I got it done cause I was doing archery and my astigmatism meant I had to shift my glasses onto my nose for it. Contacts would have solved the problem but my eyesight was close to 20/20 and was only ruined by my astigmatism so I never bothered getting fitted for them. Plus, I kinda liked buying stlyish frames which I could wear cause my prescription was so light.
In the end, I had a consultation with a reputable optometrist that rejected a lot of people with thin corneas, dry eyes, and would try to sus out if you’re shopping around for a “yes.” They did not try to minimize the risks and kept reminding me it’s an elective surgery and anything can go wrong in surgery (although, rare).
The main side effects for me were: a painful, burning sting that lasted for 30 mins after surgery (due to correcting my astigmatism), which a nap cured, some lasting light sensitivity at night (LED headlights feel so bright), and a dryness that went away after a few months. What they don’t say is that you’re still healing for more than a few months after surgery so a lot of side effects can linger and fade away with time, and a few may stick.
Now if you don’t want LASIK, there is PRK which doesn’t cut anything off but has a more complicated healing post-surgery regiment and your vision is not 20/20 until at minimum a week after surgery. It also has its own problems depending on how you handled post-op.
In the end, if you realllllly want it and you find a trusted surgeon, and they’ve discussed all risks cause everyone’s eye is different, it’s certainly nice to no longer rely on glasses. But again, absolutely not necessary surgery.
Either way, if you ever get cataract surgery, it’s practically the same procedure of cutting up your eyes and replacing some lenses. (Also if you get LASIK, keep your records cause you’ll need em for cataracts).
I just want to mention that PRK absolutely cuts something off… It actually cuts the most. LASIK cuts a little, requires very little healing, and leaves flaps from cutting into the eye. PRK cuts off the entire layer and doesn’t leave flaps… It requires way more healing but it’s recommended if you live a very mobile lifestyle like a profession skydive or swimmer etc since the flap could cause issues and mess you up. My husband got PRK in the military because of the “active” lifestyle and the military didn’t (or didn’t at the time) offer LASIK. I’ve been looking to get LASIK and my optometrist actually recommended me ICL. It’s a bit more complicated and expensive however I have very thin cornea layers and the Dr said I was really on the cusp of possibly have permanent dry eyes if I were to get LASIK. Considering it’s my eyeballs that I use to see I’m planning to get ICL because even if it’s more expensive… Eyeballs are important … You know? One other nice thing is in ICL the Dr cuts into the eye and then inserts a permanent lense under a layer of your cornea. So if your eyesight gets worse… They can re-cut… Take out the old lense… And insert one of a stronger prescription without having to cut more and more layers off. Either way my Dr said to wait because I was looking to have kids and the Dr said that having kids can actually permanently change your eyesight. I have an adorable 1yr old now and plan to have just one more… Then I will look to get it done. (Damn adorable kids) Just thought I’d mention that PRK does cut and a little more info for anyone wondering 👍
My understanding was it was some sort of dissolving? But, you’re correct, both PRK and LASIK means there’s surgery. The difference is whether or not you have a flap in your eye forever vs PRK which is supposed to heal back.
Active can be misleading as it’s really a concern about head injuries causing the LASIK flap to disconnect from a specific angle and force of trauma. After surgery, that sucker should be ON there, but they don’t recommend LASIK for anyone who are at risk of high impact injuries. So if you play a sport that doesn’t involve your head or aren’t a cop/military it’s a slim risk.
The whole thing is really complicated and I didn’t want to make a long post… longer. Which is why I stressed one should talk to their doctor and not internet strangers about their choices for surgery in a meme post. Haha.
Bob’s Discount LASIK Barn or whatever it is called down by the Confederate flag monument on the 5 had a big sign for the Nazi “America first” congressman and I feel like I wasn’t about to trust my eyes to them anyway but I especially want to avoid them now, Jesus fuck
I dunno, after having family get it done, I’m not scared of it, but I’m also not going to get it done until I’m a bit older, and only if it gets covered by Medicaid or something.
Even then, I’d still need glasses what with presbyopia, but at least I could do without for normal vision and only need reading glasses.
Assuming it went well.
But, everyone I know that’s had it ends up needing glasses around the 15 year mark. I wouldn’t even be 70 at that point, and I have no fucking desire to go back to glasses at that age.
So I doubt I’ll ever get it done.
I just don’t mind my glasses that much that I want to put myself through this/take the risk/pay the cost. I’ve had them since I was a child, I’m used to them and as far as I know, that’s still what has the least side/adverse effects.
