Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bobblehead
I've asked my optometrist about it a couple of times, and he told me that since my eyesight isn't that bad that I shouldn't do it.
His explanation is that it is great it you are helpless without your glasses, but since my eyes aren't bad it would only make them a bit better, and not perfect.
Hesla, can you confirm this?
I read on here and hear about people having the surgery and getting perfect vision from it, but my optometrist says that expectation isn't realistic. What is the story?
|
Well... it is realistic to expect an improvement... but it is not realistic to expect things will be perfect. The thing people have to understand is that this is still a surgical procedure and therefore there are risks involved. However, it is likely that your vision will be improved. It is always worth it to get a consultation to decide fully if this is right for you. Gimble, Culver, Demong will let you make the decision...a company like Lasik MD may try to force you into it. Just remember for Lasik MD the bottom line is more important, the others also see referrals for eye diseases.
Word for the Wise...... anyone in their 30's or 40's should consider one thing if their correction is in the -1.00 to -2.00 range. This is because at the point when you start losing your ability to focus at near (ie. early 40's for most) someone at those particular prescriptions can simply remove their glasses to read. Whereas, if you do get the procedure done you will need reading glasses when you reach that age, however the distance will be clear. Basically, you have to decide what is more important to you....glasses/CL's for the distance or glasses for near.
Hope this helps...