hi I'm new - could you help me?

[shyiris]

well RGC man it's not that they don't answer it is the way they answer - without giving you too much info. and they make you feel small and like you are talking ******** so you feel reluctant to ask further questions. I got the feeling I was wasting her time.

[Happylady]

well RGC man it's not that they don't answer it is the way they answer - without giving you too much info. and they make you feel small and like you are talking ******** so you feel reluctant to ask further questions. I got the feeling I was wasting her time.

Again, perhaps this is not the right optician for you.

[drk]

This is my first post here but unlike you Shyiris and GoodAsGood, I have been lurking here for about 8 months so I understand certain things a little better.

There have been a few consumers who have given the professionals here a hard time, like Sandy/Amanda recently and a little while ago someone named Patrice. Patrice wanted the professionals here to answer her questions so she could turn around and buy her glasses online. You can imagine how peed off that made everyone get... ;)

There were probably others before them that I don't even know about.

Also the professionals are getting tired of answering the same questions over and over again.

The fact is, this site is becoming more popular, and when someone does a Google search with just about any optical question, this site comes very high on the list. This is going to bring a lot of newbies here, and as time goes on it this will only happen more and more.

Clearly, what this site needs is a newbie consumer FAQ. This FAQ could attempt to both address the questions that keep coming up over and over, as will give the professionals here the chance to state their position on answering such questions without them having to keep typing the same things time and again.

This of course would take a fair amount of time for someone to do, and it's not obvious who should do it or how it should be done. But the "growing pains" experienced by this site would probably be made somewhat less if it were done...

Egad! What good common sense! Let's take this into consideration.

[drk]

What you describe here, King, is the antithesis of professionalism. Dr.-patient relationships are supposed to be non-adversarial, unlike a mechanic or any other commercialist. Any professional that does what's best for his pocketbook instead of his patient's well being is no professional. This is why I harp on professionalism: posters like this who apparently haven't had their needs fulfilled.

However, I have no interest whatsoever in being the compensating force for poor professional care, nor do I have interest in providing free
"professional" advice on this forum. I would say to any poster such as this that they have better recourse than posting here.

However, I feel that this must be a personal choice of all professional Optiboarders, and I will heretofore shut my fingers up.

when I buy a car - do I blindly go with whatever the mechanic or sales man says - No, because I have a fairly comprehensive knowledge of how a car works, including engines, brakes, transmissions, ECU's, Electrics, cooling, aircon, suspension and steering etc. I find being a knowlegable informed consumer useful, both from a driving, and purchasing and selling point of view.

I use this information in 2 ways - firstly it empowers me to make a choice based on what I need, and secondly, it lets me gauge the quality of the establismnet I am buying from. I much prefer to buy from a knowlegable local garage, with a person who understands cars, and the potential problems down the road

When I take the car to the garage, and the mechanic says "you need a XYZ sensor in the engine" i usually ask him "why". When he realises I can talk mechanic to him, firstly I dont get ripped off, and secondly know my car better - which might change my opinion about keeping or selling it, or just help me to decide if i need to spend my money on A or B

But perhaps this scenario is out of context - lets look at a topic closer to home:

You go to the dentist, and he says you need 3 fillings, you have a choice

ceramic
amalgam
gold

so they are all different prices -which is the best, does one last longer, is one more expensive, is one toxic... your dentist just says "ceramic is best", you ask a question and he is a little offish and arrogant - so you think "why is he saying this" you book in for 1 weeks time.

In between you decide to look it up, and find that ceramic lasts the shortest time. Hating the process of going to the dentist, you probe a bit further and find out there is a fourth technology available, the first dentist never mentioned it, it is a touch more expensive, lasts 3 times longer, takes a bit longer to do in the chair, and is not toxic.. what do you think now?

This is precicley where some practitioners leave some patients in opticians shops, else a second scenario applies - where most of the time, the member of staff is poorly educated, where the patient feels no empathy, or understanding, and isnt getting any information that reflects thier own experiences, let alone being informed beyond thier experience of the latest advance in technology. Customers rightly expect the staff that serves them to know thier salt, but sadly that experience is rare.. No wonder they become dissilusioned and frustrated

[QDO1]

What you describe here, King, is the antithesis of professionalism. Dr.-patient relationships are supposed to be non-adversarial, unlike a mechanic or any other commercialist. Any professional that does what's best for his pocketbook instead of his patient's well being is no professional. This is why I harp on professionalism: posters like this who apparently haven't had their needs fulfilled.

However, I have no interest whatsoever in being the compensating force for poor professional care, nor do I have interest in providing free
"professional" advice on this forum. I would say to any poster such as this that they have better recourse than posting here.

However, I feel that this must be a personal choice of all professional Optiboarders, and I will heretofore shut my fingers up.

I agree, but it seems proffessionalisim is a rare comodity, spread thinly, no mater what the profession

[chm2023]

I'm guessing this woman is about to gouge both her eyes out. Who would think a simple question like hers would generate (degenerate....??) such a miasma?

[QDO1]

I'm guessing this woman is about to gouge both her eyes out. Who would think a simple question like hers would generate (degenerate....??) such a miasma?

im mot surprised, she was doubted from the word go, and she never even posted a reply

[John Sheridan]

Who would think a simple question like hers would generate (degenerate....??) such a miasma?

If you want "miasma", hop on over to the Usenet newsgroup sci.med.vision. Just about any post about myopia is answered by the resident "yahoo" who claims that his "plus lens" treatment can prevent myopia. He has a follower who runs a Web site that talks about eating certain mushrooms (he calls them "shrooms") for their hallucinogenic effects. There was another guy - who thankfully hasn't posted for a while - who says that the answer to all vision problems is to "learn how to stare at the Sun".

Of course these people are continually shouted down by other people, which causes just about every thread to get clogged with all kinds of nonsense.

This place is a serene paradise compared to that. :D

[RGC_man]

In fairness to the doubters this board is clearly marked as an online community for eyecare professionals. Maybe there should be a section inviting queries from members of the public...but there isn't.

If I saw a group of doctors relaxing in the pub and interrupted their conversation to ask for medical advice while slagging off one of their unnamed colleagues with vague accusations against someone who was not there to defend himself, some might call that rude.

UK optics is cut-throat at the moment. The original poster should shop around, and not just on price, but for someone who will take time to reassure her and give the basic information she wants.

[Golden Dragon]

Shyiris - I have had a problem similar to you - see the thread on myodiscs. I found out about myodiscs myself and asked for them, they were never suggested by an optician. If hadn't requested myodiscs, I would probably still be wearing very heavy glass lenses which were uncomfortable all day . I also probably wouldn't have contacts unless I had asked for more instruction on taking lenses in and out (I used to have problems due to difficulties seeing the lenses but have now overcome this). So don't be put off asking, it's your vision, so of course you want the best possible glasses!

[mirage2k2]

This is an interesting thread. I suppose if non-professionals come on here asking the most basic questions or looking for free professional advice ... well, that would anoy anyone ... these people should find an optician that will answer these questions for them and give them sound advice and recommendations about thier vision.

However, what about the non-professionals that have problems that thier optician can't get to the bottom of? Are they supposed to go to thier optician and say "there is this great forum on www.optiboard.com, why dont you try looking on there for an answer to my problem?" This would really anoy the professional :angry:. Now if the non-professional takes the time and energy to do thier own research (by posting and looking at articles on here) they can go back to thier optician and say "I've find out about this great new atoric lense that might really help me, what do you think?" In this case the professionals on this forum are, in a roundabout way, helping the professionals not on this forum :) :) :)

I've reached the point where when I see my optician we can have a reasonably in debth discussion about the finer details of optics, and its not about me telling him how to do his job, but rather me understanding his explanations for why a particular lense will be better, or why a paricular option will not, also, I might be able to provide useful information that might actually help.

I have also noticed on this forum that some of the most interesting threads, that have gone into some seriously hardcore optics, have been posted by non-professionals. These threads are Gold and will benefit everyone on this forum, professionals and non professionals.

[Lewy]

In fairness to the doubters this board is clearly marked as an online community for eyecare professionals. Maybe there should be a section inviting queries from members of the public...but there isn't.

If I saw a group of doctors relaxing in the pub and interrupted their conversation to ask for medical advice while slagging off one of their unnamed colleagues with vague accusations against someone who was not there to defend himself, some might call that rude.

UK optics is cut-throat at the moment. The original poster should shop around, and not just on price, but for someone who will take time to reassure her and give the basic information she wants.

