Slashdot Mirror


Adjustable-Focus Glasses Can Replace Bifocals

Hugh Pickens writes "The NY Times reports that inventor Stephen Kurtin has developed glasses with a mechanically adjustable focus that he believes can free nearly two billion people around the world from bifocals, trifocals and progressive lenses. Kurtin has spent almost 20 years on his quest to create a better pair of spectacles for people who suffer from presbyopia — the condition that affects almost everyone over the age of 40 as they progressively lose the ability to focus on close objects. The glasses have a tiny adjustable slider on the bridge of the frame that makes it possible to focus alternately on the page of a book, a computer screen, or a mountain range in the distance. 'For more than 140 years, adjustable focus has been recognized as the Holy Grail for presbyopes,' says Kurtin. 'It's a blazingly difficult problem.' Each 'lens' is actually a set of two lenses, one flexible and one firm. The flexible lens (near the eye) has a transparent, distensible membrane attached to a clear rigid surface. The pocket between them holds a small quantity of crystal-clear fluid. As you move the slider on the bridge, it pushes the fluid and alters the shape of the flexible lens."

37 of 220 comments (clear)

  1. Cool, but... by Max+Romantschuk · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...how do you clean them?

    I've had glasses for ages now. I clean them every day. My rigid plastic lenses eventually develop small scratches no matter how careful you are.

    So how will these lenses with movin parts hold up when cleaned for every day for N years?

    The FAQ claims:

    TruFocals are rugged and durable. Most moving parts are made from stainless steel alloy or TISMO high performance polymer. TruFocals users report that they stand up to the wear and tear of fulltime use.

    I'm not impressed unless it's been proven over time...

    --
    .: Max Romantschuk :: http://max.romantschuk.fi/
    1. Re:Cool, but... by zygotic+mitosis · · Score: 4, Funny

      My rigid plastic lenses eventually develop small scratches no matter how careful you are.

      Sorry. I'll be more careful in the future.

    2. Re:Cool, but... by ta+bu+shi+da+yu · · Score: 3, Funny

      Hey. That's why someone tagged this story !Presbyterians :-) Of course, the people who needed to know that couldn't read it... but still, awesome tag!

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    3. Re:Cool, but... by Nerdfest · · Score: 5, Informative

      Don't use cleaning fluid, tissues, or even those special cloths. Use soap and water only. Run water over your lenses to get the larger dust particles off, then wet your fingers and apply a couple of drops of dish detergent to them. Use this to get any remaining dust and oily residue off the lenses by rubbing the lenses with your fingers. Rinse the lenses under running water. Repeat as required. You can shake most of the water droplets off, and if you want to get rid of all of them, dab the lenses with a soft cotton towel. You lenses should remain scratch free for years.

    4. Re:Cool, but... by zygotic+mitosis · · Score: 2, Informative

      and if you want to get rid of all of them, dab the lenses with a soft cotton towel.

      Or use distilled water as the final rinse.

    5. Re:Cool, but... by commodore64_love · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I suspect cleaning these "liquid-filled lenses" is no different than cleaning your liquid-filled calculator or LCD screen.

      Not that this will help me. I have astigmatism which makes it virtually impossible to wear anything except hard lenses or hard contacts. What I *really* need is a new pair of eyeballs.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    6. Re:Cool, but... by laughing_badger · · Score: 2, Informative

      I was once warned that dish soap damaged some of the coatings applied to the lenses - not sure how accurate that was or how relevant it is today.

      --
      Help children born unable to swallow - www.tofs.org.uk
    7. Re:Cool, but... by ingenuus · · Score: 4, Informative

      There's also soft toric lenses for astigmatism.

    8. Re:Cool, but... by nb+caffeine · · Score: 2, Informative

      I too have astigmatism and can wear Toric lenses to (mostly) correct it. Been wearing them for several years now, and I'm pretty sure my astigmatism is pretty bad. Never been recommended hard lenses. Perhaps your eye doctor is just old and not up to date? Or maybe I'm wrong in that only mild astigmatism can be corrected in soft lenses.

