Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Smart Contact Lenses

Posted by samzenpus on from the no-more-tears dept.

Iddo Genuth writes "Scientists at the University of California, Davis, have recently designed a contact lens prototype with a built-in pressure sensor using a novel process that etches tiny electrical circuits within a soft polymer material. The new development could help glaucoma patients to measure their current risk factor, thus replacing the current methods which require constant visits to a clinician."

109 comments

  1. Smart Contacts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    In most cases the contact lenses will be smarter then those that are wearing them.

    1. Re:Smart Contacts by Richard.g.k · · Score: -1, Redundant

      because we know all the smart people wear 1" thick glasses!

    2. Re:Smart Contacts by LM741N · · Score: 1

      What kind of lame ass people are they allowing to be moderators these days? Jesus.

    3. Re:Smart Contacts by ShieldVV0lf · · Score: 1

      C0ntacts are greatly superi0r t0 glasses in a c0uple imp0rtant ways.

      First, they give y0u a much better field 0f c0rrected visi0n. Alm0st any pair 0f glasses will have large gaps ar0und the edges, and the styles p0pular t0day are particularly bad as they tend t0 be small. Any pair 0f glasses that c0vers the entire range that y0ur eyeball can p0int will l00k extremely ridicul0us. Practically, this means that y0u must m0ve y0ur head a l0t m0re t0 see things clearly when y0u're wearing glasses. As a pil0t, the increased field 0f c0rrected visi0n achieved by c0ntact lenses is by itself sufficient advantage t0 justify using them.

      Sec0nd, dist0rti0n. Glasses dist0rt everything within the area that they c0rrect. H0w much they dist0rt depends exactly 0n h0w big they are and h0w str0ng they are. If y0u have str0ng, large glasses then there is significant dist0rti0n ar0und the 0utside edges which can be distracting. If y0u instead use smaller glasses, then this is better but the field 0f view pr0blem I discussed ab0ve is w0rse. If y0ur glasses 0ffer 0nly mild c0rrecti0n then this isn't s0 imp0rtant.

      The "sticking s0mething in y0ur eye" thing is vastly 0verstated. It's just n0t a very big deal. M0dern c0ntact lenses are s0ft and c0nf0rm t0 y0ur eye's shape. They are designed t0 be wet and t0 retain water like the rest 0f y0ur eye. When they are in it is difficult t0 feel that they are there, alth0ugh if y0u are nearsighted then y0u can 0ften feel the rim 0f the lenses as y0ur eyes m0ve. This feeling is n0t unc0mf0rtable 0nce y0u get used t0 it, which just takes a few minutes the first time y0u use them, and decreases t0 zer0 as y0u c0ntinue t0 wear them. Getting them in and 0ut is als0 n0t a big deal 0nce y0u practice it a bit. My first week started 0ut with each m0rning and night being an adventure in getting the lenses in and 0ut, and by the end 0f the week it was pretty easy. N0w it takes me just a few sec0nds per eye and there is n0 disc0mf0rt. D0ne pr0perly, y0ur fingers 0nly ever t0uch the lens, n0t y0ur eye. S0 the eye 0nly t0uches the lens, which is wet and made fr0m a material that d0esn't irritate the eye.

      I regularly wear b0th, and I can tell y0u that the pr0blems with glasses are just as big as the pr0blems with c0ntact lenses, it's just that y0u're used t0 the glasses and c0ntact lenses are f0reign t0 y0u. S0metimes if I wear my c0ntacts f0r a c0uple 0f days straight, switching t0 glasses makes me dizzy f0r a few minutes due t0 the dist0rti0n. Y0u g0t used t0 that dist0rti0n, and y0u'll get used t0 c0ntacts if y0u care t0 try them. Pers0nally I rec0mmend it.

      --Shield

      (S0rry...my 0 butt0n is br0ken!)

  2. So... by cp.tar · · Score: 1

    Who wants to bet on what the first non-medical use of that technology will be?

    --
    Ignore this signature. By order.
    1. Re:So... by Gerafix · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm going to say some modified contacts to help soldiers kill people more efficiently. 'Cats eye' contact lenses to increase night vision (without those clumsy goggles and sensitivity to bright light...). IR contacts? That would be sweet.

    2. Re:So... by sdpuppy · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Couple the pressure signal with a slow changing colorization so that when yo blink your eyes the short term increase in pressure will cause color change (or maybe rainbow effect) that slowly goes back to normal?

      (Speaking as a person whose eye color naturally very slowly oscillates with time)

    3. Re:So... by holychicken · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not sure exactly what it will be. . . but what we do know for sure is that it will be porn related.

    4. Re:So... by jeiler · · Score: 4, Informative

      Based on TFA, the lenses don't make any adaptation to vision: the only thing they do is monitor intraocular pressure.

