Slashdot Mirror
Experiences with Laser Eye Surgery?
GodLessOne asks: "I am about to get my hands on a reasonable lump of cash and I am working on my list of ways to make it an ex-lump of cash. All of the normal geek things appear on the list, but one item that I keep considering is corrective laser eye surgery. Would anyone care to share their real world experiences? I worry that the people selling it are the only ones saying how wonderful it is, and what percentage of people show a marked improvement afterward. Are there any stories out there relating how bad it can be if it goes wrong?"
I found a ton of info on Google...first hand encounters. Lasik experiences.
Yes. Do a google search on "lasik dangers" and you'll find that when it goes wrong, it can go horribly wrong, up to and including blindness.
I, personally, wouldn't do it unless my vision was so bad I needed coke-bottle bottoms to see.
Unless I was seriously blind. I wear glasses, sometimes it sucks, but I just couldn't bear even a 0.5% chance of something going wrong or any chance of blindness.
I've got a friend who had it done and I watched the tape of the surgery and it looked sketchy. She says that she is stoked she got it, but she has some night blindness from it. I've also talked to a few other people that have had it and they are all happy. I'd say just do research into the doctor you go to first. That's probably the most important thing.
...plus some astigmatism in both eyes; my results were quite good, if not perfect. I'm at about 24/40 now. Night vision includes some starburst effect, but not bad at all. I still wear glasses occasionally, but with lenses that don't break my nose. I think the most important things are finding a reputable doctor and going to the followup examinations. In my case, the doctor wouldn't do both eyes at once, given the high correction. I certainly have no regrets, and consider it money very well spent.
Avoid frauds and unrealistic expectations.
Understand the risks, ans assume much worse odds than you are told. If you're still up for it, go on. If you aren't sure, wait. It keeps getting better and safer, you know.
Good luck!
everything in moderation
Although I myself haven't had it, several of my friends have. The only real side effects are temporary (blurry vision and double lights while driving at night) so make sure you are prepared for a little recovery time.
The technology and the prices keep getting better as well.
One thing you will need to keep in mind is even though you might be restored to good vision, normal aging will still continue to lessen your vision. However you'll still be better off.
There are a few types of eye problems that are not corrected by the surgery though. So before you get your hopes up first ask if you are a good candidate for the surgery.
Hope that helps.
Timmmmaaay!
(If at first you don't succeed, do it different next time!)
The FDA offers this article: Laser Eye Surgery: Is It Worth Looking Into?
If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called research, would it? ~ Albert Einstein
I'm still hiding behind a pair of armor plates suspended ahead of my eyes on metal frames, but when I get to the point of actually doing some vision repair/etc, I'd be leaning towards this type of procedure instead of laser surgery.
-PS
"All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke
Had both eyes done at once (Lasik) and mine were bad but with minor astigmatism. I thik they were like 20/200+ each before.
After a VERY simple procedure (apart from the razor cutting a flap in your cornea), the recovery process was about 2 days long and now, after 1 year, I have absolutely no ill effects (apart from temp night halos for a bit but they went away after about 6 months).
Vision now 20/20 left eye, 20/15 right eye.
I had it done 1 month ago. I could not get lasic, I had to have PRK performed. The biggest difference I am told is the pain that I went through. So far, so good. This has been the first time without needing glasses in 29 years. I seem to be healing quite well but am a bit far sighted now. Good trade! One of the hobbies that I have is astronomy. So far my night vision is as good or better than it was (corrected). No complaints so far. I have heard the horror stories as well. I researched and made the decision to do it anyway.
It could be worse, it could be Monday.
You don't list if you currently wear contacts or glasses. A word of warning if you wear Hard or Gas Permeable contacts (rigid type). Since they ARE rigid they reshape your eye. After you've used them for a while your eye starts to reshape a bit. Which is great. Right up until you decide it's time to STOP wearing them. It takes a while for your eye to gradually reshape -- up to a year depending on the doctor you talk to (and since it's your eyes I'd assume you'd want to be cautious...). So if you get the surgery done before your eye has totally relaxed the surgery will be a waste.
Another warning -- always get a second opinion (from a competent opthamologist) as to whether the thickness of your cornea is great enough to successfully do the surgery. In a story a while ago (cnn?) one of the major problems was that a doctor would attempt to do the surgery with a cornea that was too thin to work with.
Invalid Checksum. Retrying.
A friend had this done and has had continuing problems because of it. I'm not entirely sure the exact issues but if you send me your email I can put the two of you in touch with each other.
One issue is that she now has serious night vision problems.
My brother had an RK which is an older corrective technique and he felt it was well worth it. However, you may want to read the book "Left for Dead" because it was the eye surgery that left Seaborn Beck Weathers incapacitated and he really was left for dead, twice in fact. So there can be serious consequences.
I where glasses and did consider surgery at one time. The glasses don't really bother me and since I am short sighted I have found that this is actually a blessing in disguise.
The glasses fix the distance vision perfectly and I can see perfectly from about 24" to infinity. Under 18" I take off the glasses and can then focus to the tip of my nose. Thus I can do close up work that others can't.
If you do elect for the surgery, then make sure you get a good doctor... there are some who try to cut a few corners (pardon the pun)
Have you considered Intacs? They're much cheaper, lower risk and very effective, though they don't correct all types of flawed vision.
I had Lasik in 1999 and my vision went from 20/400 (can't see the big 'E') to 20/17 (can read a couple of letters on the next to the bottom row)
:-)
The procedure was a bit odd. The most unnerving part was when they cut your eye open. You think you're nearly blind then, but you don't have a clue until you see that. The LED light looked about the size of a dime before it was cut, but while it was open for the surgery, it was the size of a *basketball*. Amazingly, I could see improvement while the laser was burning away at my eye.
Immediately after the surgery I could read without my glasses and there was some haze. Kinda like looking out the window on a foggy morning. There were only 3 consequences $5000 fee for the surgery (it was 1999), slightly reduced night vision, and somewhat dry eyes.
5 days later, the fog disappeared and I couldn't see *with* my glasses
Other than that, I can actually see the distortion of a perfectly clean pane of glass vs a plain view. If the wind would stop blowing for long enough, I might just be able to count the leaves on the trees from a distance.
But that means that if he worked eight hours a day five days a week, performing two surgeries per hour, it'd take him over 60 years to have performed all those surgeries. Something tells me you shouldn't trust this guy.
A few thoughts:
1) This isn't like buying toothpaste (to borrow a quote). This is surgery. It is worth it to pay the extra money for someone good, rather than skimp and regret it later.
2) If your correction is still changing year-to-year, don't do it. It's only really worth it if your vision has stabilized for a few years.
3) Be prepared for side effects. Personally, my eyes are much drier than they were before, and small, point light sources have little halos around them...especially visible at night.
4) They may say that you can function normally the next day...don't even bother trying. Personally, the day after I could look out my window and watch the building across the way shift into and out of focus as my eyes dealt with their new shape. It was like tripping, only without the mood to go along with it. Kinda freaky, actually, now that I think about it.
