continue to do so after an operation. In other words, the surgery does not have a big impact on the development of your vison, only on the vison itself.
Tor
I've got the same brand and I love them, i put them in at the beginning of the month and practically forget about them till the end of the month.
Learning how to shower w/ contacts on was a bit interesting but other than that, they've been great.
As far as Lasik is concerned, I'd be worried about the effect staring at a CRT monitor has on your eyes in the following way:
:p).
Staring at a CRT monitor all day tends to result in blurrier and blurrier vision over time. As I've read and understand it, CRT's are inherently blurry at a very small and mostly conscsiously undetectable level. When you stare at them all day, (especially text) your eyes are automatically and constantly trying to focus on this inherent blurriness (which you don't really notice). By the end of the day (or sooner), when you get up to leave, you'll find that over time you'll have a hard time focusing on things (they get blurrier) since the muscles that control focus are completely tired out from overexerting themselves all day (when they wouldn't have to normally). (Note humans did not evolve in a world with lots of blurry edges). This leads to worse vision.
It can be reversed -- not using CRTs (LCDs are much sharper in this regard -- I think this is the primary reason people report less eye-fatigue with them) and getting up and moving around a lot during the day (healthy anyway for programmers) to give your eyes a break (and simultaneously keep them warm) seem to be the main things that help.
(Getting up and moving around is also important to help prevent other body injuries that can happen when you sit around too long).
Anyway, I think a problem might come in if you have surgery and one day you stop programming or sitting behind a computer for an extended period of time every day (job change, etc). If your muscles eventually recuperate, what will that do to your already-corrected vision? Will your eyes over-focus? With glasses, you can just get less-strong glasses to meet your improving vision. But two or more surgeries doesn't sound good, or glasses again seems pointless after the surgery.
I can attest to having my vision get worse and better depending on my computer usage and exerise level. Most eye doctors don't seem aware of the CRT connection though, even though I know one person who confirmed it with her doctor and I've read about it. And of course, when a doctor hasn't read a journal article on it, they couldn't care less. (When they have read a journal article on it, uh, that doesn't seem to help too much either
Derek
But my brain did supply sound effects. That was disturbing. It went "*SCHLURP*... *POIK*...EEEEZzzztZzztZzttt *ZAPPO* *ZAPPO* *ZAPPO* *SCHLURP* *RRR-RRR0RR*" Really... really disturbing...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Very true. Perhaps I should have clarified that my vision is terrible - ~3.75 and ~4.75 - and has slowly been getting worse all my life. In my case, the odds of coming out worse in the long run are fairly small. For someone with reasonable vision, no, gains from the surgery would not be worth the risk.
That's not the right way to think about it. Right now, you can see. Well enough to read and type on the computer, apparently. Yes, you need glasses or contacts, but you can.
So the chances of LASIK making you blind are the same as someone who didn't need glasses to see but had the surgery anyway (not that I know why someone would do that). If you go blind, it doesn't matter that you couldn't see all that great before without your glasses; it's still going to suck.
-Ted
-=-=- Quantum physics - the dreams stuff are made of.
Nonsense. A CRT's picture is formed something like 1 inch below the surface of the glass, but an LCD panel is very thin and the pixels are practically at the surface.
That's the difference.
... and I went for it. I had stable myopia of -5.75 in one eye, -7.25 in the other, and an astygmatism of -1.25 in the worst eye. The surgery itself was agonising, and I was totally blind for 48 hours, but since then I've had no problems at all (except for the halo around light sources at night that you've probably heard about). I'd say go for it!
I was interested in this subject as you have been and these are the methods that I know about.
:P
* Radial Keratotomy
NEVERY DO THIS. It's a small disaster. they use diamond cutters to carve into your eye so it bulges out and changes the shape of your cornea.
At first this works, but because the different scars heal in unpredictable ways, it completely messes up the shape of your eyes after a longer period. You can never wear contacts again and glasses won't help because you vision is distorted, not near- or farsighted.
* Laser surgery/LASIK
This seems to work well, but some people have had problems with it.
The main problem I've read about (on Slashdot) is that the laser has an disc-like area it treats, and an area it doesn't treat and there is a sharp border between the two.
It vaporises away the treated area leaving a ridge at the start of the untreated area.
The ridge will stay with some people and act like a lense, giving them haloes around light sources at night (and during the day, but you can't see them then).
One other note for Laser surgery. They need to vaporise the cornea and for that, they need to remove the "skin" of the eye first. They used to just scratch it away with a spoon-like thing and give you eye-drops till it healed, but nowadays a newer technique is said to give better result. They cut 3 sides of a square shape and fold away a flap of your "eye skin", do the surgery, then fold the flap back like it was. Ask about the newer technique.
* "Plastic" rings
Don't know the name of the procedure, but it involves changing the shape of the cornea to correct your vision by inserting pieces of "plastic" in the upper tissue layer of the eye. The insertions are shaped like a wheel cut in half.
This bulges the parts of your cornea at the edges, thereby making the outer lens of your eye a flatter shape. Thus curing your near-sightedness.
The inserts are very thin and therefore only need tiny cuts to be inserted. They can be removed or replaced if needed. Seems to be a limit to the amount of near-sightedness they can correct.
*Insertion of internal lens
Don't know the name of this procedure either but it has it's history in the treatment of patients who's internal lens had been clouded by cataracts or other diseases. The diseased internal lens would be removed in these patients and replaced by an articicial lens held in place by two rounded "arms" attached to the lens acting like springs that radiate outward and hold the lens in place. The arms look like a bit like the bottom 3/4 of the letter J.
The technique to cure near-sightedness is to do the same procedure, but to leave the original internal lense where it is. The artificial lens will sit between the cornea and the internal lens (I think there's a natural "canyon" where the arms will press into that is between those 2).
The cut needs to be big enough for a folded lens to fit into but it is made at the edge of the iris so it should not be visible. Don't know if you can wear contact lenses over the scar but the implant can be removed or replaced if needed.
I myself am planning to have the last procedure perfomed when I have the money because it seems to me to give more control over the correction than the "half wheel inserts" approach. I still have to ask if they can rotate the artificial lense in such a way to cure my other sight deviation (cylinder/astimagtism?) but if not, then that's no big problem at all.
I also wonder if it's possible or wise to have the artificial internal lense block UV rays. This would prevent damage and cataracts to my eyes by sunlight and I would never become snowblind
Are there chemically stable transparent UV blockers?
- -- Truth addict for life.
I had the new Zyoptix LASIK surgery a couple of months ago. It is said to not only correct the low order aberration in the eye ( what your spectacles correct ), it also attempts to correct high order aberrations ( suchs as astygmatism ) in the eye. My eyes have turned out better than 20/15 ( 20/15 is better than 20/20, with 20/20 being what a normal person can see at 20 feet. 20/15 being that you can see as well as a normal person at 15 feet as you see at 20). I asked my doctor heaps of questions about LASIK and associated problems and he says that there is a huge variation between surgeons, I am guessing due to techniques used. The results he reported getting were, out of the last 11,000 patients ( most of them with normal LASIK ), only 2,000 bothered coming back for regular checkups, which I assume means that they had no problems. And out of the 2,000 that came back only 40 needed to be LASIK'd again. I don't know how many of those 40 had catastrophic failures, but I assume(ass) none as it would have been a big thing in our small town of 400,000.
Basically:
1/ Choose a respected surgeon.
2/ Don't get both eyes done at once. The doctor will attempt to convince you otherwise, but don't do it. You could afford to lose vision in one eye. But not both.
3/ Make sure they use a seperate microkeratome ( the thing that cuts the flap on the front of your eye ) for each eye. Of course this would only count if you got both eyes done at once.
4/ Choose Zyoptix over Normal LASIK. Zyoptix remove 10%-40%(from memory) less tissue from the eye, which has to be less disturbing to the eye. Zyoptix also has better results. Zyoptix will cost more, but hey they are your eyes.
(All spelling/grammer mistakes were put in this message on purpose to annoy you)
I saw a TV show maybe 2 years ago about a new procedure being developed where they insert thin metal blades into the cornea to reshape it. The advantage being that it was supposed to be a reversible process, if they didn't get it quite right you could have them removed, wait for the eye to heal back then have a new set reinserted (pricey and slow, but still reversible). Has anyone else heard about this process or when/if it'll be commercially available?
you should definately have a read of "The Art of Seeing" by Aldous Huxley. Its his story of how he regained his vision from almost complete blindness.
I had -2.5 nearsightedness in both eyes and decided to go looking for the best vision correction solution I could find. I considered RK and LASIK but was a bit concerned that there was no long-term data on either procedure. At the time Intacts (intra-corneal stomal rings, I think) had just getting FDA approval and UCSF was one of the eye centers that performed the procedure. The big win for Intacts was that the procedure was reversible, they put a couple of half-rings into the cornea to re-shape things and if necessary they can yank them back out again...
Post-Intacts I am 20/15 in both eyes and have had no problems after three years.
Someone mentioned 10/20 vision. I read a few articles on Adaptive Optics (a technology used in Astronomy telescopes) which will be applied to corrective vision for the eye in a few years either through surgery or contact lenses.
s /s upervision060900.html
0 61 2084400.htm
3 2, 00.html
. ht m
Just to summarize, according to the articles below, the main difference is that currently eye doctors can identify 2 abberations, astigmatism and improper focus. Using lasers, they can measure the eye's topology and identify up to 65 aberrations, therefore creating a more customized correction for every eye.
My vision is currently 20/20 but I sense it is slipping. I figure this technology will have gone through enough paces in 10 years, just when my eyes are bad enough to require correction. By then, the technology will be something closer to "bionic man".
Here are some links worth reading.
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/science/DailyNew
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/06/00
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,370
http://www.ucsc.edu/currents/99-00/08-02/optics
Another issue to consider is that this is a relatively newer surgery. What...like 20 yrs or so. who knows one of the by-products is after 30 years u go totally blind or something...........damn the country will be full of blind ppl.......:)
Definitely not ANYTHING connected with Scientology. Interestingly, I knew a man who was L. Ron Hubbard's roommate in the '40s. Back then, he talked about starting a religion.
Does anyone know of any reason not to go north of the border to have lasiks done. I know that it is significantly cheaper, and they have been doing it longer, and use newer technology (I'm not sure on the last one). Draw backs would be the burden of traveling there, and the problem with follow--ups if need be.
know any good references for advantages, or disadvantages of going to canada?
thanks
eh? I have "normal" sight and can read 1200 dpi printed code with 8 or 16 pages per sheet. I can also read a normal 8/10 pitch font at 10+ feet.
I wouldn't want to do it for any length of time though.
I think this is more normal than what you're thinking it is. Damaged sight is damaged sight, LASIK "corrected" (more of a band-aid really) or not.
If I didn't have perfect vision I would stick with glasses.
I don't want to be a pessimist (but I already am) but it makes me wonder, am I getting just one side of this issue or not? I've heard far more yays than nays for Lasik. Is it possible that there are more people out there that had the surgery messed up, and therefore can't look at monitors anymore, and therefore can't read /., and therefore can't comment, and therefore we can't hear their view? hmm. I would be very careful if I were looking for a procedure to be done on my eyes. Just imagine the tens of people out there that can't write in now.
It's not the fall that kills you, it's the sudden stop at the end.
To do it right, you must be VERY committed. Working the muscles with chronic muscle tension will bring up feelings of the conflicts that put the tension there.
Go to a hospital, checkout the nurses, see how many are wearing glasses. If you know any nurses, ask them how many of his/her nurse friends wear contacts, or have had LASER surgery. These people see a lot of eye problems from contacts/surgery and elect to wear glasses.
I had lasik in Feb 1999. So far it has been the worst decision I have made in my life. From my talking to doctors, etc. The numbers I think are real are:
5% will have real problems
10% will have annoying problems.
15% will have minor problems
70% will be wonderful to varying degrees.
Also the same result may be ok for one person, but not for another. After my LASIK procedure I was unable to drive at night for about 6 months. For me this was a disaster. A lady at work had the same problem. Her husband drove her around at night, it wasn't a big problem for her.
Another friend of mine was overcorrected. He had to wear a hard contact lens all the time. The doctor didn't think that was problem. I can't wear contacts, for me it would have been a problem.
If you have any problems with dry eyes, DO NOT GET LASIK. LASIK can cause the dry eye syndrome to get worse, much worse.
There are many, many factors involved. They are pupil size in dim light, corneal thickness, tear flow, prescription, astigmatism, etc. You need to know how each of these will affect you.
A good website to visit is www.surgicaleyes.com. I am not saying don't do it, I am saying you really need to know the actual percentages involved. If you are in the 5% that has real problems, it is 100% for you. Chances are you will come out just fine, but you need to decide if it is worth the risk for you. I was told the chance of problems was less than 1% back in 98, if anyone says this I think they are guilty of fraud (getting it to court is another matter).
I ended up with decentration (the guy doing the laser didn't aim correctly) and a central island. I am hoping that within a year or two they will be able to fix it. Right now I have blurry, fuzzy, multiple images (depends upon light level).
Choose your doctor and equipment carefully. Talk to 30-40 of their patients (spend time outside their office). Yes this is a lot of work, but you only get one pair of eyes.
I've asked my optometrist about LASIK. First, he told me (as expected) that my eyesight isn't yet bad enough to justify it.
Second, he said that there are new developments on the horizon. He can have his eyes done for free, but he is waiting for the technology to develop further (and presumably gather data on long term effects).
I've read something very brief about a future version of LASIK that is completely computer-controlled in real-time, i.e. the result is checked during surgery and the feedback loop yields better than 20/20 vision for some people.
Essentially, with ortho-k you wear hard contacts while you sleep. These contacts are engineered in such a way that they reshape your cornia to adjust for myopia or astigmatism. I also depend on staring at a monitor both during my job and when I get home (as a hobby). My vision has changed from a -3.5 lens to about +0.25. (The slight far-sightedness is actually a good thing.)
One of the advantages (or perhaps disadvantages depending on your perspective) is that ortho-k is not permanent. As a result, it's less risky. If you stop wearing the contact lenses, your eyes will slowly revert (however probably never as bad as they were when you started).
I've been using ortho-k for over a year now and I love it. I don't have to worry about dry eyes from contacts (since when I do wear the contacts I am sleeping, so I don't feel them) nor do I have to deal with the inconveniences of glasses. Plus I don't have to undergo the scary LASIK surgery. The risks and the costs are much less with ortho-k. I highly recommend it.
Jason.
the big question is : the corneas topography and paquimetry.. with these exams, we can tell if your eyes will undergo the surgery well...
if you live in Sao Pauloo - Brasil , contact me !
dan minus gil at uol dot com dot br
Ok, I had the surgery, and I am in the unique position to do an A/B comparison of a corrected eye and an uncorrected eye. I had one eye done at a time, and after much frustration, decided not to get the second eye done.
I would NOT recommend it.
I was signed up for a the LASIK procedure, but at the last minute, they told me my corneal depth wasn't enough for LASIK. I was offered another newer surgery called LASEK which was supposed to be much better: no cutting of the cornea but the same laser accuracy. They put alcohol on your eye and loosen and fold back the epithelial layer covering the cornea. Then they etch your cornea with the laser and fold it back. It supposedly has a shorter healing time, less trauma from the cutting and doesn't have the "fallen circus tent effect". This happens when the LASIK corneal flap re-covers the cornea and gets little micro-striations from settling down on a flatter surface.
So, I had the left eye done, and continued to wear a soft contact lens in the right eye.
They say I have 20/20 vision in my left eye. My right eye with the contact lens does about 20/15.
My left eye is probably 20/20 in bright bright daylight. However, the darker it gets, the worse my vision becomes.
I believe what has happened is that the brighter the light is, the smaller your pupil closes down. With the pupil closed, only a small portion of your cornea is used to bring light into the eye and irregularities in the surface don't make much difference.
However, when the pupil opens up, you need a much more precise curve in your cornea to properly focus the light on your retina. I think that not only is the curve of my cornea imprecise, when my pupil opens some light comes through the portion of my eye not corrected by the laser. (And I had the "large pupil program")
At night, my left eye shows a confusing view of lights. Headlights from cars have a certain percentage focused at a point, but a large portion comes out in a halo (seems to be more to one side for me). Signs are quite difficult to read until I'm right up on them. If I didn't have my right eye to help, I would not trust myself to drive at night.
Movie theaters are another bother. You go in a theater and as soon as things get dim, the screen washes out for one eye.
My right eye is corrected by a soft Toric contact lens. It does significantly better in almost every case. Although it is nice to get up in the morning with SOME vision from the left eye, I have to put in my contact lens to get really crisp clear vision.
I can't sit at the computer screen in a dark room easily. It helps to have a bright light near the computer screen. This closes down the pupil and I get crisper vision in the left eye.
If I could do it again, I would definitely stick to my contacts.
My doctor seemed bothered that I was upset. He kept on trying to get me to compare the eye with the surgery to the same eye without any vision correction. Yeah, maybe things are better for the 5 minutes I need to put my lenses in in the morning, but really, is that meaningful?
I believe your vision will get worse than corrected vision, especially at night. Oh yeah, I can't wear glasses anymore because they change the size of the image that I see and though the brain can adjust for minor offsets in vision, it can't deal with two differently sized images.
I have a similar problem in terms of nearsightedness. I thought about it but it seems that it doesn't cure the farsightedness at the same time so I'd still need reading glasses. And you probably will too, once you turn 40 something. It's pretty inevitable and I find I use my bifocals to read the screen pretty often. My solution: bifocals with progressive lenses + 2 19 inch monitors run at 1152x864 pixels each. Plus, I set W2K's screen appearance Windows Standard(Large) so I get reasonable fonts and it works pretty well.
I used to wear glasses/contacts and was very dependant on them from about age 5. My eyes quickly worsened to a prescription of -9.0 in one eye and -9.5 in the other with rather negligible astigmatism in each eye. I couldn't even see my hand when it was an inch from my face. I only wore contacts for special occassions because they were thick enough that they interfered with my ability to blink and really bothered me to wear regularily.
