sarahmichelef: (Default)
sarahmichelef ([personal profile] sarahmichelef) wrote2005-12-06 03:30 pm

And the damage is...

great.

Apparently my current (old) contacts are not breathable enough for my eyes, so I've got a lot of excess capllaries (ie, blood-shot-ness), and some scatching of my cornea where the contact apparently digs in. Am I being scammed? I don't know. The upshot was new, much more expensive contacts that, when combined with what seems to be neosporin for my eyes twice a day for the next week, should resolve the negative effects of my old contacts. Bonus: the new contacts are the sort that you can supposedly sleep in for up to a month, although this optician recommends removing and cleaning them once a week once I've treated the old contact-induced issues (during which time I'm to remove them daily). I also was going to get new lenses for my current glasses, since the script is old enough that I don't feel comfortable driving in them. But the difference between new lenses for my old frames and entirely new glasses ended up being only about $130 and my current frames don't have spring hinges (bad when you have a baby who likes to enthusiastically remove your glasses), so I got whole new glasses, too. AND they're little and purple. Bonus points there, eh?

Gym orientation went well. I chose the strength training orientation because, frankly, I know how to do cardio. So the nice boy showed me all the machines, gave me a card to record my workouts on (damn... that'll keep you honest), and set me free. I decided to forego more weights and go do cardio. Unfortunately the 2 rowers were occupied by the geriatric set, so I found myself a nice recumbent bike, popped Me First and the Gimme Gimmes into my ears, and raced that pesky dot around the monitor for half an hour (mental note: Interval 1 is BORING!).

[identity profile] elliesam.livejournal.com 2005-12-06 08:56 pm (UTC)(link)
Am I being scammed?

I had the same problem a few years ago. And got a second opinion that confirmed it. Switching to a more breathable contact lens fixed it.

[identity profile] alphasarah.livejournal.com 2005-12-06 09:01 pm (UTC)(link)
good to hear. I didn't really think it was a scam, but y'know. I just gave this guy a hell of a lot of money. And the glasses are cute and all, and the contacts are contacty, but...

[identity profile] fencerm2.livejournal.com 2005-12-07 12:17 am (UTC)(link)
Always good to double check - I had a dry eye condition and wore gas permeable hard lenses for like 14 years...then I got Lasik, and see 20/20 without glasses or contacts. If doable, I HIGHLY recommend this, btw.

[identity profile] alphasarah.livejournal.com 2005-12-07 01:04 am (UTC)(link)
Just waiting for my eyes to stablize enough to make it doable, and to have the cash put away for it. Our health insurance makes us eligible for a fairly substantial discount on it (although we have no vision coverage), so I'll probably do it in the next several years.

[identity profile] marajade648.livejournal.com 2005-12-07 02:02 pm (UTC)(link)
Unless you have a really good reason, I wouldn't do it. Hanging out with ophthalmolgy research people, not the kinda that actually make money directly off patients having the surgery, they're all skeptical about long term effects. Basically, the incision they make never heals properly. The cells that they kill never grow back leaving an acellular area. As these cells are pretty dormant most of the time, patients are ok but if damage occurs to your eye there are no cells to repair it in these areas. Additionally these cells naturally decline with age so researchers are concerned about people having premature age related eye problems, but the surgeries haven't been around long enough to know. Maybe by the time we're old enough though I'll have figured out how to jump start corneal wound healing so ophthalmolgists can then make the money off people with LASIK complications.