Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
wack-N-dangle
Gym climber
the ground up
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2009 - 10:22am PT
|
Karl,
Just having some fun. You in quotes, me following in italics (not stylezd).
"Guess it depends on how long you live. If you have 50 years left, let's look back and remind ourselves of the state of the art in Medicine in 1959."
"Sure, at the present moment Glasses are ubiquitous but partly thats from lack of investment, high costs of the machines, and people slow to change their ways. We're sheep."
The "sheep", a part of me would die if I really called the people I see sheep. However, many seem to be following north-south migrations. Regarding LASIK, were you suggesting that a rising tide of technology raises all boats, or even trickles down? Some very old technology, i.e. glasses, is unfortunately unavailable to many people who need it. In this economy, maybe giving up something you want in order to understand the suffering of others, or even relieve the suffering of others is a gift to yourself. Something about that rung a bell for me. Anyone want to chime in? Sorry, just enjoying myself for a moment or three. Also, please don't get me started on cosmetic colored contact lenses, peer pressure from kids to not wear glasses, and the growing youth rebellion against lined bifocals. Dioptric Power to the People.
"Climbing is a luxury too. I just think being without glasses is a pretty fine gift. You can see your lover without grinding glasses frames into her body, you can grind your face into an offwidth without blinding yourself, and you aren't vulnerable to what happens if you lose or break your glasses."
Agreed. Didn't Harding say something like climbing is just another selfish as#@&%e thing to do. IMHO:good vision is a very fine gift, glasses should be more ubiquitous, and LASIK is cosmetic surgery. No comment about love making techniques. I don't think it is a LASIK or glasses question. I agree, it is easier to for a head with contacts to pass through an awful width, than it is for a poorer man with glasses to enter the kingdom of offwidth gnar. (or something like that). If you snap your glasses in half, you can pull out the tincture, athletic tape, and you should be good to go for a while longer.
"So the question really is..What percentage of people have serious complications? Sure it's your eyes but you could also die from trying a new prescription med. You take risks all the time."
Agreed. My original post, which you responded to previously, was saying much the same thing. Look at the data, ask opinions, determine how the procedure might affect you personally.
"Seems kind of pathetic to me that Lasik still costs $3000-$5000 in the US! It takes about 10 minutes per eye. WTF? Can't they make enough machines to bring some economy of scale to bear on the investment? How can the Indians do it with western machines for $600?"
Getting back to economies of scale. People in the third world, i.e. India, are typically less nearsighted. This may exclude a large number of people from being LASIKed, who otherwise might help bring down the cost of the surgery.
Also, cataracts are the leading cause of blindness in the world. Geoff Tabin was mentioned upstream in this thread. I won't say more than compared to me, he is obviously way ahead of the curve, and peaked higher in both climbing and vision care.
Another curve just beginning is the investment in lens implant technology. The goal is to restore both distance and near vision after cataract surgery. The money baby boomers invest in their eyes may shift the direction of refractive surgery from corneal procedures to intra-ocular ones.
Finally a shameless plug for those who threw down with much more "primitive" technology. From: Granite Frontiers
peace
|
|
rayw
Social climber
bishop, ca
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2009 - 11:28am PT
|
i have mono vision naturally, comes from working as a surveyor for 20+ years. didn't even know it till the eye doc told me a couple of years ago. Think looking for distant object and then looking through a spotting scope for it repeat for 8 hours every work day. I now wear contacts, wouldn't f*#k with my eyes, a doctor, a laser and a fat bill.
I was a poor quisling addicted to rock, grinding up offwidth in distant Wyo. backcountry. Glasses (wire frame, aviator, so cool!) tilt downward, lens pops out, kind of a delicate softening tink, tink, tink, into the abyss.
|
|
Seamstress
Trad climber
Yacolt, WA
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2009 - 12:20am PT
|
Lasik is not all about vanity. I was -18.75/-19.25. I was getting a new prescription every three months until I got my first pair of contacts at age 12. They stopped the deterioration in my vision. Over the years, my eyes became less tolerant of the lenses. I was fortunate to be in clinical trials for gas permeable lenses.
Try climbing, skiing, driving a car, anything at with the awful vision I had. It was not correctable to 20/20. A bit of dust could create havoc. I carried a spare set of lenses climbing so I wouldn't get stranded in the event of losing a lense - which happened once or twice a decade.
I had lasik surgery 11 years ago. The goal was to see the clock, find the bathroom unaided, go into the backcountry and successfully get out of the tent to peee, not die if a lense fell out. Since I had abnormally thick corneas, the results were unbelievably good. I was promised 15 diopters of correction. I am now 20/25 far sighted.
In the long run, the surgery is far less than the cost of glasses or contacts for decades.
Climbing is a risk sport. I like eliminating the risk that comes with chalk dust getting behind your lenses, fierce winds causing the lenses to dry up and fall out, and other such dangerous inconveniences. Driving is no longer a risk sport, as it was when I lost a lense or had to wear glasses for a day.
You don't have to go months without lenses. I had to go two weeks without lenses. It differs.
The surgery is far less expensive than it was.
Pick your surgeon with care. There are risks. However, it was a no brainer risk for me.
|
|
wack-N-dangle
Gym climber
the ground up
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2009 - 12:53am PT
|
Seamstress,
In my understanding, LASIK correction with an Rx that high is ummm "off label" to say the least. The amount of tissue you would have to ablate (laser) is so great that I imagine you would be left with a very irregularly shaped cornea. Getting the flap to stay nicely in place afterward would be improbable. If I remember, folds or wrinkles can form in the flap of patients with very high prescriptions.