With all that said, I would do it again in a heartbeat. I was about -6 or -6.5 diopter, and about a -3 or 4 astigmatism. That's well beyond the range measureable by the 20/20 scale. I don't need glasses now, for anything. I spent a good deal more than the average person, but it was absolutely worth it.
A year and a half ago, I was (like many other computer type people) a slave to my glasses and contacts. I had myopia (near-signtedness) as well as astigmatism. To put it bluntly I couldn't see $*@#@ without corrective lenses. So I decided to take the plunge and investigate Laser surgery. I settled on Lasik MDs in Canada (where I live). I checked out a few other places, but they didn't really offer anything justifying their much higher cost.
They put me though hours of tests to determine if I would be an optimal candidate for the treatment. I know at least 2 people who have tried and been turned down by them because of various reasons. They're actually not willing to even try it on you if they think there might be any complications.
I had the surgery, which cost me just over $2000CDN. It took about 7 minutes. When I sat up on the table, it was pretty incredible, things were a little hazy, but I could see clearly! It only got better from there. I took a few days off work (and wore dumb old-guy-in-a-caddy type sunglasses), and rested. I ended up with 20/15 (better than normal) vision. I'm perfectly comfortable looking at a 19" monitor at 1600x1200 from a distance of 4-5 feet. Night vision is great too. I've recomended it to a few people already. It is perhaps the most life changing experience I've ever had. Seriously, go for it!
I suggest coming up to Canada to have it done. It's very cost-effective with the exchange rate, and the technology is top-notch.
Let me relate my experience which is probably NOT typical at all!
Eyeglasses in middle school and high school. Hated them, got contacts in college. Constantly irrirated my right eye, tried different brands and shapes (disposable) to no avail. Had PRK laser eye surgery (was $1800/eye and LASIK was $3K+/eye at the time). Both eyes were only slightly near sighted. Left eye is great, right eye they took a bit too far and made it far sighted. My brain had a hard time coping with the difference and the years of being used to near-sightedness. Tried a contact in that right eye to correct the far-sightedness, remember that's the one I couldn't stand a contact in to begin with. Talked them into a free corrective _LASIK_ procedure on the right eye which brought it back to about as perfect as can be expected. Too late though, that time of being far sighted in it caused my eyes to cross. I now wear glasses that are clear glass, NO correction for either eye, thick as can be though because they're prisms to correct the cross-eyed condition.
How's that for coming full circle?
Fast forward a few years.. A friend a few months ago went to Atlanta on a Friday, had LASIK for $750/eye done Saturday morning, stayed Saturday, went back for a checkup Sunday, drove home, went to work on Monday. Perfect ever since...
The operation (all 15 minutes of it) was very stressful. No pain, just stress. It took a few days for the fog effect to clear, but after that it was like I had never really seen before. It's amazing what I had taking for granted with glasses, like no peripheral vision, or having to look through dirty lens to see anything.
I've been glasses free for over a year now and my vision is as clear as it was a year ago. I expect that I'll have to get a tune-up in a year or to, but I'll be less stressed about it than I was the first time.
It may not be for everyone, but if your vision prescription is stable it is certainly worth serious contemplation.
Jon.
Vision science hasn't really come up with a good way to quantify glare in pre and post-operative patients of LASIK and related surgeries. Subjective studies (where they just ask the patients), along with anecdotal evidence, show a tendency for increased glare problems after LASIK.
Within the next few years you can expect reasonable quantitative studies of glare after LASIK. This will give you statistical answers to questions like: What are the chances of having glare effects? and How bad might it be?
And if anyone's wondering: LASIK stands for LAser in SItu Keratomileusis
"Preceded by itself yields falsehood" preceded by itself yields falsehood.
I would never do it again. Among other things it has completely decimated my night vision. Being an amatuer astronomer (among myriad other things) I could always take relief in that my relatively rotten eyesight was not really a hindrance when peering at points of light through a telescope. Now virtually any lighting above ambient in a low-light environment creates tons of hazy starbursts which blast my acuity all to hell. The surgery hasn't helped my vision when I'm the least bit fatigued either. I can't find any satisfactory explanation for this, so it may be an effect of my overall displeasure with the result of the sugery. Be Forewarned. According to my research I am far from being in the minority with respect to most of my complaints. Best of Luck, there are those who have done it and are pleased as punch, but I'd say it's at best a crapshoot.
Emancipate yourself from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our minds. Robert Nesta Marley
My perscription lenses were -3.75 in one eye and -4.50 in the other. I had LASIK 2 years ago, and tested at 20/20 last week. For me not having to worry about glasses or hassle with contacts, even extend wear contacts, were well worth the price and minor discomfort of LASIK.
Yes, there can be complications, but that's true of any surgery. My advice: under no circumstances should you buy LASIK on price. (Would you shop around for the cheapest heart surgeon?) Skip anybody who advertises AT ALL and find yourself a good opthamologist. He or she is going to cost more than the "$299 per eye" guys, but you will get personal care and will generally not be subject to the "LASIK mill" approach. Ask your friends, family and your regular doctor, (if you have one) for referrals.
You could also go to one of the independent laser centers (eg, TLC) and ask which private opthamologists use them, then go interview a couple of those doctors.
Most of the complications with LASIK happen when the surgeon cuts the flap badly then proceeds with the laser anyway. The flap doesn't fit back on the cornea correctly and the halos etc. happen. If the surgeon merely replaces a badly cut flap, then waits a few weeks to try that eye again the results are usually excellent.
Hi there-
I got Lasik eye surgery in both my eyes from one of the most respected (and expensive) surgeons on the west coast. I did my homework, at the time 4 years ago, he had already done 10,000+ procedures. He has impeccable credentials (Harvard M.D.) and I believe he was one of the people who actually developed the technology. He is the founder of a very fancy institute and did numerous tests both before and after the procedure.
Anyway the reason why I mention this is because although things went perfectly, there was one bad consequence. I HAVE BLURRY VISION IN LOW LIGHT! I understand this is because, when you have as bad eyesight as I did, when the pupil expands in low light it goes beyond the area where the laser ablation took place. The consequence of having light going into your eye from the central focused region and the outer unfocused region is blurriness typically as halos or rings.
During the day/bright light my vision is absolutely perfect, I have better than 20/20 whereas before I had something like 600/20. Unfortunately my work takes me into lots of dark rooms looking at relatively dimly lit images and judging them for image quality/artifacts. So it was BAD!
As a consequence I am keeping up with technological developments waiting for a fix. Now they are using something called wavefront technology, I guess they are able to ablate away your cornea in fractions of a wavelength of visible light (the laser is UV to prevent heating which would kill underlying cells). Unfortunately I think this does not help me because I need the laser to be able to get a larger region of my cornea so that my expanded pupils don't reach the boundary of the ablated area.
I am not sure if my problems were due to my extremely nearsighted vision or other factors. In any case, I am posting this warning that even the best doctor may leave you with BAD results. (I have my complaints that this part of the industry seems to be poorly regulated, while I was given disclosures on the procedures, I do not think the odds of poor results were clearly explained to me. So if this doctor thinks I'm defaming him, I'll be happy to take him to court.).