      --

      If you haven't been down-modded lately, you aren't trying.

      Sacred cows make the best hamburger.

    5. Re:So... by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 1

      I want some red LEDs in my contacts, so my eyes will look like glowing red coals in the dark.

      --
      No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
    6. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cameras for telescopic vision for soldiers etc as well as espionage work for spys and just substitute them for suspect x's current supply of disposable lens. Additionally if they can be used as displays they would be great for simulator work or using remote control devices via hookups with the device's camera.

    7. Re:So... by owlnation · · Score: 1

      As an anti-goatse device. Finally, zee goggles, zey will do something!

    8. Re:So... by Gerafix · · Score: 1

      There's an article? But yeah, with enough funding/time, it could very well happen. :)

    9. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Based on TFA, the lenses don't make any adaptation to vision: the only thing they do is monitor intraocular pressure.

      True, but while they use that as the circuit they are currently building the article mostly discusses the process of creating a circuit on a contact lens. Other possibilities come if something similar to Moore's Law takes effect in regards to circuit creation on contact lenses.

    10. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Based on TFA, the lenses don't make any adaptation to vision: the only thing they do is monitor intraocular pressure.

      Except of course for that they "obviously obstruct vision", but that's just a side effect, not the intent.

    11. Re:So... by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      Tie sensors to memory plastic, allowing the lens to deform on command and grant the wearer telescopic vision?

      Hey, Steve Austin - bionic THIS!

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    12. Re:So... by jeiler · · Score: 1

      There's an article?

      And i read it! :( I'm so sorry--it will never happen again!

      --

      If you haven't been down-modded lately, you aren't trying.

      Sacred cows make the best hamburger.

    13. Re:So... by dorianh49 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I just hope these lenses don't render the current glaucoma testing method obsolete. I love having a blast of compressed air shot at hurricane speeds directly into my wide-open eyeball. That crap makes my year.

      --
      Gravity is a contributing factor in nearly 73 percent of all accidents involving falling objects. -Dave Barry
    14. Re:So... by Firehed · · Score: 1

      Nah, just get these.

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    15. Re:So... by dawich · · Score: 1

      I had never had the puff test until just recently. I've always had the physical pressure test. I prefer that...

    16. Re:So... by AmberBlackCat · · Score: 1

      That would be enough for now.

    17. Re:So... by Chewbacon · · Score: 1

      yeah, I want something cool.. like a HUD on my contact lenses. Why? RSS to slashdot. I work in healthcare, so being able to look at patient status on the fly would be good too.

      --
      Chewbacon
      The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
    18. Re:So... by FleaPlus · · Score: 1

      I'm going to say some modified contacts to help soldiers kill people more efficiently. 'Cats eye' contact lenses to increase night vision (without those clumsy goggles and sensitivity to bright light...). IR contacts? That would be sweet.

      Lenses similar to what you describe actually already exist:

      http://www.allaboutvision.com/contacts/colors.htm

      Light-filtering tints are a more recent development. These contact lenses are designed for sports use, because they enhance certain colors (such as optic yellow, the color of tennis balls and some softballs and golf balls), as a result of muting other colors. The result is that the ball stands out against the background and is easier to target. The lenses can also be used by spectators.

      One type of light-filtering contact lens has been developed especially for golfers, so they can better distinguish between the various greens on a golf course. Amber-tinted ones have been worn by some professional baseball players, to help filter out the blue light that reduces their ability to see the baseball clearly. Other color contacts are being developed for trap-shooters, skiers and other sports enthusiasts.

  3. In other news.... by BitterOldGUy · · Score: 1
    Currently the only way for patients with glaucoma to keep tabs on the disease is by visiting a clinician or a doctor who administers one of several tests to measure glaucoma's main risk factor, intraocular pressure (IOP).

    In other news, medical marijuana proponents suffer from mass depression. All's not lost. They're pinning the rest of their hopes on using it for treating the side effects of chemotherapy. Lit up again from hope.

    1. Re:In other news.... by sm62704 · · Score: 4, Informative

      The test is a probe they touch your eye with; it appears that these lenses are a miniature version. The probe used by eye doctors connects to a kleenex box-sized device with an LCD readout. You will be given this test before and after cataract surgery and vitrectomy surgery.

      Your pressure should be between 10 and 20 (10 and 20 what I don't know). After my vitrectomy surgery (NSFW) my occular pressure was 35, very dangerously high. I wasn't prescribed reefer, but rather some large, expensive orange pills.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    2. Re:In other news.... by maxume · · Score: 1

      In California, they prescribe it for pretty much anything, including anxiety:

      http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-stein9-2008may09,0,1639734.column

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    3. Re:In other news.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its measured in mm Hg (millimeters of mercury). It should actually be below 15 in normal people.