I was told about all the risks of LASIK including dry eyes, halos, blurry night vision, and that my prescription was considered an extreme case to be considered for the surgery. Honestly, after checking it out, the risk of complications were insignificant compared to the benefits for me. So 2.5 years ago I had LASIK at the age of 22 (my eyes had been stable for 3-4 years). I paid good money for an excellent doctor. I thought it very important to get someone who trains other doctors and had done thousands of procedures at a respectible eye surgery center (no outlet malls for me!).
I haven't regretted my choice once. Immediately after the procedure I had 20/30 vision in both eyes. Over the next few weeks it improved to 20/15. I haven't been to an eye doctor in about a year but will soon to check how my eyes are doing. I don't think they're quite 20/15 anymore but then again, I could just be more aware of the natural imperfections of good vision.
For the first few months, bright lights (headlights, stoplights, some lamps, etc.) had a rainbow effect around them as if I was looking at a prism. Of course, my eyes were so bad, I had that BEFORE the surgery! So that didn't really bother me and it faded over time. It took about a year for my night vision to become what I think is normal. I say "think" because I have no memory of what normal should be.
There is a half hour period each evening (starting about an hour after the sun goes down) during which the dim twilight seems kind of weird. I rarely need to drive anywhere at that time of day so it doesn't bother me.
For the record, I use computers constantly at work and at home and also watch a lot of television. I rarely experience eye strain or headaches even after a long day staring at the screen. Of course, this is with monitors running a refresh rate of 85Hz. I absolutely can't stand looking at a monitor running under 72Hz. I can really clearly see them flicker especially if there's a lot of white on the screen.
Overall, LASIK has been an absolute blessing for me. It's amazing not to be worried about stuff getting in your eyes and under your contacts or where exactly I put my glasses down before falling asleep. My brother had the procedure a few weeks after me and my parents had it a few weeks apart about 6 months later. Each of them ended up with 20/20 vision without any complications.
--Atlantix
I was thinking about having this procedure done. Image being able to see in the morning before putting on glasses. Anyway, I chose not to do so for the following reasons.
1. Night Vision problems. Yes, everyone I know that has had the procedure gets the night vision "starring" to some degree.
2. It's only as good as your BEST pair of glasses. It can't correct better than that.
3. Dr. Weiss from the Kresge Eye Institute in Detroit, MI counseled me and explained that people who are particular about detail, i.e. (engineers and some computer users) were typically not happy with the results.
4. The surgery is a tradeoff, if you are near sighted, the surgery corrects for this and make you more farsighted, but then you are unable to focus on close objects like you used to, and vice versa.
5. No anti glare coating. The anti-glare coating on my lenses really cuts down an eye strain.
6. The smaller glasses frames look good and help frame your face, especially as your hairline recedes.
7. As your eye heals and forms scar tissue post surgery, it could potentially reduce the benefit of the surgery and require another round of corrective surgery.
My solution to the problem has to get "Flexcon Titanium Frames, with Carbon Composite lenses". This makes the glasses extremely light as well as durable, since titanium has a memory and won't deform. Just make sure that when you have the eye exam that the centers of your pupils are checked and double checked since the titanium frames WILL NOT BEND to accomodate any errors in the lens.
In my analysis, the benefits of the procedure do not outweigh the negatives and I am sticking with glasses. The two biggest negatives are the "night vision" and "not being able to focus as near as I used to".
Good Luck on your decision!
At least two CART race drivers had it done 2 or 3 years ago.
But remember this laser safety tip - "Do not stare into laser with remaining eye"
My prescription was -6.5 in both eyes and was stable for 15 years. All through my teens and early adulthood I had glasses or contacts. I fretted about Lasik for several years and finally plopped down the 4K to have it done and *love* it. It has been about 6mo now and I *do* have some haloing. But it does *not* affect my night vision and it is fading. Some friends who have lad lasik have told me that it can take up to a year for the haloing to disappear. Specifically, what I mean by haloing is this. Around small, point sources of light, e.g. LEDs on a hub or modem, I can see a halo or glare about 10x the diameter of the LED. Oddly it does not affect my visual sharpness of the LED itself. I see the sharp corners of the LED rectangle just fine and the halo does not effect my ability to read to see the darker objects behind it. In this way it is different from say a halo from a headlight caused by water drops on the windshield. My haloing *does not* effect my night vision. It seems as good to me as it ever was. I have noticed the following though: The more tired/dry my eyes are the more pronounced the halos. Would the halos affect my ability to do something like observational astronomy. *possibly*. But to be fair, my first degree was in astronomy and I failed *miserably* at observational astronomy because my -6.5 diopter prescription glasses hindered me from focusing/finding guide stars easily. Now, Am I concerned about the halos. No. It is fading over time. Yes. Will mine fade completely. I do not know. Do I care. Well, No. The benefits of being able to see *perfectly* day or night far, far, far outweight this minor inconvience. Some additional info... The reason some folks have less than optimal experiences with LASIK is because LASIK uses a statistical model to calculate just how much material to remove from the eye. The Opthamologist measures your eye pressure and topography a few days before surgery along with your current prescription and using these as inputs into a statistical model. The model then guides the computer to remove the *correct* about from the eye. People who have disappointing experiences are outside the statistical norm. My surgery experience and pointers... 1. Take the Drugs!! When I walked in for my surgery on Friday morning the nurse asked me if I wanted some vallium (sic). I was a little taken back because I really hadn't expected the question. Further, for years I had never had a problem with needing anything like NO2 at the dentist, thinking this would be just as straighforward, i.e. a little eye numbing, slice, zap, patch, move on, I said no. *Big mistake* There was just something about having my head restrained and having my eyes/vision being violated and being fully aware of every step of the proceedure that *freaked me out*. Fortunately for me, the nurse gave me a teddy bear (no joke!) I held on to that bear like I was 3yr old and it was all over in about 5min. So the first advice is take the drugs! 2. When the procedure was finished, they sat me up and had me look around. It was amazing, my eyes were still numb and goopy (like greasey glasses) but I could see perfectly! The doctor checked me out, gave me a take-home bag of eye drops, goggles (for sleeping the first night) and an appointment for the next morning. My wife drove me home, and as we were driving the numbing started to fade and then came hell. My eyes were scratchy, I was sensitive to light, they were irrated when I closed them. We got home, and I paced and paced and paced. I walking into a dark closet sat, then stood, then sat. I was going nuts. All because I was focusing on the discomfort. My wife finally had enough, called the doctor, got me some vallium , I slept, woke up in about 6 hours. And felt great! The irriation was gone, I could see perfectly (those still a little *greasey*, that lasted for a week) but was happy as a clam. So my second point is also take the drugs. 3. Use an experienced opthamologist. I credit my perfect vision to the attention to detail that my opthamologist has. Since the success of the procedure is very sensitive to the accuracy of the pre-op measurements. I do not believe my result would have been as good with a cheaper LASIK provider.
wimps... I have -11 and -10.5
However I cannot afford the surgery
No sig for the moment.
Had LASIK worked very well for me, but your milage may vary. That being said here's few pointer to keep you from a negative outcome.
- Find somebody who has done a lot of them
--you don't want to part of the learning curve
- Make sure they have a low post op infection rate
-- post op infection is a disaster
- Consider not bewing corrected to 20/20
-- This is a little counterintuitive so bear with me. You want to able to see your screen with out strain. Mild myopia is excellent for this, so consider aiming for at slight residual myopia in at least one eye.
- Shop around, find someone you trust, not the cheapest.
Good Luck
and get a laser with *pupil tracking*. It is worth it. I went from -6 to perfect in a single session, but the extra money you pay for a quality laser that can move with your eye if you twitch.
"Your superior intellect is no match for our puny weapons!"
Keep in mind that there are individuals who have completely lost their eyesight as a result of this procedure.
As a disclaimer, I have never directly spoke with my father about this issue since everyone that comes over always brings it up and I know he is tired of defending his stance. Because what I have typed above is from what I have overheard, it's possible I slightly mangled something my father said, but I'm pretty sure this is accurate.This stuff may be good for the daytime, when your pupils are dialated small, and you are looking through the tiny center of your eyes lens.
However, as an amateur astronomer, I have read many times about what this surgery means for night vision, when your pupils dialate wide and you use a significant portion of your lens.
The general concensus? It destroys night time vision accuracy. The surgeons cant correct very well for "off axis" aberrations and astigmatisms. People report lots of flare coming off lights at night, and generally, worse vision as your eyes become accomodated to the dark.
There is no question these techniques are getting better, but if someone opts for year 2002 technology, I think they might be ruining some stuff they may or may not be aware of.
I had LASIK done in April of 2001 (almost 18 months ago).
... I was never able to wear contacts because these blue eyes are just too sensitive. My first day after surgery I had to keep fairly sedated because my eyes itched/hurt, so of course my instinct was to try and open or rub them.
... I tend to see 1 strong yellow line and 2 converging "ghosted" yellow lines when looking at the road).
:) ...
I was fairly nearsighted and also mildly astigmatic, both eyes were almost equal.
Anyway
After the first day I could open my eyes and see. After the 3rd day I didn't have any measurable irritation. By the 7th day my vision was better than 20/20 except for the normal halo patterns.
However, after about 3-4 months my vision got a little worse. I'm not quite 20/20 in either eye. My right eye is better (but I'm left-eye dominant, so it's frustrating). My left eye is able to pass the Colorado driver's exam, but just barely.
My biggest problem is "ghosting" as I call it. I think it's just the healed version of the halos that I had bad at first. It is only a problem in very bright light or in high-contrast images (like driving at night
The ghosting is enough to give me a mild eye-strain headache every once in a great while, but usually it just makes me squint a bit. I have no problems working on a computer monitor for 10+ hours a day and I don't have any problems reading in bed (I had gotten so nearsighted that I had to wear my glasses to read at night).
My eyes have been stable since about 6 months after the surgery. My cost was $1500/eye, but it was at a well known clinic and they give as many free tune-ups as required for 3 years after the procedure. I would have gotten a tune-up by now, but I've moved.
I'm waiting for our vacation back to the place where it was done (Dr. Arrowsmith in Nashville, TN) this winter to get my tune-up. That will give me 14 months left on the policy to heal and see how things go. I doubt I will go for more than 1 tune-up though, as I am worried about causing scarring.
The best part is, I went in to get a tuneup in June and the doctor actually told me to wait because they were getting in a new machine (Wave laser) that was much more accurate. Apparently my nearsightedness is gone and the ghosting (which is exacerbated by my having had astigmatism) is a result of a barely uneven surface from the old laser. The new laser handles this much better. I like a doctor who will tell you that instead of just trying to clear their schedule.
Overall I'm very happy I did it. I never liked my glasses and am very happy that I can read at night. Plus, now I can buy ski goggles and motorcycle helmets that are comfortable
Recommendations:
1) I had both eyes done at the same time. DON'T DO THAT. While I turned out ok, if my eyes had healed any less "ok" than they are I would be upset that I did them both. I would recommend doing 1, waiting 2-3 months, then doing the other if you're satisfied.
2) If you get a free tune-up, especially if it's valid for a couple of years like most reputable clinics are wont to do, wait at least 6 months, maybe 12, before having a tune-up. Not only will your eyes continue to heal the first few months, but more refined technology is continuously being rolled out.
It is more productive to voice thoughtful opinions (reply) than to judge (moderate) others.
I've read "Laser Vision Surgery for Dummies!"
I'd rather be a conservative nutjob than a liberal with no nuts and no job.
Contacts recently got a -lot- easier to wear. The FDA approved a new breed of 30-day wear contacts earlier this year. Here's a bit of info. The new contacts let in a lot more oxygen than the older soft contacts, and have antibacterial properties to help prevent corneal infection.
I've been wearing these (PureVisions) for the last few months, and they're phenomenal. I put in new contacts on the first of each month, and most of the time I don't touch them until the first day of the next month. If they get a little uncomfortable (doesn't happen much), I might take them out and clean them, or leave them out overnight while I sleep. My optometrist examined me after a month of wearing these, and gave me the A-OK. I had some corneal pitting before from occasionally sleeping in my old (regular soft) contacts, and it was gone after a month of these. They dry out a lot less often than my old contacts, too.
Only real downside is that they aren't cheap...around $250 a year for contacts, mail-order, plus the eye appointment and (a very minimal amount of) cleaning fluid. OTOH, at $1500+ per eye for LASIK, that's not so bad after all.
I -was- thinking about LASIK or the like, but now I really don't even consider it an option. I have fifteen minutes of hassle a month in exchange for good night vision and no corneal scarring.
Geo
cyclops asks: "I have been contemplating about going for LASIK surgery...
Am I the only one who finds humor in the fact that a guy named cyclops is doing the asking here?
Moderator hint: a comment is neither "Flamebait" nor "Troll" if it is true.
I had LASIK done in May 2000, and aside from some dryness for a few months after it couldn't have gone better.
I was -1.25 diopters in both eyes, astigmatic, I'm 20/15 in both eyes now, even after two years.
My ex-gf had it done at the same time, she was -3.25 in both eyes and corrected to 20/20. Her vision is still "perfect".
I had mine done in Canada, because (1) it was cheaper at the time, and (2) they were using a scanning spot laster which the FDA hadn't approved. It makes a much larger incision, and has less haloing (mine went away within 6 weeks). Make sure if you have large pupils that the laser they are using will make a large enough incision to lower haloing.
Expect the procedure to take a few minutes, mine took 10. They position your head, the laser makes an incision, a cup comes down and sucks the flap up, a laser makes the correction, then the doctor uses a brush with special glue to put your cornea back in place. No hands are going to touch your eyes, no scapals will get near you. It sounds worse than it is. Don't worry about sneazing, the laser will stop. Don't worry about fucking up your eye exam, they do a bunch. I paid a whole lot of attention during those eye exams.
My only problem is that the muscles in my right eye are noticably weaker than the ones in my left. Glasses corrected for this, so my eyes didn't get as tired as they do now, but in effect it's because I look at the computer screen for too long.
One big note: make sure you use natural tears and not something like Visine. Don't ask why, just pay more.
Get out you wallet, you won't be sorry. Good luck
"All I ever wanted was to see Larry Wall give Bill Gates a Perl necklace."
http://www.eisenschmidt.org/jweisen
I make my living with my eyes so obviously I am very leery of this surgery. On the other hand, I once got a rip-roaring keratitis from leaving my contacts in too long. There are risks with everything but glasses.
I find that daily disposable contacts worn on an as-needed basis work best for me. I wear good quality glasses to work, then put the contacts in if I'm going out with my wife or doing active sports. Then before I go to bed I throw them in the trash. Costs about 3-4 dollars per pair.
Probably 2-3 days a week (or partial days) I'm wearing contacts, the rest just glasses. I never re-use the contacts and never leave them in too long, so the irritation I used to have from contacts is now gone.
-ccm
Too much Law; not enough Order.
Have there been any long term studies on this type of surgery? I don't think there have. You don't want to have a surgery which is great for 5-10 years, and then, I don't know, your eyes self destruct or melt or whatever. Might want to find some people who have had this for a long time.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
Lots of people posted in a previous Ask Slashdot that if you use a computer, PRIO vision could be for you.
From the FAQ:
"It's a new technology, and a method for testing and prescribing occupational glasses for patients who have symptoms of eyestrain when working at a computer."
"TK-421, why aren't you at your post?"
Hi All -
I was quite nearsighted and astigmatic on Thursday night got lasik done on both eyes by Dr. Iman Ali of the Manhattan Eye, Ear, and Throat Hospital. I needed this procedure because as a journalist, I need more freedom to be spontaneous than glasses or contacts would allow. For example, I often write about the waterfront and do that research from my kayak (also for my pleasure, of course). Given that this can lead me to be in New York Harbor, at night, in winter, in snow... Well, you don't want to get hit by a wave or wake and roll up blind. But I also write about astronomy, so I worried about my loss of finer night vision. And finally, as a writer I stare at a screen as much as any software developer.
Here's my progress report:
Thursday night: Operation done in 20 minutes and I'm already at 20/40 vision when I step out. The numbing drops wear off on my subway ride home and I feel like I've got sand and pepper in my eyes. Extreme light sensitivity. Sent home with a valium to sleep it off and relax my eye muscles while the first stages of healing are underway. I'll be using antibacterial and anti-inflammation drops four times a day for a week.
Friday morning: Pain has ebbed greatly. I wear sunglasses to shield my eyes from dust as much as light. Ride the elevated train and I'm astonished ro see distances, but twinges of pain come if I focus for too long -- dehydration, I suppose. Amazed to see distances from the elevated train. More amazed to take an eye exam in my follow-up apppointment: 20/20. The doctor expects 20/15 as things "tighten" over the week. The corneal flaps have healed so dust isn't a great concern.
I email a bit but take it easy on the computer.
Saturday: Pain is nearly gone. Rare twinges that are followed by minimal tearing. I walk in bright sunshine for 5 minutes to the new digs of the Museum of Modern Art to test out my new eyes in style. I see Van Gogh, Miro, Monet, Picasso, Rothke, Matisse... All with my own eyes! Near vision is still great (I'm 34) and I can see details across the room.
I wander town until 4AM -- I see stars clearly, and read a lot at Barnes & Noble. Flirt with more confidence for no some reason. : ) Headlights and other bright points produce a slight "halo" effect (more like fine radiatign spokes) but no more than I had with contacts. I had less of this with perfectly clear glasses, but my glasses were often smeared or scratched anyway! A friend says this haloing faded for her after a year.
I watched Jupiter drift by my window before dawn. Gorgeous and amazing for me still.
I check email and write a few short items, but again taking it easy on the computer.
Sunday: No pain at all. I wander town again and love the novelty of my sight. I catch up on work in the evening.
Monday: No pain and the computer isn't a concern -- I used it all day. I'll check out my telescope tonight. Nebulae are hard to spot in NYC anyway, so I'll be able to report only on stars and planets.
I am going to my doctor on Thursday for a follow-up exam. My right eye seems slightly less sharp than my left, but is still great. I think it's simply tearing a little more, thought it was my stronger eye before before lasik. I think that will correct itself as my comfort grows.
I hope this helps!