Good luck.
I had suggested the operation to my wife but she was too afraid of the risks. Her mother had gone blind and eventually died at a relatively young age... not because of laser surgery, but I mention it here because it was a factor in my wife's private fears.
Then one day she was talking to one of her friends who had undergone laser surgery. He was thrilled with the results and claimed that he "walked out of the clinic with better eyesight than he had ever had with glasses or contacts" -- a rather unbelievable story detail but his raving reviews convinced her to try it out.
She had one eye done at a time, to reduce the credit card bill and also to ensure that if the first eye didn't go well then at least she would have one working eye!
It went great so a few months later she had the other eye done and has not regretted it. Now she notices a little bit of extra hazziness on bright lights at night, and is still a bit hooked on eye drops after about two years (but then, she used a lot of eye drop stuff when she had contacts).
I know about five or six people who have had the proceedure done and they all had positive results.
Finally, if you are having it done in the SF Bay Area, my wife would strongly recommend the UCSF eye center. That is where she had the second eye done and she found them MUCH more professional than the private eye doctor (trained at UCSF) that did her first eye.
Good luck.
Religion is poison to rationality, and we lose sight of that at our own peril. -- Lurker2288
You're probably considering LASIK. At this time, the Air Force bans anyone who's had this surgery, due to concerns over possible flap movement.
If you're not planning to fly jets or go scuba diving (similar concerns) any time soon, then you should probably go for the absolute latest equipment available: the FDA list of approved lasers with approval dates is here. Keep in mind that we can't yet replace entire eyes, so now is not the time to save money. I recommend wavefront-guided "custom" LASIK.
Finally, if you get to feeling risk-averse, Ophthonix is introducing wavefront-guided custom eyeglasses later this year, which will give you 20/15 vision with none of the risks of letting some guy slice up the only eyes you have using a procedure with less than ten years of results.
Hold out for Staar Surgical and their intraocular lenses. Basically it's an implanted contact lens. Unlike Lasik, it's reversible. You can change your prescription. But it's not quite approved yet.
It definitely works. I went from having a -10 diopter prescription (which, if you're not familiar with such numbers, is really nearsighted, to the point I couldn't read a clock 2 feet away) to having perfect 20/20 vision.
But, it's not without risks. For example, my night vision is somewhat degraded because uncorrected light on the edges of the cornea (when I had the surgery done the current technology only corrected out to about 8mm) creates 'starbursts'. I'm still happy with the procedure, but it's not always perfect. There are chances (low, but statistics don't mean anything when you're only talking about one set of eyes) that much worse things can happen.
Any good doctor will clearly present your options and risks. Ask around for a referral from friends as to who to see... and don't just take the lowest cost vendor!
The 1500 is a guess, they said. The chart stops at 20/1000.
Initially, I couldn't read close up. I was like an old person w/o bifocals at the store - holding items at arms length to be able to read the label. That passed gradually over a period of weeks.
Initially my night vision really sucked. Lots of "blooming" around roadsigns reflecting the light and whatnot. Improves somewhat over time.
I had what I called "ghosting" - anyone who's had LASIK that I've talked to (with significant correction) knows what I'm talking about. Hard to explain. Some of it may be residual near-sightedness I was told, even though I could manage 20/15 on the eye chart. That's what you sometimes hear called "LASIK 20/20" - you can do the eye chart test, but things aren't necessarily crisp. At one point, predominantly with high contrast images (black and white bumper stickers, the moon, etc) I would get something like a 25% intensity image about half-shifted down and to the right (or left, I forget). This got better with time.
Some of the residual artifacts I am not sure if they resolved themselves, or whether my brain adapted. Keep in mind your brain adapts to the fact that you have two huge blind spots in the center of each eye, due to the optic bundle entering the rear of the eye.... yet under normal circumstances you don't notice it. I wonder too if the brain subtly corrects for some of the residual artifacts. Hmm..
I wholeheartedly concur with those that say to go to a high profile, higher cost place. I went with a firm that had done the likes of Tiger Woods, yada yada. I went from 20/1500 (guessed, off scale) with astigmatism to 20/15. Someone I knew went from something like 20/800 to 20/40, best case. They spent a few hundred, I spent a few thousand. There's also the integrity factor... the place I went, for the single price, if you need a slight corrective surgery after healing is about done and the results are known, they would do that for the included price. Of course they're gambling you won't need it, but it's there. Also unlimited check-ins if you think something is not quite right. Some of the low lead-in prices make everything else ala-carte - you could end up paying thousands anyway.. and does the place offer a nationwide network of places you can get checked under the initial base contract for no additional cost?
Anyway, back to the integrity thing. They measure how thick your corneas are, and where I went, they remeasured right before surgery. (should be standard, but I've only done it once, so that's my only data point) The double check showed a little thinner than before. They were going to be taking out the maximum cornea allowed. Which meant I could not have a followup procedure in that eye. They sat me up in the chair before the procedure started, told me that my chances for 20/20 were diminished because their estimate of how much cornea they needed to remove was exactly how much I had. No followup work could be performed. They were willing to tear up my check right then and send me on my way, because they couldn't offer the service they promoted.
I still went ahead with it, and overall have been pleased with the results.
To those who say you could go blind... yes you could. I could have also paralyzed the side of my face when I had my wisdom teeth cut out. If I ever undergo general anesthesia, I could die.
It's like saying getting into a car means you could get killed. Yet an awful lot of us do it every day. Check out the odds and place your bets.
One thing I did was ask how many eyes the place had done. Then, what was their rate of problems. They didn't know off hand, but got me the answer. 2 or 3 minor problems out of 50,000+ eyes left me thinking my odds were pretty good. I placed my bets, and consider myself a winner.
Your mileage may vary, as the saying goes.
w
Incredible coincidence... I got laser eye surgery today. All I can say is, it's amazing. The best investment I've ever made. (I'm actually not supposed to be on the computer right now, but... oh well.) I can already read things at distances that my parents and brother cannot, and my vision hasn't even cleared up yet, the way that it is supposed to. I got Wavefront LASIK. Traditional LASIK had many problems with it: for example, it tended to injure night vision, and its accuracy wasn't incredible. However, Wavefront LASIK actually pinpoints what your individual eyes look like, and works on your eye so well that it has great accuracy, doesn't hurt night vision much, and has fewer problems associated with it. I can already tell you that I highly recommend LASIK Wavefront, even if it leaves you broke. It's that worth it.
Go to www.docboard.org and enter your doctor's name and state. You can see if the doctor has ever been in trouble or been sued for malpractice. I found out one of the most popular Lasik doctors in my state had been banned from performing the procedure for a while because he messed it up too many times. I went to another doctor and got a great result (20/20 both eyes.)
"The advanced societies of the future will be driven by competing systems of psychopathology." -JG Ballard
I had mine done about 10 years ago, (First lasik Doc in Canada, blah, blah)
Before with glasses I was almost legaly blind. The Big E on the eye chart was blurry.
