check your RX at home in minutes .............................
The instrument is probably made in China ...............................
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bcopt
Awesome but they will start shipping in March
....................who cares, and so far they have no competition on the market.
The instrument is probably made in China and they had to order a certain quantity and will get the stock in by somewhere in late February. I guess that it could become a good selleras the news has been flashing aound the optical world.
drk.............................they will leave you alone for another 2 months,
Quote:
Originally Posted by
drk
It's not a "Rx" if there's no doctor signature.
You mean, "check your vision". It says so on the device.
I applaud the device. Now the numbskulls that are DIY opticians can be DIY optometrists, and leave me alone.
..............................look at the other side, what this could or can do in the real world that has just waited for such a device.
Any sunglass stand in your drugstore or shopping center kiosk, can now have a "check your vision" instrument and will start selling sunglasses with prescription lenses, made in labs that are just waiting for more businesses.
Opticians in non regulated states will have a "VisionCheck" instrument or several, on location, and get the "lens powers" right on the spot.
Online opticals will be the best promoters for the instrument.
drk.............................they will leave you alone for another 2 months and then it will slowly start to make its way into the optical retail trade and some of it into private hands. During the next 12 month we should see some reactions by the public as well as the professionals.
............... so why would you want it in Quebec ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
johnwilson
Thanks, I'll check it out. Does it ship to Quebec?
I do not know if it ships to Quebec, you will have to contact them .....................................
Then, by the way, your location is listed: Los Angeles, ........................... so why would you want it in Quebec ?
You just made the first comment ...........................
Quote:
Originally Posted by
drk
Garbage in, garbage out.
The engineering of a cheap autorefractor is perhaps a nice development. But face it, there are laws against "have autorefractor in store, can prescribe to my heart's content", right now. And there is enough optometric money to keep it illegal in my state, at least.
I'm sure, though, that they'll try to put these cheap autorefractors in GP MDs offices (having found a license to exploit) who will get some kind of referral spiff to have a kiosk (like an ATM machine in a gas station convenience store).
But put it in Sunglass Hut and it'll be shut down.
drk...............................interesting
You just made the first comment for not letting it come on the market and being used .
Similar comments were made when the online opticals started to pop up on the web, which now claim to have 14% of the optical retail sales.
The *CheckQue* does not claim to be an autorefractor, but to be a measuring instrument.
You got a a good point, but does it help in reality ? .............................
Quote:
Originally Posted by
drk
1. Marketing claims notwitstanding, legislators that are educated can see through the fluff.
2. "Not letting it come on the market" is better conceptualized as "they are flying in the face of existing law, so enforcement is needed."
3. Yes, online opticals are difficult because they are trans-national and private transactions.
I maintain, however, that, for example, in my state, any Ohio-based online optical selling glasses to Ohio citizens is in violation of Ohio's dispensing regulations.
You got a a good point, but does it help in reality ? here is what happened in Ontario one year ago, and we have not heard any news since then..................................
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Ryser
Essilor hit with online ban
Author: Luke Haynes
Published: 19/01/2018
Essilor Canada and its retail portal Clearly have been banned from ‘unlawfully dispensing’ prescription eyewear on the internet in Ontario after two of the country’s regulatory establishments, the College of Optometrists and the College of Opticians,successfully applied for an injunction.
The regulatory colleges filed for the injunction in December 2016 and the matter was heard in October 2017, with a verdict reached last week.
In a statement, the Colleges said: ‘We believe the internet can be an effective tool for the provision of vision care, however, the dispensing of corrective lenses is a controlled act, subject to Ontario legislation, that definitely requires a regulated health professional’s involvement. Mail order over the internet without the involvement of an optometrist or optician is inconsistent with legislation.’
source:
https://www.opticianonline.net/news/...ith-online-ban
Total silence on the subject for one full year as far as I can see.
As far as I can see "Clearly" must be continuing their sales into Ontario without objections and court cases.
..............and here is one that the optical retail trade lost
.................................and here is another one were the professions lost against Essilor:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
crazyhorse
Leading Canadian online eyewear retailer, Clearly,will continue to offer online optical retail sales to consumers in Québec. After a ruling by the province’s Court of Appeals on Monday, May 16, 2016, in case initiated by the Ordre des Optométristes du Québec, Clearly’s mission to provide better vision for consumers in Québec will continue unabated.
