Prescription eyeglasses

ErikT · Post by **ErikT** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 12:59 am

So let's say that you spend $300 every 2-3 years on glasses. Over a lifetime that's probably 20 pairs. Equals $6000. Are you really telling me that seeing is not worth $6000 over your lifetime. Come on. Quit yer whinin'.

Erik

jkrazy52 · Post by **jkrazy52** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 1:45 am

It does beat paying the $300 for a prescription medicine that will last 30 days ....

missy · Post by **missy** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:27 am

couple of things:

Loren (and everyone) NEVER use any type of chemical without protective eyewear! Safety glasses with side shields at the least, goggles if there's a danger of splashing. Regular glasses or sunglasses are NOT protection enough.
Contacts can actually protect someone's cornea in case of splash - as long as you get the contact out right away. However, soft contacts can absorb aerosols. The American Chemical Society did a study of contacts in the lab environment about 10 years ago - I don't have a link to it handy but could probably find it if someone is interested.

As for Lasik and longevity - I can only give personal antidotal experience. I know two people that are going on 8 years after surgery, and they've had no problems. I know at least 10 others, including myself, that are going on 6 years, again with no problems. In my own case, I was worse than 20/400 (I couldn't see the WALL, much less the E) and the diopter on my contacts was -6.5 and -7. I am now 20/15. I lost some of my closeup vision with the surgery (I can't see to thread a needle, or the end of a GC column at work) but I can read, do computer work, etc. without any reading glasses. I was given the option of having one eye done for close up and one eye for distance - but that's too confusing for me. I'm 47 anyway - I'm gonna need reading glasses sooner or later!
The key to good Lasik is a good doctor. We all went to the same doctor - and while I was getting examined, he turned away two patients as not being good candidates.

As to buying glasses - what's with the every 2-3 years? Both my kids need glasses every year! Nate was changing so much, we put him contacts at age 12. That way, we can change the contact prescription every three months - instead of the year wait on glasses that insurance requires (their dad has eye coverage). Even though Noah's prescription doesn't change, he still destroys his lenses with scratches, and needs a new frame, too, cuz he's so hard on them (tried those "twist proof" ones - he broke the nose pieces off of them!).

Missy

Jim McGuire · Post by **Jim McGuire** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:32 am

Most frames can be bought new (or used) on eBAY (my high-priced RayBan frames were destroyed and the exact replacement was on eBAY for a fraction of what it cost at LensCrafters); make sure that you know the exact size of the frame (should be on your current frame). After your eye exam, you can ask for a written copy of your prescription. They know you are going somewhere else for eyeglasses and hate seeing profit go out the door. You can have your prescription filled by someone through the mail (available on the internet). Simple lenses are one price but add in bi-focal invisibles with tinting and that price gets your attention. Or, with internet pricing in hand, go back to your opthamologist and get them to match price (and let them mail the order to the internet 3rd party lense grinder).

Brian Lee · Post by **Brian Lee** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:41 am

There is a lot the public doesn't know or understand about eyes, refractive error, and surgical proceedures. Sadly, it's only aggrivated buy sloppy reporting from the media which sensationalizes and misrepresents the facts on a daily basis.

LASIK is safe - assuming (as has been pointed out) you get a good doctor and you're not afraid to pay for it. You WILL get what you pay for. There are no long term health risks to LASIK. None. It's been around for far longer than most know, and there are hundreds of thousands of long term cases studied. It never "goes away" or "wears off" or makes anything else worse. It's permanent and it works.

Contacts are never to be used for a "shield" for the eyes. It doesn't matter what sort of chemical you're using, it is never a good idea to think that if you get splashed with something or are exposed to some caustic fumes that a contact lens, (be it methafilcon, silacone hydrogel, RGP, PMMA or whatever material) will do anything to protect your eyes. Even using the wrong cleaner for your lenses can warp or melt them. Just be careful, read the directions and best of all, ask your eye doc. what's truly safe and what's not.

Eye's are expensive, but for what you're using to collect more than 70% of your sensory data throughout life, it's a comparatively small outlay once every year or two. How much do you spend on car insurance every six months?

glauber · Post by **glauber** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:45 am

aderyn_du wrote:
glauber wrote: I had a damn microbe i brought from Europe try to eat one of my eyballs. It wasn't pleasant
Eeeww.... that sounds really quite awful, glauber.

