Today I'm angry about.....

[thebish]

Opticians probably know this and still peddle the notion that reading glasses are for everone. It's lining their pockets is what it's really about.

hmmmmm..... I'd have thought your expense account frequent eye-tests are lining their pockets a wee bit more than me and bruce buying reading glasses from superdrug!

[BWFC_Insane]

Today I'm angry with myself - first day back at work and I've forgot to bring my specs. Struggling somewhat.

^ no typos there, so maybe not as gog-eyed as you think you are??

i succombed to reading glasses a couple of years ago - i now can't read a computer screen, stuff on food packets, books, labels - in fact pretty much anything that isn't road-sign sized... I'm a bit alarmed at the speed of deterioration since I gave in to the specs!

I have 4 pairs - and i keep them in different places for fear of doing what you have done today - there is always a pair in the car, f'rinstance - so that I can programme the satnav...

Exactly the same as me, Bish. I'm struggling to see clearly what I'm typing here for instance (and spellcheck's my pal ).

No chance with packets, jars, DVDs etc. I too am alarmed as to how completely dependent I've become.

Always had a pair at work, a pair at home and a pair in the car, but I'm a bugger for (a) breaking them and (b) leaving them behind some place. Hence, I took my work pair home for while I was off.

Will nip to Asda at lunch and pick up a pair of cheapos.

You see, this does make me really really angry. Because I work at a screen all day, I get free eye tests, which I take up mainly for the benefits of early warnings for the likes of glaucoma etc. Needless to say the pressure from the optition to take a pair of reading glasses is relentless. I even stopped going to one because after the eyetest they made up a pair of glasses and sent them to work (complete with bill) - which I refused to pay outright. Anyway, my vision isn't perfect, one of my eyes struggles in bad light to adjust as quickly as the other, but I can still read stuff on jars or focus on far away stuff. I was told by a friend that the focussing muscles of your eye are just like any other muscle, they deteriorate without use - so I took up simple eye exercises which just consist of focussing near then far then near then far again. Ten times a day -takes under twenty seconds.
My wife, same age, virtually same results from eyetest (the prescriptions were identical) took up reading glasses four years ago. She is now totally reliant on them and is becoming worse in her need.
Opticians probably know this and still peddle the notion that reading glasses are for everone. It's lining their pockets is what it's really about.

What opticians know is that there is no clinical evidence (and thankfully evidence is what is used for clinical decisions in this country) to suggest that eye exercises can prevent the onset of presbyopia (the inability with age to focus on near objects due to hardening of structures within the eye). There are plenty of hocus internet sites that suggest exercising the eyes can stop this but equally there are plenty to suggest faith healing can cure cancer or somesuch other nonsense.

When you get reading glasses your presbyopia is increasing at a rate. Fact is you won't notice that so much as you use the reading glasses. Only when you forget them or lose them or whatever.

And of course people become reliant on them, because they get used to being able to actually see without everything blurring!

[TANGODANCER]

Wife's family had a glaucoma history so she has test and perscription specs. I usually pay a fiver a time on the market for mine plus a pair of Benidorm specials in a tin tube that I always have in my pocket for emergencies. Since I can't read much without them I don't have much choice.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Today I'm angry with myself - first day back at work and I've forgot to bring my specs. Struggling somewhat.

^ no typos there, so maybe not as gog-eyed as you think you are??

i succombed to reading glasses a couple of years ago - i now can't read a computer screen, stuff on food packets, books, labels - in fact pretty much anything that isn't road-sign sized... I'm a bit alarmed at the speed of deterioration since I gave in to the specs!

I have 4 pairs - and i keep them in different places for fear of doing what you have done today - there is always a pair in the car, f'rinstance - so that I can programme the satnav...

Exactly the same as me, Bish. I'm struggling to see clearly what I'm typing here for instance (and spellcheck's my pal ).

No chance with packets, jars, DVDs etc. I too am alarmed as to how completely dependent I've become.

Always had a pair at work, a pair at home and a pair in the car, but I'm a bugger for (a) breaking them and (b) leaving them behind some place. Hence, I took my work pair home for while I was off.

Will nip to Asda at lunch and pick up a pair of cheapos.