      --

      "Something's wrong with you...and I hope we never do meet again." - Deftones When Girls Telephone Boys
    9. Re:Cool, but... by mcgrew · · Score: 4, Informative

      What I *really* need is a new pair of eyeballs.

      Not your eyeballs, just their lenses. They have soft contacts for astigmatism now, but if you have the money for it a CrystaLens is the way to go; I have one in my left eye and it's fantastic.

      Its amazing how science has in some cases passed science fiction. In Star Trek IV there's a fictional drug called "retinox" that cures age related presbyopia by (presumably) softening the lens, and since Kirk is allergic to retinox, he has to wear reading glasses. One would think that McCoy could just transport Kirk's crystaline lens out and transport a CrystaLens into it, but the si-fi writers didn't forsee this new tech (it was FDA approved in 2003).

    10. Re:Cool, but... by nmg196 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > Use soap and water only.

      The problem is, in the real world there's no such thing as "soap". You have to buy a retail product and they contain perfumes, colours, moisturisers, anti-bacterial additives etc... Which ruin your glasses.

      I've taken to using a microfibre cloth which somehow seems to suck everything off without needing any liquids. It works quite well, but a good one is hard to find.

    11. Re:Cool, but... by J-1000 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'm not impressed unless it's been proven over time...

      If you had read the article you would know that they developed a *time machine* in tandem with the glasses so that they could prove their long-term durability.

  2. About time, too by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 2, Interesting

    But the price, the price...
    My presbyopia is such that I just do without spectacles for close work, and don monofocals for driving, etc. I have bifocals, but they irritate me to no end. If adaptive focus spectacles are reasonably-priced (no more than double the cost of good coated bifocals), then I'll be first in line.

    --
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
  3. How is that an improvement? by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The glasses have a tiny adjustable slider on the bridge of the frame that makes it possible to focus alternately on the page of a book, a computer screen, or a mountain range in the distance

    Whowever designed this has obviously never worn progressive lenses. In real, ordinary life, you don't "decide" to focus on something for a minute and adjust the slider accordingly, you adjust your focal point *all the time*, unconsciously. What progressive lenses do is allow your neck muscle to "emulate" what your eye muscles would normally do if you weren't an old fart.

    I just don't see myself (pun intended) spending the day with a finger on the rim of my glasses to do the same. If I want to be comfortable for an extended period of time in front of the computer, or to drive, I put on my near or far glasses. For the rest of the time (90% of my day), I put on the progressive glasses. Perhaps the adjustable lenses would allow me to have one pair of comfy glasses instead of two, but I ain't giving up my progressives. At any rate, my reading glasses are on the table, and my driving glasses are in the car, so it's not really a problem in the first place.

    (On a side note, I've just realized I'm talking about my presbyopia on Slashdot, and the dreaded word "middle-aged" comes to my mind.)

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    1. Re:How is that an improvement? by Jay+Maynard · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Amen. This seems like a good idea...but for the things I do that don't involve sitting in front of a computer or a book, it'd be a disaster. Both driving, and to an even greater extent flying, involve repeated, regular, rapid changes in focus distance from close to far, and especially while flying, my hands have better things to do than stay up at the bridge of my nose adjusting how well I see.

      I've worn bifocals since I was 16 years old. (Focus flexibility problems don't always start in middle age.) These new glasses will not replace them, for me.

      --
      Disinfect the GNU General Public Virus!
    2. Re:How is that an improvement? by MartinSchou · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What you're failing to realize is that this is the first step towards glasses that adjust their focus automatically.

      Right now it's done manually. Just like we used to manually card wool.

      Given time, the electronics needed to measure where you're looking, the distance to it and adjusting the focus will be built in to the glasses.

    3. Re:How is that an improvement? by Deag · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This would be really cool for controlling tint in glasses though. Those transition lenses that do this automatically don't really work well. I would love a pair of glasses that allowed me to manually adjust the tint.

    4. Re:How is that an improvement? by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Notice how you now require several glasses for several ranges; one pair for close, one for far, and some progressive. You have to switch manually between those glasses. The invention now reduces the switch action to adjusting a slide.