With glasses I had very sharp and precise vision, (I didn't need the galsses for very close work like soldering).
Now, after the surgury my eyesight was A LOT better, (I didn't need glasses to drive anymore (20/40 is my current vision)) BUT everything is slightly blurry.
It's like I am stuck reading news-print all the time. I can't stare at a computer moniter for very long, and now I wear glasses 100% of the time. I payed $4400 CDN when I got mine done. My self-esteem went through the roof for the first 6 months after getting it done.
Now I want to see that docter die.
"The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~Plato (427-347 BC)
This isn't my story, but my sister-in-law who, granted, is not exactly what I would call stoical.
Her vision was something along the lines of 20/800, and everybody chipped in (over $5,000) to get her corrective eye surgery for college graduation. She completely freaked out during the surgery. They have to cut a flap into your eye, while you're awake, and with little-to-no anesthesia. She had a complete panic attack at this point, although continued through the end.
After healing, her eyes were something like 20/25 in one and 20/35 in the other. Terrific improvement, and she stopped wearing glasses. After a few months though, she was back to 20/60 in one eye, and 20/80 in the other. She doesn't wear glasses all the time, but is required to for driving. This kind of relapse is fairly common I believe, but not this severe.
Like every other deal I've heard of, she can go back any time she wants to get corrected the rest of the way, "with no extra charge." (yeah, right) She's not planning on doing so, mostly because of the fear of the surgery, but also because of cost. The 'deal' was for surgery with the same laser they had previously used, and they didn't use that one any more. The one they had now was 'better', but came with more expensive licensing. So in order to finish the correction, she would now have to pay something like an extra $500 per eye.
So, your mileage may vary, but it didn't work very well for her. And whatever you do, watch out for those 'deals' with fine print.
Punctanym: alternate spelling of words using punctuation or numerals in place of some or all of its letters; see 'leet'
Some of the best money I've ever spent. Right now I have 20/15 in one eye and 20/25 in the other (slight residual astigmatism).
:)
May vision was bad before. And I mean BAD. I was almost legally blind. Anything beyond about 6 inches in front of my face was a complete blur. And you can't imagine the feeling you have when you crush your coke bottle glasses and toss them in the trash.
My onyly negative was that for some reason, Some of the anesthetic drops missed my cornea in my left eye. So when that blade cut, it was kinda painful. But I can't complain with the results.
Keep in mind though, it is not a miracle cure all. When you have bad vision (like me) you may still have to wear glasses (most likely ata reduced perscription.
But like I said, it was well worth the money to be freed from having to put on glasses just to get out of bed.
~X~
~X~
People have been doing RK (radial keratotomy) since the 1940's with razor blades (if you can imagine), the precursor to PRK (photoradial keratotomy), the laser equivalent. There are people alive today who have had eye surgery for over 60 years. I know at least one who had RK in the 1970's, and who has suffered, to my knowledge, no long term side effects. This is a poor statistical sample, however.
It is not yet probably known what the odds are of higher risk for long term complications, but certainly people have been having laser surgeries for a long time. Lasik is a bit different too, though, and much newer. It is possible that it will lead to a variety of long term complications that would not arise with P/RK.
I'm curious...how long ago did you have your surgery? My opthamologist claims that the starbursts and halos are preventable by proper screening. Apparently, from what he says, some people's corneas are too large to perform the surgery on and some people's eye tissue (can't remember which tissue) is not thick enough. He claims the screening for these factors is relatively new.
Denver Isuzu Suzuki
Wearing glasses since age 8, I've been through a lot with these eyes. I finally began to treasure the optics I was born with when I realized that what most people label myopia is really built in magnifying glasses. Some people think it's been a valued trait for craftsmen in the past, allowing "close work". Now that I'm experiencing presbyopia as well, I'm very happy to retain the ability to read printed material closer than arms length, without glasses.
As my (also myopic) sister discovered to her horror, that close vision goes away with correction to "20/20" by laser surgery. Turns out she still wears glasses all the time for near vision (yeah, she's presbyopic too - since this is the lens getting stiff, laser can't do anything for this). Though this consequence may be explained in the forms in some convoluted way, it certainly didn't come across to her before the "ax" descended.
So before you decide, think about and notice how you use your eyes. If you are outdoors a lot, and use middle to distant vision mostly, you are still a good candidate. If on review you notice you use close vision, ie tend to like to take off your glasses to check out something close or nearby, be aware that will go away.
I am a graduate student in biomedical engineering, and did a rotation through a vision research lab three years ago. One of the lab's goals was to improve the algorithms used in modeling the cornea's surface, in order to reduce the risk of optical side effects, so I learned quite a bit about this very topic. The best advice I can give is to go to a university medical center to get it done. Those doctors are experienced and have the best diagnostic equipment, and will turn you away if you might not be a good candidate. Also, academic clinic will often give discounts if you're a student at the affiliated university. The bargain basement eye surgery clinics you see advertised in the newspaper and on TV tend to be more concerned about quantity rather than quality. I was appalled to hear that many don't even bother running standard screening that could disqualify patients. So here are the things to know: Probably the most common complaint after surgery is poor night vision, to the point that some people can no longer drive at night. This happens because your pupil opens up big in the dark and can allow light to pass through the rough edges of the zapped area. This causes a lot of optical distortion, resulting in glare, starbursts, etc. There's a few technical issues as to why they can't just zap a wider area (including the surface modeling problems I mentioned). Bottom line is that if your pupils open up especially big, refractive surgery is not for you at this time. A reputable clinic will check to see how big your pupils open up. This brings up another point. Even people who can no longer see at night might still have "20/20" vision. [A technicality often expoited by the less reputable clinics.] 20/20 vision means that you can read the next to last line on an eye chart from in a well-lit exam room. It means nothing about glare or night vision. There are other tests which a reputable clinic should run (eye pressure, corneal topography, etc.) Also, keep in mind that you can (and should) have each eye treated on separate occasions. Get one eye zapped, let it heal, see if the results make you happy. If so, get the other one done. That said, the risk of a totally botched operation is quite small. It's *extremely* unlikely that your daytime vision would be any worse than when you started. Nearly all of the ophthalmologists and optometrists I know who work with refractive surgery have had it done themselves. Also, most patients and friends I know who've had it done are extremely satisfied with the results. I am currently disqualified because of the big pupil problem, but otherwise I would get it myself...
I also worry about the chicken pox vaccine .. you get a neutered virus ... how do they know it wont cause shingles in later life like the real virus?
I know a pediatrician (really smart guy, too) who is totally against chicken pox vaccine. Last year he was actually looking for somebody with chicken pox to expose his kids to!
The problem with the vaccine is that your immunity will not be as strong as that which you would get from a juvenile infection. So you get older your chicken pox immunity wanes and next thing you know you're in the hospital.
The problem is that it is now mandatory for all school children. Despite tons of evidence that it could be detrimental in the long run.
Public health policy made by bureaucrats and not scientists.
I had 420/20 vision in both eyes, well beyond legally blind. Through my vision plan at work, I went to TLC for $1800 per eye. In my research I had determined that (generally) cheap != good. The $1800 per eye covered all optometrist visits, the initial surgery, most medications (largely eyedrops), and any needed followup treatments. I had both eyes done at the same time, and they offered me a valium...which relaxed me quite nicely. The surgery went well, but almost everything that could go wrong after that did. The tissue grew back almost completely (which was a new one to them), reverting me to about 380/20 vision. After several weeks I had a second surgery. Two days later I developed the "Sands of the Sahara", which causes serious fogging of the cornea and can cause real problems if not treated quickly...and I woke up with it on a Sunday morning. Now for the good part. I called TLC right after I woke up that morning, and they set me up with a optometrist half an hour later. Some eyedrops were all it took. I had pretty bad glare for three to four months. Bottom line: I'd do it again in a heartbeat. For all the problems, it's hard to overstate the pleasure and practicality of not needed glasses or contacts. TLC stayed on top of the problems...they took care of me. The pleasure of being able to see...always...and not becoming an invalid if my glasses break is priceless. Check up on the people doing the work, and go for it.
Mutant Freaks of Nature: "Frighteningly Addictive"
I was in a similar situation. I came into a sizeable lump of cash in 1997 and spent the better part of a year reading up on the then new "Lasik" procedure. In February of 1998 I spoke with a number of professionals including my current doctors and local specialists in laser procedures and in March of 1998 decided to go for it.
I would do it again in an instant - but I would still do the same amount of study that I did before. IMHO far too many people don't do the required research before this kind of thing and that's where a lot of the problems can come from.
The surgeon I chose was at the Cleveland Clinic and had taken part in the clinical trials for Lasik before it was an approved procedure. At the time he had more experience than any other surgeon I could find without major travel and he was very upfront about the possible downsides and my own potential for success with the surgury. He did not try to sell me on anything just gave me as much of his time as I wanted and honest, sometimes even frighteningly so, answers.
Not all of the professionals I spoke with were the same. Some were very much in the "sell" mode and made me feel rushed as though they wanted me to decide right then and there. The doctor I eventually went with actually refused to let me make a decision on the spot and insisted that I take my time and think it over first. He also warned me ahead of time that due to the size of my pupils I may not be the best candidate and could still require glasses afterward.
I'll also add that I'm very squeemish about my eyes. I've worn glasses since 3rd grade and in high school flirted briefly with contacts. But I had major problems getting contacts in and out and when they were in found them to be a constant irritant I could not ignore...and that was with soft lenses. When my stigmatism got worse and I had to switch to hard lenses I gave them up within 6 months, wearing them was less plesant than dumping handfuls of beach sand into my eyes.
When I came in for the pre-op for my surgury the day before the doctor gave me a prescription for a mild sedative due to my anxiety over having them zap my eyes while I was awake. Also durring the entire pre-op the staff was equally curteous, friendly and upfront as the doctor himself. Nothing felt rushed but I was never kept waiting either, any questions were answered very patiently and I was not allowed to leave until they were sure that all of my questions were answered.
The day of the surgury I took the sedative and was driven to the hospital. You can't drive yourself home since afterall they'll be zapping your eyes so this is necessary even if you don't take the sedative. I know some people who did drive themselves against doctors orders and frankly I can't imagine how they did it - but my eyes are always extremely sensitive to light and were even more so immediately after the surgury.
The surgury itself took less than 15 minutes. The operating room was small and clean, the laser machine was quite large and the doctor was already seated at the controls waiting for me. Again he took time to make sure I didn't have any final questions and that I was sure I wanted to go though with the procedure. There were also 3 or 4 assistants and nurses standing by to assist.
There is some mild discomfort durring the procedure but frankly it was less uncomfortable than the hard contacts I wore. It was somewhat unnerving to be awake but the doctor was very reassuring thought the entire procedure and explained what he was doing as it happened.
The most uncomfortable part is where they make the cut to fold back the flap - and that is mainly because the pressure of the device they uses causes your eye to black out so all you see is black with some colored specks which is a little frightening - but the doctor again was reassuring and explained what would happen which made it very easy to take.
The laser zapping took only seconds and there is a slight smell like burning hair when it happens. Aftertha
--- Juggle juggle@hitesman.com
In retrospect, I would never, ever recommend it to anyone. I started off at -5.5 (which is pretty bad). I had no astigmatism, and no other problems. I had been wearing contacts for years without any problems and didn't really mind them that much, but just thought that it'd be nice not to need them.
The surgery went well. I walked out of the office, went to sleep, and woke up 3 hours later. I looked outside and could see perfectly - and I do mean PERFECTLY. I was ecstatic. For the first time in my life, I could see without those lenses. This was as good as my vision would get.
For 3 months after this, I had massive fluctuations in my vision. Some days I'd wake up seeing fine, other days I'd have weird problems including double vision, halos, astigmatism, etc (and that's not even including the night vision problems). After those 3 months, my vision finally settled down to being under corrected at -1 with astigmatism (which changed every time they measured it). At this point, I basically figured that I had no choice but to go ahead and have the touch-up (since it was much harder to correct my vision with lenses now).
After 6 months, I had a touch-up. Following this operation, I had the same weird after effects for months, until my vision finally stabilized - into 20/20 vision. During the day. In good sunlight. When I'm not tired. All of a sudden I have dry eye problems which cause me huge problems at night, or when I'm tired. Problems I never had before. I have weird problems with blue lights. At night, I can focus on most things, but am unable to focus on blue LEDs or lights. Apparently this is a normal side effect of the surgery.
I would recommend that you visit http://www.lasikdisaster.com/ If you want some more information. The major problem that they don't tell you is this: 20/20 vision is NOT the same as perfect vision. You can have double vision, ghosting, night vision problems but still have 20/20 vision. As long as you can read that little line on the eye chart, you have 20/20 and are considered a success story of the surgery. You could have a double image and not be able to drive, or function properly and STILL BE A SUCCESS.
In addition to this, you can end up with eyes that are miscorrected (so you still have blurry vision) that are UNCORRECTABLE. If you have multi-axial astigmatism, or other weird issues you may NEVER be correctable to 20/20 with glasses, contacts or ANYTHING ELSE. Think about that. No matter how bad your eyes are now, at least they're correctable.
In short, I would never, ever, ever have the surgery knowing what I know now. I would also never ever recommend it to anyone. The risks are not worth the rewards. Notice they say that 95% or 98% or whatever reach 20/20 - but they never say how many have these weird complications - and outside studies estimate them as high as 25%. Doesn't sound so good now, does it?
Cemil.
I think you've hit-upon a key point. If your eyesight is so bad that you're effectively blind without glasses (incapacitated), I would think that it's a fair chance to take. As other posters have said, the main reported side-effect can be poor night-vision (halos on bright objects) - and I found the same issue when I wore contacts.
I can "see" fine without glasses to get around and such, but I can't read comfortably without them.
The tradeoff is that I work in the film and television industry - eyes are pretty important (read: vital) for my job, and the risk is outweighed by the potential problems if something "went wrong".