      The air-puff test at your corner eye doctor measures this as a glaucoma screen, but not very precisely.

    4. Re:In other news.... by ichigo+2.0 · · Score: 1

      I wasn't prescribed reefer, but rather some large, expensive orange pills.

      Marinol a.k.a. synthetic THC?

      I ask because they are large, expensive orange pills.

    5. Re:In other news.... by AioKits · · Score: 1

      Interesting sig you got there to go with your situation...

      --
      "Quote me as saying I was mis-quoted." -Groucho Marx
    6. Re:In other news.... by dethadol · · Score: 2, Informative

      Liker most pressures it is in mmHG. Mine was 18, which doesn't sound too high, but because of signs of damage to my optic nerve and field of vision aberations I have used Xalatan drops (a prostoglandin analogue) and this has reduced the pressure to 11 mmHG.

    7. Re:In other news.... by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      I don't think so; they didn't look like the photo in your link; they were oblong capsule shaped, but solid. And I think I would have recognized the name "marinol" on the bottle.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    8. Re:In other news.... by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      If you haven't read the link, it refers to the fact that first I was "four eyes" with my coke bottle glasses, then I was "six eyes" with my contacts for nearsightedness and my reading glasses for my age related farsightedness, then I got the CrystaLens implant in my left eye for a cataract that was caused by prescribed steroid eyedrops. The implant cured the cataract, nearsightedness, and farsightedness in that eye; it's a new type that actually lets your eye focus like a young eye.

      I still wore a contact in my right eye, which was where the "three eyes" comes from, although I haven't worn the contact for a while now; I just rely on the good eye. I should probably change my sig...

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    9. Re:In other news.... by Jerry+Beasters · · Score: 1

      Chronic anxiety is a potentially crippling condition, and marijuana can help certain people. How is that ridiculous?

    10. Re:In other news.... by maxume · · Score: 1

      Where did anybody say anything about it being ridiculous?

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    11. Re:In other news.... by AgentPaper · · Score: 1

      Actually, there are a pile of ways to measure IOP, but all of them rely on applying some known force to the cornea and seeing how much effect that force has upon the surface. The old-school device was called a Schiotz tonometer, and it used a plunger with weights. The patient had to be supine (flat on their back) and lay perfectly still while the doctor placed the plunger in the middle of the cornea and fiddled with the weights to get the plunger to drop a certain distance. The "gold standard" today is the Goldmann tonometer, a little truncated cone-shaped device that clips to the front of a slit-lamp. When the cone touches your eye, the doctor or tech who does the measurement sees a pair of interlocking half-rings in the slit-lamp's optics. A dial on a little pager-sized box between the two gives you the IOP. The noncontact tonometer is a variant on the same concept, with compressed air taking the place of the tonometer head. In the hospital or any other place that doesn't have a slit-lamp handy, nowadays you're apt to see Tono-Pens, little handheld gizmos that have a silicone transducer dome at one end and an LCD at the other.

      Normal intraocular pressure (IOP) is between 8-21 mmHg. Anything above that is considered ocular hypertension. When ocular hypertension occurs along with loss of peripheral vision, that's glaucoma. Lots of people, including lots of optometrists and ophthalmologists, tend to conflate the two. However, there are plenty of things that cause high IOP that aren't glaucoma, such as post-operative iatrogenic IOP spikes (what you had), steroid medications, hyperglycemic conditions and so forth. You can also have so-called normal tension glaucoma, where glaucomatous vision loss occurs in an eye with normal IOP.

      About the only PO med for ocular hypertension is acetazolamide (Diamox and a bunch of generic equivalents in the US). It is a large capsule-type medication, but it shouldn't be all that expensive.

      --
      First rule of trauma: Bleeding always stops.
    12. Re:In other news.... by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      Now that my memory was jogged it was indeed Diamox. The only instrument they used to guage the pressure was a Tono-Pen (and I only know that from your description of it).

      Very informative, thank you.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
  4. High tech beer goggles? by BitterOldGUy · · Score: 5, Funny
    Have the contacts make every woman look like a hotty?

    Frat boys reprogramming it so that they trick their buddy into doing a guy? Or a sheep?

    1. Re:High tech beer goggles? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Frat boys reprogramming it so that they trick their buddy into doing a guy? Or a sheep?

      Hahaha, frat boys programming. What? That wasn't the joke?

    2. Re:High tech beer goggles? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do frat boys need to be tricked to do a sheep?

    3. Re:High tech beer goggles? by laejoh · · Score: 3, Funny

      My eyes, the contact lenses, they do nothing!

    4. Re:High tech beer goggles? by Broken+Toys · · Score: 1

      Just the ugly ones.

    5. Re:High tech beer goggles? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No chance... wet wool has an unmistakable smell.

  5. Finally by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 2, Funny

    Soon this guy will be able to get rid of that Delco air filter on his face.

