Savest up thou thy shekels and get thee a fair dose of LASIK. Been there, done that, six months ago. I had "custom" "bladeless" LASIK in early August, and both eyes have been 20/15 since the next morning.
As an improvement to shooting, it's hard to beat.
And, it's only money. But that's OK, 'cause this is America, where you can go earn some more.
What DJ said. I went from -6.25/-6.5 to uncorrected 20/20, even with astigmatism. I'd have done it years ago, but I decided to wait until I could just write a check instead of financing it.
Before saying, "Naaah," I suggest reading up on "custom LASIK".
Correcting vision via eyeglasses models the eye as a sphere (with the wrong radius) superposed by a cylinder (which shouldn't be there) having a radius and an orientation. The cylindrical part is "astigmatism". It's modeled that way because that's all that eyeglasses can correct for. Ordinary LASIK uses the same model.
The model should include that the cornea is "lumpy", as in misshapen like a cornflake, which eyeglasses can't correct for. My eyeglass prescription was only -1.75 diopters with a slight astigmatism in the right eye, but there was a limit to how well eyeglasses could correct my vision because my "cornflake factor" was rather severe in both eyes.
Custom LASIK involves applying the laser so as to remove the cornflake factor and make the cornea have a perfect spherical shape. It is measured by looking into an instrument that uses lasers to measure the response of the eye. It is corrected by a laser that required only ten seconds for one eye and twelve for the other.
The result is spectacular. At night, the stars are now tiny pinpoints of light instead of just smears. It's the closest thing to magic I've ever experienced.
Even if you don't opt for Laser correction, if you live long enough, odds are that you'll wind up with cataracts... which I did (yes, I'm older than dirt). When I had them removed, I had IOLs (Intra Ocular Lenses) put in. They now have them that can correct for astigmatism, too, and my distance vision is now 20/20. They also have IOLs that will correct for presbyopia, but not both astig and presby, so I still need reading lenses, but by the time you're ready, they'll have that figured out, too.
In the meantime, google "glassyeyes".
It's a blog on Internet opticians. Get your prescription from your eye doctor (they *have* to give it to you - FTC rules) and save a few bucks.
I've just ordered some shades with a bifocal spot for reading in the sun for about 1/5 of what my optician charged me last time. I'll report back when they come in as to quality.
Bud, in fairness, I use reading glasses. LASIK corrected my vision to see perfectly at a distance, but I need reading glasses to focus clearly closer than about four feet. I wore bifocals for eight years before getting LASIK.
Very nice +1.75 off-the-shelf glasses from Wal Mart are $16 + tax and work just dandy, so if I lose 'em, it doesn't matter. My sister-in-law swears by the Dollar Store, where she gets 'em for a dollar.
Hey, I'm north of 40 so I wear reading glasses too. LASIK surgeons offer the "monovision" option, basically optimizing one eye for distance and one for close work (it's recommended for people who would otherwise be putting reading glasses on and taking 'em off every two minutes), but I got both eyes done for distance. When I read it tends to be for hours at a time, and I wanted to see to shoot.
I'm 43 come August and still have 20/15 in the right eye and 20/17 in the left (as of last November).
I have noticed that my close up vision is getting worse though, anything closer than about 5 inches from the tip of my nose starts going out of focus.
I'm not saying the above to rub salt in a wound to those who wear glasses (well, a little maybe), it's just that vision is my most important sense...I'd much rather go deaf or lose taste and smell than lose my vision.
"... I got both eyes done for distance. When I read it tends to be for hours at a time, and I wanted to see to shoot."
Same here, and for the same reason.
And, rain and snow are for laughing it. No more fogged or wet glasses to complain about.
"Night-vision problems, glare, etc? That's the main thing that puts me off the procedure."
Not to worry.
My brother had "custom" "standard" LASIK, which uses a microkeratome to create the corneal flap. He could see perfectly immediately after the procedure, and his vision has been spotlessly clear ever since.
I had the "custom" "bladeless" LASIK, which uses a laser to create a gazillion tiny bubbles under the cornea, thereby detaching it to create the flap. I waited for this to be perfected and in common use because the risk of complications when using it is much less, and the flap is more perfectly formed as to thickness.
My surgeon claimed to have twelve complications with bladeless LASIK in over 15,000 procedures. I liked those odds.
But, the "bubble" procedure is not without its own effects. Again, not to worry, they go away.
Creating the corneal flap via those bubbles creates tiny facets where the cornea mates up with the eye underneath. Immediately after the procedure, this greats a bright glow, enough to make one think the procedure screwed up, but being prepared for it, I didn't worry.
The next morning, my vision was spectacular and the glow effect was reduced by about 90 percent. What was left was a diffuse glow around very bright objects at night, oncoming headlights, for example. The effect goes away asymptotically with time, and so the improvement is quick. After about six weeks, it was there but weak enough that it wasn't noticeable. Today, after six months, my vision is crystal clear, even at night.
Before I had it done, my concerns could be summed up as, "You wanna do WHAT to my eyes?" Now, I wish I had done it years earlier.
My vision was 20/08 up until about 5 years ago. I'm 49 and I could sex a gnat at 50 paces. Now, my arms have gotten so short that either I use reading glasses or put the book on a table and step back 8 feet. It most assuredly makes me cranky to have this little inconvenience. I've been considering the Crystal Lens or other similar procedure, since I've heard wholly adequate remarks about the results. Either that, or I'm going to put aperture sights on everything I own, since that seems to be the only way I can get a good view while shooting.
Yes, it's a bitch to get old, but as my grandfather always told me, "every day above ground is a good day".
While I was recovering from the sticker shock from my last pair of glasses, the optometrist explained to me that Lasik was becoming so popular, that the eyeglass industry was having to support itself off of fewer and fewer customers, hence the rapidly climbing prices. Unfortunately, the Lasik clinic said I was one of those cases with a cornea too thin, for the radical degree of correction required, to risk the procedure.
The optometrist says that I should just go ahead and have the Lasik folks do what they can: Complete correction of astigmatism and higher order errors, (The 'cornflake') and as much of the nearsightedness as they'd risk. It would save me money in the long run, because I could get by with much cheaper glasses even if the correction wasn't complete.
"... the optometrist explained to me that Lasik was becoming so popular, that the eyeglass industry was having to support itself off of fewer and fewer customers, hence the rapidly climbing prices."
Hence my optometrist becoming a "LASIK followup care provider." If you can't beat 'em, join 'em. I sneaked a peek at the paperwork he was provided, as I hand-carried it from the LASIK facility to him the next day. He was provided $587 out of what I paid for LASIK to provide that followup care.
"Complete correction of astigmatism and higher order errors, (The 'cornflake') and as much of the nearsightedness as they'd risk."
I was astounded at the difference the higher order error correction made. I thought I could see well with glasses. The description is quite apt that I didn't know what I didn't know.
Note:
All avatars and any images or other media embedded in comments were hosted on the JS-Kit website and have been lost;
references to haloscan comments have been partially automatically remapped, but accuracy is not guaranteed and corrections are solicited.
If you notice any problems with this page or wish to have your home page link updated, please contact John Hardin <jhardin@impsec.org>
JS-Kit/Echo comments for article at http://smallestminority.blogspot.com/2008/02/life-intrudes.html (15 comments)
Tentative mapping of comments to original article, corrections solicited.
Savest up thou thy shekels and get thee a fair dose of LASIK. Been there, done that, six months ago. I had "custom" "bladeless" LASIK in early August, and both eyes have been 20/15 since the next morning.
As an improvement to shooting, it's hard to beat.
And, it's only money. But that's OK, 'cause this is America, where you can go earn some more.
Kevin,
Drop me an e-mail, including your phone #, and I'll get that agreed-on deal for the 6.5 thumbhole Swede underway.
Jim
Sloop New Dawn
Galveston, TX
What DJ said. I went from -6.25/-6.5 to uncorrected 20/20, even with astigmatism. I'd have done it years ago, but I decided to wait until I could just write a check instead of financing it.
Before saying, "Naaah," I suggest reading up on "custom LASIK".
Correcting vision via eyeglasses models the eye as a sphere (with the wrong radius) superposed by a cylinder (which shouldn't be there) having a radius and an orientation. The cylindrical part is "astigmatism". It's modeled that way because that's all that eyeglasses can correct for. Ordinary LASIK uses the same model.
The model should include that the cornea is "lumpy", as in misshapen like a cornflake, which eyeglasses can't correct for. My eyeglass prescription was only -1.75 diopters with a slight astigmatism in the right eye, but there was a limit to how well eyeglasses could correct my vision because my "cornflake factor" was rather severe in both eyes.
Custom LASIK involves applying the laser so as to remove the cornflake factor and make the cornea have a perfect spherical shape. It is measured by looking into an instrument that uses lasers to measure the response of the eye. It is corrected by a laser that required only ten seconds for one eye and twelve for the other.
The result is spectacular. At night, the stars are now tiny pinpoints of light instead of just smears. It's the closest thing to magic I've ever experienced.
Sounds good to me, my bifocals are all scratched-up and I'm due for a new pair - if the wife's health-care spending plan will cover it.
Even if you don't opt for Laser correction, if you live long enough, odds are that you'll wind up with cataracts... which I did (yes, I'm older than dirt). When I had them removed, I had IOLs (Intra Ocular Lenses) put in. They now have them that can correct for astigmatism, too, and my distance vision is now 20/20. They also have IOLs that will correct for presbyopia, but not both astig and presby, so I still need reading lenses, but by the time you're ready, they'll have that figured out, too.
In the meantime, google "glassyeyes".
It's a blog on Internet opticians. Get your prescription from your eye doctor (they *have* to give it to you - FTC rules) and save a few bucks.
I've just ordered some shades with a bifocal spot for reading in the sun for about 1/5 of what my optician charged me last time. I'll report back when they come in as to quality.
Bud, in fairness, I use reading glasses. LASIK corrected my vision to see perfectly at a distance, but I need reading glasses to focus clearly closer than about four feet. I wore bifocals for eight years before getting LASIK.
