[I] Lazer eye surgery
kilyth
all, e.g. I'm not wearing them now and I can see what I'm typing
(about two foot away from the screen) but it isn't fun or easy. My
optician gave me quite a lecture about why not to do it, but she is a
bit biased, having an interest in keeping me wearing glasses and all.
She also said that since my eyes aren't bad they might not do it.
Has anyone here had the surgery? Anyone I've talked to has said that
it's the most wonderful thing ever, but I want to get as much info on
it before I let people shine lazers into my eyes.
She was also going on about artificial corneas or retinas or
something. Anyone know anything about this?
Kilyth
Caroline Alexander
> I am thinking of getting lazer eye surgery. My eyes are not bad at
> all, e.g. I'm not wearing them now and I can see what I'm typing [...]
Wow. Could you teach me how to do that? Seems like a good way to stay
informed about what's going on next door...
--
Carl.
X Kyle M Thompson
> I am thinking of getting lazer eye surgery.
You've already had my opinion on this the other week, but in case
you missed it:
NOOOOO!!
Especially if you haven't got any major prombles.
Avoid unnessesary surgery! Avoid spending ££££s! (or €€€€s!)
Look even more attractive than you already are with some smart
glasses!
'tis all.
kt.
--
I'll get you any deal that you like
Ten sweets for a mountain bike you like
Richard Bos
> I am thinking of getting lazer eye surgery. My eyes are not bad at
> all, e.g. I'm not wearing them now and I can see what I'm typing
> (about two foot away from the screen) but it isn't fun or easy. My
> optician gave me quite a lecture about why not to do it, but she is a
> bit biased, having an interest in keeping me wearing glasses and all.
> She also said that since my eyes aren't bad they might not do it.
Well, obviously YMDV, but I'd be scared stiff about someone doing
something potentially unrepairable to my eyes when it's not strictly
necessary.
Richard
Graycat
(kilyth) wrote:
>I am thinking of getting lazer eye surgery. My eyes are not bad at
>all, e.g. I'm not wearing them now and I can see what I'm typing
That's good, that's really good. I can't see anything without wearing
my eyes.
Though I saw a guy on Angel [1] last night who could, relation of
yours? :o)
[1] Episode 4, season 1.
--
Elin
The Tale of Westala and Villtin
http://www.student.lu.se/~his02ero/index.html
The Oswalds, DWcasting award - Vote Now!
http://www.student.lu.se/~his02ero/Oswald/index.html
Suzi
kilyth_at_b...@hotmail.com wibbled...
> I am thinking of getting lazer eye surgery. My eyes are not bad at
> all, e.g. I'm not wearing them now and I can see what I'm typing
> (about two foot away from the screen) but it isn't fun or easy. My
> optician gave me quite a lecture about why not to do it, but she is a
> bit biased, having an interest in keeping me wearing glasses and all.
> She also said that since my eyes aren't bad they might not do it.
[Snip]
From what I understand they'll not be keen to do it if you are still
young enough that your eyes have still not finished "adjusting" for
themselves... added to which you add a risk that if they would've got
"better" later in life (it does happen - some shortsighted people do get
an improvement in long distance vision as they get older and they become
more longsighted) you would have already mucked up the vision
permanently.
Suzi
Beth Winter
>
> I am thinking of getting lazer eye surgery. My eyes are not bad at
> all, e.g. I'm not wearing them now and I can see what I'm typing
> (about two foot away from the screen) but it isn't fun or easy. My
> optician gave me quite a lecture about why not to do it, but she is a
> bit biased, having an interest in keeping me wearing glasses and all.
> She also said that since my eyes aren't bad they might not do it.
I'm of the firm opinion that this kind of stuff should be limited to
people with serious eye defects - -8 diopters or worse, that kind of
thing. I've heard far too much about losing depth perception, colour
range and so on. A friend of a friend had this surgery, and while he
doesn't have much problems, a year later he still has to avoid any place
where there's any chance of cigarette smoke or stroboscope lights.
Hell, I don't even wear my contacts much, except to parties. Glasses
make me look more professional anyway.
--
Beth Winter
The Discworld Compendium <http://www.extenuation.net/disc/>
"To absent friends, lost loves, old gods and the season of mists."
-- Neil Gaiman
kilyth
> On 23 Apr 2004 02:57:00 -0700, kilyth_at_b...@hotmail.com
> (kilyth) wrote:
>
> >I am thinking of getting lazer eye surgery. My eyes are not bad at
> >all, e.g. I'm not wearing them now and I can see what I'm typing
>
> That's good, that's really good. I can't see anything without wearing
> my eyes.
>
> Though I saw a guy on Angel [1] last night who could, relation of
> yours? :o)
>
>
> [1] Episode 4, season 1.
LOL. I keep one of them at home watching TV [1] and one in the lift in
work so's I can see if the boss is coming.
