| User | Comment |
|---|
| lara | | posted 31-Oct-1998 9:45am |
i wear corrective lenses, and i have the extra money, but i haven't had the surgery. my excuse is that i don't know enough about the long-term effects of the surgery, but the truth is that i've been wearing glasses or contact lenses for 21 years now, so i'm used to them. |
| Mimi | | posted 31-Oct-1998 3:29pm |
I've worn glasses since I was 12 & they just feel like part of me. It would be nice to not have to grab my glasses as soon as I get out of bed of a morning, but I am not convinced yet that I want to get rid of them. I've had friends who have had great luck with their surgeries, but I've know a couple who have had bad luck. |
| elijahblue | | posted 31-Oct-1998 4:36pm |
no, because the results don't usually last very long. |
| jjg |
I won't have the surgery done unless it is absolutely needed. That is to say that my vision reaches the limits of legal blindness. From what I've heard the surgery can't be repeated. It's a one shot deal. Daver & Bill: the question specifically limits this to those with impaired vision. "For those who wear corrective lenses for vision." |
| hunter |
I'm so used to my glasses (and think I look better with them on) that I would probably not do it until there's been more time, to see what happens to people who've had the surgery as they've aged afterwards. But I can easily see circumstances under which my glasses would become inconvenient to the point that I'd decide to go for it. |
jzp  | | posted 1-Nov-1998 10:47pm |
you betcha. glasses are irritating |
| seven |
My smart-ass comment: All surveys should have an automatic "I'm not answering this survey, I just want to look at the comments" option. |
| reality | | posted 2-Nov-1998 10:12am |
not sure.. I don't know enough about it.
*daver, steve: there is, simply don't choose an answer.. then when it complains force it to submit a non-conforming answer.. |
| milktree | | posted 2-Nov-1998 11:08am |
If it worked without permanent side effects I'd go for it. |
| gilly | | posted 2-Nov-1998 12:10pm |
It would depend a lot on pain, healing time, side effects, etc. But
boy, the thought of being able to wake up and just see is pretty
appealing.
Why are my comments wrapping like this? |
| lisashea | | posted 2-Nov-1998 12:31pm |
Yes, I'd much rather have my eyes just "correct" for sanitary reasons. I use two-week-and-throw-away contacts now to try to keep my eyes clean, but even so that means every day a piece of plastic is sitting against my eyeballs trapping dirt and grime. That can't be good for them. |
| jonas |
I really would like to do it someday. It doesn't seem worth the risks right now, though. |
| Resy |
No, but perhaps that's because my eyesight hasn't deteriorated entirely (I don't have to wear glasses whenever I want to see). |
| eris |
I have been thinking about doing this, but I've heard mixed reviews. My understanding is that the final result is usually not perfect vision, but better vision (i.e. one would still need glasses for truly sharp vision). As my vision is not really very bad (just barely bad enough to need glasses to drive, plenty good enough to get breakfast and shave without 'em), I suspect the gain would not be worth the risk for me. I am trying to make a decision soonish, though, because it is probably best to get it done as early as possible after adulthood (to get the max benefit before presbyopia sets in). |
| palmtree |
I could have it if I wanted to, but fooling around with my eyes when they don't "need" surgery scares me. |
| romkey | | posted 3-Nov-1998 11:01am |
I've thought about it. I could afford it easily, but I'm worried about the long term effects. I wouldn't trade off good eyesight (without glasses) today for very poor eyesight thirty years down the road. I'm also used to my glasses but I would love not to have to ever wear them again. Then I would play sports, build things, climb mountains, run through the fields, and sing, and there'd be a rainbow, and all the wee animals would come out and climb on me. |
| phi | | posted 3-Nov-1998 11:02am |
I think I'll wait until it's a more mature technology, and the long-term effects are better explored. Plus, I think I look better with glasses, and I have lots of other things I can imagine spending money on. romkey: say hi to rebo and zootie for me, OK? |
bill  | | posted 3-Nov-1998 12:30pm |
I don't need corrective lenses for vision (and I had no answer to indicate that), but I said yes because if I did I would. jjg, a quote from the "New Survey" page: "Try to cover every possibility, every range in your answers. Always offer an "Other" answer. ". By leaving off people who don't need glasses, you gave us no way to answer your question. This is a no-no. Next time, just add a "I don't need glasses" option. Expecting people to not answer a question is a bit harsh. The interface does allow not answering, but it complains. romkey, you're scaring me. |
| Jody |
Expen$ive. Risky. Not a long-term (forever) solution if your eyes continue to change.
*Romkey - oh my. Can radial keratotomy increase my animal magnetism? ;) |
| lizzie |
It makes me nervous to have them shooting lasers into my eyes...what if they slip? *shudder* I'd rather wear glasses than be blind. |
| kadai |
Absolutely, I hate wearing glasses. |
| grmbrand |
I'd be doing my homework on that one. I've been doing fine with glasses--I'd need to be convinced that the procedure was -absolutely- going to -permanently- correct my eyesight. |
| Ynot |
daver...i guess you didn't see the "For those who wear corrective lenses" part either ;) |
| daver |
I must need glasses; I can't see the "I don't wear corrective lenses" option. **jjg: If I want to see the comments, I must choose an answer. Since there's no option that fits, you get skewed statistics and a smart-ass comment.  **reality: That's not possible with my browser. **Ynot: |
| Jane | | posted 6-Nov-1998 10:42pm |
What lizzie said...I'd be too nervous of mistakes and nasty side effects. |
| jefff | | posted 8-Nov-1998 12:18pm |
I checked "I'm not sure", but several good friends have now had the advanced LASIK surgery (as opposed to the older and less appealing RKT) and can't say enough good things about it - no pain, instant gratification, no apparent long term effects, repeatable. I'll probably wait a few more years to see if there are any problems that crop up, and then see if i can swing it. Currently there are only two or three doctors in MA that are licensed to do this surgery. |
| glen | | posted 10-Nov-1998 11:11am |
It would depend on the type of operation and the amount of research / successful cases that had been acheived. I would not do the "radial keratotomy" (I think that's the one...?), for instance, where they cut slits in your cornea and have it heal into a new shape. But I might consider the UV laser operation, if in a few years it's come down in price and there aren't any ill effects reported. Now that I participate in sports like skiing and hang gliding, I would really love to have 20/20 vision without glasses or contacts. I can understand not wanting to take the risk, but there's definitely a threshold beyond which I'd do it in a second. |
