-1.75

[Finn]

My boyfriend and I share a common prescription, although he's generally a bit ahead of me. Now we're both on -1.75 but with very different wearing patterns. He's a "most-of-the-time" wearer, my style is only-when-I have to. I come from a family shortsighted family all in the region of -3 or -4, so to them -1.75 is nothing at all. I think because of this preconditioning I'd find it very difficult to adapt to wearing a prescription like mine more than is absolutely 'essential' although I recognise that it would be beneficial.
In your professional opinion, how weak is this prescription and how justifiable is "frequent" or very frequent wear? What would your recommendations be to one of your patients?

[Johns]

When someone in our office has a prescription such as yours, and choses to go w/out glasses, we kindly ask that they call us before they go driving, so that we can vacate the highway.

:D

Seriously...I am always facinated at different people w/ the same correction in their glasses are affected (or not) so differently by them. You obviously can do much better than your boyfriend w/out your glasses, but why would you want to? Are glasses (or contacts) that annoying ? Do you really not see a huge improvement over not wearing a correction ? You may not...

We had a 14 year old boy in our office, that had an astigmatism that required a 8 dioptor (power unit) correction. The doctor, fearing he could not handle it all at once, gave him a 3.75 to start.
He put the glasses on, looked straight ahead, and didn't say a word. No smile. No frown. Nothing. He said they made absolutely no difference to him at all ! So we gave him the full 8, and the same thing ! He did admit that they helped him a "little" at night, but other than that, he doesn't wear them. (???)

I'm sure one of the OD's can give you a better expalnation of your Rx...these are just my observations

[Cindy Hamlin]

Finn,
My correction is a -2.00 and I have a restriction on my driver's license that I cannot drive without corrective lenses. I cannot imagine what you are missing. True, you may not even realize that you are. I was astonished when I got my first pair of glasses (-1.75) that trees had leaves and the blobs in the hallways at school were my friends. I had gotten so used to "knowing" they were waving at me.

I am sure that you feel that you don't need your correction, but I challenge you-what are you missing? My guess is a lot!

[Tim Hunter]

Theoretically you should drop one line of Snellen acuity for each 0.25 of refractive error, on that basis you should drop seven lines. If your best corrected acuity is 20/20 then you should be "off the chart" without your spectacle/contact lens correction. Thankfully it isn't always quite as brutal as that in terms of acuity loss but I certainly wouldn't want to be on the road if you are driving without correction.

[chip anderson]

Finn:

Why do you not wear your glasses? Are you afraid that someone will see you wearing them? Are you afraid that your correction will become stronger because you wear them (Reguardless of what Mariette Hartley says on the commercials she does for "See Clearly" that is B.S.)?

Why not wear your glasses all the time and see well all the time? That few seconds of fuzziness that you have when you first take your glases off is due to your brain having to learn to intepret fuzzy images again, not due to your glasses having made your eyes worse when the glasses are off.

Chip

[Robert Martellaro]

Finn,

If the Rx is a simple -1.75, you may wear them whenever you desire (read below for exceptions). There is no physiological benefit to full time wear with your Rx. When you become forty five or so, you will be able to read without glasses. You'll like that.

There may be legal issues if you get into a moving vehicle accident, even if the glasses are not required by a government licensing agency. I would hope you would wear them for night driving at a minimum. Certain occupations may also require a minimum corrected and/or uncorrected visual acuity.

Robert

[Johns]

Robert Martellaro said:
Finn,

There is no physiological benefit to full time wear with your Rx. Robert

Except fot the reduction in your stress level knowing that you are seeing clearly at every opportunity !

Do you think of wearing glasses as a "weakness"?

[Finn]

It seems from your replies that there's no absolute guidance for someone with my prescription. What I hoped I might hear is some general advice for someone like me. I wear my glasses - for tv, driving, cinema etc - and have no problems but I wondered if I'm unusual with this prescription that I don't make a habit of more regular wear for outdoor activities. I know it'd give me better vision but have been brought up to believe that this is an inconsequential prescription - I don't propose full time wear because I don't need them indoors. I'd just like to know what advice new patients with this prescription get. Cheers.

[chip anderson]

Finn:

Simple answer : People with your Rx see just fine for everything under 10 feet. If your activities are under 10 feet you don't need glasses. If you want to see clearly over 10 feet you need your glasses. If you are so vain that you don't mind seeing the world fuzzy beyond 10 feet leave them off for activities over 10 feet.

Chip

[Finn]

Cindy, I guess I'll get to the same prescription as you in time. What's your wearing pattern? Is the difference between -1.75 and -2 much at all?

[Tim Hunter]

My advice to a patient would not depend upon their prescription but on their vision without the spectacle/contact lens correction and their visual acuity with. I would also take into account whether they drive and their occupation and hobbies.

As a very crude generalisation a prescription of -1.75 would usually put you outside the legal limit for driving in the UK and I would therefore recommend you to wear them for driving. If your work or hobbies involve distance tasks I would advise you to wear them for that also. I would advise a patient that they could read comfortably with and without the prescription but frankly I would be surprised if after demonstrating the improvement in visual acuity for distance a patient decided not to wear them most of the time.

[Finn]

hi Tim,
you said, and I quote:

"My advice to a patient would not depend upon their prescription but on their vision without the spectacle/contact lens correction and their visual acuity with. I would also take into account whether they drive and their occupation and hobbies."

Please could you explain for me? I don't understand how prescription or vision without correction don't amount to the same. Thanks.

[chip anderson]

Finn: Vision without correction means just that : How well you can see with your glasses off. Precription means how much the focal length of the eye must be changed to achieve the best possible vision.

Some people with the same precription (say: like your -1.75 ) can see much better without glasses than others with the same correction. While they would probably average the same acutiy some would be better than others. They would all requre the same Rx.

I have seen people with very low precriptions that did not see very well at all at distance and others with precriptions quite a bit stronger that could see pretty well with spectacles off. Most of these people would see the same with spectacles on at distance.

Life is never simple.

Chip

[Stopper]

Finn,
It doesn't sound like vanity is the problem. It sounds like you just feel you don't need them all the time. This is fine although most people would wearthem all the time it doesn't mean you have to. Wear them when you neeed to see. If it thats only when you drive. Fine. It's your life. if alittle blurred vision doesn't bother you, who cares. (unless you're driving). Don't sweat the small stuff.