[1] The pain is that, obviously, I dont' get sound so I have to put
the subtitles on, and I always tend to miss the action cos I'm too
busy reading about it.
Kilyth
(might have meant glasses...)
CJ
> I am thinking of getting lazer eye surgery. My eyes are not bad at
> all, e.g. I'm not wearing them now and I can see what I'm typing
> (about two foot away from the screen) but it isn't fun or easy. My
> optician gave me quite a lecture about why not to do it, but she is a
> bit biased, having an interest in keeping me wearing glasses and all.
> She also said that since my eyes aren't bad they might not do it.
>
> Has anyone here had the surgery? Anyone I've talked to has said that
> it's the most wonderful thing ever, but I want to get as much info on
> it before I let people shine lazers into my eyes.
I'm having it done - I've made an appointment for 1 June (I wear hard
contact lenses, so I have to switch to glasses for 4 weeks before the
surgery).
My eyes are fairly bad - I can't see the time on my alarm clock if I'm
in bed, and I'd really like to be able to see at night. Plus, I have
irregular astigmatism in my right eye, so even with my contacts I
don't have great vision in that eye. So for me it's more to gain and
less to lose ... My optician actually recommended it - we've been
discussing it on and off for years, but it's just lately that my
vision has stabilised enough to do it.
Look around on the net for Lasik - you'll find plenty of info,
personal experiences, videos, diagrams, etc, etc. Just be aware that
a lot of the negative comments are from a few years back, when the
techniques weren't as advanced and there were more problems. And of
course, go to a reputable person - the pre-surgery assessment is
really important to determine whether or not you're a good candidate.
Lesley Weston
kilyth_at_b...@hotmail.com wrote on 23/04/2004 2:57 AM:
> I am thinking of getting lazer eye surgery. My eyes are not bad at
> all, e.g. I'm not wearing them now and I can see what I'm typing
How?
--
Lesley Weston.
Brightly_coloured_blob is real, so as not to upset the sys-apes, but I don't
actually read anything sent to it before I empty it. To reach me, use lesley
att vancouverbc dott nett, changing spelling and spacing as required.
Lesley Weston
I think that's more a case of the presbyopia caused by ageing being
mitigated by the existing myopia and/or astigmatism for a while. My
prescription for myopia and astigmatism hasn't changed since I was in my
twenties (and I'm older than nearly everybody here), but I didn't need
reading glasses until long after those of my contemporaries who are blessed
with 20/20 vision, and I can still manage without them if I'm only reading
for a little while.
But I agree about not having unnecessary or premature surgery.
>you would have already mucked up the vision
> permanently.
>
> Suzi
--
Mike Horner
I wouldn't.
Depends where you live, I suppose. Here in the UK, a lot (by no means
all) of the people doing this sort of surgery are similar to cosmetic
surgeons - not necessarily well-qualified, and in it for the money.
Complications are not unknown - and this is your sight you're talking
about.
Mike
Large Dave
> I am thinking of getting lazer eye surgery. My eyes are not bad at
> all, e.g. I'm not wearing them now and I can see what I'm typing
> (about two foot away from the screen) but it isn't fun or easy. My
> optician gave me quite a lecture about why not to do it, but she is a
> bit biased, having an interest in keeping me wearing glasses and all.
> She also said that since my eyes aren't bad they might not do it.
So a *trained and qualified* optician is telling you *not* to have laser
surgery
Don't you think you should listen.
> Has anyone here had the surgery? Anyone I've talked to has said that
> it's the most wonderful thing ever, but I want to get as much info on
> it before I let people shine lazers into my eyes.
>
> She was also going on about artificial corneas or retinas or
> something. Anyone know anything about this?
If the optician gets the prescription wrong or mixed up (It happens!)
It's easy to fix. Just another pair of glasses.
On the other hand......
Just my 2d worth.
--
Large Dave
Bigger than most Big Daves but no as big as Really Big Dave
Large Dave 'cos the Bigdave email address was taken.
Alec Cawley
<kilyth_at_b...@hotmail.com> writes
>I am thinking of getting lazer eye surgery.
There were several reports in the serious press about six months ago
about the occurrence of side effects being much higher than the sellers
would like you to believe. I don't have the figures to hand, but the
impression that I got was that the rate of problems was about 10 times
higher than the gave the impression. I.e the 1 in 1000 that they said
had problems were those with major, life-impairing problems, and that a
much higher proportion ended up with problems like oversensitivity, loss
of night vision etc. The figures were high enough to put me right off.
--
@lec Šawley
Mole
<bwi...@extenuation.net> writes
>
>I'm of the firm opinion that this kind of stuff should be limited to
>people with serious eye defects - -8 diopters or worse, that kind of
>thing. I've heard far too much about losing depth perception, colour
>range and so on.
