Are you nearsighted?

[ajax 2620]

How bad is your vision? Have you found anything that helps to improve your vision or maybe even cure myopia?

My vision wasn't too bad (-2.50) but I'm sick of wearing glasses and I don't want to go under the laser. I mean the fact that we go nearsighted doesn't make sense to me. How did our ancestors survive if they couldn't see shit?. We must have descended from a bunch of cavemen with 20/20 vision or else they would have starved. And I remember, even as a kid, getting new glasses and they were so strong that the floor looked curved. I thought this can't be good for my eyes. The correction is too strong and my eyes will get weaker just to adjust.

I figured since my eyesight went gradually worse as a kid, why don't I try to gradually go the other direction. I bought some glasses with -2.25 correction and wore them for a long time and my eyes seemed to adjust. Now I just moved down to -2.00 and it's blurry but hopefully my eyes adjust to these too. 

[Armybrat 40887]

I had cataract surgery on both eyes in January. Everything looks brighter and am now far sighted because I chose the standard new lens replacement. Have used readers for decades anyway.

However, even though the  right eye is now 20/20 (very cool), the left eye retina had superfluous tissue coating it so it was still blurry.  Had the retina fixed Wednesday, so hopefully when the air bubble the doc pumped in dissipates next week I’ll acquire 20/20 in that one in a few months.

Edited May 14, 2020 by Armybrat

[Js1 85549]

-2.50? That's cute.

Try -7.0 

[Sbbruin 21867]

I've gotten progressively more farsighted as I've aged.  I had perfect vision until about 45-47.  Then my ability to read started to deteriorate.  Now I pretty much need readers for most close up things.  Haven't gone as far as getting glasses.  Probably should.  My distance vision is still pretty good.

[Samson's Wig 3194]

I had laser surgery to correct astigmatism and nearsightedness.  I was nearsighted, but never understood exactly that it meant my close up vision was actually better than 20/20, as things were essentially magnified for me up close.  I just couldn't see shit at a distance and was tired of wearing glasses.    After the procedure, I'm 20/20 and see great near and far, but I was so accustomed to seeing thing up close with super-vision, that plain old 20/20 makes me want to reach for reading glasses.  If I had understood it better prior to the surgery, I may not have done it.  But at least I can drive, fish, hike, etc, without prescription shades on. 

Edited May 14, 2020 by Samson's Wig

[UTGrad98 2281]

I..... WAS nearsighted

Got lasik about 10 years ago and have had super powers ever since.

Edited May 14, 2020 by UTGrad98

[Wally Fairway 5577]

-5.25 in one eye, -6.00 in the other - just had my annual exam and the new eye Dr (prior one retired) suggested tryiing toric lenses. They come in next week, so we will see if that helps. I can read without contacts, but need cheaters (1.50) to read/computer with contacts. 
I've done it for close to 50 years, it's much easier then it was when I first got them....no issues, just take them out when I go to bed (almost all of the time) and put them in after I take my morning piss. 

[Sbbruin 21867]

5 minutes ago, Wally Fairway said:

-5.25 in one eye, -6.00 in the other 

Edited May 14, 2020 by Sbbruin

[wild_turkey 3182]

1 hour ago, ajax said:

How bad is your vision? Have you found anything that helps to improve your vision or maybe even cure myopia?

My vision wasn't too bad (-2.50) but I'm sick of wearing glasses and I don't want to go under the laser.

Your options are basically glasses, contacts, or LASIK/PRK. Any particular reason you don't want laser treatment?

[wild_turkey 3182]

1 hour ago, Sbbruin said:

I've gotten progressively more farsighted as I've aged.  I had perfect vision until about 45-47.  Then my ability to read started to deteriorate.  Now I pretty much need readers for most close up things.  Haven't gone as far as getting glasses.  Probably should.  My distance vision is still pretty good.

You've probably been about the same degree of farsighted your entire life but you never knew about it because your eyes were able to accommodate and mask the problem. Accommodation is when the lens in the eye changes thickness to change the refractive power of the eye, which is how younger people are able to see up close without readers. This also helps overcome small degrees of hyperopia (farsightedness) so your eyes are overcoming your own natural refractive error. Accommodation gradually starts to wear off for everyone in their 30s-50s, so in your case, your natural farsightedness is no longer neutralized and your vision gets worse.

