Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 07/13/2009 9:32:13 PM PDT by Treeless Branch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Treeless Branch
I had a great experience with Lasik: ten years ago, I went from being very near-sighted to having nearly 20/20 vision with no ill effects. So, this may sound weird, but I don't think anyone who doesn't need eye surgery should have it. “Need” is subjective and I won't go into what I felt I needed the surgery, but I'd say if you think it would be merely less convenient to not have to wear glasses or contacts, don't have the surgery. I think your eyes are too important to mess around with if you don't have to.
2 posted on 07/13/2009 9:41:20 PM PDT by utahagen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Treeless Branch

Book marked for info.


4 posted on 07/13/2009 9:51:54 PM PDT by The Cajun (Mind numbed robot , ditto-head, Hannitized, Levinite)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Treeless Branch

I had a great experience with LASIC in January of 2003 at Lasik MD in Toronto, Canada. They’re real pros there, and their pricing is much lower than here in the USA; my cost was about $1,500 for the whole thing. You’re likely to pay that much per eye here in the US. It’s one part of the Canadian medical system that’s *not* socialized, and they do great work.

I went from a prescription of about -3.5 myopia in each eye, plus about -1.25 astigmatism in each eye, to *better* than 20/20 in each eye. I am about 20/12 or 20/15 with each eye individually; using both eyes together I can usually read the 20/12 line without trouble, and sometimes the 20/10 line.

Quick recovery, no complications, excellent experience; I’m very glad I did it.

I had sufficient corneal thickness for LASIK despite having “enormous” pupils (8.2 milimeters); the amount of cornea removed is a product of your prescription strength and pupil size.

I’m not sure where you’re having this done, but in general scanning-spot lasers are more effective at removing less corneal tissue for the same correction. Some of the wavefront-based lasers (notably the Bausch & Lomb Technolas 217z at last check) are excellent for this. Over the past few years most facilities have moved to scanning spot lasers (small-diamater lasers that scan over your eye as opposed to large-diameter lasers that stay put, limiting the size of the correction to the diameter of the laser), but you should make sure that’s true of your chosen location.

If you go with LASIK, I’d recommend having them use a blade-based microkeratome rather than the all-laser procedure. Using the zero compression keratome from Bausch & Lomb, I had a quick recovery and minimal soreness. Everyone I’ve talked to who has used the all-laser procedure has had a more difficult recovery than people who have had the blade-based procedure.

All that said, I really do recommend the Lasik MD folks. See www.lasikmd.ca.


5 posted on 07/13/2009 9:54:43 PM PDT by xjcsa (Currently shouting "I told you so" about Michael Steele on my profile page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Treeless Branch
I had PRK. PRK was recommended for me because of my hobbies (MMA) and profession. With Lasik there is a small risk that your flap can dislodge, which can cause serious problems for you. With PRK there is no flap. Thus, your eyes are just as strong after the surgery as they were before.

There is a downside to PRK. With Lasik, your new vision would come in almost instantly. With PRK it takes a little while, about a couple of weeks. There is one other small drawback, be prepared for pain. I had a lot of pain with my procedure for the first 48 hours. I had a bit of difficulty. One of the protective contact lenses that they placed in my eye came out. This caused me a great deal of discomfort.

Don't let anyone tell you that PRK doesn't hurt. For those first 48 hours, it is going to hurt.

6 posted on 07/13/2009 10:04:39 PM PDT by freedomwarrior998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Treeless Branch

12 years ago I had PRK..it was before Lasik became perfected and because I had such a bad astigmatism it was all he said he could do.

The recovery time is longer, but the results are the same. It was one of the best things I ever did. HOWEVER...12 years later I do need to wear glasses (contacts). Laser surgery does not stop the natural deteriation of sight..so the older I get, the worse my eyes get...but still NOTHING like it was when I was young. I figure one day they may come up with something even better..and I’ll get it!


7 posted on 07/13/2009 10:17:15 PM PDT by Hildy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Treeless Branch

I had LASIK. Have excellent vision now, except near vision but I’m 45 and expected that.

Only regret is that they tested me beforehand for ability to make tears and I was at the lower end of acceptable. I now have a problem with dry eyes requiring 2-3 times daily use of eye drops.

Also I found the procedure traumatizing.


8 posted on 07/13/2009 10:18:31 PM PDT by Royal Wulff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Treeless Branch

My brother also had his LASIK done in Toronto. That was about 10 years ago and his eyes are still good now. I believe he paid about $2000.

I would like to do it, if I lived near that area. But I’m also terrified by the idea of a laser cutting my cornea. VEry squeamish about my eyes. I don’t know if I could handle it. Probably puke and run screaming from the room before they even turned on the machine.


11 posted on 07/13/2009 10:41:35 PM PDT by radio_jaos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Treeless Branch

I had LASIK in 1998 and I still think it was the best money I ever spent. I had very bad vision and a pretty bad astigmatism, but the doctor I had was very good and I had no problems at all. I literally got off the table seeing better than before.

My wife had it a few months later and she ended up having a few complications and had to have the procedure repeated on one eye. However, she was never in pain and at no time was her vision compromised.

The procedure is easier and safer now than when I had it. Sure is cheaper too! I can’t say anything about PRK, but I really do recommend LASIK.


14 posted on 07/13/2009 10:48:26 PM PDT by Comstock1 (So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Treeless Branch; utahagen; Secret Agent Man; The Cajun; xjcsa; freedomwarrior998; Hildy; ...