I'm reasonably comfortable with the technology now - I know that a local company doing the laser correction does a "no touch" technique where they use the laser exclusively without the microkeratome so no foreign objects touch the optical surface of your eye - apparently it provides a smoother finished surface with less chance of issues at night.
But it's not an urgent "fix" for me. Add to that at least a couple times where glasses have saved my eyes from being injured (once by flying debris, and once by an accidental spray of cleaning solvent) and I'm not all that unhappy wearing glasses...
N.
"Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence." - Charles de Gaulle
I had Lasik 5 years ago, at age 29. Was about -3 sphere in one eye, -3.5 sphere plus about -1.5 cylinder (astigmatism) in the other. Needed glasses or contacts to do most anything, and don't much like contacts.
My wife is an optometrist, does pre-op/post-op care for Lasik (but not the surgery itself -- you need an opthamologist for that), and had interned at a laser eye surgery place and seen it done lots of times. So I had lots of information. Not sure if I'd have done it otherwise.
We went with a doctor she'd worked with, who she knew was very good, and who was willing to cut me a friends-and-family discount. That said, you want the best doctor you can find, not the cheapest. Ask how many times he's done this particular surgery. You want an answer in the hundreds. (Yes, that's somewhat unfair to the young docs, who need to learn on someone -- but let it be someone else.)
Certain characteristics, like thin corneas, make you a poor candidate for the procedure, and increase the risk. Ask.
The Lasik made my right eye perfect, but left a bit (0.25) of residual astigmatism in my left. My "bad" eye is perfectly good for seeing small text on a TV across the room, just not perfect.
The day of the surgery was no fun. Slice slice zap zap then dark glasses. I recovered quickly, though, and was back to work in a couple of days.
Some people have more glare problems at night after the surgery. I don't.
Some people's eyes change over time. Mine haven't noticably. My wife's vision got a lot worse after pregnancy, partially undoing the effect of her Lasik. Some doctors will do free reenhancements.
Everyone gets more farsighted as they get old. Lasik won't fix that. I'm 35 with almost perfect vision, but when I'm about 40 I'll start needing reading glasses for close work. Sucks to get old, but it beats dying. (Some doctors will do monovision Lasik -- deliberately leaving one eye undercorrected so you can use one eye more for close work and the other for far -- but I started nearsighted in both eyes and they won't deliberately overshoot and make you farsighted.)
Overall it was well worth it for me. Send me an email if you need more info.
-- David Ripton
First, do not let them use a knife on your eyes. Traditional lasik uses a knife to cut a flap. This type of cut causes much more damage to the eye by cutting several layers. The place I went uses a femtosecond laser to cut a flap that is computer programmed to match your eye. This pretty much 100% avoids problems with the eye flap ripping off and such. It also helps the nerves in your eye heal faster, so your eye can inform your brain of dryness so your brain can turn on the tear ducts, reducing problems with dry eyes.
Secondly, in traditional lasik they would take a few measurements and use the laser to zap your eyes with the setting that is correct, on average. The newer machines (the call it "wavefront") use adaptive optics (per what is used on telescopes) to crate an an exact model of your eye and ablate a pattern that will give you optimal vision, the best your eyes are capable of.
I am happily glasses free, with no astigmatism, no problems with low light, no problems with dry eyes, and I am seeing 20/15 in both eyes.
So go for it, but be sure the doctor has experience, and is using the latest and greatest equipment!
-Erik -- --This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons--
It will neutralize the "glare" problems associated with Lasik. You can find cheapos at retailed as "fishing glasses"
-------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
You can put goggles over your contacts but that's a pain. Swimming in any natural body of water will result in your contacts being covered in bacteria the next day.
Prescription goggles are available, but they're excessively expensive and make you look dorkish if your just playing water frisbee or water-skiing.
Lasik rocks!!!! If you get night halos, just slap on some polarized glasses.
-------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
This is IMPORTANT, mod parent up! The parent is referring to a laser called intralase which completely eliminates the process of using a microkeratome to cut the flap, the part of the procedure that is by far the most prone to induce complications. The laser cuts the flap for the procedure by using thousands of ultrafast femtosecond pulses of light focused just below the surface of the cornea in a radial pattern. Depth and thickness of the flap can be controlled with exquisite precision and since nothing physically touches the intracorneal tissue, risk of infection is grealty reduced. While you're at it, since you're probable a technical guy, what with posting to slashdot and all, why not check out the laser itself? Manufacturers are all different with respect to the spot size of the laser pulses, the method which they use to track tiny eye movments and compensate for them, and the range of astig. and correction they are intended to treat. Also, see if they do customized ablations to reduce higher order abberations as well. If you're going to check out the doctor before you have the prcedure done WHY NOT CHECK OUT THE TECHNOLOGY TOO?!
- "Hear that?! The percolations are imminent! Cease your ingress!"
Orthokeratology or Ortho-K for short.
Basically they're reverse geometry rigid gas permeable contact lenses that reshape your eyes. Bad vision is caused by bumps and ridges in our visible part of the eye and Ortho-K is the art of flattening that part of the eye to correct vision. Your eyes are elastic and will hold their shape for 24-48 hours if you reshape them. So you wear these contacts at night and have good vision for the rest of the day. With Ortho-K the contacts are specially designed for you based off a laser map of your eye and the use of cad-like software to create the lenses.
I had mild vision problems(used glasses to read and watch tv, didn't for anything else) and I use ortho-k to give me 20/15 vision all the time.
Ortho-K has been around since the 60's, but has only recently gotten better due to tech like eye laser mapping and good software for designing the lenses. You never hear about it though because Lasik is all the rage.
OK, now I'll tell you my personal experience (that's what GodLessOne is looking for, isn't it?). I got LASIK performed on my eyes back in December, 2001. At that time I lived in Colombia.
It turns out that, to the surprise of many of you, Colombian ophthalmologists are actually leaders in their field. Keratomileusis, the first refractive-correction surgery procedure was developed by Dr José Barraquer, and ALK (automated lamellar keratoplasty) by one of his students, Dr Luis Antonio Ruiz. ALK was very similar to LASIK, but the actual molding of the cornea was done mechanically. A Greek ophthalmologist was apparently the first one to use an excimer laser to do the molding, although I have read references that it was also Dr Ruiz's team who developed the automatic tracking mechanism that warranties that the laser will always burn the correct part of the cornea even if the eye moves. (The eye is not completely inmovilized. They ask you to look up, where there used to be a red light moments before, but if you do move your eyes it's OK.)
I barely knew about Barraquer back in 2001, and nothing else. Some friend of my family strongly recommended some Dr. Luis Ruiz when they found out I was interested in LASIK. Only a year later, when I was researching LASIK on the web for a friend who also wanted to get her eyes treated, did I find out that I had been operated by one of the inventors of the damned thing. By the way, my friend also lives in the USA and got her eyes operated by Dr. Ruiz during a holiday vacation trip. I recently talked to her and she told me that she went for a control appointment a few weeks back and she's still 20/20 (she went to Colombia for an unrelated reason).
