On Wed, 1 Feb 2006 23:48:15 -0500, "Gary Kania" <gkania[at]comcast.net> wrote:

- quote -

Gary,

The best visual comfort occurs when both eyes send a sharply focused equally
sized image to the brain. I would resist creating a permanent disparity in lens
powers and try for as close of a match as possible, selecting an uncorrected
focal length for both eyes as discussed above.

Hope this helps

Robert Martellaro
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Optician/Owner
Roberts Optical
robopt[at]execpc.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes that can be made in a very narrow field."
- Niels Bohr

I say my Dr. the other day and told him some of the replies I have received
about targeting for -1.25 to -1.5.

He suggested one eye for -.5 and the other for -1.25. Not really
monovision, but enough variance where both eyes should be able to see well
for distance, but one with the -.5 setting just a bit better for distance to
maybe avoid needing glasses for driving and the one with the -1.25 just a
bit better for reading computer screen (not small print) without glasses.

Any comments?


<acemanvx[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1138541851.545362.246980[at]g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
- quote -

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 07:38:28 -0500, "Gary Kania" <gkania[at]comcast.net> wrote:

- quote -

If you keep the same Rx post surgery you'll be able to read without glasses. You
will need glasses for distance and computer.

- quote -

Maybe. You will see very small print without glasses better than you will see
the same size print with glasses if the post-op Rx is more than -2.50.

- quote -

If the psot-op Rx is -1.75, screens at 23" will be clear without glasses. You
will need glasses for distance and normal reading distances.

- quote -

That's how I plan to do it when my time comes.

- quote -

A benefit for one person is a PIA for another.

- quote -

I've heard more bad than good.

- quote -

Ditto.

- quote -

Hope this helps




Robert Martellaro
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Optician/Owner
Roberts Optical
robopt[at]execpc.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes that can be made in a very narrow field."
- Niels Bohr

I strongly agree with David Robins about aiming for a slight
undercorrection. Me and my dad was talking to this lady in person who
had cateract surgury and she ended up +.5 diopters. This means she sees
blurry at all distances and cant see/read anything smaller than half
inch from near. She wears bifocals but takes them off for distance but
needs them at all times around the house. Had she gotten undercorrected
she would be far less dependant on glasses or not at all. In the far
future when my time comes for cateract surgury, if theres no cure for
presbyopia or no good way to treat presbyopia, I will choose an
undercorrection between -1 and -1.5 diopters. This will keep me out of
glasses when using the computer, reading at arms length, walking around
the house, anything in the intermediate range. Ill only need reading
glasses to read fine print and only need distance glasses for driving
or watching TV. If someone uses their vision for near more, I dont
understand why not go for near? If you choose distance and end up
overcorrected at all, you lose! If you choose for near and end
overcorrected youll still be plano!

"David Robins, MD" <trashadd[at]bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:C002E1DF.73D3B%trashadd[at]bigfoot.com...
- quote -

Well, the Humphrey numbers were slightly larger:
-0.25; -0.75 [at] 076
-0.75; -0.75 [at] 083

Uncorrected, I see quite sharply, and parfocally, at 1 meter. So I said
I think I am a diopter nearsighted. The OD, and, on another occasion,
a technician in the same office, denied any validity for the autorefractor.
I dunno why they do that, nor why they soften the autorefractor values.
With my glasses, I still have mild uncorrected astigmatism, consistent with
the differences between the above numbers. But depth of field covers a
multitude of small errors. One would not want one's depth of field to
extend beyond infinity.

- quote -

Sounds good to me. I don't know why my surgeon would not discuss his
aiming with me -- maybe he did not feel so sure of the outcome as you do.

--
Dicky

On 1/29/06 6:52 AM, in article KE4Df.15374$M94.6514[at]trnddc01, "Dick Adams"
<bad.addr[at]nonexist.com> wrote:

- quote -

Actually, you got (in spherical equivalent) about -0.50 right eye and -0.75
left eye, not -1D.

This is a power I like to end up with after cataract surgery; as you found,
being slightly nearsighted is pretty good for many tasks.

Being zero power (aim for far) is a problem except in those people who want
distance vision without glasses, and put up with the fact that even around
the house they need glasses for most intermediate tasks, and certainly for
near tasks. Avid golfers, for example, like zero power. However, you can aim
for zero power, and where the IOL heals in the eye varies from individual to
individual, so the final power cannot be "guaranteed".

Aiming for about -0.75, given the uncertainly of outcomes (my own standard
deviation is about +/- 0.45 D), menas that the glasses aren't very strong
for either distance nor near.

acemanvx[at]yahoo.com wrote:

- quote -

Nobody has mentioned monovision yet.