I think I’ll stick to my glasses, I’m just too squeamish for that sort of thing. Sides’ I look smarter this way and my low, criminal forehead and car-door ears are not so noticeable.

Not to digress too much but LASIK is often cited as an example of free-market medicine in action. Very few health plans cover LASIK so without third-party payers the customers shop around and look for the best deal. As a result, as the technology has advanced and improved, the price has gone down. Like the rest of the free market and unlike the rest of medicine where it is a given gospel that medical advances can only cost exponentially more and more...


15 posted on 07/13/2009 10:52:40 PM PDT by sinanju
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Treeless Branch

How old are you?


17 posted on 07/13/2009 11:02:14 PM PDT by Auntie Mame (Fear not tomorrow. God is already there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Treeless Branch
I had lasik in 04 no problems then or now, no pain (zero) played golf 24 hrs later, my only complaint it didn't drop any strokes off my game.
18 posted on 07/13/2009 11:13:42 PM PDT by buggy02 (Never take life seriously, nobody gets out alive anyway.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Treeless Branch

Do NOT have radial keratotomy done, where they slice the cornea like a pie to reshape the lens. I’ve known a couple of people who did and later needed cataract surgery and the cornea literally fell apart when the surgeon made the incision to remove the lens for replacement.

The cornea had to be stitched back together, and you can only imagine the discomfort involved, and now they can’t see very well because of the scars. Their only viable option now is cornea transplant and the anti-rejection drugs they have to take for maintenance as long as they live.


19 posted on 07/13/2009 11:29:16 PM PDT by Marauder (Politicians use words the way squids use ink.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Treeless Branch

If the doc says too thin, then you must do PRK or do nothing at all.


20 posted on 07/14/2009 12:24:31 AM PDT by Kirkwood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Treeless Branch

I had PRK done in Dec, 1995. Worked great for me, and 13 yrs later my vision is still very good. This was before LASIK really caught on, so PRK was the best option at the time. There are bad and good stories with both procedures. Get more than one opinion and go with the best doctor, not the cheapest.


21 posted on 07/14/2009 4:35:54 AM PDT by GnL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Treeless Branch

bkmk


23 posted on 07/14/2009 4:47:17 AM PDT by novemberslady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Treeless Branch

I had PRK done last year, the day before my 48th birthday at TLC in Rockville, Md.

I was extremely nearsighted in my left eye (good for coin collecting) and had astigmatism in my right eye. Eye glasses drove me nuts and contacts were worse.

They did a lot of testing and workups over the course of a month or so (I slow-rolled it while I got used to the idea).

The surgery itself was 14 seconds of laser per eye. Nothing hurt. They put on bandage contacts lenses, gave me a pair of dark glasses and told me I couldn’t drive for a week. Lots of drops the first couple of weeks, but that is down to Optive twice a day or so because I have dry eyes.

I went to my local associated eye doctor the next day, then a week, two weeks, a month, three (?), six and final one coming in August.

I was back on FR after a day or two. I had halos around bright light sources at first but that’s gone away.

The cost of the procedure and all workups and followups was $4600.

I need cheap reading glasses to see things up close but I can read the computer screen just fine from normal distance with regular font size.

My distance vision is amazingly good. My big hobby is photography and it’s really helped a lot. Cool shades are another plus.

No regrets (well, maybe sooner). Make sure you trust your doctors. My guys are the ones who did Tiger Woods and a bunch of other sports figures around DC. Everybody was professional and patient with all my questions.

Hope this helps.


24 posted on 07/14/2009 5:04:18 AM PDT by PLMerite ("Unarmed, one can only flee from Evil. But Evil isn't overcome by fleeing from it." Jeff Cooper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Treeless Branch

My corneas were OK, but my lenses had become less flexible as time went by such that I could only see 20/200 at medium to far distance. I had Crystalens surgery on both eyes in late 2007/early 2008. I can see 20/15 at distance now. Still have to wear weak readers for small type, but can see great at distance.

Surgery was quite a bit more complex than LASIK requiring removal of the natural lens and replacement with the artificial ones. I don’t regret it.


28 posted on 07/14/2009 6:23:41 AM PDT by CholeraJoe (So close to Postal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Treeless Branch

My husband had PRK over a year and half ago. He still suffers from dry eyes. It’s very uncomfortable although not as painful as it was for the first year. The doctor said that this is a common side-effect with PRK. He was told that it may never go away. He does have perfect 20/10 vision.

I’ve had two family members who had Lasik. Neither had this problem. One of them had the procedure in her 40’s and now needs glasses again full-time because of age-related degeneration. The other got it in her mid-20’s and still has perfect vision 10 years later.

I’m nearly 40, very near-sighted and just got an updated exam. My vision has improved quite a bit. The doctor said that this was the blessing of being near-sighted. He said that I may never need bifocals and that I can expect my vision to continue to improve for another 15-20 years. I will have to take my glasses off to read, but it will be in perfect focus when I do.

Six in one had, half a dozen in the other. There is no perfect solution. However, because of my husband’s out-come, I’d never have PRK. Yes, his vision is great, but he’s really uncomfortable and it’s just not worth it. (He never had this problem before he had the procedure done.)

PRK also has a much longer recovery time than Lasik.


35 posted on 07/14/2009 7:13:24 AM PDT by Marie (Alan Keyes for President!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Treeless Branch

Will you please post an update when you have the surgery done? I would very much like to hear how things went.

I truly hate glasses. Anyone who does not wear them does not know what a pain they are.


37 posted on 07/14/2009 8:26:09 AM PDT by warsaw44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson