Slashdot Mirror
Coming Soon, Super Vision
lil_nohreaga writes "Wired is reporting that several companies are developing electronically controlled lenses to provide enhanced vision. From the article: Thanks to technologies created for astronomical telescopes and spy satellites, aberrometers can map a person's eye with extreme accuracy. Lasers bounce off the back of the eyeball, and structures in the eye scatter the resulting beam of light."
Other potential applications of this technology include the ability to help people with retinal degenerative diseases prolong their useful vision by dynamically mapping projections of images to other areas of the retina that are not affected by degeneration. Of course this will do nothing for the degenerative process, but it could buy some folks a bit more time until we can perfect retinal interventions (biological and/or bionic) to rescue vision loss.
As an aside, this technology to measure the optics of the eye is currently used in many procedure to correct vision such as in LASIK. You can read a little bit about LASIK and see a movie of the procedure here.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
dude, that's good advice.
i just did freelance consulting work with an influential investment banker here in NY. He's in his 50s, and he had the procedure done 6-7 years ago by Tiger Woods' doctor (for those unaware, Tiger Woods had his vision enhanced to 20/15 or 20/10 in order to give himself a golfing advantage). All of which to say is that he can't see now.
I asked him about it several times and pride prevented him from being truthful about it. But finally he confided in me and said that his vision has degraded significantly in the past year. He also mentioned that some of his older colleagues who have have laser correcting surgery have had similar degradations in vision. I know that this guy has had at least one "correction" done, but he now has his secretary reading his own emails to him.
So it sounds like its a good idea to not get lasik done unless you absolutely have to or are aware of enhancements that improve the long term prognosis for eye health.
Other than that, this is such a FUCK AMAZING TIME TO BE ALIVE!!!!!
un burrito me trampeó.
(In much the same way as increasing eyeglass prescriptions cause your eyesight to deteriorate further and increase your prescription again.)
I don't know this for sure, but I have to think that this thought is nothing more than a marketing gimmick from the Lasik community. I wear glasses, and have had roughly the same prescription for the last 15 years. When my prescription has changed, it hasn't been by enough to make any noticeable difference, and the only reason I've changed it has been because I've gotten new glasses because my old glasses have gone out of style (or, once, because I sat on them). Most other people I know with glasses are in approximately the same situation--their vision got a bit blurry in childhood for some reason, but hasn't changed much since then. So the thought that glasses will actually make your eyes worse over time is ridiculous, the opposite seems more logical. If I don't wear glasses, my eyes will be under more strain, and will get worse. Wearing glasses should preserve my vision...
ZuluPad, the wiki notepad on crack
The military already has this. They have scopes that can accurately fire for miles. Being able to see doesnt help other conditions -- wind, curve of the earth, shit in the way.
Battles are fought in cities, and cities are built so that there arent large stretches between buildings. Close-combat warfare is where most people die. Increased vision wouldnt help much, unless it allowed you to see through walls and such.
If your sight is 20/40 or better, you can already get enhanced vision as high as 20/10 or 20/15 with Lasik. Some doctors even specialize in vision enhancement for professional athletes. Many golfers and baseball players (most notably Tiger Woods) have had their vision enhanced, with real results.
So why is Lasik ok while Steroids aren't (there's little or no medical evidence supporting the idea that steroids are harmful when used properly).
Here's an article that ran on Slate during the congressional hearings on steroid use - http://www.slate.com/id/2116858/ Buckle up, sports fans, there are all kinds of elective surgeries in the works to improve human performance. I guess as long as you don't inject yourself, anything goes!
The technology is still improving so I always tell my friends they might want to hold off on "getting etched" unless they just can't stand the contacts anymore. Might as well get the best possible correction.
Somewhat true. Decent advice anyway.
The latest refinement appears to be the "no cutting" or "pure laser" systems that are just appearing in clinics. These don't require the slicing of the cornea, presumably because the laser can be accurately focused to disrupt cells at specific locations within the corneal material. The lack of slicing means less scar tissue and fewer possible complications, but may require more correction.
As for the "best possible correction", the wavefront scanners reveal higher order defects and pretty much allow for full correction now. All that's changing is how the correction is applied to the cornea.
The other company doing "optimized" optics seems to just grind a lense based on scans. So does that mean you have to hold your eyes steady?
No. These scanners are the wavefront scanners, which I've seen "up-close" quite recently. You put your head in a machine and you look at a target to keep your eye in basically the same position, but if you move your eye a little, the machine will compensate. If you move your eye a lot, the machine aborts the scan and the technician asks you do try again.
Regards,
Ross
LASIK does not, and cannot currently fix presbyopia, cataracts or macular degeneration.
According to my LASIK surgeon, most people who get the procedure done are in their mid to late 40's, which is right about the time the above conditions begin to manifest.
It's a great surgery, and has changed my 20/400 vision to 20/15. However, don't fall into the trap of believing it will stave off father time.
Just my 2p,
I had LASIK done about 5 years ago and I'm still 20/20 with no problems, halos, signs of weakening eyes, scratches and all the other standard horror stories.
YMMV of course.
It's a Unix system - I know this.
Several years ago, I knew a woman who was finishing up her studies to become an optometrist, and she told me one time that I should be very concerned about the Lasik procedures out there, and didn't recommend having it done at all.
.5% to 1% of patients. They tend not to inform people of the real risk because it's such a profitable business, and they're better off settling the occasional lawsuit than telling people the truth.
I don't know how much fact there was to it, but she claimed that the "dirty little secret" of Lasik is that it more or less casues eventual legal blindness in around
If there's truth to this, I imagine they get away with downplaying the risk factors because the vision loss happens over a length of time, and can easily be blamed on other factors, in most cases where someone complains?
Think of it this way - would you risk a 1% chance of blindness to avoid having to wear glasses for 10 years (until the new tech develops)? No thanks, I'll pass.
Sure I have some nearsightedness, but why should I want to start etching away at 2 healthy lenses without knowing how they might end up 20 years from now?
What a load of FUD. For one thing, LASIK alters the cornea, not the lens. For another thing, cornea surgery in one form or another has been around for decades, if not close to a century. There's nothing we don't know about how the corneal epithelium heals. (The truth is, it never really does... which is fine unless your pupil size in dim light is large enough to cross the ablation-zone boundary.)
Meanwhile, peoples' eyes are being damaged every day by eye infections and neovascularization caused by contact lenses.
In short, no, we are not going to see any mysterious maladies emerge in LASIK patients who were properly screened for corneal thickness. We'd have already seen those maladies in other contexts. (And, parenthetically, relying on an optometrist for advice on this is about like asking the kid down at Jiffy Lube if your air filter needs changing.)
Dahlmann tightly grips the knife, which he may have no idea how to use, and steps out into the plain.