[Rip76 4947]

Funny, 47 now.  Always had perfect vision until just recently.  Maybe staring at my damn phone during the lockdown has f'ed it up.

Far away, everything is great.  Real close up, blurry.

[ajax 2620]

45 minutes ago, wild_turkey said:

Your options are basically glasses, contacts, or LASIK/PRK. Any particular reason you don't want laser treatment?

There seem to be lots of folks that fixed their nearsightedness without Lasik. Lasik is great when it works but it sounds horrible when things go wrong. I think I'm just going to keep slowly reducing my prescription. Even if it takes years, it'll be worth it.

[Mighty fine 169]

Ajax, I'm 32. My vision at 30 was about the same as yours is currently. Now, I'm at a -2.0 in both eyes without trying. I've had a noticeable natural improvement; eye doctor said this is not uncommon.

I'm almost to the point where I don't feel that need corrective lenses (except at dusk... driving not lit roads at dusk fucking sucks now even with lenses)

[Js1 85549]

1 hour ago, Sbbruin said:

I'm -7.0 in both.

I'm 31 years old. 

[BERT 4381]

27 minutes ago, ajax said:

There seem to be lots of folks that fixed their nearsightedness without Lasik. Lasik is great when it works but it sounds horrible when things go wrong. I think I'm just going to keep slowly reducing my prescription. Even if it takes years, it'll be worth it.

Just get LASIK you pansy. I did 2yrs ago and was the best money i've ever spent. Fuck contacts and glasses. 

Meant to add,  my vision is 20/15, possibly 20/12. It's not 20/10, those letters just look like ants. 

Edited May 14, 2020 by BERT

[deadshank 24653]

 

[LurkingHorn 1068]

11 minutes ago, BERT said:

Just get LASIK you pansy. I did 2yrs ago and was the best money i've ever spent. Fuck contacts and glasses. 

Meant to add,  my vision is 20/15, possibly 20/12. It's not 20/10, those letters just look like ants. 

How much is LASIK going for anyway? I assume that probably depends on insurance. 

[HouTex 1890]

How much is LASIK going for anyway? I assume that probably depends on insurance. 

Insurance?? No insurance for mine when I did it 15 years ago.

[HouTex 1890]

And IIRC, it was $2k per eye. Don’t go with the lowest bidder on this type of thing.

[Trey3216 15354]

I used to have 20/20 in my left eye and 20/15 in my right eye.   Right eye has come back to nearly equal to the left in the last year or so, which makes it seem blurry almost, but my last exam at the Doc he told me that it was just my brain not being used to the change just yet, because my testing was fine 

[Pescado_Rojo 19428]

2 hours ago, Sbbruin said:

I've gotten progressively more farsighted as I've aged.  I had perfect vision until about 45-47.  Then my ability to read started to deteriorate.  Now I pretty much need readers for most close up things.  Haven't gone as far as getting glasses.  Probably should.  My distance vision is still pretty good.

same here, though outside of about 5 ft I've still got 20-15 in both eyes. Inside 5 ft and everything's a blur. Drives me nuts to have to carry readers around the grocery store. 

[BERT 4381]

3 minutes ago, LurkingHorn said:

How much is LASIK going for anyway? I assume that probably depends on insurance. 

No insurance here, did mine with CareCredit. Think it was $3900. Regularly $2200 per eye but i had found a $500 off coupon. Hell the worst part was having to wear my glasses for almost 2 weeks prior to surgery. I thought the surgery itself was pretty cool, like being in a SciFi movie being able to watch him come at you as your eyes are clamped open. Went home, took a nap and when i woke up i was a ok. 

[BERT 4381]

4 minutes ago, HouTex said:

And IIRC, it was $2k per eye. Don’t go with the lowest bidder on this type of thing.

That ain't no shit. 

[gsoda3 3281]

3 hours ago, Js1 said:

-2.50? That's cute.

Try -7.0 

-9.75, -10.25, heavy astigmatism both eyes.  got lasik from mann eye 5 years ago.  they corrected it to -1.25 and -.75 with no astigmatism. $5,500.

[Lerka Lerka 1094]

I've always had eyes like a hawk. Never even been to an eye doctor. Sucks for y'all. 

[Jiggy-Z 3435]

I got nearsighted starting in college.  I figure it was all of the contrast between staring at a textbook and then the overhead that overtaxed things.  Also, I suffered a severe eye injury when I was 12 (left eye) and since then it was always a little worse than the right eye which ended up pulling double duty in a way.  Vision was never really that bad.  I got glasses.