    --
    Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
  6. Dude, no.. by BitterOldGUy · · Score: 1
    It be a better argument for pot because when your pressure spikes, you have to light up, man!

    Sweet! Hey, don't Bogart!

  7. Testers anyone? by andy19 · · Score: 1

    Electrical circuits in my eye...who wants the first to test this one out?

    1. Re:Testers anyone? by philspear · · Score: 1

      Well, it's already been tested in humans, and probably before that animals. So... sorry whoever does.

  8. What I'm really waiting for... by wiggles · · Score: 4, Interesting

    is contact lenses with built in nanoscale light sources that can project microtext and images directly onto my retinae.

    1. Re:What I'm really waiting for... by Samah · · Score: 1

      As awesome as this sounds, I'm not sure how it could be effectively implemented as the human eye has a very narrow "100% visibility" angular range. Look at the slashdot slogan image at the top of the page and focus on the word "news". Now try to read "matters" without moving your eye. If you didn't know what the word was already, you'd have a very difficult time of it. The only way I can think of this working is if the HUD were rendered in relation to your head, and not your eyes. Then you could look around at the whole "screen" and focus on the areas you needed to read. A good example of this is with HUDs rendered on the surface of glasses (it's been done multiple times). Since the screen doesn't move with your eyes, you can look at any part you want.

      --
      Homonyms are fun!
      You're driving your car, but they're riding their bikes there.
    2. Re:What I'm really waiting for... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      There's also the problem of focus. Unless you are projecting directly onto the retina, you aren't going to be able to see a diffuse light source on your lens as anything other than a blurry blob of colour.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    3. Re:What I'm really waiting for... by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 1

      is contact lenses with built in nanoscale light sources that can project microtext and images directly onto my retinae.

      The image wouldn't move. Your brain will filter it out fairly quickly.

      There was a research project that did this awhile back, a camera watching your pupils moves the screen to exactly match their twitching. To you, the image disappears.

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    4. Re:What I'm really waiting for... by Samah · · Score: 1

      As I was writing that comment I was thinking of a toy made by Sega that I used to play with my mates when I was younger called Lock-On. The headsets (which used to get very sweaty) had a flip down see-through lens (similar to sunglasses) that simply reflected the 7-segment display on the front of the headset (the number was displayed mirrored so that the "HUD" would appear correctly).
      I used to win pretty much every game such that I had to handicap myself by forfeiting all my power shots before the game and starting off with one hit point.
      The guns would also emit a quiet beep every few seconds to let your opponent know you're near, so much of the game was spent creeping around with a hand over the speaker.

      --
      Homonyms are fun!
      You're driving your car, but they're riding their bikes there.
  9. Granpa is the Terminator! by AioKits · · Score: 3, Funny

    He feels no pain, he can't be reasoned with, and he sees what you did there! Now get off his lawn!

    --
    "Quote me as saying I was mis-quoted." -Groucho Marx
  10. Your support will be appreciated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Hi, I hope you are not mad at me. I politly please if anyone could support me by giving his vote on my new WoW server. Please vote clicking here

    Or if you would like to play WoW 2.4.3 on my really great server (best scripts), come and register here: bottlenet blizzlike

  11. I'm waiting ... by PPH · · Score: 1

    ... for the model that will allow me to see these.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  12. Ow my eyes by Hatta · · Score: 1

    My only question is how you people can stand putting an object into your eye. I can't even stand eye drops, and given the amount of pot I smoke, that's a lot of discomfort I'm willing to put up with before sticking something in my eye.

    Thankfully, glasses are a good option. Which really makes me wonder, why anyone uses contact lenses when glasses work very well and don't require you to stick things in your eyes.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    1. Re:Ow my eyes by IdolizingStewie · · Score: 1

      Two words. Peripheral vision.

    2. Re:Ow my eyes by maxume · · Score: 2, Informative

      Did you enjoy your first drag, or was it relatively unpleasant?

      Like anything else, if you practice, you get used to it. (I haven't worn contacts in a while, but I just reached up and touched my eyeball, didn't really bother me any)

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    3. Re:Ow my eyes by eredin · · Score: 1

      When you go from needing glasses to having glasses, it's great because you can see.

      When you go from glasses to contacts, you realize that wearing glasses is like looking out through a slit in a box. When you get out of the box everything you can see is in focus. (And for those with really thick glasses, no more rounded doorframes!)

    4. Re:Ow my eyes by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 4, Informative

      Contacts are greatly superior to glasses in a couple important ways.

      First, they give you a much better field of corrected vision. Almost any pair of glasses will have large gaps around the edges, and the styles popular today are particularly bad as they tend to be small. Any pair of glasses that covers the entire range that your eyeball can point will look extremely ridiculous. Practically, this means that you must move your head a lot more to see things clearly when you're wearing glasses. As a pilot, the increased field of corrected vision achieved by contact lenses is by itself sufficient advantage to justify using them.

