LASIK eye surgery and 3rd class medical

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Jim Burns" wrote

Can anybody else add anything? I'm still interested.

I really like my 47 year old, bifocal wearing vision, compared to the
small
chance that an eye surgery could take all of that away.

I would want the chance of having a complication down to 1 in 475
trillion,
before I would go for it.

Just my opinions, though.
--
Jim in NC


I had really been thinking of getting Lasik done. Then I saw the doctors
that invented the process on TV. (They were getting some award) They all had
glasses.

I had really been thinking of getting Lasik done. Then I saw the doctors
that invented the process on TV. (They were getting some award) They all had
glasses.

There is another change that occurs in they eye as you reach middle and
older age: The lens of the eye becomes stiffer and less flexible. This
affects the eye's ability to "accomodate" or focus on items at different
distances.

Even though I had my Lasik before the age of 30, I know that I will
likely need "reading" glasses again before I reach 50. That still makes
it worth it, having clear vision on awakening, instead of having to put
in -5.0 contacts or find my glasses before I can go do things.

It would have even been better when I was a paramedic and volunteer
firefighter, as when I was a medic, I had to sleep in my "extended wear"
lenses overnight on the nights I worked.. and I had to PUT IN my lenses
before I could run a fire call.

Overall, it was worth it. But as someone else said.. there IS a risk
that you may have permanent side effects, particularly at night. Do your
homework. Get SEVERAL free evaluations from different physicians. Make
sure you are a good candidate.

Dave

Dave S wrote:

There is another change that occurs in they eye as you reach middle and
older age: The lens of the eye becomes stiffer and less flexible. This
affects the eye's ability to "accomodate" or focus on items at different
distances.

My opthamalogist told me that there's a new procedure coming along that will
also take care of this. He says it will cost about the same as LASIK. Come to
think out it, his office should start offering it about now. I need to check
into it a bit more.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

George Patterson wrote:
Dave S wrote:


There is another change that occurs in they eye as you reach middle
and older age: The lens of the eye becomes stiffer and less flexible.
This affects the eye's ability to "accomodate" or focus on items at
different distances.


My opthamalogist told me that there's a new procedure coming along that
will also take care of this. He says it will cost about the same as
LASIK. Come to think out it, his office should start offering it about
now. I need to check into it a bit more.

The doc that was manning the optical society (or whatever it's called) booth at
Oshkosh mentioned this possibility, also. I think it involves implantation of an
artificial lens? ... or am I thinking of something else?

My LASIK story:
I was in the -4.0 to -4.5 range in both eyes and had them both done about 6
years ago. I was already presbyopic and using reading glasses. I had both eyes
adjusted for distant vision.

From my perspective it was hugely successful and worth it. It freed me from
wearing glasses or contact lenses for a lot of activities. I particularly liked
being able to walk in the rain without looking through wet glasses, and being
able to do sports without glasses.

I still needed reading glasses, but I knew to expect that going in. I had
slightly more coma. I think that's what it's called - bright lines appearing to
pass through a point source of light at night. I had some coma before, and I
quickly accommodated to the change and it was not troublesome.

Now, 6 years later, I am back to wearing glasses for driving and flying, and
increasingly for other activities as well. One eye has drifted significantly
back toward myopia, so I have a sort of accidental monovision (one eye is
optimized for distant vision, and the other for close-up). The monovision
actually has some advantages. When I wear my bifocals, I have good vision in
both eyes both distant and close-up.

Subjectively, I possibly have slightly less acuity corrected now than I did
corrected before the surgery, but I'm not sure. Anyway I have adequate acuity
and can get along without corrective lenses for a lot of activities, which is good.

The reason one eye has drifted back toward myopia, I'm told, is that I have an
incipient cataract in that eye. No prediction about how fast it will develop.

Dave