Erik
I'm 39 today, I think I'll live to 69 or so.
Show me somebody who had this done 30 years ago.
How is that person doing, cause that'll be me when I'm 69.
Until I can meet that person, it is a scarry unknown. That is why I worry about it, and won't do it.
I've only got 2 eyes, it's not like I can get new ones.
Eyeglasses have been around for 200 years (Ben Franklin) - contacts have been around for 30 to 40 years. We know how they are doing, they have with stood the test of time.
I'm sure there are thousands who will say I'm full of it - and I'm sure I'll look back at the it and say they where correct.
I just don't want to be a "Fen-Fen" diet pill problem, or a Thalitimide baby, or any of those other wonder drugs that, over the test of time, failed.
Now, in 30 years - my son (10 now) will be 39 - and he'll be able to look back at all of those people who had it done 30 years ago. I hope it turns out well for those of you who did it.
I had lasik done on both eyes about 5 or 6 years ago. My contacts were -10.5 and -11.5. Basically I could read a book confortably pressed to my nose. My vision is better now than when I wore contacts or glasses. Before I got the surgery I read that your vision afterwards would never be quite as good as before with proper contacts or glasses, but fornatually I found this to be false for myself. When I go the the DMV I can read the eye charts from double the distance crystal clear. I have never experienced any halo effects and my night vision has always been good, and still is. I sit in front of a monitor all day and the eye strain is no where near as bad as when I had glasses. I researched this subject a bit before I got the surgery. I found out that RK (radial keratomy (sp?) - using a scalpel) has an "pissed off" percentage of 90% after 20 years as the eye keeps flattening out. PRK (like lasik but on the eye vs inside) blows away the bowmans membrane which they think might help keep out UV rays. Also people with PRK tend to have dry eye problems. I think what finally sold me on lasik was the statement from an eye doctor that 3 months after the surgery an eye doctor will not be able to tell that you had the procedure done. If you ask me if things can heal up that well they must be doing something right. Anyway getting lasik is one of the smartest things I've done. I've known other people who have had it and they have also been thrilled with the results. One big difference between PRK and lasik is that lasik depends on the skill of the surgeon a lot more than PRK, so get a good eye doctor.
Deuteronomy 13:06-9
The bottom line is that they are removing part of the lens. You will see worse after you get correcction. However, the bad place is moved from when you need to see to where you don't normamly need to see, with a bigger bad area. Note that the loss is generally very small, but it is there.
Most people who have this surgery agree that the cost is worth it, they don't even notice the loss. I have decided that I won't take the risk, but that doesn't mean I've made the right decision. I hate glasses (I couldn't wear contacts, but that was 10 years ago, things have changed I'm sure), but loss of vision is not something I could stand.
I had been considering lasik for awhile after an optometrist had said I was an ideal candidate for the surgery. My wife said no way in hell I should let anyone do that until I consulted with her opthalmologist. When I went to see him, he found a problem with my retina no one had seen before. Instead of having lasik for vision correction, I had laser surgery to prevent retinal detachment.
Lasik is great for some. One brother and a brother-in-law have had it and they both love it, but I've given up on my dream of having perfect 20/20 vision until I can buy new eyeballs.
...since I am posting late.. but
:P) if I couldn't get someone to tell me if I was above or below.
(haha, pun originally not intended, but it is now)....
Find someone who will turn you away!
One of the big things about this surgery is that, most (all?) Dr's will tell you the average risk. But they will not tell you your specific risk. For people with certain eye characteristics, the rate for having complications is much higher than others. I'd have serious reservations (if I couldn't see 20/20 already
In fact, I'd be willing to pay a fair some of money to a doctor to evaluate me who KNEW he wouldn't be getting me as a patient. Second opinion is one thing. Objective opinion is another.
So close and yet so far from the world's perfect ID number
My wife has had one eye done so far (but not by Lasik, another outfit) and likes the results. Her new vision is as good or better than the other with a contact, except at night where bright lights have more streamers, making the contact slightly better.
The best thing about the surgery is that she can see as soon as she wakes up. Also, she can see well when playing in the water. She's planning on having the other eye done in a few months.
She wasn't sure about undergoing the procedure until a friend of hers with worse vision had both eyes done at once and said he could see better walking out of the clinic than he ever could with glasses or contacts.
I definitely recommend going through the consultation to see if it is likely to be good for you.
Three years ago I managed to get into FDA phase 3 trials for Staar Surgical's implantable contact lens (ICL). The lens is already widely used in other countries. The results have been good. I was extraordinarly near-sighted (-17 D), so LASIK as not a good option. I now see 20/30, owing to some residual astigmatism the lens is not designed to correct. I wear some very light, thin glasses when I want things to be crisp, like night driving. There are a number of implantables in trials right now. They have the advantage of being reversible and the optics are more precise because you are not dealing with tissue.
My wife considered this and spoke to a opthamalogist. She said that the surgery is worth doing now, but the technology is improving quickly, so if you are not dying to do it now, wait a couple years and it will be that much better, with lower risks.
If you're not in a rush, give them a few more years to figure out the side effects better.
I had LASIK done a year ago, and I love being able to see! Yeah, there are risks, but those exist with any procedure. Basically, a machine does the surgery automatically... the surgeon doesn't do much of anything requiring a whole lot of skill.
Most people get the vision they want first time through, but most surgeons will "touch up" if need be. Be sure to talk to your surgeon about that.
My experience was that for about four months after having the procedure, my computer screen looked blurry, even though I could see details fine if I concentrated on them. It was like having ointment in my eye and having to wait for it to settle every time I blinked. But that went away eventually. In the meantime, I set all my fonts on my computer to HUGE so I could read them more easily. But four months later, I was seeing everything completely normally.
Being able to see without aid is wonderful (and I know it will only last until middle-age). It sure beats glasses, painful hard contacts, or blurry soft contacts that you just can't get that piece of lint off of...
my dad had RK done in the 80s, he went from being 20/3000 to 20/70 about, he also had the lasik done in the 90s and now his vision is about 20/30. he does have the starburst effect from the RK though, and it's so bad that he hates to drive at night, other than that he is very happy he had both procedures, he doesn't need glasses anymore.
my aunt also had very bad vision, 20/200, (there's a funny family story about her first date with my uncle, she was driving and was trying to be funny and she swerved to hit one of those bags that fly across the freeway and then she laughed meniachially, and my uncle in the passenger seat was horrified that she was so villianous that she would swerve to run over a rabbit and then laugh about it.)
she had the lasik done and she no longer wears glasses and she is very happy with the results
i however am very happy with my new contacs after wearing glasses since the 4th grade, i had always been afraid of sticking some plastic in my eyes. however, my eyes to get bothered when i read a computer monitor for more than a couple hours. but i can see without glasses and i don't need to worry about where i put them. (i just need to remember to put in my contacs in the morning)
my physics teacher has a daughter who worked closely with one of the guys who is one of the top developers in this field. and guess what? he still wears glasses. why? there just isn't enough long term evidence that it isn't bad for you. sure it works great now, but is it ok to do?
With my left eye, I have very fine "microscope" vision. I can get very close to something, like a monitor, and easily make out very fine details, like individual pixels on a very high resolution display. While I can sort of do this with my right eye, I cannot get as close to things without loosing focus, and while I can still make out 90% of the detail I can make out with my left eye, it's an order of magnitude more difficult. It's also very hard to explain without the unique perspective that I have. The best way I can describe it is to imagine wearing a very low power microscope on one eye -- you can see great detail, but you lose a bit of distance vision in the process.
All that said, I'm thinking seriously of Lasik. My wife had it done on both eyes, and she's never had one complaint about the procedure. I can't wear glasses because of the extreme differences between the prescriptions for each eye, and I have never done well with contacts. I figure my risk is much less than normal, because it's only one eye, and if I have a less than perfect result, my brain is already used to ignoring most of the faulty data from that eye anyway (I see 20/20 using both eyes). While I enjoy my microscope vision, it seriously interferes with my depth perception, and I find myself wanting good depth perception more than I want super-detailed vision.
My advice to those seeking Lasik, is to definately shop around, and get several recommendations. Take the time to find a competent doctor, and don't cheapen out on the cost of the surgery. The doctor who did my wife's surgery owned his own machine (many are simply rented and shared among many doctors), and never reused blades. He'd also been performing Lasik since it was an experimental surgery, and was very honest about the risks, bad experiences, and eligibility. It was quite a bit more expensive than anywhere else in town, and even the preliminary exam wasn't free -- but in retrospect, it was worth every penny.
-------------------------------------------------
A: This is not OT.
B:I chose to comment at this level because you're talking about my prescription, or close to it - 10.0 and 10.5 nearsighted, with a couple of diopters of astigmatism.... at least, it was. It was a scary decision, but i figured the chances of permanent crippling vision damage was miniscule, and the chance of some degradation was still pretty small. I figured i could wear even worse coke-bottle-bottoms, switch to a larger font, and maybe squint a bit, maybe even use a screen reader, for my job. On a mountainside, glasses can be a real hassle. Fogging in the cold, sliding down your nose in the heat, and, the possibility of them falling off and leaving me hoping for a high-altitude rescue (contacts are even worse when you're that far out on your own) made me take the chance.
I had to go with PRK, as my cornea is only about as thick as the flap they cut for LASIK. During my post-procedure phase, I accidentally took the cortisone drops a few days too long, and ended up making myself slightly farsighted. I'm only 39, so i've still got good focal range, and can focus down to about 8 inches, but I'm going to need reading glasses sooner than I should have. I still don't regret it. I'm a solid 20:15, and can jump out of bed in the middle of the night seeing perfectly.
Note that if you're much past 10, nobody will do you, so it can't get rid of 2-inch-thick lenses. What it comes down to is your own priorities, what losses you can live with, what risks you can stomach. If you're a couch potato, barfly, gamer, or otherwise sedentary, vision correcting surgery is probably a waste of time, stress, money, and karma. For me, not a day passes where I don't think about it and giggle about the fact that I'm no longer a cripple when I sleep.
"...the experience can be phychologically very uncomfortable. If you are the least bit squeamish about people playing with your eyeballs with scary tools and having your head and eyes locked into one position for a duration, then forget it."
If this is a problem, you can get a prescription for a tranquilizer. I've been prescripted them for dental procedures before (though not for eye surgery), and it works quite well.
Do a google search for these keywords: see clearly method
t m
That will bring up lots of info, starting with a company which sells a whole videotape, book, cassette, ec package which you may or may not want or need.
Also you might want to check out CRT and Ortho-K - contacts you sleep in which reshape your eyes.
http://www.allaboutvision.com/contacts/orthok.h
Considering the risks I would not recommend surgery to anyone who needs to read small text for their livelihood. If your glasses are getting you down, get some cooler frames and leave the lasers to those who have a lifestyle which can handle the side-effects or a botched job, e.g. those who don't spend hours coding, hours on end reading, etc.
I cannot recommend more highly this doctor. He just started his own practiceafter working with Vanderbilt for a while.
Ming Wang, M.D., Ph.D. in Nashville, TN
This guy is one of the best in the world, and when you have someone working on your eyes that's what you want.... Not some quack in a strip mall. It will cost you more, but it is completely worth it. I know people who have had bad eye surgery and people who have had it done right... This guy does it right... Working on the eyes of 800 physicians should really make that point... Check out his credentials:
From his web site: drmingwang.com
* Has successfully performed over 8,000 consecutive LASIK procedures; * Was named as a "VISX Star Surgeon" for having a LASIK surgical volume ranked in the top 5% nationally; * Over 800 physicians have entrusted their own eyes to Dr. Wang for LASIK surgery since 1997.
* M.D. (magna cum laude) Harvard Medical School and MIT; * Ph.D. in laser physics, atomic spectroscopy; * Residency (Wills Eye Hospital); * Cornea/refractive surgery fellowship (Bascom Palmer Eye Institute); * One of the very few LASIK surgeons in the world who has both ophthalmology training and in lasers(Ph.D).
I researched different doctors and asked each one how many surgeries they had done. The one with the most experience was also the most expensive ($5000). But, I have 20/15 vision, no bluriness (took about three months to clear up), great night vision and I am in front of the computer 4-12 hours per day. Don't get the $700 bargin...remember you only have two eyes.
Play Well
Radial Carrot-otomy, 8 years ago. Been great, no more crushed, bent, smeared or broken glasses. I sit in front of the computer for hours a day. 19-inch, no jumbo fonts and no eight foot deep desk.
I wholly agree. A 99% success rate sounds really bad for a surgery that's basically a convenience. Hell, I think I'd want at least a 1:10,000 chance for something like that. I'd certainly rather fly in an airplane or attempt to climb Mt. Everest.
Wil
wiki
My glasses do more for me than just correct my vision, they protect my eyes from all kinds of damage on a daily basis. I have gotten a few extremely deep gashes across my lenses from misc. situations. I'm glad it was my lenses, and not my eyes.
Has anyone heard of the Bates method?
William H. Bates was some scientist who figured you could improve vision through exercises. He published the book, "The Cure of Imperfect Sight without Glasses" which covers his method of improving vision naturally.
This method is based on the belief that vision problems are not static, but dynamic. The key to good vision is to keep the eye muscles relaxed, so that the eye can distinguish the center from the periphery (this is called central fixation).
I was considering laser surgery in a few years, but I recently stumbled upon the Bates method. I haven't given it any serious practice yet, but I plan to soon.
There is more info available here
My brother's eye doctor - one of the best in the state - said this to my brother when he inquired about LASIK.
"Have you ever looked at the doctors in those pictures? Ever notice that they all wear glasses?"
Sure as hell convinced me.
MY Opthamologist sez: IF the only things available
were contact lens and lazer surgery, then the
guy who invented `glasses' would be given a Noble
Prize. Glasses are NON-invasive, nor do they
touch the eye. 'Nuff sed.
I have to say that you are the first person I've ever encountered with worse vision than mine. I have -9.0, -9.5, no astigmatism. Vision corrective surgery is on my list of expensive things to do when I get out of debt.
Someone hates these cans.
I personally have not had the surgery, but both my parents have (one's vision had gotten so bad, contacts were not even an option) now, they both have 20/20 or 20/30 vision
on the 20/30 side, they are still elated, because if they have to wear glasses or contacts, they are lite and hardly noticable
but both are happy, (even though there is a bit of loss in night vision) and would do it again in a heart beat.
there are others, but the moral is that I would do it for myself, and have done all the research i need, to know that having vision without the lenses is worth the small risk involved!
i had lasik eye surgery several months ago, and now I can dee great no com-plaints hereQ
The foei;s uea;;y like it@
Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
See my user info for links.
I've been toying with getting LASIK done as well, but I'm worried because my myopia is -9.75 and -9.25 on R/L eyes respectively. Has anyone had experience with this kind of thing, or heard of someone who has?
Ceci n'est pas une sig
The safest choice is wearing glasses--actually safer than having "perfect eyesight" since glasses give you constant UV and physical protection. If you occasionally wear disposable contacts, your risk of infection is still negligible and you get the convenience of contacts when needed.
Had it done Monday september 20th, 1999.
paid $5000 for two years of unlimited support at Duke UNiversitsy Center for Aesthetic learning. yes, they consider it 'cosmetic surgery'. Duke is part of the study to finally get the procedure approved. For two years they do everything they can to improve your vision. Reburns, prescriptions, follow up visits, everything all included. Serious doctors, not a franchise operation.
It was the deal of a lifetime. I have never woken up and thought "gee, I wish I could wear my glasses today".
I took 3 months off over y2k and went surfing in Hawaii. Can't do that at -6.5,-6
JKL
P.S. the little indents in you skull over your ears slowly fill in over the next two years or so
Can you get just one eye done? If you could, then if it worked the first time, you'd know you'd have at least one good eye even if the second one bombed. And if it didn't work the first time, then you'd at least have a second chance to decide whether or not to risk losing your other eye.
I can put you in touch with a woman who is suing because of a damaged eye (she did both eyes, and one is practically useless now).
That isn't bad at all. Mine is like -9.75 in both eyes, with astigmatism. I'm not even sure that LASIK is sufficient with this severe a myopia.
"I see men, like trees walking around"
Then again, that might have to do with older contact lenses when the technology wasn't as good.
I used to have soft contact lenses from about 14 to 23. I finally got LASIK in January 2001 because I was starting to have trouble with contact lenses. The problem wasn't actually, in my case, with scratching, but rather with not letting enough oxygen reach the surface of my eyes.
LASIK works well for me. I don't think I would've been able to wear contacts for too much more time, and glasses are pretty inconvenient for some things that I do.
I can't speak for any technical details on the surgical procedures of Lasik but I can speak for the integrety of a Dr. Nancy Tanchel, M.D.
In August she contracted me to install her network using Redhat Linux and the Linux Terminal Server Project exclusivly throughout the practice. This, despite the hassel's she recieved from the medical practice software community. (If you have a minute email the folks at http://www.axitech.com about thier half hearted Linux support, espepecialy a Frank Harnett who tried repeatedly to bully us into "just running windows because nobody cares about Linux". Perhaps the company owner would care to replace him with someone more open minded with an interest to pursue new markets.)
In any case, this is a 100% Linux based Doctor I would trust for an honest opinion on anything. And being an optn source advocate I'm sure if the community asked we could get some honest opinions on Lasik.
She can be reached at ntanchel@libertylasereye.com.
my vision was terrible. 20/200 with a nasty astigmatism. I had PRK (different than lasik; non-invasive; preferred by the military--they don't want lasik) and my vision is now 20/15. no joke--20/15. bionic vision, baby! :)
I had LASIK 1 year ago after 30 years of nearsightedness and astigmatism. Now it seems natural to me to see well without glasses. I have 20/20 in one eye and 20/25 in the other. I think within 10 years noone over 25 will wear glasses in the developed world. LASIK too easy and safe. It's getting cheaper too but be sure to go with a doctor with a good track record.
I had the surgery about a year and a half ago, and it was a good experience. I actually had a complication, I can't remember the name of it, but it is nicknamed "Sands of the Sahara." Basically some blurred vision and irritation. It cleared up quite quickly, but was still a little nerve wracking. I had some halos at first (but *less* tha with glasses) but they were gone after about three months. I get less eye strain thanI used to, but part of that is that I'm far more comfortable sitting further away from the monitor. In fact, I wish my desk was deeper, because it would be great another foot away.