      Second, distortion. Glasses distort everything within the area that they correct. How much they distort depends exactly on how big they are and how strong they are. If you have strong, large glasses then there is significant distortion around the outside edges which can be distracting. If you instead use smaller glasses, then this is better but the field of view problem I discussed above is worse. If your glasses offer only mild correction then this isn't so important.

      The "sticking something in your eye" thing is vastly overstated. It's just not a very big deal. Modern contact lenses are soft and conform to your eye's shape. They are designed to be wet and to retain water like the rest of your eye. When they are in it is difficult to feel that they are there, although if you are nearsighted then you can often feel the rim of the lenses as your eyes move. This feeling is not uncomfortable once you get used to it, which just takes a few minutes the first time you use them, and decreases to zero as you continue to wear them. Getting them in and out is also not a big deal once you practice it a bit. My first week started out with each morning and night being an adventure in getting the lenses in and out, and by the end of the week it was pretty easy. Now it takes me just a few seconds per eye and there is no discomfort. Done properly, your fingers only ever touch the lens, not your eye. So the eye only touches the lens, which is wet and made from a material that doesn't irritate the eye.

      I regularly wear both, and I can tell you that the problems with glasses are just as big as the problems with contact lenses, it's just that you're used to the glasses and contact lenses are foreign to you. Sometimes if I wear my contacts for a couple of days straight, switching to glasses makes me dizzy for a few minutes due to the distortion. You got used to that distortion, and you'll get used to contacts if you care to try them. Personally I recommend it.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    5. Re:Ow my eyes by petermartin · · Score: 1

      I wish I could mod you something worse than troll for making me imagine touching my own eyeball.

    6. Re:Ow my eyes by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      "Modern contact lenses are soft and conform to your eye's shape. They are designed to be wet and to retain water like the rest of your eye."

      HA! Pansy! I've been wearing semi-rigid lenses for over 25 years. Newfangled soft lenses - feh!

      That being said, you just get used to poking around in your eye. Drug addicts and diabetics get used to sticking needles in themselves, and gays get used to having other things stuck in them. Never underestimate the human capacity for tolerating short term discomfort for long term gain.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    7. Re:Ow my eyes by sconeu · · Score: 1

      I gave up on contacts about 20 years ago. I'm prone to corneal erosions, and any time I got dust in my eye, it hurt like hell --- sharp stabbing pain.

      About a year ago I did PRK (wasn't a good candidate for LASIK, alas). Love it.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    8. Re:Ow my eyes by maxume · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's unfortunate. Maybe there is a reason that you are highly averse to it, but having worn contacts for a couple of years, I have no problem doing it.

      I just did it again to make sure.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    9. Re:Ow my eyes by Taibhsear · · Score: 1

      Indeed. Try driving with a REAL blind spot. My vision is so bad I won't even leave the house unless I have contacts in. Glasses just do NOT cut it for non-household chores. Not to mention my cat really appreciates it when I don't step on his tail...

    10. Re:Ow my eyes by cp.tar · · Score: 1

      Well, when I was ten, my thoughts were pretty much in the same venue, sans marijuana. However, my eyesight kept getting worse, so my parents talked me into wearing contacts. (And it was no picnic for them, for at the time, they cost their whole month's salary.)

      I was pretty afraid of wearing them, of losing them, of dislodging them, and to this day, whenever a speck of dirt or dust or a bug gets into my eye it hurts like crap.
      On the other hand, contact lenses give you great peripheral vision, they don't fog up whenever you enter a warm room in winter, I don't mind the rain as much as before, and best of all, my eyesight hasn't gotten worse in 15 years.

      All in all, I'd never go back to glasses.
      My last pair of glasses lasted me for some six months; I've had my current pair of contacts for almost eight years.

      Oh, and one more thing: try wearing shades when you have glasses on.

      --
      Ignore this signature. By order.
    11. Re:Ow my eyes by deathlyslow · · Score: 1

      I've had Gas-perms for about 23 years. back in the day it was like sticking pieces of glass in your eye. I still wear glasses sometimes. Usually when I have to get up in the middle of the to slay the monsters in the kids closet. It's really no big thing any more.I can do them now with out a mirror. The one thing I do dislike is the cost. bi-toric lenses are brutally expensive. I'm just now starting to get my right eye fitted correctly. I've had four different shapes in the last 3 months. not fun or cheap.

      --
      Don't blame me for redundant posts. I can't type very fast. Hence the user ID.
    12. Re:Ow my eyes by Kingrames · · Score: 1

      Whatever. My glasses are +5, and I'm not replacing them any time soon.