It was nasty. My eyes started itching Friday morning. By lunchtime my right eye was red and hurting, and i had to take the contact off. Saturday morning the whole thing was so swollen i could barely open the eye, and any light caused piercing pain. I ended up putting 2 kinds of collyrium alternating every 15 minutes (the doctor said it could be one of 2 kinds of bacteria and we didn't have time to find out which kind). That's every 15 minutes, day and night, for 3 days; and one of the drops hurt like hell. Once we confirmed the thing was dead, i got steroid drops to fix the swelling. In the end i was very lucky; there is a small scar but it didn't affect the cornea, didn't affect vision.

At the time i was wearing 30-day disposable soft contacts (i couldn't get the weekly or daily kinds, because of my astigmathism). The soft contacts are porous, and bad stuff can come live there. This has been several years ago. I wore glasses for a while, and last year i went back to rigid gas-permeable contacts. They work better for my kind of prescription, and i think they're more comfortable too. And i'm using an eye doctor that makes me come back for checkups 4 times per year.

Sunnywindo · Post by **Sunnywindo** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 3:30 pm

http://www.iblindness.com/

Sara (who needs glasses to drive or see far away)

aderyn_du · Post by **aderyn_du** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 3:34 pm

glauber wrote: It was nasty. My eyes started itching Friday morning. By lunchtime my right eye was red and hurting, and i had to take the contact off. Saturday morning the whole thing was so swollen i could barely open the eye, and any light caused piercing pain. I ended up putting 2 kinds of collyrium alternating every 15 minutes (the doctor said it could be one of 2 kinds of bacteria and we didn't have time to find out which kind). That's every 15 minutes, day and night, for 3 days; and one of the drops hurt like hell. Once we confirmed the thing was dead, i got steroid drops to fix the swelling. In the end i was very lucky; there is a small scar but it didn't affect the cornea, didn't affect vision.

At the time i was wearing 30-day disposable soft contacts (i couldn't get the weekly or daily kinds, because of my astigmathism). The soft contacts are porous, and bad stuff can come live there. This has been several years ago. I wore glasses for a while, and last year i went back to rigid gas-permeable contacts. They work better for my kind of prescription, and i think they're more comfortable too. And i'm using an eye doctor that makes me come back for checkups 4 times per year.

Wow, that sounds intense.

I'm glad you didn't have any lasting damage from all that! My daughter (who has worn glasses since she was 15 months old) has talked about wanting contacts, but stories like this scare me too much to give in.

Scott McCallister · Post by **Scott McCallister** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 4:19 pm

I don't get it... we are a group of folks who routinely spend dozens, even hundreds, of dollars on a little tube of metal or wood or plastic that is drilled full of holes in an effort to gain the next latest greatest piece of equipment that can fill our boredom. We have absolutely no compunction about laying down the cash for the part-time craftsman whistlesmith to send us a stick. Yet we all bitch about spending about the same for equipment that will be used daily, nearly all day, both in leisure persuits and in work, to enhance perhaps our most used and trusted sense of sight. Equipment, mind you, that is prescribed by degreed professionals and produced by full time technicians. Don't they deserve the same compensation as would a whistle smith?

It reminds me of a bumper sticker a while back, popular among individuals from the Colorado School of Mines (then ranked 2nd to MIT as an engineering school) who would frequent the University of Colorado, Boulder campus (land of fuits and nuts and all things herbal and wholistic)

It said:

"Ban Mining! Let the Basmatis freeze in the dark."

Scandalous? I think there are lots of things that are scandalous. :roll:

mamakash · Post by **mamakash** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 4:41 pm

The only thing that hurts more is the dentist bills. Last time - one root canal, one crown, one onlay, a couple fillings. Three grand.
Ouch.

PhilO · Post by **PhilO** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 5:01 pm

At least there's an excuse for the lens part of the cost; for me that entails unbreakable stuff that changes light to dark as well as three fields of seamless vision (far, or pistol range range, mid or computer range, and close, or reading range), which has worked so well for me for years as I can't stand contacts. It's the frames that are really jacked up in price because the designer frames generally look fit and feel better (light and unobtrusive) what with the new titanium bendable almost no glasses look.

So for me, it's always been worth the investment - I need them and now think (as opposed to when I was a teenager) that I look good in them (ok, no worse than without them), can't stand contacts and will not subject myself to any laser work on my eyes. I also have the same great guy who does the prescriptions and glasses for me through the years.

You can get cheap glasses through an employer plan at various places (Cohen Optical,etc.) if you don't want or need the extras. Sometimes that leads to multiple pairs though that in the long run may not save money. I don't buy them that often as my Rx is fairly stable at this point and I take care of them relative to their importance to me - a lot. I have 3 pairs - including a backup and blackout sport sunglasses for boating, beach, etc.