Anyway, a few days after the operation I wrote this for my friends. I thought it might be interesting to some of you to get a really first hand account. Forgive, the typos, my eyes tired easily that first week.
----------------
Sorry, my eyes are too tired to proofread, so I'll just give you the
first draft.
---------------
As most of you know, I went to TLC on Friday to have laser refractive
surgery performed on my eyes. The purpose of the surgery is to
eliminate myopia and astigmatism. Now that a few days have passed, I
thought you all might be a little curious to know how it went.
I arrived at the center at exactly 1:00PM. They were with me very
quickly, and technician took me back to get a topological scan of my
eyes. The purpose of the scan is to determine how thick the cornea is,
and where the astigmatisms lie. I had memorized the important numbers
from the scan they did two weeks ago, and I made sure the two matched.
Before we went any further, of course, they took my money. Let's just
say it was not very cheap. If anybody is curious, send me email.
I was sent back to the waiting room for a few minutes, then a doctor
came to examine my eyes and check my prescription. I tested exactly the
same as I had two weeks before, which made both of us happy. The doctor
gave me some Valium (5mg) and told me that the surgeon would be in to
speak with me in a minute.
Dr. Perraut came in, asked me if I had any questions, and we discussed
the relative merits of nasally-hinged vs top-hinged corneal flaps as
well as my antibiotic allergies. When we were done, he told me I had
about a fifteen minute wait before he would see me in the laser suite.
Juanita and I waited again in the chairs, then a technician came to tell
me they were ready to bring me in. The laser is basically a big machine
with an arm extending over a reclined couch. The tech settled me on the
couch, then moved my head underneath the arm of the machine. I could
see a round glass window with a blinking red LED. He taped my left eye
shut, and then aligned my right eye directly under the blinking light.
It was at this moment that the Valium became noticeable, and I started
to get a little confused. All I could see was this blinking red light,
and all I could here was the doctor and the tech talking shop somewhere
in the room.
In a moment, the doctor sat down behind me and said that we were ready
to start. He held an instrument close to my ear and turned in on for a
moment. I sounded like an electric shaver. He told me that this was
the sound of the blade that would make the corneal flap, and he wanted
to let me hear it so I would not be startled later.
He put various drops in my eyes (the tech had also done so earlier),
then inserted the speculum into my right eye. This device holds the
eyelids open so that you cannot blink. It is a little uncomfortable
going in, but fine once it is settled. Then the doctor placed a ring on
my eye around the iris and applied pressure. My vision dimmed and went
to black. He asked me if I could see, and I said that I could not. He
then let me know that the microkeratome was about to come on.
The ring that was inserted on my eye has a little track on top to guide
the blade that creates the corneal flap. The tool itself is called a
microkeratome. The blade vibrates at a very high frequency which helps
to create a really precise cut.
The microkeratome came on for about two seconds, and I got a sense of
lateral motion, although I am not sure how. He pulled the ring off my
eye and I could see the red light again. He and the tech examined the
flap and agreed that it was good.
Now came the really weird part. I saw a pair of forceps touch my eye,
then the cornea was lifted and pulled to the side. The red light faded
to a soft blur. It was definitely not like anything I had ever seen
before. Very cool.
He then placed another ring on my eye to hold it stead and told me to
center on the red light while the laser was running. The laser started
making ticking sound and I thought I could see flashes on my eye. I
could also smell ozone. The laser ran for about thirty seconds. When
it was done, the doctor but the flap back in place and brushed it flat
with a small brush. A few more drops and the procedure was done.
The left eye was more of the same, except that I could not keep focused
on the red light, and he had to stop the laser twice to recenter me.
When the left eye was done, I got up and shook the doctor's hand. He
pointed out the clock on the wall, which I could now see clearly, even
though my vision was swimming a little.
The whole procedure was very strange. I was very disoriented, and at
certain moments I could not quite remember what I was doing. I think
Valium just got me at a weird moment, and I could not adjust until the
procedure was over.
After fifteen minutes, they checked the flap and let me go home. My
eyes were tearing very badly and I could not open them at all. Juanita
got some food on the way home and I ate it with my eyes closed. When we
got home, I went to sleep.
Upon awaking, I could open my eyes and look around. Everything was
blurry, but much less so than without my glasses before. We went out to
dinner, and I was able to get around, order from the menu, etc. The
next morning, I want back to the doctor to have the flap checked and
test my vision. Everything was still quite blurry, but I tested 20/30
on the chart.
When I got home, I went back to sleep, and when I awoke, everything was
much clearer. Things have steadily improved since then, but I still
have weird distortions, which can take as much as a month to go away. I
also have about a 10% chance per eye of needing an additional surgery.
Meanwhile, my vision is technically about 20/20 or 20/25, so I can drive
and do everything that normal people do without glasses or contacts,
which is pretty cool. Most of the distortion should be gone after a
week, and I have another appointment on Friday to see how I am doing.
If you stuck with me this long, wow! Anyway, I'll keep you all posted
as things change.
I can honestly say, I strongly recommend this procedure, but with the following caution : choose a physician who's done thousands, not hundreds of procedures. Also, I'd recommend using a physician who uses the 'tracking' lasers. Older lasers require that you keep your eye still during the procedure. I had some difficulty keeping my eye still while I was under the gun - after all; they'd loaded me up with valium. The doc kept telling me "Look directly at the red light in front of you", to which I replied "I am, but it keeps moving...".
Anyhow; my vision went from being 20/300 to 20/15; not overnight, but over the course of about a month. Still (2 years later) sometimes you wake up, and one eye is a little blurier than the other, but that's just a variable.
You should be aware that LASIK does not prevent the normal degredation of vision. If you've been picking up a few points per year on your perscription; you'll continue to do so after surgery.
I have noticed, also, that my eyes do get more tired, and more dry than they used to. Keeping a bottle of visine handy solves that. There's also this gel stuff (really just seems like vasiline for your eyes) called Refresh P.M. by Allergan that you put in your eyes before going to bed. I highly recommend that if you give your eyes a tough week at the computer screen.
The way I look at it though, there are few negatives, and huge positives to having it done. If you've worn glasses or contact most of your life, you won't believe the satisfaction of being able to read the clock when you first open your eyes in the morning...
Need a simple, easy to use data tier generator? http://www.gryphinsoftware.com/
...almost 4 years ago.
I needed correction in the range of -9 to -10 before the surgery. Now I don't need any correction in the left eye, and a -1 correction in the right. (The right also has slight astigmatism which wasn't there before.)
I passed the DMV exam so I can drive without corrective lenses. I wear a soft contact lens in my right eye for when I really want to see clearly.
There are multiple downsides, however.
1. More floaters than I had before -- that could be natural aging of my eyes, however. Floaters are more common in nearsighted people because of the elongation of the eyeball, and laser surgery doesn't change the length of the eye. There's a possibility that the stress of the suction device (used to stabilize the microtome over the eye when making the flap) could have contributed to this problem.
2. Less sharpness, even with the soft contact lens, than before with rigid gas permeable lenses. This could be due to the type of lens. But I don't want to go back to RGP lenses -- too uncomfortable.
3. Your myopia may continue to progress. I think my vision has worsened by a fraction of a diopter this year. I'm not a candidate for further enhancement due to the amount of corneal material removed in the first surgery.
4. My eyes still get dry, even after this long.
5. Yes, night vision is worse. I don't have halos anymore but looking at a point source of light (such as a star), I see two images -- the main one and a faint double just to the right of it. (For a well-known example of night-time impairment, Jennifer Capriati says her tennis game suffers at night due to the surgery.)
Results vary widely. I've known several other people who have had LASIK, as well as one with PRK and one with the much older radial keratotomy (don't think anyone does RK anymore; you might find some surgeons who do PRK). My wife's vision after LASIK is near-perfect, but pre-surgery she was only around -3 to -4 (I think smaller corrections are less risky, though for someone who is a -2 or better there's probably no need for LASIK).
A friend of mine had worse results from LASIK; one of her eyes is practically useless without a contact lens.
There isn't a one-size-fits-all answer to the "should I have LASIK" question. I've heard more good stories than bad ones. Know the risks, and make a personal assessment of how much risk you want to accept for the possible benefit of reducing (probably) or eliminating (maybe) your dependence on corrective lenses.
My mom had this procedure done. It gave her almost perfect vision for about two years but then her eysight reverted back to its old state.
I have heard that that is pretty comman.
My neighbor had laser surgery to prevent his cataracts from causing "future" problems. Normally, you do one eye then wait 3 weeks to see the results and then do the other. The doctor was in a hurry to go on vacation and did both eyes. Well, it didn't work and now he is legally blind. Before he could read a newspaper without any problem and now he needs help just walking around the house.
He's had to exercise his eyes for the past 3 years and is only now getting to the point where he can read large print.
The fine print that he signed waived the doctor of all responsibility. He didn't even get the $3000 he paid back. Naturally, the medical community covers their butt.
I had LASIK done four years ago this summer, and it's been excellent. I am a system administrator by trade and, indeed, I do spend a very, very large portion of my day in front of computer monitors of all sizes, shapes and resolutions, and I have had no negative aftereffects (headaches or anything) from the surgery. And the halos everyone is whining about are a fairly minor problem. Even if they never go away (and many do!) I still find that the minor residual halo leftover from LASIK surgery is nothing compared to the difficulty of seeing through contact lenses that have been in your eyes for ten hours or more. I have had no trouble whatsoever with them, and I often drive long distances at night. (Actually, I would argue it makes your eyes LESS irritated at focusing on the road for long periods of time...)
And I have also wrestled competitively in the NCAA for those four years, and in my experience anybody who tells you that the corneal flap won't sit right and will come out as a result of head impact is spewing BS. The corneal flap in my right eye didn't sit properly the first time and I had to spend another hour on the table while my doctor made sure that it was set correctly; three days at home and everything healed up quite nicely. Four years of intense contact sports later, I have never had any sort of a problem.
I will say one thing, however; only go through with the surgery if you really trust your opthalmologist and the doctor you consult with, and you've read and understood the risks involved. This is your vision you're talking about here, and you DON'T want to take the chance that it might get fscked up without fully considering and acknowledging the risk.
Best of luck with whatever you decide,
-d
I had LASIK on both eyes in spring 2001. Best decision I ever made, hands down! (I had pretty bad myopia of -9.5 and -10.5) I now have 20/25 vision -- good enough to play outfield during baseball games and see the ball clearly off the bat; no cloudiness in my site from constantly fogging contacts, etc. I DO sit in front of a computer screen 8 hrs/day for my job, and no problems whatsoever, not to mention actively participating in athletics, waking up drunk in the morning not having to worry about taking out the contacts the night before, etc..
The main piece of advice I say is to not go cheap. These are your eyes! Spend the extra grand to go to a very respected institution/surgeon that you feel comfortable with. (I had my surgery at Northwest Memorial Hospital in Chicago). If you plan ahead, use your employers flex plan (aka cafeteria plan) and you can pay for your cosmetic eye surgery with pre-tax dollars, which is a nice savings (since most insurance doesn't cover LASIK... at least mine didn't).
Lastly, be realistic about the outcome, and do your own homework about the procedure. The patient makes more of an impact on the success of the procedure than the doctor does!
-Randy Vernon
rvernon@spindustry.com
When I took a Software Engineering class in college about 2 years ago, one of the LASIK developers came to give a presentation about the development process. Towards the end, asked about the implementation environment, he conceded that (as of early 2000) a LASIK system is built around a windows 3.1 machine ("but we're planning to migrate to windows 95.")
Now, he had already explained their general system of hardware interlocks which abort the treatment in the event of component failure, so this doesn't really mean much. A source of amusement.
That doesn't mean that it works for everybody, or that when it works badly it doesn't really really suck, or that the failure rates are 10%, 1%, or 0.1%. Perhaps the statistics are skewed, either because people who have trouble with it don't think reading Slashdot is worth the eyestrain, or because computer people are more likely to have eye trouble than and lots of disposable income than retail clerks, so they're more likely to get the surgery done and rave about it here.
Disclaimer: My eyes are still running on original equipment, though I've had several friends who've really liked it, among a small enough sample set that the lack of bad experiences doesn't mean that the failure rate couldn't be as bad as 10%. I'm now at the age where my parents were regularly using reading glasses, and I don't find them helpful, much less necessary, so I guess I'm lucky here.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
Don't ask shit like medical questions on Slashdot.
You might want to check up on new/upcoming surgeries which provide "super vision" - these new techniques correct for much finer imperfections in the cornea, making the limiting factor the quality of your retina. Also, supposedly this surgery does away with the risk of night vision haloing (It actually looks to improve night vision). Here's a couple of links -
Good Introduction
Super Technical
This is the stuff I'm waiting for.
My friend is spending $35+ a week on drops he has to use during the day. He also has to use some special salve at night that costs $20 a week. (He uses all these drops for comfort and to be able to see better now). These drops are all OTC products, so they aren't covered by insurance or FSAs. He paid about $3k for the surgery after insurance. Thats almost $6k not counting loss of income from work missed. Thats $220 a week - enough for a car payment.
Anyway, the monetary cost is not working out in his favor. Granted, he is in that small percentage of LASIK patients that ends up with major problems. His corneal flaps stick to his eyelids because his eyes are so dry, he almost ripped the flap off. He now sees two of everything, and will have to wear glasses and have more surgeries to try to correct the problem. (more $$$$) He has to get tear duct plugs inserted to help with the dry eyes. Constant headaches and blurriness are other side-effects he's having. (He went to a surgeon with lots of prior surgeries and an outstanding reputation. Unfortunately, someone ends up being in those 1% who have complications.)
I've thought about the surgery a lot, worrying about damaging my precious eyesight and facing pain and gross stuff. Those are all bad enough. I never stopped to think about the costs adding up, or how damaged vision could affect my ability to provide for myself or my family in the future. Even those of us who don't stare at a monitor for the majority of the day probably need our eyes for work in addition to play.
Keep the money factor in mind too when you consider your choices.
WBGG
~WBGG~ "And I'm so sad like a good book I can't put this Day Back a sorta fairytale with you" ~Tori Amos
I realize not every experience is the same, but I had LASIK performed about 2 years ago and it's been great. I had miserable vision (don't have prescription before LASIK handy) and when I went back for a checkup one week later I was 20/15. I could tell on the ride home that it had worked as I was able to read license plates and such that I could never see before.
I do experience the halos that some people describe during nighttime driving. It's a little bit of flare around bright sources of light on a dark background but as stupid as it sounds I can't remember if this is how I was before the surgery. Even if I wasn't, it's worth it for me. I do a hell of a lot less nighttime driving than I do daytime seeing. I just recently spent 2 days going to and 2 days returning from Burning Man, driving for 12+ hours at a time and had no problem at all.
Basically, I recommend it. I love my new eyes.
I got new glasses just a couple of months ago and asked the optometrist about Lasik or alternatives. He said that with my prescription (-6.0) Lasik could have some problems with opening up a large enough flap. He had a patient with a -12 that started to have it done, and they had to abort. He told the patient about a trial of a new form of contact lens that she would be ideal for. This is a contact lens that goes UNDER the cornea, but over the iris. The lens is larger than the iris ever opens, and it stays put. This also takes care of the halo problems, and there is no external contact lens to take care of. The patient did go for the trial and the results were good. The doctor estimated that it would be about a year before the procedure becomes accepted and generally available, and that I should wait for this.
~3.75 and ~4.75
:)
No idea what the fuck that shit is, but I'm 20/200 or so in one eye and something or another in the other.
Need help treating your acne? Come here!
My vision was a -1.5 diopter with a stigma before I had it done. I was lucky though to have it so small. If your vision is larger than 4.0 either way. The best that Lasik can do for you is lessen it so you won't have such a large optical prescription. For me though my vision was corrected from 20/35 to 20/10. I was one of the lucky ones to have my vision corrected so well. It took care of the stigma too. I had the surgery in the morning and I was driven home to rest for the day. I was back at work the following day. I had eye drops to put in every hour for the day right after the surgery. I couln't open my eyes until late in the afternoon. It felt like I had sand in them. After that for the next two weeks or so I had drop to put in every four hours or so. They were antibiotics and antiflamatories. I had heard of some horror stories from people who had it done before I did it. One lost his vision for a year. His sight milked up due to his eyes becoming inflamed because apparently he failed to put in the drops when he should have and his body reacted not too kindy to the surgery. The only bad side effect that I have from the surgery is the fact that I'm a bit more sensative to bad air and my eyes dry out. But I combat that with Refresh when I need to wet my eyes. Aside from that, I'm happy with the results. No problems with night vision, no halos around lights either.
I had lasik surgery done about a year ago, and I loved it. There are a lot of websites around that have more info than I can give, but I'll relate my personal experience.
I paid about $1200 to get both eyes done with lifetime corrections. My vision was about -4.75 in both eyes with astigmatism, but I can't remember what it was exactly.
The worst part is having to be super, super careful with your eyes for the first month, but it's tolerable. I had about 20/40 vision right after the surgery, and it took about a month to get up to 20/25 or so, and now, a year later, it changes between 20/25 and 20/20 depending on the day.
I have noticed that days that I spend too much time on the computer that my eyes are about 20/25 and things are just a little fuzzy. I mentioned it to my eye doctor the other day, and he suggested that a pair of reading glasses while using the computer would help reduce the strain on the eyes. He said to just get the weakest pair of reading glasses you can find at wal-mart or somewhere and leave them by the computer and pop them on when you are on it.
Yes, I did lose a small amount of vision, and on some of my worse days, it is only about 20/25 and some things are noticably blurry, but if I had known before I got the surgery how my vision would be when it was done, I would have still done it in a heartbeat. The small amount of vision that I lost really isn't that much that I even notice that much, and it's well worth not having to deal with glasses or contacts any more.