You see, this does make me really really angry. Because I work at a screen all day, I get free eye tests, which I take up mainly for the benefits of early warnings for the likes of glaucoma etc. Needless to say the pressure from the optition to take a pair of reading glasses is relentless. I even stopped going to one because after the eyetest they made up a pair of glasses and sent them to work (complete with bill) - which I refused to pay outright. Anyway, my vision isn't perfect, one of my eyes struggles in bad light to adjust as quickly as the other, but I can still read stuff on jars or focus on far away stuff. I was told by a friend that the focussing muscles of your eye are just like any other muscle, they deteriorate without use - so I took up simple eye exercises which just consist of focussing near then far then near then far again. Ten times a day -takes under twenty seconds.
My wife, same age, virtually same results from eyetest (the prescriptions were identical) took up reading glasses four years ago. She is now totally reliant on them and is becoming worse in her need.
Opticians probably know this and still peddle the notion that reading glasses are for everone. It's lining their pockets is what it's really about.

What opticians know is that there is no clinical evidence (and thankfully evidence is what is used for clinical decisions in this country) to suggest that eye exercises can prevent the onset of presbyopia (the inability with age to focus on near objects due to hardening of structures within the eye). There are plenty of hocus internet sites that suggest exercising the eyes can stop this but equally there are plenty to suggest faith healing can cure cancer or somesuch other nonsense.

When you get reading glasses your presbyopia is increasing at a rate. Fact is you won't notice that so much as you use the reading glasses. Only when you forget them or lose them or whatever.

And of course people become reliant on them, because they get used to being able to actually see without everything blurring!

You see, you've got a perfectly valid point, which you ruined by taking it one teenyweeny step too far.
My argument was that there is room for individual difference, and just because one person's eyesight starts to deteriorate with age and becomes progressive doesn't mean that another person's will progress the same. But, however optitians do not point this out, they just prescribe. It's a bit like having an independent advisor who isn't actually giving any advice other than that which gives him a larger wage packet.
And, if you missed it, I'm giving you evidence that eye exercises can halt progressive age related vision problems. Me, my eyes, evidence. (Again, I'm not arguing that ther aren't complete and utter tools who spout bollox. It's this black/white vs grey area again).

[BWFC_Insane]

You see, you've got a perfectly valid point, which you ruined by taking it one teenyweeny step too far.
My argument was that there is room for individual difference, and just because one person's eyesight starts to deteriorate with age and becomes progressive doesn't mean that another person's will progress the same. But, however optitians do not point this out, they just prescribe. It's a bit like having an independent advisor who isn't actually giving any advice other than that which gives him a larger wage packet.
And, if you missed it, I'm giving you evidence that eye exercises can halt progressive age related vision problems. Me, my eyes, evidence. (Again, I'm not arguing that ther aren't complete and utter tools who spout bollox. It's this black/white vs grey area again).

An optician prescribes based on an EYE exam.

For presbyopia they give you a card and ask you to read it. No optician prescribes reading glasses purely on age, it is based on your eyes.

Now if you can read the smallest text on said card comfortably at a usual reading distance AND said optician prescribes reading glasses, then change opticians.

If you couldn't then that is why the prescription.

Same with distance specs. If you can read the chart to 20:20 standard then no optician will try and correct your vision. If you can't however, then they will prescribe glasses or contact lenses to correct the myopia. That is surely what you expect? Again if you obtained 20:20 vision and they still wanted to prescripe then change opticians.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

You see, you've got a perfectly valid point, which you ruined by taking it one teenyweeny step too far.
My argument was that there is room for individual difference, and just because one person's eyesight starts to deteriorate with age and becomes progressive doesn't mean that another person's will progress the same. But, however optitians do not point this out, they just prescribe. It's a bit like having an independent advisor who isn't actually giving any advice other than that which gives him a larger wage packet.
And, if you missed it, I'm giving you evidence that eye exercises can halt progressive age related vision problems. Me, my eyes, evidence. (Again, I'm not arguing that ther aren't complete and utter tools who spout bollox. It's this black/white vs grey area again).

An optician prescribes based on an EYE exam.

For presbyopia they give you a card and ask you to read it. No optician prescribes reading glasses purely on age, it is based on your eyes.

Now if you can read the smallest text on said card comfortably at a usual reading distance AND said optician prescribes reading glasses, then change opticians.

If you couldn't then that is why the prescription.

Same with distance specs. If you can read the chart to 20:20 standard then no optician will try and correct your vision. If you can't however, then they will prescribe glasses or contact lenses to correct the myopia. That is surely what you expect? Again if you obtained 20:20 vision and they still wanted to prescripe then change opticians.

