Contact lens and medical

In article .com,
wrote:


Dale-

Go read the FARs on this. Next time you post a statement like that, do
us all a favor and make sure you know what you're talking about.

Well hell, I thought I did. My apologies if I misled anyone.



I wasted several years getting into professional aviation because of
unsubstantiated statements made by people like Dale.

I think perhaps you wasted several years because you relied on what
people said instead of putting out the effort to get the facts yourself.
Don't blame me or people like me when it was you that screwed the pooch.
G

Dale wrote:

I think perhaps you wasted several years because you relied on what
people said instead of putting out the effort to get the facts yourself.
Don't blame me or people like me when it was you that screwed the pooch.
G


Which is what I said (although it was kind vaguely put, I admit)...
You're right, I have only myself to blame for missing out on a couple
of years. Fortunately I didn't miss out on too much. But I've seen
others that have and I think it is very unfortunate.

The reason why I jump all over people that so easily hand out incorrect
information on this topic is that it is so prevalent - thus making it
less likely that someone with an interest in commercial aviation will
go for it if they wear glasses.

If even people like yourself, who are current pilots, so easily accept
the incorrect notion that there is some mythical requirement than
pilots have a certain uncorrected vision requirement than perhaps you
can understand how those with no aviation experience can so easily
"screw the pooch" as you say. After all, if it is a given that you
can't become a pilot, why research it?

FLAV8R writes:

I don't know if it was coincidence or if the contacts caused me to lose
a considerable amount of distance vision.

It depends on the type of correction the contacts provide. If they
compensate for poor accommodation (e.g., presbyopia), their constant
presence may encourage the loss of accommodation power since your eyes
need no longer strain to see objects at certain distances. When you
remove the correction, you find that things that might have been clear
before without contacts/glasses no longer are.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

If the FAA felt that a change in distant vision lenses is a cause for
rejection, then that question should be asked in the application form.
The FAR does not ask for it, the application form does not ask for it,
and the AME does not ask for it. So, how is the applicant supposed to
know that this is something that they need to explain. If I were a new
student going for a medical, I would never have questioned this, and
would have simply walked away with a medical that had no limitations.



Robert M. Gary wrote:
Andrew Sarangan wrote:
I just got my new medical. When I got the certificate I saw that under
limitations it said "None". My previous medical used to say "must wear
corrective lenses". I should have simply walked away with the
certificate, but instead I asked them why that limitation was missing.
The response was "You wear contacts? Well, that changes everything. You
should have told us about the contacts". The FAA form does not ask
anything about wearing lenses (except near vision), and they did not
ask me about it during the exam either. I thought all that mattered was
your corrected vision, not uncorrected vision. In the end we had to do
some extra stuff to get that fixed, and I got another certificate with
the correct statement. She said that I should stop wearing contacts for
24 hours before coming to the medical exam, and bring the lenses with
me. I have never heard of this before. Anyone else had similar
experiences?

You did the right thing. The FAA would have sent you a letter soon
afterwards telling you that your medical was invalid and that you need
to send supporting evidence to describe the procedure that caused your
vision to become corrected and your reaction, recovery etc. You must
supply documentation evidence to remove glasses/contact restrictions.

-Robert

I regained quite a bit of my distant vision by wearing reading glasses
on top of my contacts when working on a computer or reading a book.
The next time I went for the eye exam, the power had dropped by 0.5.
This makes sense to me. Reading things up close with distant vision
glasses is putting the same strain on the eyes that caused you to
become nearsighted in the first place.



FLAV8R wrote:
"Dale" wrote in message ...
The suggestion to not wear the contacts for 24 hours prior is to allow
the eye to adjust to not having them in. Not sure with newer lenses,
but with hard lenses they reshape the eye somewhat.

I don't know if it was coincidence or if the contacts caused me to lose
a considerable amount of distance vision.
Before I wore contacts I could see clearly up to a distance of 30ft
away and right after I started wearing contacts (early 80's) my clear
vision dropped to arms length and has stayed that way ever since.
I'm over 40 now and still wear the same prescription for distance
viewing and I still don't require any correction for reading, go figure.

I also find that I can spot things at a distance much quicker than my
non-correct vision pilot friends... What's up with that?

David 8 )

There are in fact limits for vision beyond just being correctable. If a
person requires high correction they may in fact need a SODA. The FAA exam
form requires examination with and without correction.

So, just correction to acceptable limits is not enough.

JN, MD
FAA AME

Andrew Sarangan writes:

Reading things up close with distant vision
glasses is putting the same strain on the eyes that caused you to
become nearsighted in the first place.

Myopia is not caused by eyestrain.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Reading things up close with distant vision
glasses is putting the same strain on the eyes that caused you to
become nearsighted in the first place.

It's not clear to me that becoming nearsighted is related to "strain" on
the eyes. My understanding is that it is due to the eyeball being the
wrong shape, and that presbyopia (needing reading glasses as we age) is
due to the lens hardening (and becoming unable to change its focal length).

Jose
--
"There are 3 secrets to the perfect landing. Unfortunately, nobody knows
what they are." - (mike).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose writes:

It's not clear to me that becoming nearsighted is related to "strain" on
the eyes. My understanding is that it is due to the eyeball being the
wrong shape, and that presbyopia (needing reading glasses as we age) is
due to the lens hardening (and becoming unable to change its focal length).

Yes. Hyperopia and myopia are usually associated with asymmetry in
the shape of the eyeball. Presbyopia is presumed to be due to
hardening of the lens, although there is still some debate about this.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Interesting, the whole thread. Evidently a requirement from the 1970s has
been dropped. Back in those days, for a first class medical you had to have
a waiver (and I've got both of them in front of me as I type just to be
sure) if your UNcorrected vision is worse than 20:200.

I guess I can forget about filling in the "do you have a waiver" box on the
application form from now on.

Jim




"Andrew Sarangan" wrote in message
ps.com...
I just got my new medical. When I got the certificate I saw that under
limitations it said "None". My previous medical used to say "must wear
corrective lenses". I should have simply walked away with the
certificate, but instead I asked them why that limitation was missing.
The response was "You wear contacts?