Personally, I say go for it. If you have doubts about it, you can always get one eye done at a time. Just be sure to get your eyes checked on schedule right afterwards. Keep your eyes moistenened even though the stupid drops aren't that cheap. When you consider that you will pay over a thousand dollars for the surgery, it's worth investing an extra $20-30 for extra eye drops to keep your eyes moist so they heal better.
Anyways, I hope that helps.
I have always had very good night vision. After my lasik surgery I had no loss of night vision whatsoever. I think though that you are mostly mixing up lasik and radial keretotomy. RK was well known for people losing night vision. Lasik you have potential for having halos around lights (similar to what you get when you look at lights when wearing glasses when it's raining and they are wet). I experienced the halos for the first month or two, but I don't have them any more, and my night vision is still significantly better than my wifes is. She has better distance vision in the daytime, but I can still see better than her at night, and she hasn't needed glasses or lasik.
I had LASIK done last spring as well. My eyes were -9 and -7.5, so I am biased towards ranting.
My eye doctor asked me whether I had any haloes or starbursts when I wore my contacts. I told him I had some light ones. He told me they would likely get a bit worse, and asked me if the risk was acceptable. I told him it was.
I had my work done, went home and rested, and got up the next morning. Holy clarity! It was just like when you've just had a new set of contacts on a new presription.
Almost year and a half ago, I still see like an eagle! Sure, I got some starburts. 95% of the time, they don't really manifest themselves. Mostly, it's a nuisance when I'm in a high contrast environment, like driving when it's dark. But, it was very much worth it to me, since I was quite helpless without optical hardware.
Stop the brainwash
I've had 3 friends LASIK and they all love it. But that hasn't convinced me to take the plunge.
i d_ lasik_problem.htm
y /avoid_ lasik_problem_2.htm
One thing I worry about is that with age, you can develop a condition called presbyopia (inability to see close-up objects due to stiffening in the eye). For most people, this means they go out and get a pair of bifocals or reading glasses. But myopia sometimes compensates for the stiffening in the eye so that glasses are not needed right away. Getting laser surgery could mean you'd need those glasses earlier than you would if you went uncorrected; LASIK sometimes unmasks the need for reading glasses. That'd suck if you're still coding at 40... back to the glasses or contacts you go!
Some of the posts I've read here are yelping about adverse effects from LASIK. If you're worried about complications, you might want to check out this link. It has pretty comprehensive information on what things could make you a good or bad candidate for LASIK.
http://www.allaboutvision.com/visionsurgery/avo
Many LASIK complications, it turns out, are the result of people who are bad candidates getting the surgery; pre-existing conditions usually predict poor outcomes. Things that can make you a bad candidate: dry eyes; excessive pupil dilation, etc. The best advice I've gotten is to research your doctor well. Then, have him give you a comprehensive pre-op exam that covers everything mentioned here:
http://www.allaboutvision.com/visionsurger
THEN, go get a second opinion (and a second exam) somewhere else. If they both say go, then you're probably not getting a sell job and hopefully will not experience the worst complications.
Winton Airport in Australia?
:)
You realise Winton is a tiny little town off the huge highway (the Hume) that links Melbourne and Sydney.
I'm guessing this "airport" is little more then some flat land and a guy with a radio.
Just a thought
I got Ortho-K contact lenses several years ago.
These are gas-permeable hard lenses that act as "braces for your eyeballs". They gradually change the shape of your cornea. The initial change, over the first couple of months is dramatic, with a lesser change over the next two years. You have to get a series of different lenses, with different "base curves", as your eyeball shape changes. You wear "retainers" after that.
First developed in Russia, some consider this bunk. It does work, at least for non-extreme cases of near-sightedness. It's not perfect. I went from a -2.5/-3 to +.25/-.75
When you take the lenses out, there is a degradation as the eyeball goes back to it's old shape. It won't go back completely. You will have very good vision for several hours, though - after that things get more blurry. The "retainers" only need to be worn for a couple of hours a day to retain the shape.
I like getting out of bed and being able to see, or being able to take my lenses out for a couple of hours and participate in sports without having to worry about the lenses. Before I got the Ortho-K lenses, my perscription was getting progressivly more negative - since then, it improved significantly and has not changed in years. (Save for near vision!)
In any case, if you wear contact lens, do consider gas-permeable hard lenses, whether Ortho-K or not. They do take some getting used to - they are not as easy to wear as soft lenses, initially. After adjustment, though, I think they actually become easier to wear. Smoke, for example, is much less of a bother than with soft lenses. They are also easier to put in and remove than those huge hydrophylic soft lenses. Ortho-K lenses are larger than conventional gas-permeable hard lenses, but much smaller than those big floppy pizza-eyes.
Gas-permeable hard lenses also correct astigmatism by providing a solid, spherical front surface - tears fill-in the gap. Soft lenses aren't able to do this, except the bizarre weighted versions that will not work if you happen to be sideways at the time.
As I have grown older (I am 48, and have had the Ortho-K lenses for about 10 years) I have started to have problems with near vision. No problem - I just take out my lenses when working in front of the screen. Once you have had surgery, this is not an option. (Of course, this would also be the case if Ortho-K fully corrects your vision, except that after a while with them out, it will start going back...) I've also had my perscription adjusted to "mono-vision" which allows me to read super-market shelves, my watch, my cell phone, and the speedometer, without taking my lenses out. Reading is uncomfortable, though.
If you get Ortho-K lenses, and decide to have surgery later, there is an extended adjustment period required (about 6 months) where you first have to switch to soft contacts, and then to no contacts at all, before the surgery can be done.
There is also new surgery for presbo (somebody else spell it for me - NEAR VISION!) It sounds scarey - they do surgery on the muscles that focus the eye, shortening them. My eye doctor doesn't recommend this surgery - he wants to see a few more years of experience with it.
Okay, so it wasn't quite that dramatic. However, I went from about 12 diopters of miopia in both eyes, along with some astigmatism, to 20/20 vision.
Having worn eyeglasses since the age of 7, and contact lenses most of my adult life, I'd had no idea how much of my everyday existence was defined by those words on my driver's licence: "Needs Corrective Lenses".
I love the results and would do it again in a heartbeat. The price was great -- $3300(US) for both eyes, with all of the preparatory and followup exams. I could've gotten it done cheaper, but I write for a living. So yes, the thought that I could be that one in however many it is who ends up blind did prey on my thoughts. What's more, I'm one of those sorts who is terrified of anything getting near my eyes. (I have a LOT of trouble watching one particular scene in "A Clockwork Orange", and it's not because of what little Droogy Alex is being forced to vid, but rather what they do to make certain he watches...). Anyway -- thank goodness for valium.
The first day was pretty hellish, what with the pain and constant eye-watering, but I got through it by listening to Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone on CD, napping, and listening to music. I could tell that my vision had been improved, but the eye shields kept me from seeing much.
The following morning, the eye-shields came off, and I'd say I was at about 20/40 vision. Over the following week, my eyes kept getting better, although dryness was a problem -- treatable though with natural tears eyedrops.
Within three weeks, I was back to 100%, no more drops needed, and my vision has never been sharper or better.
A real medical miracle if you ask me.
YMMV, of course...
-Technowitch
Quick Recap of where I was and where I am:
I was extremely nearsighted. I could be very mistaken, but I think my vision was something like 20/900 in one eye and 20/1000 in the other. Basically, I couldn't clearly see or read anything more than a few feet away... and while glasses and contacts brought me to ~20/20 in both eyes, I was tired of dealing with it all.
So, I had LASIK almost 2 years ago... and I'm glad I did.
Yes, I do have slight blurring in the dark (the halo effect), but it isn't something that I don't notice too often and it certainly isn't enough of a problem that would keep me from going-through with the procedure again. And, I'm better than 20/20 in both eyes.
And, contrary to what others have paid... my surgery only cost $500 per eye.
In any event, do some research... and ask your doctor questions. If he/she hasn't performed at least a few hundred (or thousands) of these surgeries, then keep looking. Also, I'm in front of a computer for 8 to 10 hours a day and my eyes are doing fine.
Before you do it, please think it over really hard. Surgery on a healthy organ is unnecessary, and it always carries a risk with it.
If you've decided to do it anyway, then you should prepare yourself by checking out surgeon, before deciding on that particular one. If s/he is an objective professional, then s/he will not try to hide any risks.
The last thing I have to say is that I recommend that you perform your surgery in the country you live in. Having a medical emergency, where you are blinded on one or two eyes in a foreign country, with all the hassle involved concerning medical insurance, is probably not that much fun...
Intacs are a relatively new technology that are being used to correct vision. It involves placing a circular piece of plastic into the lense, warping it into a correct shape. The process takes around 20 minutes, is completely reversible (the plastic can be removed), and people have experienced better than 20/20 vision. I'm not sure why it hasn't become more popular or widely known, since the method seems to be better in almost every way than LASIK (more effective, safer, a lot cheaper). More info:
/ insert s.htm
http://www.keravision.com -the company that makes them
http://www.getintacs.com/ -promotional intacs site
http://www.allaboutvision.com/visionsurgery
http://www.lasersite.com/intacs/
This was reported in Popular Science a while ago.
wish I done it earlier. I'm a developer and couple of months after I had no problems with a monitor. Read some of the blogs by people as they go through the process and the recovery.
My personal one can be found under the 'personal' section here.
given by this article:
http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_681188.htm
----------------------------------- My Other Sig Is Hilarious -----------------------------------
Oh-please! Don't fall for this nonsense! The mechanisms of myopia and the like are very well studied and understood.
While your "looking habits" probably can do something to your vision during eye developement (i.e. childhood) this whole eye-training thing is totally bogus.
Myopia is not caused by tensions of muscles - strain on those is a result of the (insufficiently corrected) myopia. The reason for myopia is that the eye bulb is too long and thus the image projected by the lens system would be in focus a little in front of the retina. In the case of close objects (e.g. computer screen) this can be compensated by "accomodation" (i.e. focussing closer). Of cause a person with myopia has to focus "harder" compared to a person with regular vision which causes the strain on the eyes, that people experience while reading without glasses (headache, burning eyes, blurred image after some time).
If a myopic person stets the lens for infinty (i.e. focusses on a distant object) the immage remains blurred because we can't focus beyond a certain point which unfortunately is not sufficient for the too long eye ball. Thats why you call it shortsighted: close objects can still be seen in focus while distant ones can't.
If the eye ball is too short the opposite happens.
So what happens if you throw the glasses in the bin and decide to give your eyes some excercise? At first you feel blind becasue you are used to corrected vision and the uncorrected images are impressively bad. After a while you start to get used to be back to bad vision and get the impression of improving vision. Maybe your perception even improves a little over the initial situtation because you (your brain) adapts to the the poor input from the eyes and does all it can to compensate. And our brain is extremely good at dealing with missing or poor data (thats why we don't see our blind spot). If you measure the vision of someone who underwent "eye-training" you find that the vision is just as bad as it was but the person still believes in a miraculous improvement.
Oh and a final personal note: I've been suffering from myopia for a long time now and although I can read without glasses I never do because my eyes get tired of the effort quickly.
Philipp
Signature under construction
Intacs can be removed when technolagy advances or if you dont like them. http://www.getintacs.com/
Doctor Evil:
Back in the 60's I developed a vision changing machine, which was in essence a sophisticated heat beam which we called a "laser."
Using these "lasers" we punch a hole in the protective layer around the eye which
we called the "cornea". Slowly but surely ultraviolet rays would pour in increasing the
risk of blindness that is...unless..... the world pays us a hefty ransom?
My wife has had it, her friend has had it and a close personal friend, with a degree in fine arts and is a cameraman has had it done. I know of 5 people who have had it done and all 5 have 20/20 vision now.
You call that a bad eyesight? -11 on left eye, -10.5 on right, plus a little bit of astigmatism on both, unfortunately not in the same plane. And I am an amateur astronomer, I tend to see double stars all around the place! :-( (Also I spend upto 14-16 hours in front of a computer screen most of the days).
I always wondered about corrective surgery but I'm simply scared of it. :)
In the UK (though I'd wrongly assumed it was intenational) to pass your JAR Class 1 (Professional Pilot) medical.
If you have had refractive surgery, Class 1 certification will not normally be considered until one year after the operation. Please note that:
the pre-operative refraction must not have exceeded +/- 5.00 dioptres;
an assessment by an eye specialist at Gatwick will be required.
from the CAA
For a class 2 license your initial eye sight is ignored it's just the corrected vision that matters (a recent change).
There are many complications associated with LASIK that aren't usually mentioned.
I had problems with my lasik--the flashing light didn't flash (or I didn't see it) in my good eye. (I am amblyopic, which means I only read with my good eye).
Then something got underneath the flap. It took a month of not being able to do just about anything for the surgeon to lift the flap and clean it out. Then the flap tore...
So I see between 8 and 22 moons when I look at the moon with my good eye.
Then there is the problem with dryness. LASIK can exacerbate dry eyes. Some nights I wake up and my eyes have sealed themselves shut with crystalline formations, then they get scratched.
Then an increased risk of infection. I had an eye infection last spring, which started eating away at my cornea. Three visits to the opth. in 5 days and oodles of antiobiotics.
I can see 20/30 in the sunlight on a good day, as long as they are dark letters on a light background.
Dimly lit locations are very difficult to deal with.
But I can read the computer screen without much difficulty, mostly though because I am used to seeing blurred.
I hardly drive at night, cannot drive at night in rural locations where it is dark.
BUT--I had a terrible lasik experience, but it can happen.
There are newer technologies coming out, like wavefront (at least in the USA, it is already in use pretty much everywhere else) which offer significant improvements in vision and are slightly less risky.
But I would suggest checking out:
www.asklasikdocs.com
www.surgicaleyes.com
I'm happy, but I came from a "-5" level where I'd need glasses to find my glasses if I misplaced them ;-). And yup, I've done the lens thing (I'm old enough to have been there when the soft ones were introduced - I was one of the first users as I *hated* glasses). ;-). And you will STILL have to face glasses later (when you're approx 40) - reading glasses...
Your satisfaction will improve the greater a correction you need, from stories I've heard doing a small correction is more likely to overshoot. That's bad because correcting long sight is a much more complex job, and having surgery twice (with again the same risks) is nobody's idea of fun.
Go to a company that does lots of them (not advertises a lot, DOES a lot), and ask for track record and statistics. I think they're by law compelled to keep track, not sure if they are compelled to share them (if they won't you have your answer anyway
So, in summary, if you need a large correction you're likely to be quite happy,. if you need a small one (below -2) you may get mixed results. Good luck!
Now the important bit: I'm English, and I hold honours in both physics and maths. I investigated LES in great detail before having it done, and I was totally happy.
Now, you're a /. reader, you must be reasonably smart (hah!), so my recommendation is that you do the same. Learn about the structure of the eye, and what the laser is actually going to do. Don't ask people their opinions cos for every one like me who's been there, there are ten people who tell you their friend's friend had a hole burnt in their retina or whatever.
Just one more thing: I only had one done. It's fine for everything, from coding (I do ~7 ours a day) to driving. It also means that when you get to 40/50 years old, you won't need reading glasses. Neat huh? There was also the minor detail that even though it was (for me) completely pain-free, it scared the living s%^& out of me!
Justin.
You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
When you walk down the street in a big city in the U.S., look at people. If you look closely, you will see that the walking of most people is not completely free and easy. This is because of chronic muscle tension.
Then, walk down a street in a big city in Brazil, for example Rio de Janeiro. Look only at people who are genetically similar to those in the United States. Although many Brazilians come from the same genetic stock as people in the U.S., Brazilians have much less chronic muscle tension. Their walking is, in general, more natural. From a humanistic view, the U.S. is a difficult place to live even though there is a lot of money, and American's bodies reflect that.
For anyone who is interested, read "Bioenergetics" by Alexander Lowen. Also, read "The Primal Scream" by Arthur Janov. It is not exercise that cures myopia; it is the awareness of inner conflict that comes from the exercise. It is possible to exercise without becoming more aware; someone doing that would not see improvement.
Chronic muscle tension may not be the only reason for myopia, but it is the biggest reason by far.
My [potential] lasik surgeon--one of the top ones in NYC--said [in 2002] that while my distance vision would improve my near vision would likely get worse and that I would need some minor correction via glasses [I currently do not need glasses for work at a monitor]. I decided that the inconvenience for work would outweigh my current driving, skiing, etc inconvenience until the procedure makes glasses unnecessary as well at a monitor. Be sure to explain your concerns to the surgeon before going ahead with this.
I've been wearing night-and-day contact lenses for over a year now. Normally you'd need to wash them once a week or two, but apparently my eyes stay pretty clean and I keep them in the whole month, after which I switch to a new pair.
Included in the price of these lenses are free eye checkups, which I take every three months. A quick scan to see if everything is correct.
And just three weeks ago they noticed a scrape in my right eye. I took the contacts out for one week and then did a recheck. The scratch was gone, so I resumed wearing my contacts. Hasn't seemed too risky yet.
So far I've been very happy with them - no need to hassle every morning and evening like with normal lenses. After a month or two you don't even notice them. On the contrary, you notice when you're not wearing them.
Cost for me is like 200 for half a year, with checkups and such.
Shit, I'm -12.5 - -13.0 with nasty astigmatism. I've been to a few consults about LASIK and always hear the same thing. "We can probably do you with great success, but.... Wait till next year - great things are a comin'".
One time a friend asked me, "If bad eyesight is a dominant gene, then how did people survive before glasses?"
I've wondered that myself. The answer, I think, is pretty obvious.
Bad eyesight is not a dominant gene.
Rather, the dominant gene is for normal eyesight, which degrades when not exercised. The recessive gene is for perfect, incorruptible eyesight.
You know, back before *everyone* wore glasses, there was a time when only book-nerds wore glasses. That was in this century. If the dominant gene is truly for "bad eyesight," then there wouldn't be time for the gene pool to alter so quickly like that.
Take off your glasses. It works. In fact, you'll probably notice a difference within a day. Take them off now, then come back on-line tomorrow and relate your experience. As an alternative, simply flame away with the b$ your optomitrist told you.
As for LASIK, I look at it like liposuction. If you're not willing to exercise, then sure, just go in there with a vacuum and suck out the fat. Be prepared for the side-effects of this invasive correction.