Very nice +1.75 off-the-shelf glasses from Wal Mart are $16 + tax and work just dandy, so if I lose 'em, it doesn't matter. My sister-in-law swears by the Dollar Store, where she gets 'em for a dollar.
It's hell getting older.
It's hell getting older.
Yup. But I understand that it beats the alternative!
Hey, I'm north of 40 so I wear reading glasses too. LASIK surgeons offer the "monovision" option, basically optimizing one eye for distance and one for close work (it's recommended for people who would otherwise be putting reading glasses on and taking 'em off every two minutes), but I got both eyes done for distance. When I read it tends to be for hours at a time, and I wanted to see to shoot.
I'm sorry for all of you who wear glasses.
I'm 43 come August and still have 20/15 in the right eye and 20/17 in the left (as of last November).
I have noticed that my close up vision is getting worse though, anything closer than about 5 inches from the tip of my nose starts going out of focus.
I'm not saying the above to rub salt in a wound to those who wear glasses (well, a little maybe), it's just that vision is my most important sense...I'd much rather go deaf or lose taste and smell than lose my vision.
So, all you guy's who've had Lasik:
Any bad side-effects? Night-vision problems, glare, etc? That's the main thing that puts me off the procedure.
"... I got both eyes done for distance. When I read it tends to be for hours at a time, and I wanted to see to shoot."
Same here, and for the same reason.
And, rain and snow are for laughing it. No more fogged or wet glasses to complain about.
"Night-vision problems, glare, etc? That's the main thing that puts me off the procedure."
Not to worry.
My brother had "custom" "standard" LASIK, which uses a microkeratome to create the corneal flap. He could see perfectly immediately after the procedure, and his vision has been spotlessly clear ever since.
I had the "custom" "bladeless" LASIK, which uses a laser to create a gazillion tiny bubbles under the cornea, thereby detaching it to create the flap. I waited for this to be perfected and in common use because the risk of complications when using it is much less, and the flap is more perfectly formed as to thickness.
My surgeon claimed to have twelve complications with bladeless LASIK in over 15,000 procedures. I liked those odds.
But, the "bubble" procedure is not without its own effects. Again, not to worry, they go away.
Creating the corneal flap via those bubbles creates tiny facets where the cornea mates up with the eye underneath. Immediately after the procedure, this greats a bright glow, enough to make one think the procedure screwed up, but being prepared for it, I didn't worry.
The next morning, my vision was spectacular and the glow effect was reduced by about 90 percent. What was left was a diffuse glow around very bright objects at night, oncoming headlights, for example. The effect goes away asymptotically with time, and so the improvement is quick. After about six weeks, it was there but weak enough that it wasn't noticeable. Today, after six months, my vision is crystal clear, even at night.
Before I had it done, my concerns could be summed up as, "You wanna do WHAT to my eyes?" Now, I wish I had done it years earlier.
My vision was 20/08 up until about 5 years ago. I'm 49 and I could sex a gnat at 50 paces. Now, my arms have gotten so short that either I use reading glasses or put the book on a table and step back 8 feet. It most assuredly makes me cranky to have this little inconvenience. I've been considering the Crystal Lens or other similar procedure, since I've heard wholly adequate remarks about the results. Either that, or I'm going to put aperture sights on everything I own, since that seems to be the only way I can get a good view while shooting.
Yes, it's a bitch to get old, but as my grandfather always told me, "every day above ground is a good day".
Regards,
Rabbit.
While I was recovering from the sticker shock from my last pair of glasses, the optometrist explained to me that Lasik was becoming so popular, that the eyeglass industry was having to support itself off of fewer and fewer customers, hence the rapidly climbing prices. Unfortunately, the Lasik clinic said I was one of those cases with a cornea too thin, for the radical degree of correction required, to risk the procedure.
The optometrist says that I should just go ahead and have the Lasik folks do what they can: Complete correction of astigmatism and higher order errors, (The 'cornflake') and as much of the nearsightedness as they'd risk. It would save me money in the long run, because I could get by with much cheaper glasses even if the correction wasn't complete.
"... the optometrist explained to me that Lasik was becoming so popular, that the eyeglass industry was having to support itself off of fewer and fewer customers, hence the rapidly climbing prices."
Hence my optometrist becoming a "LASIK followup care provider." If you can't beat 'em, join 'em. I sneaked a peek at the paperwork he was provided, as I hand-carried it from the LASIK facility to him the next day. He was provided $587 out of what I paid for LASIK to provide that followup care.
"Complete correction of astigmatism and higher order errors, (The 'cornflake') and as much of the nearsightedness as they'd risk."
I was astounded at the difference the higher order error correction made. I thought I could see well with glasses. The description is quite apt that I didn't know what I didn't know.
Note: All avatars and any images or other media embedded in comments were hosted on the JS-Kit website and have been lost; references to haloscan comments have been partially automatically remapped, but accuracy is not guaranteed and corrections are solicited.
If you notice any problems with this page or wish to have your home page link updated, please contact John Hardin <jhardin@impsec.org>