That'd be me, then.
But I'm still shit-scared of this procedure.
--
MegaMole, the Official Enrico Basilica
\\\\\ laaa! mole at lspace dot org Liff, Filks, Stuff
\\\\\\\_o / "I'll sit in the U-bend and think about death."
__ \\\\\'c/__ Hitting the high notes with hedgehogs since 2001
Jenny Radcliffe
> Beth Winter <bwi...@extenuation.net> writes
> >
> > I'm of the firm opinion that this kind of stuff should be limited to
> > people with serious eye defects - -8 diopters or worse, that kind of
> > thing. I've heard far too much about losing depth perception, colour
> > range and so on.
> That'd be me, then.
> But I'm still shit-scared of this procedure.
I rather thought it wasn't yet up to *big* defects?
Mind, I can't remember how big is big, in context ...
*rummages for prescription*
The only one I can find doesn't is old-ish, but I haven't changed that much
I don't think. It lists me at -6.00 and -4.25 (plus some cyl and axis, but
it's the sph we're interested in here, yesno?) - and I'm fairly sure I'm at
the outside edge of what can really practically be done at this stage.
Unless things have developed a lot in the last few years, I don't think
someone of -8's going to be able to go without glasses after surgery. OK, it
could be improved - but not perfected.
AIUI, ICBVeryVeryW, and all that.
Jenny
Julia Jones
Radcliffe <je...@durge.org> writes
That was the case, but it's improved a lot since then. The most recent
technology can handle very accurate cutting on high prescriptions. I
asked about it here a while back, since I knew there were afpers with
personal experience who were extremely pleased with the results. The big
problem is finding someone with the most modern kit *and* the most
modern training *and* enough experience. As has already been pointed
out, "cowboy" would not be too strong a term to describe a lot of the
practitioners. In the UK it was, and possibly still is, possible for a
non-specialist to buy one of these machines and set up shop with no
qualifications whatsoever in eye surgery.
There is also much shading of the truth with regard to satisfaction
rates, where "success" is defined by some practitioners as "patient did
not sue". There are people who find a change to a much weaker
prescription an acceptable improvement - I am not one of them, which is
a major reason why I still haven't had the surgery. For me it would have
to be "throw away my glasses" to be worth the risks, and the chances of
success by that definition aren't good enough for my liking. I can
certainly conceive of situations where I would think it an acceptable
trade-off, but I need an honest assessment of the odds of likely
outcomes.
--
Julia Jones
"The Syndicate" - a heartwarming tale of geek love among the stars. Volumes 1
and 2 available now from http://www.amatory-ink.co.uk Details and free sample
chapters at http://www.julesjones.com/fiction/syndicate/syndicate.htm
Suzi
Weston brightly_co...@yahoo.co.uk wibbled...
> in article MPG.1af30e85d...@192.168.0.3, Suzi at
> bas...@volcanomail.com wrote on 23/04/2004 4:30 AM:
>
[Snip]
> > added to which you add a risk that if they would've got
> > "better" later in life (it does happen - some shortsighted people do get
> > an improvement in long distance vision as they get older and they become
> > more longsighted)
>
> I think that's more a case of the presbyopia caused by ageing being
> mitigated by the existing myopia and/or astigmatism for a while. My
> prescription for myopia and astigmatism hasn't changed since I was in my
> twenties (and I'm older than nearly everybody here), but I didn't need
> reading glasses until long after those of my contemporaries who are blessed
> with 20/20 vision, and I can still manage without them if I'm only reading
> for a little while.
My grandfather actually went through a phase of 20/20 vision and
not needing any corrective lenses while going from shortsighted to
longsighted (in his late 50's/early 60's) - not that common I know, but
it can happen :-)
Suzi
Carl Muller
> kilyth_at_b...@hotmail.com (kilyth) wrote in message news:<86d4bfbf.0404...@posting.google.com>...
> in bed, and I'd really like to be able to see at night.
I thought one of the side-effects was artefacts in your night-vision?
Do what I did - spend five pounds and buy an alarm clock that speaks
to you when you touch it. "The time is two...fortyfive...a.m."
(IIRC I'm -6.25 or so).
The Roach
> My grandfather actually went through a phase of 20/20 vision and
> not needing any corrective lenses while going from shortsighted to
> longsighted (in his late 50's/early 60's) - not that common I
> know, but it can happen :-)
I have had glasses since I was six, slowly getting stronger. Until...
In 2000, I was leaving one job, going to another, andf had bout three
weeks (paid) vacaton in betweeen. As my last voisit to the doctor had
been about five years earlier, I went to an eye doctor -- a new one,
after my parents had a row with the old one.
The new doctor measured my eyes with that apparatus of his, then
measured the glasses -- and then started to swear like a sailor.