My wife who has probably close to x-ray vision, now just uses drug store magnification glasses for reading, but still has to get sunglasses without rx.

Wow, I just did 4 paragraphs on glasses; probably should've been an opthalmologist or optometrist.

Here's lookin' at ya!

Philo

Post by **Dale** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 5:40 pm

ErikT wrote:So let's say that you spend $300 every 2-3 years on glasses. Over a lifetime that's probably 20 pairs. Equals $6000. Are you really telling me that seeing is not worth $6000 over your lifetime. Come on. Quit yer whinin'.

Erik

No. I must persist in my song of complaint.

I'm not paying these people for the gift of sight. I'm paying them for a pair of glasses. That they are pretty handy doesn't justify prices that are so far beyond any rationale. I don't think paying $100 for a pair of glasses would be out of line for the materials and the professional services going in to it. But I just don't get $300-$400.

Dale

avanutria · Post by **avanutria** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 5:50 pm

Scott McCallister wrote:I don't get it... we are a group of folks who routinely spend dozens, even hundreds, of dollars on a little tube of metal or wood or plastic that is drilled full of holes in an effort to gain the next latest greatest piece of equipment that can fill our boredom. We have absolutely no compunction about laying down the cash for the part-time craftsman whistlesmith to send us a stick. Yet we all bitch about spending about the same for equipment that will be used daily, nearly all day, both in leisure persuits and in work, to enhance perhaps our most used and trusted sense of sight. Equipment, mind you, that is prescribed by degreed professionals and produced by full time technicians. Don't they deserve the same compensation as would a whistle smith?

I can play the same tunes with a Meg as with a silver copeland. Wish I got the same vision with cheap glasses.

I think the gripe factor (besides filling our boredom) comes from the fact that we don't get much of a choice about how much we pay. First, we are part of the population who need corrective lenses to begin with. Then, we have to pay nearly a hundred dollars for really lousy frames or between 1 and 2 hundred for nice ones. Then, if you're in the unlucky part of the poor vision population, you have multiple things that need correcting, special materials, etc, so your lens price skyrockets. Then, if you're in the OTHER unlucky bit, your eyes continue to deteriorate and you need to get new lenses every year or two.

Severe nearsightedness, super sensitive to light, strong astigmatism, cataracts forming, no medical insurance, etc etc...Even reusing the frames till they broke and waiting two years before getting new lenses (when really I should have gone every year) I was still shelling out quite a lot. And they never seemed to be made quite right the first time, either.

When I buy a handmade whistle, I know whose pocket is receiving the money (Hi Mack! Hi Noah!). I don't think the guy in Lenscrafters who was wrenching my new frames with a pair of pliers is getting much of a pay raise.

Scott McCallister · Post by **Scott McCallister** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 6:05 pm

DaleWisely wrote:
No. I must persist in my song of complaint.

I'm not paying these people for the gift of sight.

Why are you buying glasses at all then??

DaleWisely wrote: I'm paying them for a pair of glasses.

Yes, but really what are the glasses if not a means to an end. The materials cost alone is problably less than ten bucks for the whole shot. It is what the glasses can DO for you when those materials are properly arranged to meet your own unique needs that you pay for.

Just like a whistle. In and of itself, the materials costs for an item like a brass copeland is only a few bucks. It is what it can DO if properly arranged that you are paying for.

Surely you see that.

mvhplank · Post by **mvhplank** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 7:44 pm

This doesn't often happen, but I had too much money in my flex spending account at the end of 2004. It's one of those deals where you kick in some money before the taxes are taken out. You get it back when you present receipts like prescription co-pays and certain classes of non-prescription health items. Eyeglasses are allowable. Any money you don't spend that year, the fund administrator gets to keep.

I was darned if I was going to let the flex spending administrators keep about $500 of MY money.

I overshot the mark just a little, but I ended up with an eye exam, a new pair of gas perm contact lenses, eyeglasses to get me from the bathroom to bed and back (I wear my CLs pretty much all the time), and something new that the optometrist cooked up at my request--driving glasses.

I can't explain it, but with my contact lenses, my 50+ year old eyes do pretty well with close work and with middle distances, but I was having trouble reading road signs, especially at night. Voila--glasses and sunglasses that make me a bit far-sighted.

I've got astigmatisms and have read that Lasik wouldn't completely correct my problems. I'd have to wear glasses and would not be able to go back to contact lenses. So, good luck to you folks who can completely correct your vision with it. I'm doing pretty well, considering.

M