goose11057 wrote:Good Question - The reason I had the Lasik surgery was that I felt the technology and results were matured enough to provide consistently good results
Lasik/PRK is a mature technology but results are still not 100% guaranteed. How long had you researched this? My research lets me know that the PRK im getting can improve my vision and reduce my dependancy on glasses, but that I must have realistic expectations. I would consider it a good result if I need glasses much less than I currently do. If they can get me in the -1.5 ballpark without overcorrecting me to hyperopia, ill be happy.
I never liked wearing glasses and did not really mind the contacts although at the end of the day my eyes were tired and dry.
Contacts cause my eyes to feel dry within minutes and they feel like an eyelash. I tried contacts 20x and they are not for me, this is why im looking into PRK to help me reduce my dependancy on glasses. Your contacts did a great job, im hoping PRK can offer some improvement. I don't expect perfection, that would be unrealistic.
The biggest problem was that in addition to wearing contacts, I now needed reading glasses to see anything up close.
That is why I am aiming for -1.5 with PRK in both eyes. Monovision isn't for me.
I tried some new multifocal Toric contact lenses, but since I had an astigmatism and big correction (-4.5 and -5.5) they did not seem to help.
Did monovision work for you before lasik? If not, youd have to accept still needing glasses part time with contacts(or lasik) or wear progressive glasses fulltime.
The Lasik surgery would at least allow me not to get rid of the reading or regular glasses, and they have.
I thought your contact lens did that. Contacts aren't compatable with my eyes and I let the surgeon know this as a reason. He agrees my expectations for improving my vision and reducing my dependancy on glasses is realistic. He understands that I don't want reading glasses and is why I am aiming for a slight undercorrection of -1.5
I think having one eye 20/20 is very important for monovision and would not have considered an enhancement, or this posting, if we had achieved that goal in the first place.
Perhaps lasik wasn't for you if you insisted on 20/20. Isn't your vision good enough to legally drive without correction? Couldn't you function without correction? I feel that I could at -1.5. Most people do end up that way but it's not a guarantee. I don't get 20/20 with glasses and besides, 20/20 for distance would only mean id need reading glasses many hours a day. So to avoid this, I have elected for a slight undercorrection of -1.5 and have accepted the fact ill occasionally need distance glasses(I don't drive)