I was give a prescription, I was told that the prescription could be made up into glasses. I declined said glasses, and instead did eye exercises. One year later, although I still had another prescription (from a different optician) it was nowhere near as bad as the previous prescription. However, neither of the opticians suggested that one way of battling deteriorating eyesight was to try eye exercises. Probably because both of them have already come to the same conclusion as you - i.e. I'm talking voodoo crap. The difference between you and them (I'm presuming) is that you aren't potentially making money out of it.

[BWFC_Insane]

You see, you've got a perfectly valid point, which you ruined by taking it one teenyweeny step too far.
My argument was that there is room for individual difference, and just because one person's eyesight starts to deteriorate with age and becomes progressive doesn't mean that another person's will progress the same. But, however optitians do not point this out, they just prescribe. It's a bit like having an independent advisor who isn't actually giving any advice other than that which gives him a larger wage packet.
And, if you missed it, I'm giving you evidence that eye exercises can halt progressive age related vision problems. Me, my eyes, evidence. (Again, I'm not arguing that ther aren't complete and utter tools who spout bollox. It's this black/white vs grey area again).

An optician prescribes based on an EYE exam.

For presbyopia they give you a card and ask you to read it. No optician prescribes reading glasses purely on age, it is based on your eyes.

Now if you can read the smallest text on said card comfortably at a usual reading distance AND said optician prescribes reading glasses, then change opticians.

If you couldn't then that is why the prescription.

Same with distance specs. If you can read the chart to 20:20 standard then no optician will try and correct your vision. If you can't however, then they will prescribe glasses or contact lenses to correct the myopia. That is surely what you expect? Again if you obtained 20:20 vision and they still wanted to prescripe then change opticians.

I was give a prescription, I was told that the prescription could be made up into glasses. I declined said glasses, and instead did eye exercises. One year later, although I still had another prescription (from a different optician) it was nowhere near as bad as the previous prescription. However, neither of the opticians suggested that one way of battling deteriorating eyesight was to try eye exercises. Probably because both of them have already come to the same conclusion as you - i.e. I'm talking voodoo crap. The difference between you and them (I'm presuming) is that you aren't potentially making money out of it.

Because they are talking about actual clincal evidence.

Now, do you drive?

[Lost Leopard Spot]

You see, you've got a perfectly valid point, which you ruined by taking it one teenyweeny step too far.
My argument was that there is room for individual difference, and just because one person's eyesight starts to deteriorate with age and becomes progressive doesn't mean that another person's will progress the same. But, however optitians do not point this out, they just prescribe. It's a bit like having an independent advisor who isn't actually giving any advice other than that which gives him a larger wage packet.
And, if you missed it, I'm giving you evidence that eye exercises can halt progressive age related vision problems. Me, my eyes, evidence. (Again, I'm not arguing that ther aren't complete and utter tools who spout bollox. It's this black/white vs grey area again).

An optician prescribes based on an EYE exam.

For presbyopia they give you a card and ask you to read it. No optician prescribes reading glasses purely on age, it is based on your eyes.

Now if you can read the smallest text on said card comfortably at a usual reading distance AND said optician prescribes reading glasses, then change opticians.

If you couldn't then that is why the prescription.

Same with distance specs. If you can read the chart to 20:20 standard then no optician will try and correct your vision. If you can't however, then they will prescribe glasses or contact lenses to correct the myopia. That is surely what you expect? Again if you obtained 20:20 vision and they still wanted to prescripe then change opticians.

I was give a prescription, I was told that the prescription could be made up into glasses. I declined said glasses, and instead did eye exercises. One year later, although I still had another prescription (from a different optician) it was nowhere near as bad as the previous prescription. However, neither of the opticians suggested that one way of battling deteriorating eyesight was to try eye exercises. Probably because both of them have already come to the same conclusion as you - i.e. I'm talking voodoo crap. The difference between you and them (I'm presuming) is that you aren't potentially making money out of it.

Because they are talking about actual clincal evidence.

Now, do you drive?

Yes, I drive. What has that to do with the price of fish?

[BWFC_Insane]

LLS was yours a reading prescription or a distance prescription? I only ask because you need to be very careful if you've been prescribed something for distance and not taken up that prescription in terms of driving.

If it's reading then no worries.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

LLS was yours a reading prescription or a distance prescription? I only ask because you need to be very careful if you've been prescribed something for distance and not taken up that prescription in terms of driving.

If it's reading then no worries.

It was reading, short distances.
However, and this is the point I think you are not quite understanding.
My first eye test was ~ six years ago. Four years ago both my wife's and my eyesight had deteriorated noticeably and we were both given prescriptions for reading glasses. She took hers up, I didn't. I, instead took up eye exercises. My eye exercises have reversed the deterioration to a significant extent (not perfection but a much weaker prescription), meanwhile my wife's prescriptions get stronger with each year.