Turned out my glasses were about 2 to 2.5 dioptries too strong for my
eyes. Grmbl. My eyes had become used to the strong glasses, so despite
the fact that much weaker glasses would have been the right
prescription, I wasn't able to see much with them. Over the least four
years, the doctor has reduced the strength of the glasses in steps of
0.5 dioptries -- this being the most that my eyes would acceopt as 'I
can still see with this' -- until now I'm at the good prescription,
IIRC.
Of course, every time I got the new glasses, for a day or two it was a
very weird feeling, as if everything was ever so slightly odd-focused
(not out of focus, but somehow off). But it was worth it...
--
yIn nI' yISIQ 'ej yIchep
The Roach
(www.roachware.de -- www.roach.demon.nl -- elfwood.lysator.liu.se/~mja)
Torak
>
> That's good, that's really good. I can't see anything without wearing
> my eyes.
I've got perfect vision on my left eye, but on my right I can't focus
more than a foot and a half away. Oddly enough I still have good depth
perception... Anyway, I only need my glasses when I'm shooting, and even
then only when I'm shooting with rifles, because with pistols I just
move the gun over to aim with my left eye...
Where was I... oh yes, dodge surgery as long as you can. It involves
sharp pointy things.
Orjan Westin
>
> Where was I... oh yes, dodge surgery as long as you can. It involves
> sharp pointy things.
You did read the subject line, right?
Orjan (L-2.25, R-1.25)
Kegs
> Torak wrote:
>>
>> Where was I... oh yes, dodge surgery as long as you can. It involves
>> sharp pointy things.
>
> You did read the subject line, right?
surely a laser is the ultimate in sharp pointy things?
--
James jamesk[at]homeric[dot]co[dot]uk
Believe those who are seeking the truth; doubt those who find it.
grahamafforda...@hotmail.com
On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 13:37:04 +0200, Beth Winter
<bwi...@extenuation.net> wrote:
>I'm of the firm opinion that this kind of stuff should be limited to
>people with serious eye defects - -8 diopters or worse,
Well I'm -10.5 on the right and -11 on the left but there's no way I'd
go for it. It couldn't offer me complete correction and there's no
guarantee of no problems, so I'll stick my contact lenses thanks very
much!
Cheers,
Graham.
Sian Hiscock
My eyes are fairly bad - I can't see the time on my alarm clock if
I'm
> in bed, and I'd really like to be able to see at night.
All day, all night contact lenses. Wonderful things, and you only take
them out once a month. And no, they don't dry your eyes out either.
It's wonderful to wake up clear eyed and not have to faff around with
solutions and contacts.
Can someone tell me if -3.50 L and -3.75 R is bad? I've gradually go
worse over the years too. I'm 20, and I remember my optician telling
me that my eyes would reach a point of them not getting weaker. On
average I go weaker by .25 in each eye every year or so, since I
started needing contacts/glasses.
On the subject of laser surgery, I'd rather wait until there's the
"100% success rate!" tag on it, rather then "oh, er, we're 97% sure we
won't muck up your eyes, but even then if we don't we can't garantee
it'll actually work..."
Sian
X
Alec Cawley
Hiscock <i_just_l...@hotmail.com> writes
>Can someone tell me if -3.50 L and -3.75 R is bad? I've gradually go
>worse over the years too. I'm 20, and I remember my optician telling
>me that my eyes would reach a point of them not getting weaker. On
>average I go weaker by .25 in each eye every year or so, since I
>started needing contacts/glasses.
Not bad at all. I think they don't bother with glasses until you reach
-2.0. You merit glasses, but not extremely so. I am -5.0, roughly, and
regard myself as "medium shortsighted". Others have posted with worse
than -10.0: not that will give you problems without glasses.
--
@lec Šawley
CJ
> cjo...@telkomsa.net (CJ) wrote:
>
>
> My eyes are fairly bad - I can't see the time on my alarm clock if
> I'm
> > in bed, and I'd really like to be able to see at night.
>
> All day, all night contact lenses. Wonderful things, and you only take
> them out once a month. And no, they don't dry your eyes out either.
> It's wonderful to wake up clear eyed and not have to faff around with
> solutions and contacts.
I wish - astigmatism (and particularly irregular astigmatism) rules
out that option. I don't see much better with soft lenses than I do
without any lenses. Having said that, they have brought out a new
range of toric disposable lenses, but they're really expensive.
If the laser surgery just gets me to the point where I can wear soft
lenses, I'll be happy.
CJ
The obvious answer being, go to someone reputable if you do have it
done. My opthalmologist is really good - he's done a minor op on my
eye before, and he's the only person I trust with my vision. Also, I
trust him to do a thorough assessment, and tell me honestly if I'm not
a good candidate for lasik.
CJ
> cjo...@telkomsa.net (CJ) wrote in message news:<da83bb26.04042...@posting.google.com>...