Shyiris,

I have to say you need to visit different Opticians, ask friends for reccomendations. Opticians are not all the same and the chemistry has to be right. find someone you feel comfortable with, is knowledgeable and will answer your questions for you. I know from personal experience that some clients are easier to communicate with than others, we can't get on with everybody so try and fins domeone who can help you. Sorry I don't know anyone in Blackburn to reccommend.

Good luck in your endeavours, but it is really difficult to answers some questions online without actually being there in person and without your full history to look at. Most good Opticians will take an holistic approach to their advice and will take great pride in what they do.

Kind regards,

Lewy

[gola]

How can we say that the prescription has really changed if the vertex distance of both prescriptions (old and new) has not been considered?

[SpecialT]

How can we say that the prescription has really changed if the vertex distance of both prescriptions (old and new) has not been considered?

I am a little disappointed in this post. Though I love an optician that is detail oriented, we just recently discussed this and I think it is safe to say that with 7 diopters in only one meridian that a few millimeters will be insignificant in terms of vertex distance. As a doctor, I would recommend that you assume a standard distance of 13.75mm or ~14mm which is the standard distance for refracting and if the patient desires a very unusual frame fit then consider asking the doctor if vertex distance should be accounted for. Vertex distance just isn't going to matter for this Rx, but I can understand your inquiry more with a power of over 9 or 10 diopters.

[gola]

Sorry, you are disappointed by this post.
When you assume things is when your problems begin.
As a Optometrist i know that the so called standard vertex distance is not so standard. If you use a phoropter or a trial frame, you take your time trying to be precise while refracting, why not spend a few more second to measure the vertex distance even if in a +7.00 this could not be relevant in some cases.

+7.25 -2.00 x 180 at 14mm is equal to +7.41 -2.08 x 180 at 11mm.

This is a possible scenario and here the vertex distance does care if you are dealing with a demanding patiente and if you considere that the tolerance for this prescription would be of .013 for the sphere. If the optician assumes a +7.25 and the lens comes out of the lab +7.12 while what the patient really needs +7.41. The time you took to trying to provide a precise prescription, was lost time if this is what your patient is going to wear.

When you write a prescription like this and include vertex distance you are giving the optician the message that you care about a precise lens for you patient and you are providing the information "if needed".

It take more time to solve a problem that to avoid creating it.

[QDO1]

Sorry, you are disappointed by this post.
When you assume things is when your problems begin.
As a Optometrist i know that the so called standard vertex distance is not so standard. If you use a phoropter or a trial frame, you take your time trying to be precise while refracting, why not spend a few more second to measure the vertex distance even if in a +7.00 this could not be relevant in some cases.

+7.25 -2.00 x 180 at 14mm is equal to +7.41 -2.08 x 180 at 11mm.

This is a possible scenario and here the vertex distance does care if you are dealing with a demanding patiente and if you considere that the tolerance for this prescription would be of .013 for the sphere. If the optician assumes a +7.25 and the lens comes out of the lab +7.12 while what the patient really needs +7.41. The time you took to trying to provide a precise prescription, was lost time if this is what your patient is going to wear.

When you write a prescription like this and include vertex distance you are giving the optician the message that you care about a precise lens for you patient and you are providing the information "if needed".

It take more time to solve a problem that to avoid creating it.

this is especially pertanant - as in the UK a lot of refractors use a trial frame, that fits closer than a phoropter

[SpecialT]

+7.25 -2.00 x 180 at 14mm is equal to +7.41 -2.08 x 180 at 11mm.

Are you sure, perhaps my calculations are off but I calculate it as +7.15-2.07X180 and confirmed it with a computer program. Could someone else confirm this, please?

If you use a different vertex distance, then by all means specify it. I, like all the docs I know, use the standard 14mm. And again, maybe my calculations are off and if so I will change my mind but if I am correct, the vertex distance is not going to matter on a 7 diopter Rx.

[QDO1]

If you use a different vertex distance, then by all means specify it.

