Laser Eye Surgery

[rikko 20]

I had it done 8 months ago. The results have been brilliant, wish i'd done it sooner! I went for the cheapest one on offer and can read the smallest line on the sight charts.

 

THe actual operation itself was not pleasant, but only lasted like 10 mins in total once i was sat in the chair. Then immediately after my vision was alot better, just felt like i had grit in my eye and greens were more vivid. THe only problem i had was in getting from north london to south london without using the tube (which they said to avoid after) and being led by a friend who walks into things at the best of times...

[Sir Bob Almighty! 0]

The missus had hers done a month ago at Optical Express, after service has been great.

 

She said it wasn't painful, just a bit weird having your eyes pinned open and people buzzing around.

 

 

Don't forget to haggle on price. We asked for a discount and got £300 off, then rang up and said Optimax were £200 cheaper and they said they'd price match - even though we never went to Optimax.

 

How much did it cost in total? If you dont mind me asking?

[Dr Kenneth Noisewater 0]

It seems fine for most people, but as has been previously mentioned there could be a long-term issue. Unlikely though I would have thought. It used to be true that no opticians or ophthalmologists had had it done on themselves in this country, but that's not the case these days. Just check if your surgeon is wearing glasses ;-)

 

We used to recommend Ultralase because they were very good clinically and turned down two-thirds of applicants. Basically if they thought there was a chance the results wouldn't be satisfactory, they wouldn't treat you. Very sensible when you're talking about people's sight. Unfortunately they were taken over by venture-capitalists a couple of years ago so they maybe aren't as ethical now.

 

Two or three other things to bear in mind: genetically we have thinner corneas in the North-East due to the Vikings getting into the gene pool when they came over raping and pillaging. Thin corneas are less suitable for some treatments.

You might still need some glasses for night-driving.

You'll still get presbyopic in your mid-forties and you'll definitely need reading glasses sooner or later.

Pay as much as you can afford, rather than trying to get it done on the cheap. Like most things in life, you get what you pay for. You only get one shot at this so don't think about it like you would buying a tv. Wavefront seems to get very good results.

 

All the best.

[The Fish 8989]

and DKN wins "Best Viking Fact Of The Day"

Edited June 16, 2009 by The Fish

[nufc4ever 0]

It seems fine for most people, but as has been previously mentioned there could be a long-term issue. Unlikely though I would have thought. It used to be true that no opticians or ophthalmologists had had it done on themselves in this country, but that's not the case these days. Just check if your surgeon is wearing glasses ;-)

 

We used to recommend Ultralase because they were very good clinically and turned down two-thirds of applicants. Basically if they thought there was a chance the results wouldn't be satisfactory, they wouldn't treat you. Very sensible when you're talking about people's sight. Unfortunately they were taken over by venture-capitalists a couple of years ago so they maybe aren't as ethical now.

 

Two or three other things to bear in mind: genetically we have thinner corneas in the North-East due to the Vikings getting into the gene pool when they came over raping and pillaging. Thin corneas are less suitable for some treatments.

You might still need some glasses for night-driving.

You'll still get presbyopic in your mid-forties and you'll definitely need reading glasses sooner or later.

Pay as much as you can afford, rather than trying to get it done on the cheap. Like most things in life, you get what you pay for. You only get one shot at this so don't think about it like you would buying a tv. Wavefront seems to get very good results.

 

All the best.

 

Thanks for the info.

[donaldstott 0]

I went for a consultation and they quoted me £1200 for Standard Lasek and £2400 for Lasek Wavefront. They promise lifelong results for both treatments, with same as glasses results with the standard and the wavefront offers better than glasses results and less night time glare.

 

Either way it's a lot of wedge but struggling to justify the extra expenditure.

 

It is my eyes though and I don't want to regret it.

[Dr Kenneth Noisewater 0]

I went for a consultation and they quoted me £1200 for Standard Lasek and £2400 for Lasek Wavefront. They promise lifelong results for both treatments, with same as glasses results with the standard and the wavefront offers better than glasses results and less night time glare.

 

Either way it's a lot of wedge but struggling to justify the extra expenditure.

 

It is my eyes though and I don't want to regret it.

I'd ask them to clarify that.

 

What they are doing is re-profiling the shape of your cornea to bring your vision to a sharp focus, which is fine.

 

However, once you hit your mid-forties the lens inside your eye (the crystalline lens) starts to becomes too stiff and inflexible for your eye muscles to be able to bring your focus in close. The classic sign is middle aged people trying to hold a menu as far away as possible and squinting to read. This is just as much a certainty as going grey, getting more wrinkles or having loads of hair start spurting from your ears & nose. It will happen to us all.

 

Now, you can get one eye corrected for distance and one for near if you can tolerate 'monovision' and if you're able to suppress one eye then the other. However, presbyopia is an on-going thing, ie you'll need more and more magnification in the reading eye the older you get, so I don't know how they get round that.

[donaldstott 0]

I went for a consultation and they quoted me £1200 for Standard Lasek and £2400 for Lasek Wavefront. They promise lifelong results for both treatments, with same as glasses results with the standard and the wavefront offers better than glasses results and less night time glare.

 

Either way it's a lot of wedge but struggling to justify the extra expenditure.

 

It is my eyes though and I don't want to regret it.

I'd ask them to clarify that.

 

What they are doing is re-profiling the shape of your cornea to bring your vision to a sharp focus, which is fine.

 

However, once you hit your mid-forties the lens inside your eye (the crystalline lens) starts to becomes too stiff and inflexible for your eye muscles to be able to bring your focus in close. The classic sign is middle aged people trying to hold a menu as far away as possible and squinting to read. This is just as much a certainty as going grey, getting more wrinkles or having loads of hair start spurting from your ears & nose. It will happen to us all.

 

Now, you can get one eye corrected for distance and one for near if you can tolerate 'monovision' and if you're able to suppress one eye then the other. However, presbyopia is an on-going thing, ie you'll need more and more magnification in the reading eye the older you get, so I don't know how they get round that.

 

The promise was for lifelong results for long distance vision, they said (almost exactly) what you said with regards to the deteriation in short-sight.

[catmag 336]

Bit of a thread bump but I'm seriously considering getting this done. It would just make life so much easier considering I'm scatty as fuck and keep forgetting to put my specs in my bag for work, then have to look at patients monitors all night.

[Kid Dynamite 5908]

I considered it but contacts are so easy and convenient for me Im happy to stick with them

[catmag 336]

I considered it but contacts are so easy and convenient for me Im happy to stick with them

 

I've tried contacts but my eyes are so sensitive that I can't wear them for as long as I need to and end up having to take them out halfway through a nightshift etc. I'd just love to be able to get up in the morning and be able to see properly without having to do anything.

[LeazesMag 0]

I wear glasses most of the time and daily lenses occasionally but reckon it's time to get my eyes lasered. Not for vanity, more for convenience.

 

But for every person you speak to who say best decision I ever made there is another who has a horror story.

 

Anyone had it done? Is it painful?

 

I personally haven't heard any horror stories, but I still wouldn't get it done unless it becomes absolutely necessary, and touch wood, I'm a long way from that at the moment. I just wear specs for reading etc [ i have to put them on to read the paper though, for instance]

[Kid Dynamite 5908]

I think he probably already got an answer to his question at some point in the last 2 and a half years

[LeazesMag 0]

I think he probably already got an answer to his question at some point in the last 2 and a half years