If you're a developer, then you might as well get the LASIK. You have the money for LASIK but not the time or the lifestyle to go outdoors.
There are too many incoungrences, problems and nasty side effects documented.
And there is also the conflict of interest of the Docs "selling" this procedure.
For all the inconveniences of glasses, you can't beat something: they are not invasive and don't attack your eyes in ways that could be harmful in the future (once you modify your eye it may very well be that if you require a procedure for a more serious illness in the future, your eyes would not be able to cope due to the lasik procedure).
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
I had bi lateral lasik performed last year and they screwed up one of my eyes. My good eye before the op (left) is now constantly dry and I require to use artificial tears once every half hour. And have done for the last year.
The left eye is still slightly short sighted and has astigmatism and the right eye was corrected too far and is now long sightd. Reading magazines is a mind numbing experience as both eyes are trying to focus in differnt directions.
Be aware of all the facts and also remember that you dnt get a second chance if they screw it up.
This is possibly not an answer that you'd want but i'll say it anyways... In the last month or so, i've considered Laser Treatment but its too damn expensive for a poor student like me. I went to my opticians though, and he told me about some new lenses - ones that you can keep in for a month constantly - sleeping in and all. Its probably a good trade off between wearing lenses and not having the annoyance of taking them out. Oh, and they're 25 of your english pounds per month...
You appear to be missing the point. Someone with imperfect vision who has laser surgery takes a risk in order to obtain a benefit. They must judge whether the potential benefit is worth the risk. The worse their vision to begin with, the greater the benefit of the improvementSure if you go blind, it's still going to suck. But if everything goes to plan you get an improvement in your eyesight. .
Someone with perfect vision who has unnecessary surgery is taking a risk with no offsetting benefit. As you point out, the risks are substantially the same. It is the potential benefit which makes the difference.
NO ID: BEING FREE MEANS NOT HAVING TO PROVE IT
I am medic, and looking forward to be an ophthalmologist, and there are some details this traditional explanation CAN'T cover.
First of all, it is all THEORY; the only way to PROVE that this about the eye size is the reason for myopia is to CAT scan a very large number of persons and make the statistical study. And even if done, it cannot explain some things:
Why does myopia get worst in a non growing group? This happens to many adults, Is it supposed that their eyeballs deformed more?! Improbable.
Astigmatism is a cylindrical optical deformation, How exactly can it get worst if it isn't related to the crystalline musculature system?
One last thing. An Optometrist is a TECHNICIAN and most of the time knowing very little about worsening eye defects, they'll typically sit you in the chair, measure and clamp on you the more powerful lenses you 'seem' to see better with.
An Ophthalmologist, is a specialized medic, and will know that giving you the 'highest' lens is the worst, it will worsen your eye problem more, and more quickly. So (s)he will try to find a balance and give you a pair of 'good enough' graduated lenses.
This is because recent studies seems to prove the notion that eyes DO accommodate to the lens, so, what is being observed is that, if getting annual screenings you are prescribed with lenses, the bigger the change in the prescription the faster your defect progress.
This may sound as 'the more water you add, the quicker you fill up the can', but the interesting part is that a faster defect progress means that EVERY year your prescription changed. While in individuals that where given a 'not the highest you "need"' lens, had years with no variation in their prescription
1. Best $ I ever spent
2. Low-light hallowing and nighttime vision/contrast loss are caused by large low-light pupil size. Pretty much a one-to-one correspondence. If your pupils are over 6.5mm in low light, you'll want to stay away. A good doctor will refuse to do you. However, new techniques allow larger and larger ablation areas, mitigating this restriction.
3. Surgical skill can generally be measured by number of procedures done. My surgeon had done around 10,000 eyes. The guy who did Tiger Woods' (who, essentially, has infinite resources to put into research) eyes is also in my city, and he's done 20,000 eyes. Quantity breads facility with the radiokeratome (the corneal-cutting device), and that's what you want. If you suck, you don't end up doing that many procedures. My surgeon wasn't a personable guy, but man can he cut and laser.
4. There are no documented cases of anyone going blind from the procedure.
5. The FDA has available (on the new-fangled Internet, even!) stat sheets in pdf format on each of the laser devices used to perform the procedure, detailing reported outcomes over time. I have also read (not sure if this is true) that your surgeon is required by federal law to provide these FDA sheets at your request for any of the various laser devices he/she plans to use on you. Check the stats. They're what convinced me, in the face of some peoples anecdotal horror stories. This surgery is about as safe and effective as it can possibly be.
Other things you can see when youre near sighted and take off your glasses:
Focus on anything at a distance of one inch.
Individual colour dots in 300dpi print.
Individual rgb dots in crt monitors (even at extremely fine dot-pitches).
Individual "hairs" in paper.
I had a behavioral optometrist looking after my eyesight when I was in elementary school. His brilliant theory was for his patients to use prescription eyedrops to dilate one of their pupils for a week at a time, then switch to the other, ad infinitum. His theory was that by forcing my iris to remain open, I would be passively exercising my eye muscles and improving my sight.
Looking like a tiny David Bowie, I followed this regimen for two years before the doctor was sued for malpractice by a group of his patients using the same regimen, whose eyesight had deteriorated. So had mine. The doc vanished, and I'm wearing thick glasses.
Please check the imagination blindness site first. It's a non-profit site. It doesn't have anything to sell you. It's not related to the Scientology or whatever sect :).
It offers all you need to know to have a better eyesight. You can find the full "Better eyesight without glasses" book from Dr Bates online there. The Bates method works. I've been doing it alone since two years and I'm nearly back to normal sight. If you want to know more, you can do a search on google with kuro5hin+bates, you'll find my story there.
"Of course I'm french, why d'you think I got this outttrrrageous accent?"
You have to keep this in mind, nocebo effect is an adeverse reaction to placebo intervention. This means that besides the intervention hey are doing in you doesn`t have any effect (placebo) you may still have adverse reactions, caused by your fears and anxiety.
So is IMPOSSIBLE to exist any intervention wich would have NONE adverse effect, sure someone will experience something. So don`t take the reports here as adverse effects of LASIK, they may be nocebo effects.
What is most frustrating is that probably you can experience nocebo effects yourself, and in this case it won`t mind is they are atriutable to the intervention or not. But probably you know yourself and know if you are propense to nocebo or not. I`m am not and didn`t have any problem with LASIK.
I am wearing lenses for over 10 years now. I 've got -6.0 / -5.75, no cylinder (or other abberations). I got interested in LASIK treatment and read alot about it. I even made an appointment for treatment, but in the end I decided not to do it.
The reason: when looking at the risk / reward, I figured it was not worth it. I am wearing pretty comfortable lenses (Bausch & Lomb PureVision. You won't find information on the Bausch & Lomb site; because of a patent issue the lenses are not allowed for sale in the US). These lenses are designed so you can wear them for 30 days without interruption. I don't have to take them out at night, or put them in in the morning. Just replace them once a month. They are so comfortable that I hardly notice that they are there.
So the "reward" for LASIK surgery is very small. The risk of having reduced night vision and seeing halo's (which is large when you have large pupils at night and -6.0 like me) does not outweigh the small benefits. I will at least wait for the treatment method to improve (ie. no more halo's) and the long-term effects to become more well known.
My karma ran over your dogma
Before: -9.75/-10.25 myopia
After: no glasses required
Bad experiences:
Had to have two operations to correct first eye
Side effects:
Eyes do feel dry occassionally,
Some minor halo effects in dark conditions
Opinion:
Go for it!
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
Got my eyes done last October. I had 20/400 in one eye, 20/600 in the other. I had PKR instead of lasik due to weak corneas. My vision isn't 20/20, but better than 20/40. Still have weird night vision. (bright lights at night or in dark places are very fuzzed and feathery, which made some night driving a little uncomfortable. Still, I am very happy to be free of glasses, to wake up, open my eyes and see. I look better, I don't have to keep up with and clean glasses or contacts, and it only cost a K. No more falling asleep reading a book with glasses on. No more awkwardly taking the specs off while making out. Get to wear cool sunglasses. Very worth it.
I had -2 diopters in my eyes when I had it done.
I have better then 20/20 now.
The first few days after the surgery, I couldn't read, but I could do computer work. A few days after that I could read too. My vision fluxed for about 6 months, it was noticable fluxing, but didn't impact anything really. I definitely would be careful about driving at night until your vision stabilizes and you know your limits as your reaction to night lights will change some.
Sincerely, Matthew Schroeder Title: Einstein or The Dork (due to my crazy nature)
You can smell your eyes burning. Burning corneas smell like... Waitaminit. I paid a grand to find out. I'm not telling you.
I had it done a year and a half ago.
I had myopia in the 5-6 diopter range. (Can't remember). I also had REALLY nasty astigmatism.
My astigmatism was severe enough that most of the time, contacts just didn't cut it. They never corrected nearly as well as glasses, and for me were uncomfortable as hell. (Even 3-month disposables - They'd be uncomfortable from Day 1)
The healing process takes a while - If you're a developer you might have a problem for a month or two. And you'll be attached to your bottle of artificial tears for a few months. 1.5 years later, I usually only need tears in the morning (Honestly, I needed them before the surgery, I've always had dry eyes in the morning.). I have 20/20 vision in both eyes, and it's wonderful.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
if you can't see this hole you probably need lasik.
Dont do it. The last thing you need is some guy you don't really like screwing with you eyes because your trying to save a few bucks. I had lasik and love it. My right is better the 20/20 but my left is only 20/25. I payed for the best and feel I got my moneys worth.
Capitalism: unequal distribution of wealth
Socialism: equal distribution of poverty
See here for more info.
hth
- Derwen
http://fsfeurope.org/
i was thinking of doing it in malaysia for the winter holidays since it inexpensive and my home. and i would probably be back for like 3 weeks.
anyone would know if it has any side effects if we travel by plane after 3 weeks of surgery.
thanks.
In the traditional surgery, the flap is cut with a mechanical blade. This causes most of the complications involved with the procedure. In the new procedure, they use an ultrafast pulse laser to cut the flap, which is cleaner and more accurate. Intralase is the company currently manufacturing the machines.
First let me say that Lasik wasn't bad at all. IF you go to a good doctor, they will do a very thorough screening to make sure that you are a good candidate for Lasik. The doctor I went to not only gave me the basic eye exam but also check my eyes to make sure there was enough material to work with in case they didn't get 20/20 vision for me the first time around. Lucky for me, the doctor was good and got it right the first time.
The procedure itself was quick. Basically someone swabbed my eye, i saw purple lights flashing, another swab, and that was one eye done. Immediately afterwards, I was seeing 20/20. The next month or so my eyes were as dry as anything, but if you've had contact lenses get dry on you before, this won't be anything new.
Hope this is helpful for you!
I've worn glasses for myopia full-time since my ninth birthday. I turn 40 in just a few months. Sure, glasses are a pain sometimes, but they work well for me. I've had the same prescription for over twelve years; it still corrects my vision to 20/15.
I'm a programmer/analyst by trade. There is no bloody way I am going to risk my vision on a wacky, unnatural invasive procedure like LASIK. I don't care how good the surgeon is or how minimal the risk is. With my luck, I'd end up being one of the poor souls whose eyesight has been permanently and irretrievably screwed by this procedure.
No, thanks--I'll keep my glasses and my eyesight. To the daredevils out there, I only have one thing to say:
Good luck.
My wife had this procedure approximately 3 years ago and she swears by it.
She had worn glasses since the age of several-months old and had a bad astigmatism in one eye. We made the decision to have the surgery because her doctor estimated she might have become legally blind in one eye within 5 years at the rate her eyesight was deteriorating.
To make a long story short, the eyesight in her "bad" eye improved beyond what the doctors had predicted going into the surgery. She has minor "night vision" and "halo" issues, but these are no worse than when she used to wear glasses and only seem to occur when she's tired or fatigued.
There's always a risk of complications with any medical procedure, but there are so many of these being done, the percentage of complications is very minimal.
The most important thing we did is find a doctor who is experienced performing the procedure. Our doctor's office provided a packet of 20+ pages immediately upon request. This packed documented his academic and professional credits, including documentation of over 10,000 procedures preformed. Sure, there are many doctors performing this procedure...find one who is experienced.
It's a great deal these days......I've seen it advertised for under $2000.00 for both eyes. We paid over $4600.00, and insurance wouldn't have anything to do with it. They considered it "cosmetic" regardless of the doctor's claims of eventual eyesight loss. Insurance companies may have changed their stance these days, considering how widespread the procedure has become.
...mixed results ranging from totally perfect to disasterous.
Most people are OK after and say they are satisfied.
No longitudinal data. Aging, post operative vision degradation, and other long term variables effects are unknowns.
Irreversible.
Very probably won't blind you.
These are the facts - go forth and deceide for yourself.
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
LASIK's not an option for me (went in for it and found out I had induced pseudomyopia. Don't squint, kids.), but even if it were I might be inclined now to wait for the fruits of this research:
s /s upervision060900.html
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/science/DailyNew
It could be that 20:20 will be considered impaired if this becomes safe and affordable.
If you do Lasik, figure on having vision fluctuation for a year afterward. If you're planning on doing both eyes, I recommend doing one, waiting until it stabilizes, then doing the other. Otherwise, you'll have to buy a 5'x5' projection system to get any work done on the bad days.
With Lasik, they cut a flap on your eye, zap what's underneath, then replace the flap. The cutting is really unnerving. (I wish they had given me two valium instead of one.) Don't do PRK, which is basically laser without the flap to protect the eye afterwards.
Yes, at night you will get starbursts around lights, and light from the side will cause some flareups in your field of view. During the day your cornea is smaller, so the light doesn't pass through these "problem areas". The halo for my Lasik eye is like a fuzz, while the RK eye is more like a starburst (due to the scapel cuts).
This was several years ago, and my right eye isn't as clear as it was. Of course, my eyes always degraded over time.
All of the people that had bad experiences with surgery are blind now and can't read slashdot so naturally you only hear about the success stories. ;)
These fears maybe valid, expecially with the amount of quick-fix doctors out there.
I have 20/25 vision now. This is more than adequate for any computer work (yes, I am a full developer). I had such vision that I could not hardly even SEE the monitor. Now, I enjoy a life without glasses/contacts. It is amazing.
A few recommendations:
1. Find a reputable doctor. One who has been doing this a LONG time. Find one who works on sports stars and celebrities in your area (they usually are better).
2. Make sure you do your homework. It is very important to know that you are messing with your EYES here.
3. Follow the doctors care to the LETTER. No flubbing or missing an eye-drop.
Is it for everyone? No, but it cured my nearsightedness and astigmatism. I recommend it everywhere. Of course I paid 2400 per eye at the time.
I can program myself out of a Hello World Contest!!
It seems that I had become unusually dependent on my peripheral vision, because I have noticed a reduction in quality. I had -5.00 of correction with some astigmatism. The doctors said that they've had people with -10 with only 6.5mm of their cornea corrected and felt that their peripheral vision was better than with glasses, while I noticed very early on that something was amiss with my peripheral vision. They don't seem to believe me.
Also, the overcorrected me so that I needed +1.5. They've done an "enhancement" since then. To do hyperopic correction, the correction area is about 8mm. But what pisses me off is that they did that correction without taking into account the original 6.5mm for -5.0. So rather than smoothing my cornea to the optimal shape, they did a superposition of 6.5mm of -5 and 8mm of +1.5.
It's been just over a week since the enhancement, and I'm noticably near sighted. We'll see how it heals, but I'm worried.
If I'd known that I would have so noticably uncorrected peripheral vision, I would never have had the surgery. Sometimes, I feel like I'm in a bit of a tunnel. It's amazing to me how little they account for peripheral vision... one of the topography machines only images 5.26mm. What about the rest of the eye?
Zyoptix is scheduled for rollout in the US at the beginning of next year by Bausch & Lomb. It's already available in Canada. The true advantage of Zyoptix really occurs in patients with high order abberations, and normal LASIK surgery with the Bausch & Lomb Laser will produce comparable results for most patients with low order aberrations, often better than 20/20. Additionally, the risk for glares or halos is significantly reduced thanks to a 2mm + 1mm beam profile which can treat a wider area of the cornea than most (any?) other conventional laser used for LASIK. The LADARVISION4000 system is also a good choice, as is the VISX Star S3. But as important as the laser is, a lot is still dependent upon the individual skill of the ophthalmologist... at least half. Reputable eye surgeons will track their results and case histories, able to provide statistical data upon your request.
I had LASIK performed in early 98 and couldn't be happier with the results. I went from the -6/-7 range to 20/20 or better in both eyes. I drove to the checkup the next morning and went back to work that afternoon and played volleyball that night (with safety glasses on...). I had some haloing/starbursting on bright lights for a few months afterword but it has since faded and I have absolutely no night vision problems. I have several friends as well as my brother who have had the procedure since me, all with satisfactory results. One girl I know went from -10 or worse in both eyes to 20/15. As usual YMMV...
LASIK and any of the other corrective procedures that I know of can't correct for presbyopia - the hardening of the inner lens of the eye with age. (The thing that makes your arms grow shorter, making it harder and harder to hold whatever you are reading far enough away.) Since I am in the age range (40s) where that usually starts to affect people I will probably need reading glasses at some point but that is a minor concern compared to needing glasses to read the clock next to my head in bed...
I considered having this done about two or so years ago. I went to the orientation thing offered here in the Atlanta (At Emory). After the 'session' thing was over, I went to a doctor and asked him, "I'm aware that there are only a few parts of the body that continue growing until death. THe lens of the eye being one of them. What's to say when I turn 65 or 70, my eye just won't rip along the scar tissue?" (I was 27 at the time).
His reply -- "You're right. Stick with glasses or contacts."
Now, my parents and grandparents have all had it. If I were in my 50's or so, then sure. What the hell. But, I don't want to spend the last of my days with split eyeballs. Maybe I'm just paranoid.
--Xan
"Congratulations, Boots. Your robot has become self-aware. You're a daddy now." -- Dr. Rho Bowman
Here's a site critical of eye exercises. And another article at the same site. Complete with scientific journal references.