Also, my bad.
cosmetic surgery = elective surgery, and elective surgery = LASIK surgery.
However, I suppose that LASIK and cosmetic surgery aren't part of the same sub groups of elective surgery.
Finally, LASIK and refractive surgery are procedures that have worked for many people. Some continue to have good vision after 20-30 years. Some of my previous comments came from seeing kids who won't wear their glasses, and adults who never had the opportunity to see well.
A professor who helped develop the laser center at a teaching university used to recommend the site below.
http://www.lasikdisaster.com/
Again, I thought the wikipedia article was pretty good and a little more balanced.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LASIK
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2009 - 01:08am PT
|
Pretty clearly after a detailed exam an ophthalmologist who is not interested in selling a treatment can give you a better idea where you fit in to the continuous risk/benefit spectrum, over which everyone is spread.
Two other considerations.
Absent the treatment you are dealing with the devils you already know.
If you have every expectation of living for another sixty years and a procedure has been in use let's just say for thirty years, there is a huge hole in the data.
|
|
Scoop
Mountain climber
Truckee, CA
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2009 - 07:31pm PT
|
I had lasik four years ago. At first, it was great. But my vision has gone so downhill I think I need distance glasses in addition to my reading glasses.
|
|
other
Trad climber
LA, CA
|
|
|
Sep 15, 2009 - 01:09pm PT
|
I've been researching it for years and am definately going to get LASIK this year. I'm 3.5 / 4.5 and wear great comfy disposables but don't like having to remove and reinsert them daily. Lots of people sleep in them even though they shouldn't.
Having a contact directly on your eyeball all the time isn't healthier then LASIK and can cause infections. What are the stats on complications of LASIK vs. long term contact use?
I just don't want to pay multiple thousand$$ because of scare tactics that say that the more you spend the better off your eyes will be. Of course docs want to charge as much as possible for their 10 minutes of work. I don't buy it.
GLASSES are not a good alternative for active people, especially around water.
Most of the LASIK horror stories are probably generated by optometrists who don't do LASIK, eyeglass and contact lens/ solution companies who don't like competition. From what I've read the rate of serious complications is very low.
|
|
wcm
Trad climber
cardiff, ca
|
|
|
Sep 15, 2009 - 01:34pm PT
|
Lasik for climbers with bad eyesite? Do it. I did it 2 years ago and went from being able to see detail no more than 4 feet in front of me to 20/10 vision. I also surf a ton and this makes a huge difference. Climbing w/out contacts lets you get, not that you want to, but get dirt, rock, sand in your eye and be able to clear it out like a normal person...instead of having to call a timeout and deal with it for 30 minutes.
I paid 3400 for lasik, it was more than worth the money. Its your eyes, paying top dollar for your EYES is a no brainer. You want cheap lasik? Go to Tijuana, they do Lasik for $600 an eye or less. But you'll be lucky if you wake up with both eyes lol, and what are you going to do when the mess up? Go after a Mexican doctor w/ an American Lawyer? I dont' think so. Spend the money, yes it can be expensive for some but again, we're talking about your eyes here.....
The technology has come a long way in the past 20 years and its pretty damn spot on at this point.
Do it, be the ball, feel the laser....
|
|
other
Trad climber
LA, CA
|
|
|
Sep 15, 2009 - 02:20pm PT
|
This is exactly what I was talking about. Scare tactics that drive up the price. So spending $10,000 would get you a great doc but "only" $3,400 gets an average one? You cheaped out dude. Lucky you're not blind. Make sure you drive a Range Rover or Rolls cause Toyota/Honda are inferior and dangerous.
Newsflash, most of the world pays far less for the exact same procedure. They also have engineers, scientists and every other high skill profession in other countries that charge less.
No one seems to be able to provide data that paying 10 times more gets you any better results. The people that overpay want to feel good about overpaying.
An American lawyer would be beneficial how? The vast majority of medical malpractice cases don't win or settle with any substantial benefit to the patient.
"paid 3400 for lasik, it was more than worth the money. Its your eyes, paying top dollar for your EYES is a no brainer. You want cheap lasik? Go to Tijuana, they do Lasik for $600 an eye or less."
|
|
other
Trad climber
LA, CA
|
|
|
Sep 15, 2009 - 02:40pm PT
|
LASIK price correlation:
Check the cost of the doc's houses, spouse, kids, cars, boats, country club memberships, planes and office rent/lease.
The higher those costs, the higher the procedure price.
Feel free to pay for his new jet and yacht through your LASIK.
|
|
Bobo
Trad climber
San Francisco
|
|
|
Sep 15, 2009 - 11:45pm PT
|
I looked into Lasik recently. I am near sighted - about -5 in each eye and I also need reading glasses.
I tried the monovision contacts and they were ok in bright sunlight only. The Lasik doctor said that the monovision correction to the eyes would result in diminished night vision.
Another alternative is to have the actual lenses in the eye replaced, like cataract surgery, safe but it will diminish distance vision according to the Lasik doctor at Pacific Vision in SF.
With any Lasik you also lose your in your face vision. No more holding the page up close to see the topo. I realized this would mean having to put on the reading glasses alot.
May as well stick with distance contacts and reading glasses or else the bifocals.
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Sep 15, 2009 - 11:58pm PT
|
OK I can resolve this question once and for all.
Suppose you had lasik and then you were no longer able to see the Pink Lady.
Would you still consider it to have been a good decision?
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!