“This is an important decision for eyewear consumers in Québec,” says Clearly CEO, Roy Hessel, “and another step towards our goal of making vision care accessible worldwide. Clearly remains committed to working along with eye care professionals (ECPs) across Canada to deliver eye health information and promote the importance of eye examinations, as more and more consumers are seeking information online to educate themselves about eye health and related concerns,” added Hessel.
Clearly has been keen to engage in dialogue with optometrists and opticians across Canada to find areas of collaboration and provide better products to their customers. The company shares its passion for promoting vision as a universal right with ECPs. Clearly will continue promoting regular eye exams through qualified ECPs and instilling the importance of eye health alongside their product offering.
Clearly is well-known in Canada for accessibility, affordability and quality.Recently they have also been focused on their quality of service. This includes in-house opticians in their call centre available to answer questions and determine what’s best for the vision of the consumer. This is built on the company’s foundation that every employee is a Vision Ambassador, trained specifically to provide the best customer service, product knowledge and understanding of the importance of eye health.
https://www.optiboard.com/forums/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=524629
...............................so the question is : how much is that professional protection worth these days in a commercial world, that is on a racetrac of fast change in every commercial field ?
Are the professional legal protections that were created in the last century out of date, and can be bypassed by political know how, or cash money ?
How many more similar cases across thei continent are in the works ? There is total silence and nobody in the professional law protections field, fights for what they stand for.
Court judgement on Optometrists of Quebec c. Coastal Contacts Inc.
37135 |
College of Optometrists of Quebec c. Coastal Contacts Inc., 9130-4329 Quebec inc. (doing business under the name of Gestion Progrex)
(Qc) (Civil) (By Leave) |
| Professional Law - Optometrists - Internet sales of ophthalmic lenses to Quebec residents by a company located in British Columbia - Sections 16 and 25 of the Optometry Act , RLRQ c. O-7, do they prohibit the sale of ophthalmic lenses to Quebec residents by an out-of-province person? |
|
The respondent Coastal Contacts inc. (" Coastal ") is a company headquartered in British Columbia that, although it does not have a facility in Quebec, sells ophthalmic lenses to residents of Quebec through its sites. web. Coastal is related to the respondent Gestion Progex (" Progex "), a commercial corporation with head office in Quebec, by a service agreement. Under this agreement, Progex redirects customers who are interested in the properties advertised on its website to Coastal's websites.Coastal's sales activities are in accordance with the laws in force in British Columbia.
On January 11, 2010, the College of Optometrists of Quebec, plaintiff, filed a motion for a declaratory judgment in the Superior Court declaring that Coastal and Progrex contravened the Optometry Act through their sites. Web site by claiming to have the right to exercise a professional activity reserved for members of the Order or by acting in such a way as to give reason to believe that they are authorized to do so. The College argues that the sale of ophthalmic lenses is an act reserved for optometrists under sections 16 and 25 of the Optometry Act .
The trial judge found that under Quebec civil law, the contract of sale was formed in British Columbia, and it is the law of that province that governs the contract. He also considers that art. 16 LSO does not prohibit the sale of ophthalmic lenses to Quebec residents by an out-of-province person. Although the purpose of the OSI is to protect the public, acts relating to the sale of ophthalmic lenses are less clearly connected to the protection of the public, and with this in mind, the reservation made to s. 16 LSO seeks instead to confer an economic monopoly on professionals (para 53). It states that the OLS does not have an extraterritorial effect in this case, since the situation in question does not have a real and substantial connection with Quebec.The Court of Appeal dismisses the appeal. |
]
December 3, 2014
Superior Court of Quebec
(Judge Mayer)
2014 QCCS 5886 |
|
Motion for declaratory judgment dismissed |
May 16, 2016
Court of Appeal of Quebec (Montreal)
(Doyon, Giroux and Savard JJ.)
2016 QCCA 837 ; 500-09-024950-156 |
|
Appeal rejected |
source: https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/ne.../5403/index.do
...........................and here is what actually happened, translated from french by GOOGLE, and the final judgment on the case. It looks it is not that easy to pass professional laws in court and takes lots of time.