It all makes sense, they literally are allowing the part of your eye they cut to heal .. and it
needs to heal without any jarring or bumping or infections (from the pool water) ..
It's been over a year, and I have no regrets. I stare at a monitor more than my wife or my mother suggest is healthy, but I think it's one of those 'use the muscle, it works fine' things in terms of the fact that I don't get eyestrain, even after the surgery. I do not see any worse close up, and far awa things are still very clear.
Understand this is not going to avoid your need for bi-focals but nobody has come up with a way to keep the muscles working beyond the 35-50 yr 'inability to focus closeup' in all eyes (or thats the way I understand it).
One happy Lasik customer.
Todd Fries
I've done it and I never regained my 20/20 vision. I saw well for the first 3 months after that I needed glasses again. I didn't mind it was a good improvement.
The bad part and I mean really bad is the glare!
I can't drive at night anymore. There are a number of times I came close to a serious accident. Even though I still wear glasses the glare I see is really bad. It's been 2 years and it hasn't gone away.
Please do not do this.
"If a show of teeth is not enough, bite
You know how many airports there are in California?
I would guess there's a landing strip and some "guys with radios" every 10 miles or so ; )
However, the International Air Transport Association gives a 3 letter code to basically everything that the local goverment considers an "airport"
No sig for the moment.
You appear to be missing the point. The hassle of glasses or contacts are in the noise compared to being blind.
Now If they only had a decent non-intrusive option to get rid of my damn floaters...
/
I used to think I had little amoeba's in my eyes..
http://interservicesnetwork.tripod.com/floaters
an excerpt from the LASIK SOS website
http://www.lasikSOS.com/
5. VIP FRAUD.
In my own pre-op consultations with "Doctor" Gordon, I said something along the lines of, "What's the downside of this here LASIK ?" "Doctor" Gordon said, "Well, I've had laser surgery, and I use a few eyedrops now and then."
What would you do if you went to a dentist and asked a question about a root canal - and he told you about his experience with getting a crown put in ? You might think that that dentist is dishonest.
That is exactly how I feel about "Doctor" Gordon. In my opinion, "Doctor" Gordon lied to close the sale. But the story doesn't stop there.
Some time after I had LASIK, "Doctor" Gordon went on national television to discuss LASIK. Appearing with "Doctor" Gordon was "Doctor" Roger Steinert, one of the VIP LASIK surgeons in the Boston area. In the context of a show on LASIK, "Doctor" Steinert presented his experience with "Doctor" Gordon, to convince the audience that, "LASIK is Safe." There's only one little problem.
"Doctor" Gordon and "Doctor" Steinert performed PRK on each other. Not LASIK.
While we're talking about VIP Fraud, let's discuss "Doctor" Tooma. As I have stated, "Doctor" Tooma has a patient on whom he performed LASIK in January 1999. That patient has experienced chronic eye pain since that time - pain which becomes excruciating when that patient uses their eyes. That patient has since been discovered to have large quantities of microscopic metal dust in their corneas.
Shortly afterwards, another patient, whose initials are T.J., visited "Doctor" Tooma for a pre-op consultation. T.J. stated affirmatively to me that "Doctor" Tooma told her he had no complications. Although, at that time, "Doctor" Tooma had one patient with a quite catastrophic complication. In my opinion, "Doctor" Tooma lied when he told T.J. that he "had no complications."
Unfortunately, the plot thickens. The patient with the metal dust embedded in their cornea, and the constant eye-pain, participated in a clinical trial when they had their LASIK. That clinical trial was conducted in conjunction with a local university. When we called that university to request a copy of the record of that patient's participation in that clinical trial, we were told that there was NO RECORD of that patient's participation in that clinical trial. It appears to me that "Doctor" Tooma removed that patient's record from the clinical trial.
Subsequently, given that that patient's surgery was performed using a Technolas 116 and that Technolas is owned by Bausch & Lomb, I perused the Bausch literature. Lo and behold, there's "Doctor" Tooma himself in the Bausch annual report.
Now, I'm a design engineer. I know that equipment manufacturers loan expensive equipment to potential customers.
I'm also a human being. And common sense tells me that you don't get your picture in an annual report by being loaned an expensive ophthalmic laser workstation, and using it to cripple a patient. You can, however, get your picture in an annual report by borrowing the surgical workstation, and reporting back that "it works great."
Unfortunately, it doesn't end there. The patient with the constant pain and the metal dust went to see "Doctor" Steinert for help. That's right, the patient flew across the country, to get help with LASIK complications. At that time, "Doctor" Steinert had access to a Tomey Confoscan confocal microscope. He examined that patient's corneas. He then returned the confocal microscope to Fortune Technologies. I subsequently spoke to "Dave McLellan", at Fortune Technologies. He stated affirmatively that he specifically remembered the machine he had loaned to "Doctor" Steinert . He also stated affirmatively that, when the machine was returned to him, all patient records were deleted.
That patient subsequently was examined by an experienced corneal specialist, with many years of experience using confocal microscopes to look at human corneas. He told that patient that he saw a huge amount of microscopic metal debris embedded in their cornea.
So, what did "Doctor" Steinert see ? Nothing ? In that case, although he is a VIP refractive surgeon, he is a newby when it comes to corneal microscopy. Or, something far more sinister. You see, there's a word for deleting or altering patient medical records. It's called "spoliation". In the state of Massachusetts, where "Doctor" Steinert practices "medicine", spoliation of medical records is grounds for revocation of one's medical license.
In my opinion, "Doctor" Steinert saw the metal debris embedded in the patient's cornea. In my opinion, instead of helping the patient, "Doctor" Steinert risked the loss of his own medical license, to protect "Doctor" Tooma.
In my opinion, that's not all "Doctor" Steinert was protecting. He was protecting the entire LASIK gravy train. You see, should it ever be made public that LASIK regularly leaves metal dust embedded in patient corneas, LASIK will be history.
I do not use the term "VIP" LASIK surgeon lightly. For sure,"Doctor" Gordon is one of the most experienced refractive surgeons in San Diego. "Doctor" Tooma's staff states affirmatively that he has performed 30,000 LASIK procedures himself, without making it clear whether that includes enhancements. "Doctor" Steinert himself is one of the most experienced refractive surgeons in the Boston area.
In other words, I have just finished describing the dastardly deeds, not of some cut-rate fake-degree shyster, but of some of the most prominent names in the LASIK industry.
Are you sure you want to trust your corneal health to these people ? Please note, they're among the "best in the business."
It has been the best thing I have ever done. It only took 10 minutes total and my vision immediately went to 20/30. A week later it was 20/10 and has stayed there since. The surgury was painless and quick. You are awake the whole time and if you have a good doctor he explains everything he is doing. My night vision is fantastic..even better then when I was a kid. There are some dangers but they are small and you are more in danger of an infection from contacts. Don't go for the cheapest plan and don't use a doctor that does not have his own equipment. The last place you want to be is a in an eye factory using rented equipment. Other then that I highly recommend it and my friends are amazed at my ability to read from a distance, and so am I for that matter.
And I love it. I'm going to reiterate what a lot of people have been saying that you should definitely get a doctor that has had a lot of experience with the procedure. It has been a little over a month since my surgery and I was -5/-3 with an astigmatism of less than -1. My vision had not changed in over four years (which they told me that your vision has to at least have been stable for a year in order to be a candidate for the surgery). You must realize that this is a surgery and I would not mess around with my eyes. I went to the best for my surgery although the cost was very high. The part of the surgery that is the most critical actually isn't the surgery itself but the measurements they take of your eye before the surgery. These measurements are what they use to program the laser. It took over three hours to get all the measurements done while the surgery itself only took maybe thirty minutes. The place where I got my LASIK surgery had access to equipment that not very many places do. They had a machine that uses lasers to take a precise prescription of your eye. No looking through lenses and trying to tell which looks better, number one or two, one or two... Also, if they use a ruler in a dark room to try to measure the size of your cornea in complete darkness I'd suggest going somewhere else. Since I had a fairly large pupil (which was determined by the measurement of my pupil in complete darkness) they used a different laser on my eyes; one that would cover a larger diameter to accomadate my larger pupils. The rooms where they performed the surgery with the lasers were also climate controlled. They controlled the humidity and the germ level and everything. They had every angle covered. The doctor had even hired a statistician to compile his results since he knew that his results were better then average. For myopia of a -5 and an astigmatism of -1 or less, his results for patients seeing 20/20 the next day were 98%. That definitely helped sell me on the surgery with my doctor. After the surgery I was seeing 20/16. I'm a developer and I have no problems with my eyesight at work. I had my surgery on a Friday and was working again with no problems on Monday; I could have easily of worked the next day though. The only problem I had with the surgery is some slight haloing/starbursting around lights at night but it is fading dramatically with each passing week. I was aware of this problem when I got the surgery though as I had talked to a lot of people before and they said that they experienced the haloing/starbursting as well but that it faded after a few months. My experience with LASIK was excellent and I would highly recommend it. Just make sure you get a reputable doctor with lots of experience and high quality equipment.
Both Intacs and Lasik have a risk of night-vision halos and reduced contrast, so I've been holding back myself. See Clearly Now, as others posted, seems to be a scam.
In the past few months, a new type of extended-wear contact lens was approved. Only Novartis/Cibavision is making it; it's called "Focus Night & Day". The contacts are made of a new material that lets 6x more oxygen into your eye than regular contacts, attracts your tears to keep itself moist, and has a special coating that prevents bacteria (and possibly virus) buildup. After 30 days, there's no noticeable buildup on the lens.
Basically, these solve all the problems that the 1980s extended-wear contacts had. You can keep these in for up to 30 days! (And then you throw them away: no care required.) It's actually better for your eye health than regular contacts due to the increased oxygen flow. A year's supply costs around $250, cheaper than daily disposables.
I have an appointment tomorrow to get these. I never end up wearing my contacts because I take lots of naps, am lazy, hate splashing saline all over the counter, get dry eyes, etc. So for me, it sound like it will solve the inconvenience and mess of contacts without any of the risks of today's surgeries.
The one disadvantage: It won't help if you have astigmatism greater than 1.5, as torics are not yet available in the US (I think they may be in other countries). It sounds like the fit may take a bit of getting used to as well.
CIBA has a web site: www.nightanddaycontacts.com
Can you tell I'm excited?
I'm waiting.
I stopped shopping/thinking about RK or LASIK when my dad had cataract surgery. He got a new lens and better vision for less money than the laser treatment costs!
Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from bad judgement.
- W. Wriston, former Citibank CEO
A couple of years ago, I looked into this, and frankly, I was not convinced that the technology had been perfected. Worse still, the few people for whom the surgery did go wrong, were told that they were crazy, discredited, etc. Yet when careful medical analysis was done by third parties, yes - there was evidence of permanent damage having been done. True, you can go get cornea transplants for like $10,000 per eye to repair the damage.
The horror stories were just too horrifying.
I decided to wait a couple of years to see if the Lasik procedure had matured or evolved. It has not. Basically, the company has created their "product" - and is now sitting back and raking in royalties from the surgeries. (about 80% of the cost of the surgery is royalties that go back to the company that makes the machines - the surgeon has to pay-per-use, in addition to paying for the hardware).
I also waited to see if a competing technology had evolved - it involved inserting a clear polymer torus into the cornea to change the shape - the important bit was that it was reversible. The company was bought out and shut down.
Finally, I had my optometrist do a check up on me to see if Lasik was right for me - as it turns out - it is not, because I get dry eyes. My eyes were damaged as a teen from sensitivity to thimerosol in my contact lens solutions - (they don't use thimerosol anymore, because many people were sensitive to it).
The new contact lenses, I can wear, in a limited fashion, about 8 hours a day at the most, and maybe 2-3 days a week. That's enough for me. I wear glasses the rest of the time.
MOST importantly:
The CURE for dry eyes!!!!
If anyone out there is suffering from dry eyes - try taking 1000mg of FLAX SEED OIL a day. Flax seed oil is a dietary supplement, and it's sold mostly at health-food stores and such, in the aisle with all the bee pollen, ox bile, and other garbage. But from experience, Flax seed oil REALLY does work for dry eyes. I used to be totally fatigued by 5pm, and unable to read my computer screen anymore. I even had to stop reading books for pleasure, because I just couldn't keep my eyes open from dry eyes. The Flax seed oil really helps. And it's a lot less annoying than having to stop and put in drops every half hour.
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
Somehow I have to think that this:
No idea what the fuck that shit is, but I'm 20/200 or so in one eye and something or another in the other
Pretty much eliminates the chances of this:
Poet looking for greeting card publisher Inquire Within [netfirms.com]
It's just not very poetic.
I've been diagnosed with kerataconus (sp?), severely in one eye and mildly in the right. It's a condition which distorts the cornea and having it disqualifies me for any laser treatment.
My opthamologist has given me two options, one being hard contacts, the other being corneal transplant. I'm deeply uncomfortable with contacts. I tried them during adolescence and couldn't deal with putting objects in my eyes and found the actual insertion to be diffucult. Also, I can't always count on having a lifestyle where the accessories of wearing contacts can always be at hand. Sometimes I go on extended trips living out of a small backpack.
So far my opthamologist has been stalling on the transplant surgery, but I'm starting to feel a sense of urgency as my right eye has gotten bad enough that I'm considering an eyepatch. As it is, input from the really bad eye is starting to interfere with how my brain inerprets signals from the sort of ok eye. it's to a point where I don't feel comfortable driving at night.
What should I be taking into account, here?
. We've got computers, we're tapping phone lines, you know that ain't allowed - Talking Heads, "Life During Wartime"
screw Lasik, I want a shine job like Vin Diesel had in Pitch Black!
$8.95/mo web hosting
If LASIK is such a successful procedure, why are there more optometrists out there opting to wear glasses or contacts instead? I don't know about you, but how many optometrists have you seen that have had that procedure done? I can't think of any.
If you tear a contact or break your glasses, you can just go to the store and buy a replacement. If your cornea gets screwed, you're screwed for life, so just stick to contacts/glasses and save your money for more important things..
You are exactly the sort of person who is at the greatest risk for damage. It's not a particularly huge risk you're taking, it's just bigger than the risk of LASIK problems. Or was at the time I was considering the operation.
And just three weeks ago they noticed a scrape in my right eye.
Um, yeah. The people who get in trouble tend to wear extended lenses "too long" (whatever that means) and don't get checkups as often as you. Scratches are bad, and contacts can (a) cause scratches, and (b) interfere with the healing process. But as with LASIK, the odds are on your side. 99% of extended-wear users probably don't have any problems worse than yours.
I play Nerd-Folk!
Probably posted too late to get noticed, but WTF...
(Humor) What to expect from your LASIK surgery:
1. When you stretch out on the table, you will be offered a teddy bear to hold. You will say "no thanks" because you are a mature adult with no need for stuffed animals. But trust us: take the teddy bear.
2. The doctor will numb your eye and prop it open with a lid speculum. The word speculum should make you think of a gynecological procedure involving a cold surgical instrument. If you can't imagine this, just think of two metal spoons wedging your eyelids open.
3. Relax.
4. A ring will be pressed on your eye and suctioned to the cornea. You may feel some discomfort.
5. Please, for the love of all that is holy, stare directly into the red light. If you can't do this one simple thing then maybe you shouldn't have this procedure!
6. A cutting instrument is attached to the suction ring. This blade will cut a flap in your eye to open the cornea like a flip-top box. The doctor will then dry your cornea by blowing on it as if it's a hot cup of coffee.
7. The laser is programmed to vaporize layers of your corneal tissue. For you, this will take one solid minute. It will be the longest minute of your life. The odor of burning hair will pervade your flesh. This is normal.
8. If you flinch, we cannot be held responsible for vaporizing tissue that should not be vaporized. Please be aware that something could go wrong, horribly wrong, at any time during the procedure. This may add a dimension of frantic urgency to your spirituality.
9. The doctor will use a tiny squeegee to put your corneal flap back in place. A shield will be placed over your eye. No stitches are used to hold the flap in place. If you rub your eye or put pressure on it, the flap may come loose or get folded over and then you will be sorry. Please refrain from poking yourself in the eye until the flap has healed.
10. Don't worry about putting the stuffing back into the teddy bear. Our staff handles that.
When violence rules the world outside / And the headlines make me want to cry / It's not the time to just keep quiet
The rest of it is all good.
I recommend that you do your homework and you get the best surgeon your money can buy you. I wouldn't trust my eyes to the $500 per eye people. I went to the guy that did Tiger Woods. Dr. Watkins, across the street from White Flint Mall, in Bethesda/Rockville, Maryland. As far as I know, he doesn't do his own screening. You go to one of the referring Ophthamologists, who figure out if you're a good candidate, then you go to Dr. Watkins for the laser. It's like an assembly line once you get there, but you're paying a lot of money ($5500 for me, but my medical plan membership gave me a discount to $3600), so they give you lots of personal service. I didn't actually have anything to do with Dr. Watkins except for the 5 minutes it took him to do my eyes. I asked him if he really did Tiger Woods and he said "Yes. He laid in that exact same chair."
The thing that really sold me was the testimonials: They've got a binder with pictures of all the famous people who've gone through there: Every major sport - football players, baseball players, basketball, hockey, tennis, golf; there's astronauts, movie stars, CEO's, foreign royalty (Saudi Princes and such) - pretty much anyone they'd put on the cover of Time. I figured if it was good enough for those people, it was good enough for me. The lobby is filled with autographed golf bags, baseballs, footballs, etc. If you managed to rob the place, you could make a killing on E-bay.
Can you think of anyone who's more dependent on his eyes than Tiger Woods? Don't you think he researched it and got about a million dollars worth of advice beforehand? I did research, too. I found out that most people who had problems (2 years ago, anyway) were going to cut-rate doctors. They would then come to Dr. Watkins to ask him to fix their problems. There's lots of doctors who do marginal candidates or even people whose eyes are so far from the norm that there's no way LASIK could help them. These are most of the people that are complaining.
For all you people on here advising against it because you had a bad experience: How much research did you do? How many opinions did you get? Did you use a coupon and try to find the cheapest price? Were you a marginal candidate and still chose to undergo the surgery? Are you an Ophthamologist afraid of losing more business?