Got contacts in the early mid 90's but never really liked them.

Fast forward to 1996 when I started my construction business and I found myself jostling with  regular glasses and safety glasses and safety sun glasses etc.  I had had enough so I got Lasik and it was awesome, up until about two years ago when I started getting farsighted, but not really since my up close vision started to go and my distance vision did not get any better and then started to get a little worse as well.  I don't think I am going to pass my next driving test without glasses.

But Lasik was great while it lasted.  ~15 years.

[Sbbruin 21867]

23 minutes ago, deadshank said:

 

the best

[Nice Guy Eddie 13522]

Was nearsighted. Had lasik around 2004 when I was 35. They're still pretty good except I need reading glasses now which is because of old age not lasik. I can tell that some distance viewing isn't at 20/20 anymore. It mainly causes me problems when young people use font size 10 on powerpoint slides in large conference rooms. 

[Guadaloopy 11012]

There are studies showing that under-correction of myopia worsens rather than repairs myopia  It’s not like a workout with resistance training for your eyes.  You can’t correct the physical optics in your eyeball through exercise, especially as an adult.  Wear corrective lenses or get lasik.   Those are your options.

[Guadaloopy 11012]

I’ve worn corrective lenses since I was 8. I had LASIK when I was 28.  Lasted me 15 years without any corrective lenses.  It was great. When I was 43, I started developing a bit of farsightedness and went to the optometrist for the first time in over a decade.  I had developed an astigmatism and normal age-related farsightedness.  Got some progressive lenses for reading and screen time, but I wear them all the time to keep from putting strain on my eyes as they age.  I can still function pretty well without lenses, which was never the case before LASIK. 

[deadshank 24653]

12 minutes ago, Sbbruin said:

the best

I don't see too good from the Empie-uh state bildin

 

[wild_turkey 3182]

56 minutes ago, ajax said:

There seem to be lots of folks that fixed their nearsightedness without Lasik. Lasik is great when it works but it sounds horrible when things go wrong. I think I'm just going to keep slowly reducing my prescription. Even if it takes years, it'll be worth it.

Not trying to be argumentative or discouraging, but you came here looking for information and, as an ophthalmologist, I don't think your plan of gradually reducing your prescription is likely to work.

There have actually been studies on undercorrecting myopia in children to see if it would slow the development of myopia. Not only did it fail to reduce myopia, it actually made it a little worse. To my knowledge, there have not been any similar studies in adults, but you would have a tough time finding an ophthalmologist that actually thinks this is a valid treatment.

Most people become more nearsighted as they get older and it typically levels off in your early 20s. It can be made worse by spending a lot of time on near activities - reading, computer use, etc. People with higher education tend to be more myopic because of this. There may be small variations in the glasses prescription beyond this age, but it is far more common to become more myopic than less myopic.

LASIK is a great surgery with a very low rate of serious complications, but there are certainly risks just like any other surgery. Then again, there are risks to wearing contact lenses as well. That would be a discussion to have with an ophthalmologist you trust, who would have to do a thorough exam in order to determine if you are even a candidate.

And if you're completely against that option, then I would strongly recommend glasses or contact lenses with the correct prescription. Undercorrecting your glasses is not likely to have a long term benefit and you are merely cheating yourself out of the ability to see more clearly.

[ajax 2620]

Thanks. It's good to hear all sides.

Edited May 14, 2020 by ajax

[Tex Long 4437]

Lucky y'all. Dunno what my numbers are, but it makes no matter for me, anymore - been getting needle in the eyeball every 8-10 weeks for five years now, so not a candidate for any lens/cornea surgery.

Actually, the AMD bubbled up the retinas, which makes everything wavy like a funhouse mirror. The right eye went from can't see past about 18 inches to 20/20 when the meds kicked in and got the distance to the retina just right, but it's kept on getting "better" and flattening back out to only a little wavy, and now to around 20/70. Left is still a little too wavy to be much good even with glasses, although the glasses do let me tell that the top letter on the chart is an "E". Nothing lets me read most of the fine print on bottles and cans, other than the handy dandy magnifier, and it's a pain in the ass to read books, at least on paper. With a decent size touchscreen, I can zoom enough to read PDFs and whatnot... and, of course, shurly bevoe. Not a touch screen in my library, but I'm looking at a 42" screen from about two arm-lengths away, zoomed in, same thing in my studio, although Ableton's screens are pretty damn busy and full of small text even on a big ol' screen. 