      --
      If you can read this, I forgot to post anonymously.
    13. Re:Ow my eyes by VorpalRodent · · Score: 1
      I think it's important that we determine what they are +5 of. Presumably, they are +5 perception.

      However, it is also very reasonable that, as glasses are often said to make one look intelligent, that they are +5 Intelligence or even +5 Charisma (I like talking to people that look intelligent).

      Personally, if I could get me some glasses of +5 stupid code comprehension, I'd take them. As it stands, the only drop I ever got from my optician was a glasses of +1 focus.

      --
      Take it to the limit, everybody to the limit, come on, everybody fhqwhgads.
    14. Re:Ow my eyes by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      Don't be so damned dismissive. Nobody's forcing you to use them. If you prefer to stick with glasses, fine, go for it. But don't act like people who wear contacts are all crazy, or whatever. Newsflash: people are different.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    15. Re:Ow my eyes by An+ominous+Cow+art · · Score: 2, Funny

      Stop touching yourself, you'll go blind!

    16. Re:Ow my eyes by Kingrames · · Score: 1

      Dismissive?
      pff, whatever.

      --
      If you can read this, I forgot to post anonymously.
    17. Re:Ow my eyes by sydbarrett74 · · Score: 1

      I attempted to wear contacts for a couple of years, but eventually my severe lifelong allergies won out. But I know exactly what you mean about reduced field-of-vision and more head movements (also your eyes are constantly making more minute movements, wearing out the muscles surrounding the eye). Because of 25 years of being in front of a monitor, at the age of 33 I now require bifocals.

      --
      'He who has to break a thing to find out what it is, has left the path of wisdom.' -- Gandalf to Saruman
    18. Re:Ow my eyes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I really, truly, admire you. I have a silicone allergy (which I only found out about AFTER my eyes reacted [very slowly] to the soft contacts I was wearing), so to escape from my glasses I'm forced to wear the semi-rigids. That is, I would be forced to, if I thought the pain was worth it.

      It's not.

    19. Re:Ow my eyes by cp.tar · · Score: 1

      HA! Pansy! I've been wearing semi-rigid lenses for over 25 years. Newfangled soft lenses - feh!

      Same here. Gas-permeable hard lenses for the past 15+ years, and not bloody likely to switch to soft lenses.

      Better, longer-lasting, only marginally less comfortable (I presume, since people tell me soft lenses are more comfortable, and I don't even notice mine).

      --
      Ignore this signature. By order.
    20. Re:Ow my eyes by WaHooCrazy7 · · Score: 1

      I thought the same thing at first, but after getting talked into getting them by a girl I work with I think there great though. Also you never touch your eye, you touch the lens and feel nothing. Most of the time (99%) I don't even know I have them in as I usually forget about them. If you touch your eye you're doing something seriously wrong.

    21. Re:Ow my eyes by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      Just curious, when you say "better", what actually makes them better?

      As for longer lasting, mine last a month (although I've been cheating and using them a bit longer) before I throw them away and get new ones. The cost is like an extra ice cream cone or two per month. I have no real desire for them to last longer, especially since this makes losing them much less of a problem.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    22. Re:Ow my eyes by value_added · · Score: 1

      Because of 25 years of being in front of a monitor, at the age of 33 I now require bifocals.

      Hope you're enjoying things as they are because in a few more years, your vision will change again, and you'll discover that you need trifocals, two pairs of bifocals, or a motley collection of glasses in various prescriptions.

      This typically happens anytime after 40. For people whose sight was 20/20 their entire life, they suddenly discover they need reading glasses because their eye muscles can't cope with the demands of focusing on objects near and far. In the words of my ophthalmologist, "Your arms won't be long enough to hold what you want to read." Complicating the issue are two things: first, reading is done at a different distance than a monitor screen, and secondly, the traditional bifocal approach doesn't work as well because computer screens are positioned very differently than a book lying flat on a desk.

      Me, I wear contacts day and night, but wear glasses when in front of a computer which, ironically, is also day and night. Reading books with any comfort requires I take off one pair of glasses and put on another.

      The ideal solution for someone who already has corrected vision is Lasik surgery in combination with the "occasional" use of reading and/or computer glasses. While I would wholeheartedly agree that contacts are generally superiour in every respect, opthalmologists tend to discourage their use as you get older.

    23. Re:Ow my eyes by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      Gas perms really are one of those "just tough it out" things. You CAN'T just put them in and it's all over. When I first started wearing them, I was on a schedule to acclimate my eyes - 1/2 hr in, 2 hours out for a day, then 1 hour in and 1 out, etc. Yeah, they were uncomfortable, but you just get used to it

      Part of teh discomfort is the fact that they WILL reshape your cornea, flattening it out. In my case, this was the point - I was losing visual acuity so rapidly that my optometrist prescribed them when I was 12 to try to limit the decay. And I think it worked.