> > kilyth_at_b...@hotmail.com (kilyth) wrote in message news:<86d4bfbf.0404...@posting.google.com>...
> > My eyes are fairly bad - I can't see the time on my alarm clock if I'm
> > in bed, and I'd really like to be able to see at night.
>
> I thought one of the side-effects was artefacts in your night-vision?
Yes, to an extent - you can get halo and starburst effects around
lights at night. But I get this when I have my contacts in at night
anyway, so in that respect I don't have much to lose.
PeterH
My father will be pleased to hear this - he thought he was the only
one with eyes that bad!
Contact lenses turned out to be his solution too: they slowed the
deterioration of his eyes and meant that he no longer had to wear
glasses heavy enough to pull his face out of shape.
..PeterH
Beth Winter
>
> Can someone tell me if -3.50 L and -3.75 R is bad? I've gradually go
> worse over the years too. I'm 20, and I remember my optician telling
> me that my eyes would reach a point of them not getting weaker. On
> average I go weaker by .25 in each eye every year or so, since I
> started needing contacts/glasses.
I'm -3.50 L and -2.75 R, and I usually consider myself fair to middling
- I can function without glasses, just not very well and not when it
comes to recognizing people at a distance of over two metres.
As for your eyes getting weaker, have you tried herbal medicines? I used
to take some pills with blackberry extract - I was falling .5 per year
until I did, and then when I started taking it, my eyes stopped
worsening when I was 13. Wouldn't have believed it, but it did happen :)
kilyth
>
> I'm having it done - I've made an appointment for 1 June (I wear hard
> contact lenses, so I have to switch to glasses for 4 weeks before the
> surgery).
My initial appointment and examination is on the 31st May. Can you
tell me how you get on?
>
> Look around on the net for Lasik - you'll find plenty of info,
> personal experiences, videos, diagrams, etc, etc. Just be aware that
> a lot of the negative comments are from a few years back, when the
> techniques weren't as advanced and there were more problems. And of
> course, go to a reputable person - the pre-surgery assessment is
> really important to determine whether or not you're a good candidate.
Cheers for the advice. I found Lasik ( http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/lasik/
)very helpful and informative. I'm still thinking. One of my biggest
considerations is still if I could recognise myself without my glasses
;)
Kilyth
Torak
> Torak wrote:
>
>>Where was I... oh yes, dodge surgery as long as you can. It involves
>>sharp pointy things.
>
> You did read the subject line, right?
Yes. Sharp pointy laser beam. Still cuts, dunnit?
And anyway, don't they give you any anaesthetic? That involves needles,
usually...
Kevin Golding
>Has anyone here had the surgery?
Yes. Check Google over the past few years and you'll find a few threads
involving other people who've had it done/considered it too.
>Anyone I've talked to has said that
>it's the most wonderful thing ever,
It is pretty nifty but still don't listen to them :-)
As this thread proves it's not for everyone. We're talking about
someone burning off part of your eye with a laser - if you're at all
unsure then don't do it.
Caomhin,
with eyesight his optician envies
Kevin Golding
Usually eye-drops given what they're doing ;-) They do use metal clamps
to hold your eyelids apart though, wouldn't want to get on the wrong
side of one of those.
Caomhin
Tom De Mulder
> I am thinking of getting lazer eye surgery. My eyes are not bad at
> all, e.g. I'm not wearing them now and I can see what I'm typing
I've had a radial keratotomy performed on my eyes. Don't do it. It's
irreversible, and you *will* regret it in the future. Stick to glasses
or contact lenses, at least those you can "upgrade" later.
--
Tom De Mulder.
Julia Jones
<t...@lspace.org> writes
it's a warning for current techniques - there was this burst of
enthusiasm for a wondrous new technique that allowed you to throw away
your glasses, and then it started to become obvious that it didn't allow
many people to actually throw away their glasses, and for many people it
made matters worse. But the practitioners didn't actually *tell* people
this...
Laser surgery has been around for long enough now that there are some
decent statistics, and it does look like it has much better results both
in terms of how many get perfect vision and how many are made worse. But
there are still concerns about long term effects, and the guys with the
expensive equipment to pay for are still reluctant to tell you what the
statistics are, and what the "trivial" side-effects are.
CJ
> cjo...@telkomsa.net (CJ) wrote in message news:<da83bb26.04042...@posting.google.com>...
>
> >
> > I'm having it done - I've made an appointment for 1 June (I wear hard
> > contact lenses, so I have to switch to glasses for 4 weeks before the
> > surgery).
>
> My initial appointment and examination is on the 31st May. Can you
> tell me how you get on?
Will do - my initial assessment is on 1 June, and they've
provisionally booked the surgery for 2 June.