Back to my story:
So my recommendations are:
I got LASIK done about 2 years ago. I would recommend it to anyone. I went from 20/200 to 20/20. That being said, it did affect my night vision. The older lasers could only treat 6mm on your eye which means that at night when my pupils expand to be larger than that 6mm I get halos around lights. It's not that bad, but driving at night in the rain is a little more difficult than it used to be. IIRC, there is a new FDA approved laser that can treat 9mm which should eliminate this problem. A word of advise. Do NOT skimp on your doctor. I went to one of the best in the country in Dallas who has performed over 10,000 of these procedures. I was in and out in less than a half hour even though my surgery was non-standard due to my deeply recessed eyes. I paid $1500 per eye (3 years ago).
Part of the equation is your age - at 34, I was considering laser surgery (I use contacts or glasses), but one factor in the decision is that laser surgery doesn't do anything about the natural aging process, so I'll probably start needing reading glasses in the next ten years anyway.
That and some guys I know who have had it claim increased night glare, which basically prevents them from driving at night. No thanks!
Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
They say there are two types of surgery that you don't care about the cost: your heart and your eyes. It's true.
(1) It's far better to be your doctor's 1000th surgery than his 50th. Experience is extremely important.
(2) Even if you're not a geek, the model of laser machine your doctor uses is very important. Older ones don't have dynamic tracking to follow your eye movements during the dot vaporizing stage. No matter how hard you try to hold it perfectly still, your eye will move. This will substantially increase the chances of less than a perfect outcome.
(3) You didn't mention your age. If you're over 50 and have borderline dry eyes to begin with (I had to take out my extended wear soft contacts every night), you're going to have real (but temporary) problems with dryness following your surgery. The mechanism is simple: The microtome will peel back a surface flap to expose the cornea below. Any nerve endings in that flap are severed in the process. They grow back in 4-6 months, but in the mean time the surface numness takes away the stimulus needed to produce normal tears. Don't be surprised if you have to use eye drops A LOT after your surgery.
(4) The surgery blew away my up close near vision. This is a common trade-off that can't be helped. Some folks get one eye done for near vision and the other for far. That wouldn't be my choice. Reading glasses are inexpensive and very effective.
(5) Before my surgery I was almost totally disabled without my glasses (-4 plus diopters, plus astigmatism). I'm about 20/40 now in one eye and 20/50 in the other, and have some minor double vision. Not a perfect result (I'm thinking about going back for a trim), but overall I consider the improvement nothing short of miraculous.
Bottom Line: RECOMMENDED
Talk with your opthamologist/optomitrist first. I had it done and had a pretty bad prescription +5/+5.5 and a large amount of astigmatism. The results for me were good enough (20/40 with both eyes, some residual astigmatism). I went for several years w/o glasses, but evenutally went back to using them. I can function fine w/o glasses, but fine work (tying a #22 fly on a 5x leader) was more difficult than when I was using glasses, which gave me 20/20 vision. If you are farsighted, you can expect some regression over the first couple of weeks and your vision will not be "oh my god!" great just after surgery. You should be sure that your doctor is experienced and well qualified, especially if you are a difficult case. A difficult case is defined as very farsighted and/or lots of astigmatism. People who are nearsighted tend to have better results. You should also be sure that your doctor measures your corneal thickness -- some of the cheesier (read cheaper) ones will take practically anyone and insufficient corneal thickness is a receipe for disaster. Also, the size of your pupil in low light should be measured. If your pupil is too large when fully opened you will have problems with your vision in low light. This can be corrected with glasses for night vision and is not an uncommon side effect of the surgery. The fact that I can read, drive and generally function quite well w/o glasses is a real blessing. The thing that drove me to get glasses again was the eye strain associated with long hours at the computer. All in all it was worth it and I would do it again, especially since the techniques for the surgery have improved since I had it about four years ago.
Isn't theory a great place? Everything works in theory.
Then the left eye seemed a little blurry. A contact for that one and its uncorrected vision sucked almost as bad as the right eye's. Still not as nearsighted as before but the astigmatism was much, much worse. Seems they took too much off the corneas and they started to buckle and warp. My vision kept getting worse for awhile. Now the right eye is at -12 diopters (!?!) and the left is at -8. With 2 diopters of astigmatism (I think that's what the guy told me - does that make sense to the opticians out there?).
So I'm back to contacts all the time. But my vision with them isn't as good. And the vision without them is seriously jacked. But the worst part was being free from contacts for two years and having to go back to them. I really miss being able to fall asleep whenever and wherever...
You should look into intacts to see if you can get those instead. They're better than Lasik. My mother got intacts, and she doesn't need glasses anymore. She had problems with far- and near-sightednes.
// file: mice.h
#include "frickin_lasers.h"
Linux kernel hacker Val Henson had LASIK last year and he writes about it (including lots of recent research) online.
This is part of what I do. And it's good. It's very good - and getting better. One of the first things I did was have one of my colleagues work on me. My recommendations:
1) Find a clinic that can perform a "wavefront ablation." These are procedures that are customized to your own eye instead of based on a generic template. The difference lies in that they can correct third and fourth order curve errors, not just sphere and cylinder. The technology is not yet mainstream so you may have to hunt around.
2) Ask the doctor how many procedures he's performed, what % require revision, and what percent result in impaired vision.
3) I personally believe in IntraLASIK. It's an all-laser method of creating the eye flap. Traditional methods use a very sharp blade on a battery powered slider. While good, these devices can skip a bit and actually *create* third order error.
4) For god's sakes, FOLLOW YOUR POST-OP INSTRUCTIONS. Use the eyedrops RELIGIOUSLY, use the eye shield at night. This stuff is micrometer surgery. It doesn't take much to ruin an otherwise optimal result.
Best wishes!
U of Iowa
I had this done last October (2003). It was truly the best money I have ever spent. I see now with my own eyes, without the nighttime effects. Most importantly, since I've been wearing lenses of some type since high school, I've never experienced the depth of the nighttime sky. When I look up, I can really FEEL depth, and that's because of the proper correction at the retina instead of in front of the cornea.
Some things to keep in mind:
If you don't use the eyedrops like your told to, the cornea flap can heal out of alignment causing the halo nighttime effect. The first 24hours after the surgery are the healing hours for the eye. Rest for those hours and take the drops without fail.
See the doctor when he tells you to see him. My doctor wanted to see me the next day, 5 days later, 10 days later, 30 days later, and once a month for 6 months.
Don't rub your eyes during the healing process. Just don't.
laters.
Yep.
Two of my cousins are both doctors. When I met them recently after many years, I noticed that they both now had glasses. So I asked them why they didn't have Lasik surgery.
One of them related how at a conference he attended on Lasik sugery, all five of the opthalmic surgeons on the panel wore glasses.
That was good enough for him, and me.
IIRC the severe complications are mercifully rare, and plain shingles is fairly rare.
After some further research, it appears the place that's doing it locally is doing a laser PRK as opposed to LASIK.
:P. Apparently this company also gives you "free touchups for life" after the surgery incase your prescription drifts as you age.
The laser PRK actually uses the laser to remove the cells above the cornea rather than cutting a flap.