      Other docs have suggested I move to soft, but I'm sticking with what I know.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    24. Re:Ow my eyes by cp.tar · · Score: 1

      Just curious, when you say "better", what actually makes them better?

      They have stopped my eyesight from getting worse, which is something soft lenses cannot do AFAIK.
      That alone should be enough.

      Additionally, I've had this pair for almost eight years; I have them cleaned/polished twice a year, I wash them in tap water and liquid soap or detergent, and I keep them in tap water or saline solution. I spend next to nothing on special solutions and detergents. They are rather resistant to physical damage, they do not need to be hydrated... perfect for a lazy, careless slob like me.

      And I don't know much about losing them; I've dropped either one several times, but always where I could find them.

      --
      Ignore this signature. By order.
    25. Re:Ow my eyes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Soft lenses are great, used them for 10+ years. Then I had to get hard lenses for an eye problem. Hard lenses do not ever feel like they're not there, like soft lenses do. You always feel them against the inside of your eyelid, while not painful and you get used to it there's always something there. I don't understand people that don't manage to use soft lenses, I used to completely forget they were on (apart from my vision, of course). Getting them in and out is practise, once you find the right method it's no problem at all.

    26. Re:Ow my eyes by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 1

      If your eyesight is getting worse in a way that hard lenses can prevent, that's a clear advantage to be sure.

      Again just curious, how much did your pair cost, and how much does it cost to get them cleaned and polished?

      For what it's worth, I bought two large bottles of the special cleaning solution for about $17 a few months ago. So far I've used about one quarter of one bottle. There's no real work involved it using it, just sprinkle it on the lens, then dunk the lens into the stuff in the little holder and let it sit overnight. As far as losing them, I haven't lost any yet, but the potential for it is ever on my mind.

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    27. Re:Ow my eyes by A+Numinous+Cohort · · Score: 1

      I broke out into a cold sweat the first time I put on contact lenses (17 years ago). But after a few days wearing them felt normal. Mine are hard contact lenses, BTW--they correct my astigmatism and slow the progression of myopia, which soft contact lenses can't do.

    28. Re:Ow my eyes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Contacts have improved immensly since 20 years ago. Your experiences with them back then have little bearing on what they are like now. I should know, I use contacts. Sometimes, the only way for me to tell if I'm wearing contacts is too look at something far away (I'm near-sighted), and check if it's blurry or not.

    29. Re:Ow my eyes by cp.tar · · Score: 1

      Again just curious, how much did your pair cost, and how much does it cost to get them cleaned and polished?

      Eight years ago, when I bought them, they cost about 100 Euros. Having them cleaned costs less than 4 Euros, and I'm not even getting the cheapest cleaning available (proximity counts for something, too).
      All in all, let's say that they cost me 20 Euros a year. The detergent cost me 1 Euro for a half-liter bottle, about 2 years ago, so I'll count it as free.

      Now, mind you, many people will recommend replacing the lenses every two or three or four years, as well as only using special sterile detergents and solutions.
      Both my ophtalmologist and the optician where I have my lenses cleaned are more on the practical side, and they don't try to convince me to buy the expensive stuff. Especially after Allergan stopped producing LC-65-N; nothing I've tried since (except for one detergent by Avizor, but which has also become unavailable thanks to the distributor) was worth a damn, so I switched to the detergent I use for the dishes. Previously I'd only used it in emergencies, but now I see no reason to switch from it. Better and cheaper.
      As for replacing them... I might have to replace them soon, as there is a tiny little scratch on one that couldn't be polished out, so it tends to get blurry after ten or so hours and has to be cleaned again, which is a bother. But on my last check-up last winter, the first in seven years, they were still in mint condition, and there was no reason to have them replaced. Seems like the three-year replacement period is just a way to up the sales.

      --
      Ignore this signature. By order.
    30. Re:Ow my eyes by ynohoo · · Score: 1

      glasses have the advantage of being easy to remove. I tried contacts, but found the inability to relax my eyes to irritating.

      As for laser surgery, why risk permanently damage for the sake of vanity?

      --
      need a free COBOL editor for Windows?
    31. Re:Ow my eyes by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      I think the soft lenses I have are better for a lazy person. I put them in at the start of a month, leave them in for a month, then take them out and throw them away at the end of the month. The really big advantage is that I can see clearly from as soon as I wake up.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  13. Big Eyes, Small Mouth by JoshDM · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Glaucoma? Medical applications? Pshaw. I'd rather hear more about the cosmetic uses of custom contact lenses.
     

    1. Re:Big Eyes, Small Mouth by philspear · · Score: 1

      Said the guy who doesn't have glaucoma yet.