      No it doesn't. I'd still have to have progressives and a pair of magic-slider glasses. So instead of three pairs, I'd have two. Unless of course I can have glasses with 3 settings (progressive, fixed/near and fixed/far), in which case I'd gladly buy them.

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    5. Re:How is that an improvement? by shadow349 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This would be really cool for controlling tint in glasses though. Those transition lenses that do this automatically don't really work well. I would love a pair of glasses that allowed me to manually adjust the tint.

      That problem has been solved for decades, if not longer. Two polarized lenses, one of which can be rotated relative to the other, produce the effect you are looking for.

    6. Re:How is that an improvement? by MatthewCCNA · · Score: 2, Funny

      Right now it's done manually. Just like we used to manually card wool.

      Speaking of getting older, was wool carding the best analogy available or should I get of your lawn?

      --
      "He is so stupid. And now back to the wall!" Moe Szyslak
    7. Re:How is that an improvement? by CrackedButter · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Canon EOS 3 (and probably the 1V) had a feature whereby the camera would lock focus depending on where the eye was pointing while using the camera. These were both film cameras as well btw just to show how old this tech is.

  4. Not a new idea by the way by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 2, Informative
    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
  5. Crystalens by mcgrew · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They're three years too late for me; I had a CrystaLens implanted in one eye in 2006. It is an adjustable focus lens that replaces the eye's natural lens, and it uses the eye's focusing muscles to focus.

    Its drawbacks are first, you have to have surgery, and second, it's pretty expensive. It's affordable if you have cataracts, where insurance will pay most of the costs and even then the out of pocket expense to cover the difference in price between an old fashioned InterOptical Lens (IOL) and the new one.

    Your eye actually has two lenses; the cornea and the crystalline lens. The latter is what focuses, until you reach your forties when it starts becoming stiff, too stiff for the eye's muscle to move.

    These new reading glasses would be a boon to anyone with the old fashioned IOL, anyone who is afraid of letting a doctor stick needles in their eyeball, and anyone without about $6,000 to get one eye fixed. I'll bet they're expensive (haven't yet RTFA) but I'm sure they're cheaper than surgery, and like all new technologies, the price will come down in time. In twenty years you'll be able to get them for ten bucks in today's money, I'd be willing to bet.

    1. Re:Crystalens by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What's it like to get a shot in the eye? I assume they anesthetize you so that can't flinch or blink. But are you conscious? It seems like a waking nightmare to watch a needle slowly approach your eyeball and there's nothing you can do about it.

      I suppose it's a pretty routine operation, but yikes, the needle in the eye...

    2. Re:Crystalens by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 3, Informative

      What's it like to get a shot in the eye? I assume they anesthetize you so that can't flinch or blink. But are you conscious?

      They do apply a local anesthetic to the eye, but you are otherwise fully conscious and alert. They merely use a steel contraption to pin your head and shoulders down. ;)

  6. I kinda like the progressive lenses by jbarr · · Score: 2, Informative

    I've been wearing glasses for over 35 years since kindergarten, and about two years ago, I got progressive lenses. Sure, they were a bit strange at first, but within a day, I just "got it" and I think they're great! By simply doing "micro adjustments", I can get pretty much anything into focus very quickly.

    I really don't see what the big deal is. Can someone please explain why progressive lenses are so despised?

    --
    My mom always said, "Jim, you're 1 in a million." Given the current population, there are 7000 of me. God help us all!
    1. Re:I kinda like the progressive lenses by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The progressive lens I tried out at the optician's only gave clear focus over a five or ten degree horizontal field of view through most of its close-focus range. Anything left or right of center was astigmatically blurred. No way could I live with that, particularly in this day of "wider is better" displays.

      I might consider a progressive lens that gave clear focus across the entire width of my FOV, but from what I've seen, that isn't happening.

  7. Reading glasses! by Rick+Richardson · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Reading glasses: $2 at Northern Tool. Regular prescription glasses: $40 from internet (china). Total cost: $42.

    VS.

    Trufocals: $895.

    Next topic!