> > Look around on the net for Lasik - you'll find plenty of info,
> > personal experiences, videos, diagrams, etc, etc. Just be aware that
> > a lot of the negative comments are from a few years back, when the
> > techniques weren't as advanced and there were more problems. And of
> > course, go to a reputable person - the pre-surgery assessment is
> > really important to determine whether or not you're a good candidate.
>
> Cheers for the advice. I found Lasik ( http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/lasik/
> )very helpful and informative. I'm still thinking. One of my biggest
> considerations is still if I could recognise myself without my glasses
> ;)
Have you watched one of the videos yet? I cringe just watching it,
but somehow I can't stop myself from watching it over and over :-) I
haven't managed to convince anyone else to see it yet, especially not
my parents.
Cheers
Cathryn
Orjan Westin
> "Orjan Westin" <nos...@cunobaros.demon.co.uk> writes:
>
>> Torak wrote:
>>>
>>> Where was I... oh yes, dodge surgery as long as you can. It involves
>>> sharp pointy things.
>>
>> You did read the subject line, right?
>
> surely a laser is the ultimate in sharp pointy things?
Myeah... no. A monomolecular edge (as you get from chipped flint or
obsidian, for instance) is a lot sharper.
A laser doesn't cut, it burns. It's sharp the same way that a blowtorch is
sharp, i.e. not.
It's not pointy either, since it isn't tapered. *A* point, yes, but not
pointy.
Orjan
Sean Cleary
>
> >
> > I'm having it done - I've made an appointment for 1 June (I wear hard
> > contact lenses, so I have to switch to glasses for 4 weeks before the
> > surgery).
>
Sean
X Kyle M Thompson
> I think they don't bother with glasses until you reach -2.0.
Really? My left eye is pretty spot-on, but my right eye is -1.75
at the moment. Not a big deal.
I do wear glasses however, becuase it is nicer to see things in
focus, except at christmas when fairy light look pretty blurred...
actually the monitor and cars, and the tube map and people a long
way off are improved greatly, while I *can* manage perfectally
well without them, I don't. Anyway, I like my glasses, they're
funky. http://www.kylet.co.uk/kylet/newGlasses.jpg
kt.
--
I'll get you any deal that you like
Ten sweets for a mountain bike you like
Beth Winter
>
> Has anyone here had the surgery? Anyone I've talked to has said that
> it's the most wonderful thing ever, but I want to get as much info on
> it before I let people shine lazers into my eyes.
By the by, I've just talked to a friend who got laser eye surgery last
October. He had it done at what is reputed to be one of the top six
ophthalmology clinics in the world (Katowice, Poland), and before he was
-2.25 with slight astigmatism in both eyes. Now his sight is mostly fine
- but for six months he has had to avoid any place with a chance of
cigarette smoke, and one eye was done too narrow (so that sometimes his
pupil expands to the uncorrected area), so he's getting a correction
soon. He also has serious artifacts at night: we were looking at the
moon, and he said he was seeing "faded rubber stamps" of the moon,
overlapping each other.
He says that for all that he likes not wearing glasses, he would not
recommend the procedure.
Tom De Mulder
> By the by, I've just talked to a friend who got laser eye surgery last
> October. He had it done at what is reputed to be one of the top six
> ophthalmology clinics in the world (Katowice, Poland), and before he was
> -2.25 with slight astigmatism in both eyes. Now his sight is mostly fine
> - but for six months he has had to avoid any place with a chance of
> cigarette smoke, and one eye was done too narrow (so that sometimes his
> pupil expands to the uncorrected area), so he's getting a correction
> soon. He also has serious artifacts at night: we were looking at the
> moon, and he said he was seeing "faded rubber stamps" of the moon,
> overlapping each other.
I have a similar problem with my RK'ed eyes - at night every bright
object aquires "spikes" around it. It doesn't sound as bad as your
friend's experience, though - although it does annoy me because the
extra light scattering means I lose 1 to 2 magnitudes of visibility at
night - painful for an amateur astronomer like myself.
I wouldn't recommend eye surgery as it currently is to anyone. Mostly
because the procedure is irreversible, and modern glasses and contact
lenses aren't nearly as much pain to use as they once were.
--
Tom.
grahamafforda...@hotmail.com
On 26 Apr 2004 00:21:26 -0700, pete...@yahoo.co.uk (PeterH) wrote:
>> Well I'm -10.5 on the right and -11 on the left
>
>My father will be pleased to hear this - he thought he was the only
>one with eyes that bad!
Technically I count as "partially sited" if I were still to have the
right to claim NHS vouchers for glasses.
>Contact lenses turned out to be his solution too: they slowed the
>deterioration of his eyes and meant that he no longer had to wear
>glasses heavy enough to pull his face out of shape.
In a way it's a good thing that my glasses are so heavy, in that they
give me headaches if I wear them too much so it *makes* me put the
contact lenses in...!