I can think of two specific instances in my life when wearing glasses saved me from serious eye damage, I’m sure there were more.
You can still wear glasses, and not need them.
I live in a sunny place, so I’m never outside without wearing my sunglasses. As you’ve pointed out they’ve saved my eyes from traumatic injury at least a dozen times over the years.
I wear safety glasses when I’m working around the house with anything that could be considered a power tool (kitchen mixer, drill, etc…) and those have saved me a few times as well.
But not needing glasses, now that could be a lifesaver. I have a close relative who is basically blind without his glasses. He’s told me that if he’s in an unfamiliar place and is woken up by the fire alarm, there’s a good chance he can’t find his way out without his glasses.
Yeah! This ^ Lasik doesn’t sound worth the risks at all.
There’s a lot of folks in the comments who are pretty cavalier about the safety, yet the CEO who produces Lasik machines refuses to get the procedure and just wears glasses.
Obviously there’s a lot of folks happy with it.
However, many people end up needing glasses within ten years. “Relating to the legal requirements in Germany, sufficient visual acuity was found in 76.7 % of the LASIK group, in 73.9 % of the Ortho-K users and in 85.7 % of the reference group (72.7 % in the adult group, 100 % in the juvenile group).” https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23508754/
“Nearly 5% of subjects were dissatisfied with their vision after Lasik… eyes feeling irritated (50%), glare (43%), halos (41%), and [trouble] seeing in dim light (35.2%).” Source: Mamalis N. Laser vision correction among physicians: “the proof of the pudding is in the eating”. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2014 Mar;40(3):343-4.
“Lasik Suicide” is a real thing, most of the folks who have been affected don’t take the time to say much about the excruciating pain, they just commit suicide.
https://www.lasikcomplications.com/suicide.htm
Definitely think very carefully, your eyes are something you can’t fix if you get this surgery. For some people enough nerves are damaged to cause persistent pain that doesn’t go away.
I almost got the surgery a few years ago, if it worked 100% of the time I would have taken the risk. But vision is so important that I didn’t want to take the risk. Several of my family members did get it and still have dry eyes and halos ten years later, and two now need glasses again anyway.
Yup friend of the family got it years ago and now sees coronas of light intensely enough while driving at night that they had to stop driving at night in their mid-40s.
The sample size of that study was only ~300 people. A study with 20,000 participants in Singapore found that 90% of patients had 20/40 or higher vision after 10 years. It found that high-myopia (-14+)(the most extreme form of near sightedness) patients had a much higher rate of regression, with 39% of those patients losing 2 points or more from their vision within 10 years of tratment (and likely choosing to wear glasses [not listed in the study] or get retreatment [27%]).
So basically, if you have extreme vision problems before LASIK you’re much more likely to have to wear glasses again down the road.
Also, worth pointing out that almost everyone will need reading glasses as they age regardless of LASIK. This conversation only surrounds glasses for near sightedness.
Good points. So roughly 10% chance of needing to get glasses or surgery again, which gets higher the worse your vision is to start.
Yep you got it. So for people with only minimal vision issues it might not be worth it, but for those with severe vision problems it may be worth the risk even though their vision likely will degrade slowly back to their original prescription.
Yes, 99% safe. Be very scared :p
99% safe isn’t that safe, it just means that out of every hundred customer one will be injured.
So, looking at this page:
https://www.mariettaeye.com/eye-care-info/lasik-eye-surgery-statistics/
1700000 lasik procedures are performed every year (estimate), and to give the treatment the best possible chances (and make it easier to do the math), let’s accept that it is 99% safe
This means that every year 17000 people are in some way injured by it.
That is not negligible…
It’s not 99% perfect 1% absolutely obliterated. That 1% is people with itchy or dry eyes for a bit afterwards. But yes, I could’ve pointed that out.
Heck, the 1% of the covid vaccine included people complaining they had to poop the next day :p
I see your point, but when you consider that eyeglasses have a 100% guarantee to not damage your eyes directly, that one percent risk becomes a huge extra risk.
I mean, I’ve had my glasses break and scratch my cornea… The likelihood of that happening is probably less than 1%, but it’s definitely not 0%
That is why I specified “directly”, accidents happen, but the glasses won’t dammage your eyes just by wearing them
This “directly” distinction you’re making is not very relevant.