[Lord Kangana]

If we're looking for evidence, a friend of my dad's had the same result as LLS. It may be psychosomatic, but I suppose the end result is the same.

[BWFC_Insane]

LLS was yours a reading prescription or a distance prescription? I only ask because you need to be very careful if you've been prescribed something for distance and not taken up that prescription in terms of driving.

If it's reading then no worries.

It was reading, short distances.
However, and this is the point I think you are not quite understanding.
My first eye test was ~ six years ago. Four years ago both my wife's and my eyesight had deteriorated noticeably and we were both given prescriptions for reading glasses. She took hers up, I didn't. I, instead took up eye exercises. My eye exercises have reversed the deterioration to a significant extent (not perfection but a much weaker prescription), meanwhile my wife's prescriptions get stronger with each year.

I know what you're saying. But it's like someone who was cured of cancer by a faith healer swearing it. Who knows what is actually going on?

Perhaps you're eyes have just deteriorated very slowly. Or perhaps they deteriorated quickly then stopped? Who knows?

Perhaps the first optician under-prescribed then the second over-prescribed?

Fact is that there is no evidence to suggest that exercises help. It is not even necessarily anything to do with muscles as I understand it.

Now if you feel it has worked for you then that is great. Perhaps you are lucky. Perhaps as LK says it it more in the mind.

But no optician can advise eye exercises unless there is some clinically accepted proof. And so far there is none.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

I know what you're saying. But it's like someone who was cured of cancer by a faith healer swearing it. Who knows what is actually going on?

Perhaps you're eyes have just deteriorated very slowly. Or perhaps they deteriorated quickly then stopped? Who knows?

Perhaps the first optician under-prescribed then the second over-prescribed?

Fact is that there is no evidence to suggest that exercises help. It is not even necessarily anything to do with muscles as I understand it.

Now if you feel it has worked for you then that is great. Perhaps you are lucky. Perhaps as LK says it it more in the mind.

But no optician can advise eye exercises unless there is some clinically accepted proof. And so far there is none.

Focusing is achieved through ciliary muscle contraction, so yes it is to do with muscles.
And yes, as you suggest, maybe the prescriptions were wrong.
However, I do not think that opticians are looking for clinically accepted proof. I think they are happy with the status quo. Hence my anger.
Furthermore, you will not convince me, and I will not convince you on this subject, so I think it best we agree to disagree.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Clarkson. What a total knob.
And to think somebody thought it was a good idea to stick him on before University Challenge.
Every week I have to endure a few minutes of his unbelievable ego as he runs overtime, every feckin week. Just piss off tosser.

[thebish]

i still think the opticians are lining their pockets much more from LLS going back for his test-the-theory multiple eye-tests than they are from me and bruce buying the odd pair of reading glasses from Superdrug.

can you tell me what proportion of superdrug reading-glasses sales goes to opticians, LLS?

[jimbo]

Today I'm angry with myself - first day back at work and I've forgot to bring my specs. Struggling somewhat.

Any better now?

[Gooner Girl]

Today I'm angry with myself - first day back at work and I've forgot to bring my specs. Struggling somewhat.

Any better now?

[Bruce Rioja]

Today I'm angry with myself - first day back at work and I've forgot to bring my specs. Struggling somewhat.

Any better now?

Why are people simply quoting my original post?

[Gooner Girl]

Today I'm angry with myself - first day back at work and I've forgot to bring my specs. Struggling somewhat.

Any better now?

Why are people simply quoting my original post?

Just to confuse you (easily done )

[Dujon]

I'm going to be a bit pedantic. The following questions are submitted in all seriousness.

Perhaps I'm a bit thick or there are terms being mixed here. To me an optometrist is a professional who checks eyes for physical anomalies such as long/short sightedness, glaucoma, retinal deterioration, cataracts and such like. An optician is the artisan who turns the optometrist's findings into corrective lenses (and tries to flog you frames and other ancillary bits and pieces at the same time). An ophthalmologist is a super-duper version of an optometrist and who specialises in serious stuff (detached retina, cancerous tissues and the like). The ophthalmologist would normally require a referral from an optometrist before giving you the time of day.

Now, what's this about ducking down to Aldi or Tesco to pick up a pair of glasses? How does that work? Surely stores don't have a range of ready-to-wears awaiting a customer?