Even though I spend the bulk of my day at the computer or reading, I'd choose
good distance vision. If for some reason you break your glasses you're a lot
better off being able to drive to the drugstore to get some more reading
glasses than to walk to your optometrist's office to order some new distance
glasses. You can also buy ordinary sunglasses. Way more convenient.

My mom's ophthalmologist didn't tell her she had options, just gave her near
vision. She was really pissed when she found out that she hadn't been given a
choice because she would have chosen good distance vision instead.

--
Cheers,
Bev
================================================== =======
"Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority."
-- U.S. Supreme Court, McIntyre v Ohio Elections,1995

"Gary Kania" <gkania[at]comcast.net> wrote in message newsfydnULJVLjVKkHeRVn-pA[at]comcast.com...

- quote -

I got about 1D nearsighted in each eye. If I had it to do again, I'd choose
that. It is good for almost everything, but night driving and reading take
eyeglasses. If my computer screen were at 40 inches (~one meter), it would
be good without eyeglasses. 23-in.TV at 10 feet is acceptable without correction.
Recognizing faces across the street is problematic.

- quote -

The outcome of lens replacement is not precisely predictable. Astigmatism
may be changed, or be introduced. In my case, there was a stated uncertainty
of a half diopter sphere on account of uncommonly long eyeballs. I learned
that from the tech who measured. The surgeon was unwilling to call the shots
or consider requests (very frustrating and anxiety provoking!) Probably
your surgeon will shoot for something in the mid range. Hope you have such
good luck as I did, so as to not need glasses for most things.

Walgreens readers (+1.25 D) do fine for me, and are no worse than
"add 2" to my prescribed numbers.

- quote -

I do notice objectionable flare, and halos when the corneas get unduly dry.
Dry-eye was increased by the implant surgery, more in one than the other.

--
Dicky
Age 77
~3 months after implants:
-0.25; -0.50 [at] 075
-0.50; -0.50 [at] 090
(subjective -- Humphrey slightly different [more])

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 07:38:28 -0500, "Gary Kania" <gkania[at]comcast.netwrote:

- quote -

last month, though I was far sighted (+4.0) vice near sighted. I'm
going to give you my opinions, based upon my research, and experience,
and I am an online news editor, not an OD. There are some good ODs
and MDs reading this group and they can certainly provide you with
their expertise.
- quote -

how you feel about glasses. E.G. I have worn them most of my life,
and I still do. If you are tying to get rid of glasses rmember that
this is not cosmetic surgery to enable you to do so. But, if glasses
are acceptable to you, then accept them. (Carrying them, putting them
on, taking them off, peering over the top, would drive me nuts - I
expect them together with the condition pf my eyes, to afford me the
best vision possible at all ranges/conditions---one pair---all of the
above---all of the time)
My reccomendation is go with the "far" option. He will probably bring
them in just under perfect to avoid over-correction. You glasses will
handle the rest.
- quote -

And how important is this??? It depends on how you have the IOLs set
up. But, according to my reading of your message, you have lenses
with a correction in them now---or do you only put them on for
distance viewing.
- quote -

now?
- quote -

were enough problems with them that some folks were opting to have
them removed - enough to have the number generate a statistic. So, if
something drives you in this direction, have your eyedoc guarantee you
that he will replace them, free of charge, if they don't work for you.
- quote -

research says they tend to go away after a time. I'm experiencing
some with nioght driving. Nothing that would prevent me from doing so
(My last implant was done about 6 weeks ago.) There are ultraviolet
filters available in lenses by several mfgrs. They will help siome
and will help with night vision. Might as well opt for them. I did
- quote -

them,
BTW, if you have an astigmatism problem, in there somewhere, I would
be glad to provide you an opinion on procedure known as the LRI
(limbal relaxing incision) Folks in this group know it won't be a
good one.
Be well!!!
starrin

"Gary Kania" <gkania[at]comcast.net> wrote

- quote -

Measure the typical distance to your computer screen and tell him that's
where you want your best vision. Given the opportunity to choose, most
people would prefer a less nearsighted prescription than -3.00. If you've
been pulling the monitor close enough to see without glasses (eg ~12")
consider moving it back to 20".

- quote -

If the implants make your distance vision perfect, you will certainly have
trouble at computer distance and closer.

- quote -

Presumably the surgery is required because your vision is cloudy at all
distances. That will certainly improve, but there is still the problem of
focusing at different distances. Choose the "working distance" that _you_
use most. If your monitor is at 22", you'd want a post-surgery refraction
of -1.75, and your "driving" glasses would be perhaps 30% thinner than
your -3.00's.

Multifocal implants aren't as satisfying as we might wish, and they cost
more.

-MT