You are not only specifing the vertex distance for comparison to the next test, you are specifying it, so when the dispenser fits a frame at BVD=6mm, the RX is right

at -7.00 each mm movement equates to approx. 0.05D. If the frame fits at 9mm (and a lot do) and the test was @ 14 then the RX need to be adjusted by 0.25

Thats why BVD is required by B.S. as part of all RX's over 6.00D

[gola]

+7.25 -2.00 x 180 at 14mm is equal to +7.41 -2.08 x 180 at 11mm.
Here you can find a vertex distance calculator
http://www.eyetec.net/calculator.htm
But i did the calculation with a software i downloaded from a place in this board. I do not remember the address and the link is in favotrites of the computer i have in my office. Maybe someone could help.
In both software the result is the same.
Remember to use the plus sign on the sphere. 14mm is the vertex distance at which the exam was performed and 11 is the vertex distance at which the frame will fit the patient.
There is nothing wrong to write the prescription converted to vertex distance 14mm. The problem is if the doctor does not measure it on prescriptions over 6.00D and assumes (i hate this word) it is 14mm. The phoropter is not always at 14mm and if you use trial frame to refine your prescription and be able to be more accurate, you must measure it too since it may fit at a distance very diferent that 14mm.
In other words, do not assume. Make life easier for everyone and measure it and write it as part of the prescription if it is over 6.00D plus or minus.

[mirage2k2]

I do not remember the address and the link is in favotrites of the computer i have in my office. Maybe someone could help.

If your are referring to favourites in Internet Explorer - right click the favourite and select Properties - the URL will be displayed - select URL and copy it (ctrl-c or right click and select Copy)

Post the URL when you're done - I'd like to see it.

[Lewy]

+7.25 -2.00 x 180 at 14mm is equal to +7.41 -2.08 x 180 at 11mm.
Here you can find a vertex distance calculator
http://www.eyetec.net/calculator.htm
But i did the calculation with a software i downloaded from a place in this board. I do not remember the address and the link is in favotrites of the computer i have in my office. Maybe someone could help.
In both software the result is the same.
Remember to use the plus sign on the sphere. 14mm is the vertex distance at which the exam was performed and 11 is the vertex distance at which the frame will fit the patient.
There is nothing wrong to write the prescription converted to vertex distance 14mm. The problem is if the doctor does not measure it on prescriptions over 6.00D and assumes (i hate this word) it is 14mm. The phoropter is not always at 14mm and if you use trial frame to refine your prescription and be able to be more accurate, you must measure it too since it may fit at a distance very diferent that 14mm.
In other words, do not assume. Make life easier for everyone and measure it and write it as part of the prescription if it is over 6.00D plus or minus.

and when you assume something you make an *** out of U & ME!!

Lewy

[QDO1]

Back to the original post

Hello to everyone. This looks a good forum :)

Nothing rude/agressive or patrionising about the start of this post

I am wondering if there is anyone out there who can help me?

Simple enough, she needs some help, she cant do a task herself... lets see why..

i went to have an eye test yesterday & apparently my prescription has changed, but she wrote the prescription down differently than my existing one, so I can't compare to see by how much it has changed.

If the optician had written down the script in the other form, there wouldnt be the question. Also, as it only takes 2 seconds, why not as a proffession just go through the numbers with the patient. I see this all the time.. patient brings a script allong and says - the other optician said the RX had changed - "look the numbers are all different" when you transpose it, there is very little change

If I write down my old prescription - might some clever person be able to convert it to the different way of writing - so I can compare this to the new prescription???

hardly an unreasonable request

The rest of the post finishes off politley enough. I just cant see what this person said to get such a negative vibe in the thread

[gola]

Found the address


http://www.opticampus.com/tools/vertex.php

Mirage2k2 this one of the links for vertex distance calculation

http://www.optiboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12648

This is the software i downloaded to calculate the Vertex distance convertion i postes.

!!! Great software!!!

[John Sheridan]

I just cant see what this person said to get such a negative vibe in the thread

The original poster didn't do anything wrong. The "negative vibe" can only be understood by considering the past history of this forum, i.e. where consumers caused some trouble before. Unfortunately the newbies don't know this past history, and get the impression that this forum full of rude people. Its actually one of the better forums around, once you get used to the place...

[SpecialT]

gola,

You are correct and I am correct. I didn't realize you were starting with +7.25. I was starting with +7.00. I still don't think it is significant enough. That is my opinion.

Anyway, sorry for the mix-up. And I will stay off of this topic, because it really isn't the subject matter of this thread. Sorry, to interupt your thread Shyiris.