Cheers,
Graham.
Julia Jones
"gra...@affordable-leather.co.ukDELETETHIS"
<grahamafforda...@hotmail.com> writes
high index plastic - suddenly glasses were comfortable, rather than a
torture device. In fact, I've just realised that I still haven't put my
lenses in this morning, and it isn't morning any more...
Eric Jarvis
how do you work that one?...some of you is in Portsmouth and the rest is
in Southampton?
--
eric - afprelationships in headers
www.ericjarvis.co.uk
"live fast, die only if strictly necessary"
jodie...@gmail.com
Bonanza Medical Tourism
www.bonanzameditour.com
On Friday, April 23, 2004 10:47:38 PM UTC+5:30, Large Dave wrote:
> kilyth wrote:
> > I am thinking of getting lazer eye surgery. My eyes are not bad at
> > all, e.g. I'm not wearing them now and I can see what I'm typing
> > (about two foot away from the screen) but it isn't fun or easy. My
> > optician gave me quite a lecture about why not to do it, but she is a
> > bit biased, having an interest in keeping me wearing glasses and all.
> > She also said that since my eyes aren't bad they might not do it.
>
> So a *trained and qualified* optician is telling you *not* to have laser
> surgery
> Don't you think you should listen.
>
> > Has anyone here had the surgery? Anyone I've talked to has said that
> > it's the most wonderful thing ever, but I want to get as much info on
> > it before I let people shine lazers into my eyes.
> >
> > She was also going on about artificial corneas or retinas or
> > something. Anyone know anything about this?
>
> If the optician gets the prescription wrong or mixed up (It happens!)
> It's easy to fix. Just another pair of glasses.
>
> On the other hand......
>
> Just my 2d worth.
> --
> Large Dave
> Bigger than most Big Daves but no as big as Really Big Dave
> Large Dave 'cos the Bigdave email address was taken.
larry
>
>
The lenses in both my eyes failed so I had them replaced; the surgery
was out-patient, painless and quick.
The replacement lenses focus better than my born-with ones and I haven't
needed glasses for the first time in fifty years.
OTOH, my eyes tire more easily.
Nigel Stapley
> Bonanza Medical Tourism expertises in laser eye surgery in India. Contact Bonanza Mecial Tourism at http://www.bonanzameditour.com for more details.
>
> Bonanza Medical Tourism
> www.bonanzameditour.com
>
> On Friday, April 23, 2004 10:47:38 PM UTC+5:30, Large Dave wrote:
>> kilyth wrote:
people's newsfeeds are a bit slow, but...
--
Regards
Nigel Stapley
www.thejudge.me.uk
<reply-to will bounce>
Bernard Peek
> jodie...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Bonanza Medical Tourism expertises in laser eye surgery in India.
>> Contact Bonanza Mecial Tourism at http://www.bonanzameditour.com for
>> more details.
>>
>> Bonanza Medical Tourism
>> www.bonanzameditour.com
>>
>> On Friday, April 23, 2004 10:47:38 PM UTC+5:30, Large Dave wrote:
>>> kilyth wrote:
>
>
> Where the hell did *this* bounce back from after 8+ years? I know some
> people's newsfeeds are a bit slow, but...
>
--
Bernard Peek
b...@shrdlu.com
Denis McMahon
>> Where the hell did *this* bounce back from after 8+ years? I know some
>> people's newsfeeds are a bit slow, but...
> Google Groups of course.
an advert into an 8 year old thread. You may have missed the advert, it
was top posted.
Rgds
Denis McMahon
larry
what happened.
GaryN
news:p-idncfrrsqPtJDN...@wightman.ca:
"Is this lift going up or down"
"Down"
"Well it's quicker than waiting for one going up"
Me: Well it's more fun than just going back to my bed in the ward
upstairs"
You meet interesting people in lifts.
However, back to the original subject. A friend of mine has a 'Lazy
eye' which never quite looks where the one that is paying attention is
looking. He refuses to have surgery and quite frankly nobody notices
anymore. The normal eye works, as does the 'lazy' one; they just don't
quite see the same thing.
He refuses to have it fixed because, well, why bother? OTOH it's
probably an ocipital muscle problem but who cares? He doesn;t.
gary
--
.Sig file abducted by aliens.
I was bored with changing it every week anyway but as a last gasp...
"And if California slides into the ocean,
like the mystics and statistics say it will,
I predict this motel will be standing,
until I pay my bill"
Warren Zevon, from "Desperados Under The Eaves"
GaryN
news:h5qa18lhjq075hq6p...@4ax.com:
<snip>
> How's the dessication effort going, and what stage are you at?
>
Well I've had no alcohol for over a week but I'm getting through a lot
tropical fruit flavour fizzy pop. I'll probably have to go in to detox
from that next!