There's a lot of options for correcting bad eyesight. LASIK was the right choice for me. I did a lot of research. I asked a lot of questions. I read all kinds of books and pamphlets. I'm an intelligent, thinking, rational human being and I can assess how much of a risk I'm willing to subject myself to. If I needed to do it over, I would. I've got 20/15 vision in both eyes and I love not having to wear glasses. It's especially nice when I'm going swimming. No fumbling with clips. No messing with contacts.
As an interesting side note, there's apparently a slight magnification that's done by glasses. Without glasses, things appear just a little smaller. Apparently, the only person to have ever noticed this is Tiger Woods. He told the doc on one of his follow-up visits that golf balls seemed a little smaller to him. My respect for the guy went up even further after I heard that. I think there's a reason he's the best golfer around.
http://www.lasikcourt.com/tlc/brenthanson
When I asked my eye doctor about surgery a few years ago (I'm WAY nearsighted in my left eye, and really nearsighted in the right), she said that the LASIK surgery was good, and would probably work well for me. But since I was worried about long term problems (like what happens in 60 years why my tissues are weaker, and my cornea is only half as thick as it should be?), she suggested I look into Intacs.
Instead of opening a flap over your cornea and shaving, they make two slits at the side of your iris, down to that same depth. They insert two silicon half-rings, one on top, and one on the bottom, just below the surface of your eye. The rings put pressure on your eye and help it focus better.
The major advantage is that if there are any problems (infection, for example), or if your prescription changes, they can remove the rings. Some people do still get the halo effects, but I think the rate is lower than for the LASIK.
The major disadvantage is that the FDA has only approved (at least, last I talked to a doctor) three thicknesses. So, unless you happen to be at exactly the right prescription, you probably won't get 20/20 vision... it might be a little worse, or it might be a little better. The cost is about the same as LASIK.
Personally, I don't mind wearing glasses or contacts. What I do mind, is that when I go swimming down at the beach, I have to take my glasses off, and when I get out of the water, I have no idea which blobs of color are my friends/family. All I want is to be able to see clearly beyond the length of one arm. If I still need glasses, that's fine with me.
For those who say that LASIK is great, which type of doctor do you recommend?
Here in Dallas, there's one doctor who is advertising all over tv and radio. He's probably performed the procedure more times than 90% of the other doctors in the country; he could probably performed the procedure with one hand tied behind his back. However, I met him once when my wife was refered to him for an eye problem she was having. He has a horrible bedside manner; he obviously cares more about the volume of patients rather than the patients' needs.
On the other hand, my optho is great, and I have the utmost confidence that he will place my needs first. This guy is a genuinely good doctor, and I don't doubt that he can technically perform the procedure as well as or better than the first doctor. He simply doesn't have the volume of LASIK patients as the first guy.
So who would you choose? The first doctor is an ass, but he's done the procedure so many times that it's pretty much second nature to him; I would think that there's a small chance of anything going wrong. The second doctor is a great guy, and is probably capable of performing the procedure as well as the first doctor. But he hasn't performed the procedure nearly as many times as the other guy, so he might not be as prepared for problems as the other doctor. But if anything did go wrong, I'd rather have my doctor looking out for me than the other guy.
I had LASIK on both eyes in 1997 (the right eye in June and the left eye in December). I had a fairly serious complication with the right eye (explaining the delay between the two surgeries): epithelial tissue regrew underneath the flap, and I had to have the incision reopened and scraped clean with a metal pick several times (really!). Quite like a visit to the dentist, except the pick was in my eye rather than my tooth.
Although the period between the two operations was pretty unpleasant, the end result was fairly good. I went from -11.25 myopia with no astigmatism to around -1.5 diopters of myopia with -0.25 diopters of astigmatism. (For the first year or two after surgery, my vision was nearly perfect, but it has since deteriorated slightly). I can see well enough to read books, magazines, and computer screens unaided (although I use large fonts) and to avoid traffic while walking around. I wear glasses to watch TV or movies. My corrected vision (i.e. while wearing glasses) is 20/20.
Despite the fairly serious complication, the only residual side effect of the surgery is a considerable amount of glare when viewing high-contrast objects (e.g. white text on a black background), especially in fairly dark surroundings. This can make it difficult to drive at night, appreciate city lights, etc.
I would personally recommend the surgery, but you should be prepared to suffer (uncorrectable) glare, especially at night. I suppose it's the price you pay for doing away with myopia.
I had it done 2 years ago. I was driving without glasses or anything else to my follow-up appt the next morning, I was going about 80mph, and I noticed the cop with the radar gun before he noticed me. I think that prooves how well lasik works. As a programmer I can say that I can still see clearly after 2 years and I am happy that I did it.
Lasik does have its problems: At night I get a starburst effect. It was very bad the first two weeks then slowly got better. By six months the effects were trivial. I still have it today but it does not impair my ability to drive at night. It is so insignificant that I do not even notice it anymore.
The best advice I can give is this: Don't go to one of the two-bit hacks that undercut everyone else on price. Research the people in the area and go to a real professional to have it done. While the process is automated so that the idiots can safely work on an assembly line of patients, the real professionals will pre-screen you and not work on eyes that have a high risk of complications.
Looking for a job?
Want your resume written professionally?
DON'T USE TUNAREZ!!!
Don't do it!
I personally know 2 people who have had LASIK. Family. And one who's considering it, strongly.
Father: My dad works as a Surgeon. He needs to have good vision MORE than a coder does. He has to be able to see what he's doing. He can't just up the font size. He went from 20/50 (BAD vision) to 20/15 in the right eye and 20/10 in the left (EXCELLENT vision). He was fully aware of the risks involved with surgery , and as a surgeon, he had access to detailed reports and the knowledge to use them. He did the procedure based on this. Side note: he had this procedure done about 5 years ago before it was legalized in America. He went to canada. They corrected him to 20/30 in both eyes. 2 years later, when it was legalized here, he had a REVISION done. This corrected him to the aforementioned vision.
Brother: My brother works as an engineer at Micron. I don't know the specific details of what he does there, much beyond that he makes tests for the RAM modules there. I'm sure he deals with text on computer screens, and I'm sure, and I have little doubt he has trouble reading them with his 20/15 vision in both eyes (33% better than 'normal' vision). He had vision worse than 20/40 in both eyes.
And people who are considering it: ME.
I've got terrible vision. 20/40+ in the right eye, and 20/100 in the left eye (That's about a 1-inch resolution at 5 feet). I'm a coder, all the way. I AM going to get this procedure done, partially due to the new advances.
Intralaze is the biggest one.
The old version of the procedure (see, I'm a coder!) did the following.
1. Cut the surface of the cornea with a very precise KNIFE (This is the MicroKeratome), ALMOST all the way across.
2. Pull back the newly formed flap
3. Lase the exposed surface, reshaping it as desired.
4. put the flap back.
(note: it reattaches slowly over time)
The new version, A.K.A. "IntraLase" replaces step 1 with a laser-based process. For a demo of that, go here
Go here for some more information: WillVision
P.S.: My dad and my brother both went to WillVision. They know what they are doing. If you're in the Northwest USA, I'd recommend them.
Well, I had been considering laser surgery for my vision, but since reading other /.ers posts about it has left me with severe nausea and the cold sweats, maybe I'm not cut out for it.
Reminds me of the time a friend drove me to have my vasectomy (which, by the way, should be done under general anesthesia, but isn't). On the way back, he asked me what the procedure was like. I told him. He had to pull over on the side of the road because he was afraid he was going to pass out. I didn't feel like driving, either, so we sat on the side of the road until he regained his composure.
-- stream of did I lock the front door consciousness
Having -- and hating -- to wear glasses, I wish lasik were absolutely cast-iron 100% guaranteed. But I'm blind in one eye, so even if it ever gets to 99.9999%, it's that last decimal place that will prevent me from getting the work done.
"How many light bulbs does it take to change a person?" --BMcC-->
Supposedly those (1/10k) are the odds that a vasectomy (sp?) will be ineffective.
Well, perhaps 'ineffective' was the wrong word...
The following is damn piss poor as a poem, but please try to understand the message. I wish I was better at this.
To Cliff,
I felt so bad I had no shoes,
till I met a man with no feet.
He had only stubs and a smile to greet all,
His happiness left me in spectacular awe.
But now I need glasses to see,
give me good lenses and I'll be happy.
Oh no, lenses will not do,
I must look like a supermodel with a great doo.
So off I went to the laser man next door,
It was wonderful and exciting all the galore
next'd I bump'n into the car next door.
Blurr Blurr, hiss hiss,
Now wasn't so easy to see in the bliss
My eyes were leaking through tiny incisions
Given another chance I would second the decision
One set of eyes is all I'm allowed,
Some say phooey, some yell out loud,
Now matter the noise I have what I was endowed,
A set of eyes corrected to see out loud.
Dedicated as am apology to all those I meanly
called "4 eyes" in the past,
Please forgive me.
Please whatever you do...Do for your family, Do for yourself, but please don't do to please someone else.
I'm sorry,
Jim
High pass means pass through high frequency (eg. spots and other blemishes) while removing low frequency (ie. overall shape). Some video cameras use low pass filters when they see skin tones (programmable for all races!) and in fact in my work we use a high pass filter when we want just the blemishes on someone's face. But don't ask why we do that, we just do.
-- SIGFPE
You make a great point. If you're sensitive to the _thought_ of having someone touch your eyes then this could be a bit of a troublesome undertaking.
When I had mine done almost 5 years ago the doc realized I was anxious the day before and came up with a great solution. **5mg of Valium** Enough said. Then take another 5mg a couple hours later and go to bed for the day/night.
I had my eyes done back in Oct. of '97. Almost 5 years to the day and let me tell you, I'd do it again in a heartbeat.
Think about these things...
- Ever wonder why shampoo and conditioner have different color bottle tops?
- SCUBA diving without a prescription mask (all water sports for that matter)
- Sunglasses!!!
- Falling asleep while reading.
Life just becomes a little easier.
The list could go on and on. Do the research and take the leap. You'll thank us later.
Interesting to read your message-- I'm at 20/60 and 20/400 uncorrected and I've had 3 optometrists tell me I was the most unbalanced vision they'd ever treated. It is hard to explain not having depth perception to people who take it for granted. (My eyes have always been unbalanced so they don't really work together-- yes, I am the person with no dominant eye.) Don't get why you can't wear glasses though?
It also occurs to me that if one was drowning, yelling "Help! I'm drowning and I lost my bikini top" would probably be m
Mirnav: This is for real. The eye is very plastic. If the muscles did not hold the eye in a bad position, the vision would be perfect.
You said, "... entertain the thought that my myopia that started at the age of 7 was caused by an excessively tense lifestyle in elementary school!"
The problem is not elementary school. Babies need constant contact with a loving person. If they don't have it, they grow up with considerable inner conflict. Check one of my other posts in this sub-thread about genetically similar people in Brazil and the United States. In Brazil, parents typically hold their babies constantly. (They bring their babies to parties and dance with them, for example.) This is the major reason that Brazilians have far fewer physical problems than Americans. Often, Americans put their babies in a crib in another room.
It is not logical to focus just on myopia. Many Americans are physical wrecks. A very large percentage are obese; the U.S. is the most obese country in the world, with the exception of a Pacific island where the diet is heavy in coconut fat. Americans have chronic muscle tension in many of the muscle groups, not just the eye muscles.
Social problems exist in every nation of the world. However, the U.S. is the worst in the world in several ways: 1) Obesity, 2) Killing other people, 3) Spying on people, 4) Putting people in prison. What goes around comes around. The U.S. is a difficult place to live, in many ways, and American's bodies reflect that.
Using Brazil as an example again, I have been told that the last time the Brazilian government killed someone in war was 1822. I'm not sure this is true. I am sure that the U.S. government killed more than 2,000,000 people in the last 35 years in war. For more about the tendency of the U.S. culture to violence, see my article What should be the Response to Violence? .
Before the mayor of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, cleaned up the mess during the Viva Rio movement, Rio was notorious for violence. The city had a murder rate then of something like 45 murders per year per 100,000 population. The rate in Washington, D.C. is 77.
Instead of seeing the world in a friendly, socially sophisticated way, the U.S. culture tends to see things in an adversarial way. This causes inner conflict in U.S. citizens.
It's a big transition, I know, realizing that, all your life, people have been lying to each other about their inner reality. But it's true.
As I mentioned in another comment in this sub-thread, read "The Primal Scream" by Arthur Janov.
I have have never lived in the US and hence was not exposed to the sort of life you are describing. My brother, however, studied in UPENN, worked in Manhattan for two years, and is now doing his MBA in Harvard. If anyone is subjected to the difficulties in American way of life, I guess he is.
He has perfect sight in both eyes.
The difference between me and my brother, in my humble opinion, is that I was reading encyclopedias as a child, while his interests were more in the "lego" domain :)
When your vision *is* corrected, do you have depth perception? I'm in a similar boat (although not quite as bad--just three diopters difference) as you. Corrected (glasses or not), I still don't have depth perception. I went for so long as a kid with unbalanced uncorrected vision that my brain doesn't have highly developed depth perception.
I can obtain depth perception one of two ways: 1. use glasses with orthogonally polarized lenses (think 3D polorized lenses)
2. Eat acid.
Neither way is really conducive to work. =) I was wondering if you had found anything that might be of assistance.
You have missed the point a little.
It is what happens as a very young child that causes the problems, generally.
Also, I was giving you an example of how it could be true that large numbers of people have chronic muscle tension. Maybe it does not apply to you, however. Obviously, I would have no way of knowing anything specific about you.
Two people who love each other sometimes unknowingly traumatize their child, so it is not impossible. It is extremely common that someone says that he or she had loving parents when, in fact, he or she was traumatized. The two are not inconsistent.
My $.02 Many commercials offer 99-100% success rates on their surgery. What they don't tell you is that 20-40 vision can be called a "success". Disregard ALL commercial claims and find a Doctor who will openly tell you their success rate of 20-20 or better patients. I have been told by several doctors (eye doctors, that do NOT perform the surgery themselves, many who have had it done), that money does matter. Many of these "$500 an eye" people are the ones who claim 100% success, even though more than half will have 20-40 vision. Almost no doctor should have a 100% 20-20 success rate, go for the one with the highest rating who seems the most open and honest about their record. In case you are not familiar, with 20-40 you would have a very hard time reading posters and signs that were in the same room as you. I opted to wait, the procedure is only going to get better, and contacts are so cheap and easy to use nowadays. Consider that you can even wear some for the whole month and then throw them away, no cleaning no taking them out, compared with night halo vision and possible blindness, it seems like a winner to me :)
I had lasik performed in San Jose in July 2000. Absolutely the best $4000 I've ever spent!! The doctor who did my eyes also did Steve Job's eyes, as well as those of four of my co-workers at Cisco.
My former prescription: -5.5 in both eyes. My eyes didn't tear enough, and wearing contacts in San Jose summer smog was impossible... I had conjunctivitis frequently.
Following surgery, my vision is 20/15 in both eyes. No haloing, no impact on night vision at all. Have always had exceptional night vision... except with gas-permeable contacts, which caused significant haloing.
The surgery was not painful, just kinda scary -- whether you're squeamish or not, watch the video first so you'll know what to expect!. The first 4 hours after the anaesthetic drops wore off were more painful than I expected, like sharp sand in your eyes.. but I stayed in a darkened room, in bed, and mostly slept through it. Lubricating the eyes frequently during the first week is utterly essential to smooth healing of the corneal flap.
As has already been said above, it's important to rest your eyes periodically throughout the day by looking out the window and focusing at a distance. It's also critical to ensure your monitor refresh rate is set properly.
This surgery changed my life for the better in so many ways: swimming, skiing, white-water, scuba... some nights I still wake up and reach for my glasses to read the clock... and it hits me all over again:
I CAN SEE!!!!! :)
One more experience to add to your tally...
I wore contact lenses for 9 years, up until this past spring. I always hated the contacts, since they were a nuisance to put in, take out, take care of, etc. I hated glasses even more, though, since they didn't do as much for me (especially annoying was the lack of peripheral vision when wearing glasses).
Last winter, I got an infection in my eye from the contacts, and couldn't wear them for a few weeks. The eye doctor told me that that's not uncommon in contact wearers, even if you've gone for ten years with no problems. He said it can happen again any time, or maybe never again.
After that, I started seriously considering getting laser surgery. I'd thought about it a couple of years ago, but decided that the failure rate (about 3-4% at the time) was too high for me to risk. I did some research into the procedure, and into various doctors. I found an excellent doctor (one of the pioneers of the surgery, considered one of the best at it in the country, yada yada yada), and spoke to him about my concerns. He told me about the recent developments (flying-spot, for example) which addressed many of my concerns, discussed his history with other patients, and his methods. He really set my mind at ease.
To make a long story not-quite-as-long, I decided to get the surgery done. I had the LASIK procedure in mid-April. It was quick and painless, and worked perfectly. My vision went from 20/200 or so to 20/15 in both eyes. There were no complications, my night vision is fine, my eyes are fine, I can sit in front of a computer for hours every day without problems.
I've been recommending this surgery to people who ask me about it, and recommending this particular doctor, who did an excellent job, and takes good care of his patients.
The one thing to consider is that the long-term effects aren't really known. The surgery hasn't been around for very long, so nobody really knows for sure what might happen 20 or 30 years down the road.
The theory explains much of what happens in the world. Look around. Read the books. It's a difficult experience to realize this, but a growthful one. Whether anything I said applies to you, I don't know.
It's unfortunate that you have turned hostile. I was only trying to be helpful.
The reasons given were that one lens would produce an image considerably smaller than the other lens, and I'd eventually get headaches from trying to "merge" the two images. There was also the fact that the glasses would make my eyes look odd (one larger than the other) -- and yes, I'm that vain.
I do have good depth perception once my vision is corrected. My vision didn't start deviating until I was in fourth grade, and even then, it was 20/20 and 20/30. Over the years, one eye has gotten better and the other much worse.
-------------------------------------------------