I recently prescribed a pair of 1.67 hi index lenses for a patient with an Rx of about -8.00. The patient came back furious after receiving her lenses and complained that although she paid a "fortune" they were much thicker than her older pair of glasses. I took a lot at her older pair and agreed that they looked a lot thinner. I found out that they were polycarbonate and were called "polythin". I was quite surprised at this having always thought that 1.67 was the superior option at this range.
On a related topic: I noticed over the last few weeks that my optician was frequently prescribing polycarbonate lenses to patients who are in a low myopic or hyperopic range eg: -1.25. My feeling about this is that if there is no compelling reason to use polycarb ie: thick or heavy lenses, sports, kids etc then why not use CR39 which has a better clarity. My optician was previously trained to sell Polycarb to almost everyone on the basis of built in scratch and UV protection, thin/lite, and impact resistance. I am not sure if I am exaggerating the abbe concept but I do wonder if it is right to dispense it polycarb so liberally.
Last point to make: ANyone aware of polycarb that's better than other polycarb
Bookmarks