The old-style PRK method of this that got a really bad name is when they used to abrade (read: sand off) the top surface of the eye using a q-tip of some sort. Apparently this was highly uncomfortable and was prone to problems healing (ick).
The laser version basically does the same thing, but it just vaporizes the top layer of cells then uses the laser to reshape the cornea underneath and is much less traumatic to the eye as nothing is physically touching the optical surface of the eye.
That said, the technology you mentioned is also very intriguing. Using a laser to cut a flap, then reshape makes good sense as well. Apparently each method has it's tradeoffs:
-The flap-cut method heals faster and causes less discomfort, however there's the issue of the flap itself and the size of flap they can cut to work on the cornea underneath. Apparently "flap problems" are the biggest cause of after-surgery complications
-The laser PRK method is a bit more uncomfortable afterwards as the membrane on the eye needs to regrow (a few days). But there's no flap, and they can work on a larger area to reduce night-effects. This method is apparently not approved in the US (although the reference for that was a few years ago) so you might need to go to another country to do it (ie: Canada).
The only reason I know about it is that I went for one of their free evaluations a few years ago because I was curious what they could do. I opted not to do anything at the time, but I felt comfortable with the staff and it seemed like an easy-enough procedure.
There were a few people in the lobby that were getting after-procedure checkups, but they didn't speak english, so I couldn't ask them about it
N.
"Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence." - Charles de Gaulle
Greetings, eh?
Just a quick note, really. Get yourself a good opthamologist and get a set of corneal maps done. I have reasonably bad astigmatism in both eyes and the maps (along with careful study of the eyes themselves) revealed that I have several clinical symptoms for keratoconus.
Simply described, keratoconus is when your cornea decides (for whatever reason) that it'd be happier in a cone shape rather than a spherical shape.
After I found out about this, my opthamologist, optometrist, and optician all agreed that there is no way in Hell I should be having lasre eye surgery to correct my vision. I've seen my maps and instead of a smooth, hill-like surface, each eye resembles a mountain range - steep on one side, with a big drop off towards the centre, with a large smooth portion along half of my eye. Pretty bizarre.
Fortunately, my opthamologist (Dr. Joseph Leong-Sit of Edmonton, AB) and optician (Jim Thompson of Edmonton, AB), had worked with keratoconus cases before. Thanks to their combined experience, I'm wearing Rose-K RGP contact lenses that have given me 20/20 vision in one eye and 20/15 vision in the other. Sure, it's a little blurry and "halo-y" at times, but it was the best option. At least until I turn 45-50 years old and the gradual deterioration of my cornea becomes so bad that I'll need a corneal replacement. Yep, looking forward to that! ^)_(^
I'm glad I had the maps done and I think it's a worthwhile expense for anyone looking to get this type of surgery.
Ja ne, eh?
--
Beej
Brendan "Beej" Dery "Only in Canada, eh?"
It wears off pretty quickly, and the worse your vision is, the faster it wears off.
My eye doc gave me some info on it, with my vision (-3.75 and -3.25), I could expect 20/40 for about 2-4 hours after taking the lenses out, and all down hill from there.
It's an interesting idea though. Just doesn't seem worth it for me.
First off, don't go for the person who is the cheapest. Find the most experienced doctor you can get. An inexperienced doctor can easily do massive, irreversible damage to your eyesight. Nothing is worth that risk.
;)
I went from about 20/600 in each eye to 20/25 and 20/50. That's the good part. I have a light astigmatism in my left eye, and a medium one in my right eye. Great for daily activities that don't involve reading. The astigmatism causes a double image (within each individual eye) that makes text a little bit difficult to see properly. I also have the halos around bright lights at night that are common among lasik patients. I often find myself squinting while driving at night. I had dryness and itchyness for 6 months, and needed to use eyedrops. My eyes still feel dry a bit more than they used to. I still have a pair of glasses for reading the computer screen and tabletop gaming.
It was a highly unpleasant procedure. They keep your eye wide open with a speculum for 10-15 minutes. You get local anesthetic drops for your eye, but you can still feel the pressure of what they are doing to your eyes. The keratome (that cuts the protective layer of your eye) is attached via suction and causes you to temporarily lose vision. You get the closest possible view of them slicing the protective layer of your eye, and then peeling it back like a bedsheet, causing your vision to blur. Then you have to intently follow a red dot while a laser burns your cornea down to the desired shape. It smells like burning hair. And since your nose is about an inch away, it's very strong. Afterwards, they have to lay the protective layer back down so that it lays flat. It naturally sticks to the cornea, so if it's not laid down perfectly the first time, the doctor may have to peel it back and put it down again. Perhaps several times. Now do the other eye. If you're looking to get both eyes up to 20/25 or better, then you should expect to come back in 6 months and do it all again.
Some bad reasons to get lasik surgery:
Save money on glasses/contacts. You will most likely still need to own a pair of glasses for the rest of your life.
Want perfect vision. Your vision with glasses or contacts is most likely better than lasik will be capable of.
Don't like the way you look with glasses. Try contact lenses.
Some good reasons to get lasik.
Don't like the way you look with glasses, and you have problems wearing contact lenses. (me)
You have very bad vision and can't really do anything until you get your glasses on, or contacts in. (me)
You like to engage in activities that aren't friendly to contacts or glasses, such as swimming.
I had mine done under my medical coverage, so it didn't cost me much more than a few bottles of eye drops and a new pair of glasses (a year later). It wouldn't have been worth it if I had to pay out of pocket. I'd say I'm 'fairly satisfied'. My vision is nowhere near as good as it was before with glasses (20/15, 20/10), except that I used to have prismatic effects with the thickness of my lenses. It's great to not have to clean fog, water and dirt off my glasses. Being able to see while swimming in the pool or ocean is especially nice. What's the point of going if you can't enjoy the view?
Was before I learned that some people can only see in a tiny area of their vision. Enough to read but not enough to hurriedly board an unfamiliar train arriving on the wrong platform.
Mammalian vision really consists of two parts: peripheral and central vision. Peripheral vision is really dedicated to monochrome vision and motion detection. Useful in all light levels and needed to orient yourself relative to surroundings. Central vision is used for colour and texture recognition (needed for reading/writing). Lose your peripheral vision, and you won't be able to tell where things have moved to when you shift your gaze onto something else. Lose your central vision (macula, 5% of retinal area, around 2.5mm in diameter), and you will still be able to tell when things move and where they have moved to, and orient yourself, but you won't be able to recognise faces or read text.
Or there's night blindness and glare sensitivity, where the eye loses the ability to automatically adjust the brightness and contrast settings.
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
Visit their Image Center for simulations of what the world will look like if you're one of the unlucky ones...
When I got my contacts for the first time I experienced the usual irritation and got myself some eyedrops to carry around. I began using them constantly as it kept getting worse and worse, so I went back to see my eye doctor. It was there that I learned eyedrops are very addicting. Your eyes will stop producing their own natural tears if you provide them artificially over an extended period of time. I suffered for a week without eyedrops and my eyes adjusted and the irritation went away.