Jealous af, me. 

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

3 hours ago, Js1 said:

-2.50? That's cute.

Try -7.0 

Team -7.0 / -7.5 represent!

[BBQ2Bayou 807]

4 hours ago, wild_turkey said:

Your options are basically glasses, contacts, or LASIK/PRK. Any particular reason you don't want laser treatment?

Do you  recommend laser after the age of 40? Seems like some do, some don't. 

[wild_turkey 3182]

7 minutes ago, BBQ2Bayou said:

Do you  recommend laser after the age of 40? Seems like some do, some don't. 

It depends on the person and what their goals and expectations are.

In general, people start to need reading glasses or bifocals in their 40s. This is because the lens in the eye loses its ability to focus on near targets (loss of accommodation). The exception to this is a person who is moderately nearsighted who can simply take their glasses off to read. They are still losing accommodation, but their natural nearsightedness spares them the need for reading glasses or bifocals.

LASIK reshapes the cornea to modify the glasses prescription (refractive error). It doesn't do anything with the lens and there is currently no treatment available to improve the loss of accommodation. Therefore, if you take someone who is 45 and perform LASIK with both eyes set for distance vision (zero residual prescription), that person will very likely have great distance vision but also need reading glasses. 

There isn't a great solution for this currently. There is a situation called monovision in which a person has one distance eye and one near vision eye. LASIK can be used to achieve this, but it has its trade-offs as well and some people just don't like it. In general, I'm not a huge proponent of monovision but I do it for people who have already had successful monovision through contact lenses.

The final consideration is that once people get into their 50s, we start to see the onset of cataracts. The cataract can affect the glasses prescription and cause a general deterioration of vision, so the LASIK result may be affected by that. If someone wants LASIK but their cataracts are significant, I steer them more in the direction of cataract surgery.

TL,DR -- I do recommend LASIK for people after age 40 in certain situations, but I would say the rate goes down for various reasons.

[Gladeite 375]

Had mine done in 1997 when I was 35.  23 years later and still test at 20/15 in both eyes.  Have to wear readers but overall very happy.  I think the technology then was PRK?  The cost then was $1500 per eye.  Steven Dell did mine.  

[Iceman 2725]

Marine Corps Basic Training 1989... barely qualify as Marksman( lowest level) at the rifle range after a lifetime of shooting/ basically growing up with guns in my hands. Was completely pissed and requested to go see eye doc.   Receive a brand new pair of birth control glasses.  Got to re-qual with the pieces of shit who couldn't hit a barn... qualified Expert  then and every time after that too.  Senior Drill instructor gave me hell for being in denial of not being able to see shit.

Lesson learned-  when your shit is fucked up, go to the respective doctor and get it corrected.

 

Edited May 14, 2020 by Iceman

[Hawndoh 2386]

my old contacts were like -10.25 and -11 or something like that. I couldn't see the "E" at the top of the chart.

Then LASIK followed by 20/20. Best money I ever spent.

[Stella Link 534]

5 hours ago, wild_turkey said:

Not trying to be argumentative or discouraging, but you came here looking for information and, as an ophthalmologist, I don't think your plan of gradually reducing your prescription is likely to work.

There have actually been studies on undercorrecting myopia in children to see if it would slow the development of myopia. Not only did it fail to reduce myopia, it actually made it a little worse. To my knowledge, there have not been any similar studies in adults, but you would have a tough time finding an ophthalmologist that actually thinks this is a valid treatment.

Most people become more nearsighted as they get older and it typically levels off in your early 20s. It can be made worse by spending a lot of time on near activities - reading, computer use, etc. People with higher education tend to be more myopic because of this. There may be small variations in the glasses prescription beyond this age, but it is far more common to become more myopic than less myopic.

LASIK is a great surgery with a very low rate of serious complications, but there are certainly risks just like any other surgery. Then again, there are risks to wearing contact lenses as well. That would be a discussion to have with an ophthalmologist you trust, who would have to do a thorough exam in order to determine if you are even a candidate.

And if you're completely against that option, then I would strongly recommend glasses or contact lenses with the correct prescription. Undercorrecting your glasses is not likely to have a long term benefit and you are merely cheating yourself out of the ability to see more clearly.