Usually “direct” would mean that without it, it wouldn’t have happened. Yes, whatever broke the glasses would’ve happened without the glasses as well, but it likely wouldn’t have resulted in a scratched cornea. So yes, the scratched cornea is a direct effect of having worn glasses.
Eh, fair I guess, but I maintain that glasses are 100% safe when you try them out, LASIK is way more dangerous during the treatment phase even at a 99% safety rating
Lots of scary side effects to many medications people take as well. It all depends on the probabilities.
And benefits. Some cancer treatments include common symptoms like hair loss. What would you choose?
Glasses are barely an inconvenience; you can’t compare them to cancer. A 1% drop rate on making my life significantly worse is terrible odds, especially given the monetary cost.
It’s an extreme example where the decision is easy: death vs hair loss.
When it comes to more subtle examples: glasses vs < 1% risk of blindness, that’s a decision that people will have more different opinions on.
I have photophobia, which is not a fear of light (that’s heliophobia) but a high sensitivity to light. I have to wear sunglasses essentially sunup to sundown. I keep my office lights off. My display is set to the lowest brightness and contrast settings I can get away with.
I have Transitions lenses and even those aren’t strong enough sunglasses to cope with the brightness. Goodr sunglasses work really well for me as does my $600 prescription sunners. But mostly I try to avoid sunny days and live for the November through March days when the sun sets at 4 PM so I can go outside and enjoy myself.
Do you also have an urn of dirt from your homeland so you can get a restful sleep in your coffin?
I do. May I enter your domicile and show you?
Only if I can spill some salt grains first 😅
Well-played!
Risk management isn’t solely based on how bad the outcome is but also on how likely that outcome is.
It’s a big factor considering the benefits.
Glasses are a hotness superpower
*“Optional” glasses are a hotness super power.
Real glasses are more about how you see than how you look.
Spoken like someone who has normie glasses
Talk to me when your prescription is -13 or worse, your glasses always have to be special ordered with the most expensive high index lenses, your glasses are physically heavy, and they distort your face so the area around your eyes looks far away.
You go to warby Parker and get the $99 frames but it’s still somehow $230. Even a place like Zenni is $75 for 1.74 lenses (not including frames).
Also you have to be cautious about what frames you pick because the larger your lenses are the thicker they’ll be. You one of those zoomers that wants cute big grandma glasses? Bad plan
Not just that, but you’re absolutely blind without your glasses. Someone sexily takes them off to look at you sexily, you’re now squinting and can barely see their face. You wake up in the morning and either put on your glasses or pick up your phone and put it right next to your face otherwise you can’t see it.
There’s a reason why any scene where an actor wears glasses they have essentially zero prescription, unless the goal is to make someone look nerdy. (Aside: Stephen Root is an incredible actor!) In fact, it gets even more ridiculous. There are pictures of Brad Pitt wearing glasses going all the way back to the 1990s. But, when he’s in a movie role he’s wearing contacts and then has zero-prescription glasses on.
Still cute as hell
Thank you for making me feel more confident
I do not have to wear glasses, although I have some reading glasses with a hacked prescription I made.
I find the psychology of glasses somewhat fascinating. I can fake my actual visual limitations in almost every instance using peripheral awareness. I have no clue what it is like for others with worse vision than my own. When I put on glasses adjusted to my vision, it feels like relaxing, like my mind shifts to other interests and awarenesses. But I kinda like my normal visual focus, even if it limits me in some way that could be improved.
I also have a pair of ultra magnification hacked reading glasses I use for soldering very tiny things. I adjust and relax with them just the same.
So really, when I see you in your big thick glasses, first off, I see someone aware of their needs and both willing and able to address them. Looking different is actually looking interesting to me. Secondly, I am curious how my vision measures up and the psychology. I really want to probe and explore self awareness from many angles. Finally, I find nerdiness super attractive although the glasses and look are only a hint at the possibility of what I actually find attractive.
I am a jack of all trades type of person. I am very aware of my limitations. I have no ego or narcissism. I can be very unintentionally intimidating in the broad spectrum of what I am interested in and know. Hidden in this aspect of life, I need someone that can correct me, can tell me no, but also has their own curiosities independent of my own. And this is key to what I really see; when I see someone that looks a little different, I see the potential for an independent mind. I see someone that might have hobbies, and interests. Someone that may not be totally absorbed in simple friends or fixated on some fantasy future expectations. I see the life catalyst that pushes a person to explore within themselves incrementally across their years of existence. I see the potential for someone I can respect and someone that can tell me no with substance and understanding. That is what is truly attractive. Looks fade, but friends first and forever.
So you see, glasses say a lot more than one might imagine. It infers much about a person before we’ve even met. I pick up on the details and it is the implied meaning behind them that I value. These are not some judgmental expectations or anything like that. I am only perceptively aware of the potential and it is the potential that I explore with an open mind. That is what I actually find attractive. It has nothing to do with the aesthetics of those cute glasses. Conformity is ugly and boring in almost all instances. Differents are who make life interesting; so much potential is hidden just under the surface of different.
Tldr, Jake is tryina fuck
De facto can’t. Physically disabled in social isolation and too easily harmed by such physical interaction. Like right now I wake up after only sleeping 5 hours. My spine feels like a twisted towel. I can barely move. I write a few words at a time with long pauses you can never see between the words as I try and twist and turn against the pain until I can get up through the tears. And this is a good day. One of my best. I am haunted by the knowledge of how fast I am degrading and what that will mean.
I come here to escape that reality. Here is the only place I can exist as me; as some simulacrum of who I was because in the real world I am a hollow shell in extreme pain, ridiculously fragile. I don’t want to make anyone watch me fall apart. I have nothing to offer anyone but burden. I can’t be fixed. I can’t get anyone to even fully diagnose the problem. Such is life after barely surviving a broken neck and back. Sex would be suicidally inducing levels of frustrating and I could never sleep with someone else in a bed with how I must move around constantly to keep from locking up entirely and losing my remaining mobility. So while there may be some element I am drawing on from such an emotional place that rings true to your accusation, there is nothing I have that can back that up. Reminding me of this is a little hurtful. Like telling me I can’t exist and oppressing the last outlet of humanness that remains a thread of me that did not die at the hands of a terrible driver while riding a bicycle to work 2/26/14
230 bucks? I usually paid twice that. Then I spent 7000 bucks on getting ICLs implanted. The years later my eyes got worse again so now I’m wearing glasses again plus I’m a bit farsighted from the ICLs.
But those glasses are only at -2 dpt and are so comparatively cheap that I’m still saving money over my expected lifespan.
So. Fucking. Worth. It.
Warby Parker, Zenni optical, eyebuydirect, etc are finally breaking the luxottica monopoly. 5-6 years ago my glasses were easily 2-3x that
Very jealous of the ICLs. I need the toric kind (or to also get lasik or also continue wearing glasses/contacts) and the last quote I got was 5-7k per eye. It should be covered by insurance, ridiculous
You rep a -13 in both eyes? Ouch, my -9 is bad enough, and I feel you in the pain of everything relating to glasses is very custom and very expensive, I get the extra bonus of I’m a large human, at 6 foot 6 and that reduces the small selection of frames i can choose from even further, as so many just don’t fit my large head.
I will be with you there soon.
-7 and deteriorating like a mother fucker.
Laser correction won’t really help in these extreme cases, no?
: Bubbles from Trailer Park Boys enters the chat :
I never had it done for two main reasons:
- Actual cutting of the cornea.
- A cripplingly negative response to anything that surgically impacts my body. Even giving blood triggers an overwhelming need to inject it right back into me.
Knowing what I do about CC and the astronomically high likelihood of global civilizational collapse before mid-century, I should really have something like that done so I can do without glasses if absolutely necessary. Assuming I live that long, that is. Which, judging from the current advanced age of my own parents, is a decent “likely”.
It’s only good for 10-15 years before they have to shave more cornea off, best to wait for the last possible moment
I had my done over 20 years ago, and only needed glasses again this year (and that is only for a very slight correction, I can see fine without them, while 20 years ago I was basically blind without my glasses). I can’t recommend lasik enough, especially for people with very bad eyesight.
Never knew that it wasn’t permanent. The climate change argument would’ve worked on me. Now I’m even less inclined.
You just have to make good friends with a ripper doc in the wasteland
also people with damage to thier cornea, like from shingles even if it made a small scar on the sclera, makes in ineligble for lasik.
I don’t plan to do LASIK, unless:
-
I am not able to put my glasses on;
-
When my glasses break, I am not able to go outside and drive by bus to the nearest glasses repair shop.
Please try to ride the bus instead of drive it if your glasses break.
-
ITT pussies who don’t want to pop xannies and see the pretty light show
deleted by creator
I’m not sure if I look better without glasses or I just look better in SD