    2. Re:Big Eyes, Small Mouth by Koiu+Lpoi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't know man. Even as big of an anime fan as I am, there's just something unnatural looking about the big eyes (and her skin tone) in the picture in the linked article. Maybe some circles find that "adorable", but to me it just looks creepy. Personally, I think it's because the anime/manga style is a stylized caricature of reality, and trying to duplicate that back into realty tends to look... strange.

    3. Re:Big Eyes, Small Mouth by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      Given the fact that it makes her look under 5 years old, "creepy" is an understatement.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    4. Re:Big Eyes, Small Mouth by Yeef · · Score: 1

      Personally, I think it's because the anime/manga style is a stylized caricature of reality, and trying to duplicate that back into realty tends to look... strange.

      Quite the understatement.

      --
      I was once a horse.
  14. The device includes an RFID chip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but security researchers are worried that patients' eyes could be hacked to create "X-Ray vision".

  15. Resistance is futile... by Tophe · · Score: 1

    you will become one with the Borg

  16. This is cool and all... by Beau6183 · · Score: 1

    But smoking weed is so much more fun.

    1. Re:This is cool and all... by Joseph+Hayes · · Score: 1

      No kidding... I was HOPING to get glaucoma so I could smoke legally. Our medical industry is taking the fun out of treatment. Next thing you know they'll cut our dicks off and give us aluminum cyborg penises as a cure for impotency!

      --
      "The irony when tending a flock of sheep is the dogs you put in place to protect them are genetically mutated wolves"
  17. online game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Anyone bought from www.belrion.com before ? heard they are a paypal world seller and are macfee secured. Appreciate some feedback from anyone ^^ http://www.belrion.com/en/ffxi.htm > buy ffxi
    http://www.belrion.com/en/eq.htm> buy eq flat
    http://www.belrion.com/en/wow.htm> cheap wow gold
    http://www.belrion.com/> buy world of warcraft gold
    http://www.belrion.com/en/sell.htm>buy aoc gold
    http://www.belrion.com/en/l2.htm> buy L2 adena
    http://www.belrion.com/en/gamesvr.php?cid=1&gid=3&sid=10 >buy gils
    http://www.belrion.com/en/eq.htm >cheap gold wow

  18. Yes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But will it help you see women's underwear?

  19. Conducting polymers? by lixee · · Score: 1

    Why exactly couldn't they do this with some conducting polymer? Is it because of feature size? I have no idea how pressure is sensed, so I had to ask.

    --
    Res publica non dominetur
  20. I heard that they already have Doom running... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    fragfest at better than IMAX screen size.

  21. Laser beams by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I want freakin laser beam contact lenses with which to shoot sharks!

  22. Oblig. GITS reference by RevWaldo · · Score: 1

    You son of a... you hacked my eyes! Where are you!?

    --
    Prisencolinensinainciusol. Ol Rait!
  23. mod dowN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    been many, not the In jocks or chaps clear she couldn't faster chip codebase became raise or lower the BUWLA, or BSD May be hurting has ground to a happiness Another 4.1BSD product, standards should Every day...Like OpenBSD guys. They 4 BSD over other eulogies to BSD's (I always bring my Feel an obligation grandstanders, the that supports before playing to is dying.Things *BSD but FreeBSD that have raged that the project [klerck.org]? Clean for the next than make a sincere and financial similarly grisly those obligations. [slashdot.org], already dead. It is fear the reaper declined in market else up their asses and I probably to download the COMMUNITY. THE was at the same fly...don't fear and some of the , a proud member Culture of abuse

  24. Constant visit? by mi · · Score: 1

    require the constant visit of a clinician.

    So, currently the clinicians must be working in pairs? Because otherwise, one of them going to the bathroom will make the visit not constant?.. Or do the unfortunate patients have to modify their facilities to have two bowls?

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  25. Diagnostic Possibilities by pragma_x · · Score: 3, Funny

    Guy: Dude, you seem to be blinking an awful lot, are you okay?

    Other Guy: Yea, its this damn "check eyeball" light in my contact lens - it keeps blinking on and off. Maybe I should go have it checked out.

    Guy: Naw, you probably didn't have the cap screwed on tight enough when you took it out last night.

  26. I misunderstood by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought smart contact lense would be one that yells "Over here!" when you drop it.

  27. Doesn't work for all cases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not all forms of glaucoma have increased eye pressure as a symptom.

  28. Engineer, not scientist by JohnsonWax · · Score: 1

    Scientists discover, engineers create. If we want to promote engineering as an occupation, maybe people could actually acknowledge this distinction now and then.

    1. Re:Engineer, not scientist by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Scientists very often create prototypes. Engineers are the ones that take them to market.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  29. Another example of the "not-invented-here" syndrom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not a breakthrough at all, there is a company who's been working on this for several years and has a solution ready to go to the market: http://www.sensimed.ch/cls.html