This.

These days, it's more fashionable to wear glasses than it used to be, and there are certainly a lot of better choices for glasses and several ranges of price-points.  Contacts are much better these days too.  

[Bama Chick 28596]

Nearsighted with an astigmatism.

No idea what my prescription is but I do know I have bifocals and whenever anybody asks to try on my glasses they always say “Whoa!” or that they make them feel sick.

I usually don’t mind being a glasses wearer - glasses are stylish right now, I have a good face shape for glasses, and I’m a giant baby when it comes to putting anything in my eyes. I can barely do eye drops much less contacts.

But I am hating needing glasses right now. I have to currently wear a face mask at all times at work unless I’m in my office with my door shut (work at a hospital) and OH MY GOD the way my glasses are constantly fogged up is doing my head in.

[Liquor and Poker 3659]

I am -6 R and -4.5L.  Been that way since elementary school.  Never bothered me a bit - wore contacts since 3rd grade.  Could always see 20/20 or better corrected.

Then, suddenly, at 46, that fucking presbyopia shit came on.  Now I own a 42" monitor just to read text.  By the end of the day I can't read my phone.  So much worse than nearsightedness.

[Bosco 56]

I was -8.5/-9.0 before I got LASIK in 2001.  Best decision ever.

[wild_turkey 3182]

But I am hating needing glasses right now. I have to currently wear a face mask at all times at work unless I’m in my office with my door shut (work at a hospital) and OH MY GOD the way my glasses are constantly fogged up is doing my head in.

If you are wearing a surgical mask at work, have you checked to see if your hospital has the anti-fog mask with an adhesive strip along the top border? Those work pretty well although the adhesive is annoying.

Another thing that may help is to tie the top tie tight and leave the bottom tie loose. Probably not the ideal way to wear a mask from an infection control standpoint, but at least your glasses aren’t constantly fogged up.

[Chet Steadman 940]

Negative eleven?  Damn people.  That’s legally blind territory right?
 

I’ve been in the -4.50 range for the better part of 15 years.  With contacts I’m 20/25 or slightly better.  I’ve been reluctant to do LASIK because anything worse than 20/15 or and I start squinting because it doesn’t feel perfect like I’ve been used to all the years.  I have a pair of back up glasses which I’ll sometimes wear on vacation which are 20/20 and I’m constantly wondering “what’s the point?”   
 

Can they tell you before the surgery what your eyes will look like?  I would hate to go through with it only to achieve 20/20.  

[Your Mom 4849]

Wild Turkey, what are your thoughts on laser lens replacement to correct near vision?  In my eyes, none of the surgeries are worth it if I still need readers in my late 40s.  Needing readers is worse than having full-time glasses or contacts. More crap to carry around, taking on and off, etc..

[wild_turkey 3182]

27 minutes ago, Your Mom said:

Wild Turkey, what are your thoughts on laser lens replacement to correct near vision?  In my eyes, none of the surgeries are worth it if I still need readers in my late 40s.  Needing readers is worse than having full-time glasses or contacts. More crap to carry around, taking on and off, etc..

Lens replacement surgery is basically cataract surgery prior to the development of a cataract. The most common term for this is clear lens exchange. Some people do that because you get into this grey area where you don't yet have cataracts, or the cataracts are too mild for surgery to be considered medically necessary, but you're close enough to cataract age that LASIK isn't a great long-term option.

When you do a lens replacement, whether it is standard cataract surgery or clear lens exchange, you have the option to put in multifocal lenses which provide both distance and near vision. There are different versions of these lenses (multifocal, trifocal, extended depth of focus, etc) that each have their pros and cons. They are overall pretty successful but not perfect, so I typically warn people not to expect 25 year old eyes again. 

The biggest drawback of this approach is that lens exchange surgery is somewhat more invasive than LASIK and carries its own risks. It also has to be done one eye at a time and the cost is typically much more than LASIK (ballpark $10-15k for both eyes, depending on where you go).

[tx ind 7013]

-12/-11.5 in contacts, glasses a little higher. Not a lasik candidate so I may explore ICLs at some point.  Glasses in 1st grade and hard contacts in 5th. Was amazing when I could move to the soft lenses. 

[El Diablo 4232]

Zoom Text software for the computers. Blind in the right eye and 10 deg visual field in the left eye. Good eye focus is around 10", don't know the number but corrected I can see 20/40 or so.