Nigel Stapley
> A.Reader <anony...@example.com> wrote in
> news:h5qa18lhjq075hq6p...@4ax.com:
>
> <snip>
>
>> How's the dessication effort going, and what stage are you at?
>>
>
> Well I've had no alcohol for over a week but I'm getting through a lot
> tropical fruit flavour fizzy pop. I'll probably have to go in to detox
> from that next!
>
Lesley Weston
> A.Reader <anony...@example.com> wrote in
> news:h5qa18lhjq075hq6p...@4ax.com:
>
> <snip>
>
>> How's the dessication effort going, and what stage are you at?
>>
>
> Well I've had no alcohol for over a week but I'm getting through a lot
> tropical fruit flavour fizzy pop. I'll probably have to go in to detox
> from that next!
Lesley.
--
This address is real, but to reach me use leswes att shaw dott ca
Robert Carnegie
> A.Reader <anony...@example.com> wrote in news:h5qa18lhjq075hq6p...@4ax.com:
>
> Well I've had no alcohol for over a week but I'm getting through
> a lot tropical fruit flavour fizzy pop. I'll probably have to go in
> to detox from that next!
I don't know how far it'd go as an all-day beverage.
_Snuff_ - which I've misplaced - seemed to have reasonable
coverage of non-alcoholic beverages for alcohol-appropriate
contexts, if that makes sense outside my head. I don't know
if they work, some of them sound like P. G. Wodehouse hangover
cures instead, but IIRC Pterry used to collect a lot of story
details from drunk mates and he probably isn't allowed to keep
up with them nowadays - I'm guessing - so maybe it's from life.
But anyway beer is a self-limiting intoxicant, although not
enough so, really. And I'm not sure what's involved in
root beer. Roots?
GaryN
news:8k6d18lij2du8uac2...@4ax.com:
> On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 12:38:07 -0500,
> GaryN <webm...@oxtoyrun.org.uk> wrote:
>
>>A.Reader <anony...@example.com> wrote in
>>news:h5qa18lhjq075hq6p...@4ax.com:
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>> How's the dessication effort going, and what stage are you at?
>>>
>>
>>Well I've had no alcohol for over a week but I'm getting through a lot
>>tropical fruit flavour fizzy pop. I'll probably have to go in to
>>detox from that next!
>
> probably cope (you don't have a problem with b.g., do you?)
>
Not that anyone has noticed yet. Fer Crissakes don't give the buggers
ideas!
Apparently my platelet count is low so I should eat more food containing
iron but my liver is retaining too much iron so I should stop eating
iron-rich foods like liver (which I happen to be very fond of) My BP is
low but my heart rate is abnormaly high.
My suggestion that the HR may be a counteractive measure to the low BP
went down like a lead balloon.
I'll just carry on eating liver casserole because I like it.
Chris Zakes
caused A.Reader <anony...@example.com> to write:
>On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 08:07:31 -0700 (PDT),
>Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>>And I'm not sure what's involved in
>>root beer. Roots?
>
>and looked it up, silly me, and it turns out to be artificial
>(because the real thing is toxic) sassafras-root flavoring! Plus
>sugar and other flavorings, of course.
I've heard that root beer was originally going to be called root tea,
but someone (possibly the inventor's wife?) suggested that calling it
root beer would make it sound more desirable.
-Chris Zakes
Texas
--
Education is when you read the fine print. Experience is what you get if you don't.
- Pete Seeger
Chris Zakes
>On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 12:17:54 +0000 (UTC),
>Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>
>>In message <n6hf18h7da6lbm3uo...@4ax.com>
>>> On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 14:07:31 -0400, an orbital mind-control laser
>>> caused A.Reader <anony...@example.com> to write:
>>
>>>>On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 08:07:31 -0700 (PDT),
>>>>Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>>>>>And I'm not sure what's involved in
>>>>>root beer. Roots?
>>>>
>>>>I thought the main ingredient was sarsaparilla root, but I went
>>>>and looked it up, silly me, and it turns out to be artificial
>>>>(because the real thing is toxic) sassafras-root flavoring! Plus
>>>>sugar and other flavorings, of course.
>>
>>soft-drinks.
>>
>>Couldn't be that toxic, my father grew up drinking it (not root beer,
>>but actual sarsaparilla with sassafras).
>>
>>I see no information that sarsaparilla is toxic in anyway.
>
>No, no, sorry if I wrote unparsably. It's the natural sassafras
>drippings that's toxic, and so in rootbeer they use artificial
>flavouring.
According to the Wikipedia article, safrole, an element of sassafras
was determined by the US Food & Drug Administration to be carcinogenic
and cause liver damage.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sassafras#Culinary_uses
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safrole
Robert Carnegie
> According to the Wikipedia article, safrole, an element of sassafras
> was determined by the US Food & Drug Administration to be carcinogenic
> and cause liver damage.