  8. Great! Lenses that look like a FULL Coke bottle. by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I really, really want adjustable-focus lenses. But I don't want heavy lenses, and I don't want large, round lenses.

    I'm hoping these folks, linked in TFA, can deliver. Electronic focus sounds a lot more appealing and reliable.

  9. tiny slider by MagicM · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The glasses have a tiny adjustable slider on the bridge of the frame

    Good thing the over-40 crowd is well-known for their dexterity and ability to accurately manipulate tiny adjustable sliders.

  10. Violates the KISS Principal by frodo527 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This really sounds like a solution in search of a problem. Bifocals and trifocals work, and have no moving parts.

    --
    http://blogostuff.blogspot.com/
  11. Who Needs Bifocals? by InsertCleverUsername · · Score: 2, Funny

    Just get a bigger monitor.

    --
    Ask me about my sig!
  12. You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile! by mcgrew · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You're only semi-conscious; they drug you into what they call "twilight sleep". They use anesthetic eyedrops to numb the eye and they put an IV in your arm with the "twilight sleep" anesthesia. They tie your arms to the gurney "so you won't try to help the doctor". The only unpleasant part is when the needle actually goes into your eye, but it's not painful, only shocking and wierd. They have some sort of frame over your face that lets them see inside your eye with a microscope (they dose your eye with dialation drops as well as anesthetic) and holds your eyelid open.

    You don't see the needle coming towards your eye. I journaled about it; the link is in the comment you responded to. The needle goes through the white of the eye and they shoot ultrasound through it to turn the lens to mush, suck the mush out and insert the prosthetic lens. It sounds bad, but it isn't. The best part is I wore thick glasses all my life, I was severly myopic. The CrytaLens cures myopia (nearsightedness), presbyopia (farsightedness), astigmatism, and cataracts. The eye I have the implant in is now better than 20/20 at all distances, but the surgeon said mine worked out better than most.

    Now, a vitrectomy, that's a nightmare. I wouldn't wish one on anybody, but it sure beats the certainty of absolute blindness. BTW, one slashotter asked me to warn people before I link the vitrectomy journal, it really freaked him out. There's a link to the wikipedia article about victrectomy in that journal, and there's a picture in the wikipedia article that is NOT for the faint of heart. Pray you never have a detached retina!

  13. Replace the lenses in the eyes! by jameskojiro · · Score: 3, Interesting

    People get that way because the lenses in their eyes stiffen with age and soon the muscles int he eyes can't adjust them properly. People who have had certain type of cataract surgery where they replace the lens inside of the eye usually regain most all of their focusing ability.

    --
    Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
    1. Re:Replace the lenses in the eyes! by mcgrew · · Score: 3, Informative

      You're correct; the "certain type of cataract surgery" is a new implant approved by the FDA in 2003. The older implants, the ones insurance covers, won't focus. But by the time you need cataract surgery your eyes won't focus anyway.

      I have one of the new ones in my left eye. My surgeon said my outcome was better than average, but I'm better than 20/20 at all distances. I see better than most 20 year olds!

      BTW, the new lenses move, on struts, making them devices. This means if you get these implants you're a cyborg.

      Resistance is futile.

  14. Mod parent "only half-right"... by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 3, Informative

    Yes, the lens stiffens with age. (There was a competing theory that it grows with age, and that focus problems arise because the focus mechanism doesn't have enough range of motion to adapt, but that apparently hasn't been borne out by further studies.

    No, in general, lens replacement does NOT give you back focusing ability. There's one type of lens (Crystalens, referenced upthread) that restores accommodation for some recipients, but results vary widely, and regular replacement lenses don't accommodate at all.

  15. What about thermal effects? by HikingStick · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I wonder how these will respond when temperatures may vary significantly. Will I need to adjust them going from an air-conditioned office out into a sweltering summer day? Similarly going from a heated house into a Minnesota winter? What about possible freezing? I take my glasses with me when I camp and some nights the temperatures are below freezing both inside and outside of my tent.

    I guess I'll watch for this to hit the market, but am simply glad I don't need them yet.

    --
    I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...