LASIK 6 months later(bemmu.com)
bemmu.com
LASIK 6 months later
http://www.bemmu.com/lasik-6-months-later
32 comments
Yeah, actually I agree with you and the point of this blog post was there is no reason not to do the operation based on this 6 month experience.
There is, the halos!
If you are a software developer, as many of us, you really don't want that. Nor do you want dry eyes, specially when staring at a screen under air conditioning.
If someone really wants to do the operation anyway, then get a LASEK. This won't create the never-healing flap, with all its complications. Recovery time suffers a bit, but that's a minor issue, considering the long-term benefits. Less dry eye.
Halos might still be present though.
If you are a software developer, as many of us, you really don't want that. Nor do you want dry eyes, specially when staring at a screen under air conditioning.
If someone really wants to do the operation anyway, then get a LASEK. This won't create the never-healing flap, with all its complications. Recovery time suffers a bit, but that's a minor issue, considering the long-term benefits. Less dry eye.
Halos might still be present though.
I had LASIK done and had the halos, but they are now gone 1.5 years later. I also had bad dry eye in the morning for a while - that's also gone.
> the 'problems' I have with my eyesight are completely comparable to 'problems' I had when I wore glasses and/or contact lenses.
I would be upset on a daily basis that my eyesight is irreparably damaged.
I would be upset on a daily basis that my eyesight is irreparably damaged.
I live a pretty active lifestyle, I swim, skydive, go running, box, play squash (not all at the same time). I had LASIK about 7 years ago and having wore glasses and contact lenses for 8 years prior to that I still tell anybody who will listen it was the best £2,000 I ever spent.
There was one downside to the operation and that was if I stared at a screen for a long amount of time, or worked too many late nights, I suffered from really dry eyes. It was almost painful. Fortunately some drops that I kept with me for about six months took the edge off of it and now I don't suffer with this anymore.
The Halo thing is definitely a side effect. As other people have pointed out, it's no worse than contact lenses/glasses.
I now no longer have to worry about looking for my glasses first thing in the morning. I can play any sport without fear of losing or breaking my glasses.
Wearing non-prescription sun glasses is something I now take for granted and a complete joy.
I genuinely do believe that my overall quality of life has improved as a result of the operation.
There was one downside to the operation and that was if I stared at a screen for a long amount of time, or worked too many late nights, I suffered from really dry eyes. It was almost painful. Fortunately some drops that I kept with me for about six months took the edge off of it and now I don't suffer with this anymore.
The Halo thing is definitely a side effect. As other people have pointed out, it's no worse than contact lenses/glasses.
I now no longer have to worry about looking for my glasses first thing in the morning. I can play any sport without fear of losing or breaking my glasses.
Wearing non-prescription sun glasses is something I now take for granted and a complete joy.
I genuinely do believe that my overall quality of life has improved as a result of the operation.
Honestly, basically all of the upsides that he lists can be gained from using contact lenses, which are amazing. Also, with plain old American vision insurance (VSP), I get a year's worth of contacts for free, every year. As a longtime glasses wearer I switched to using primarily contacts a while ago and it's amazing. Contacts have their share of (mostly minor in my experience) issues, but as long as LASIK continues to have bugs like the halo thing OP describes, I'll stick with them.
From a cl user :
- Increased self-confidence, this is subjective, but I prefer how I look without glasses. (check)
- Going out to nature is awesome, as you can see everything without a frame in your view. You feel more immersed in reality. (check)
- Swimming is less fuss, as there is no need to switch between glasses / prescription swimming goggles. Just swim. (this is a sore point for me I have to use goggles or the lenses wash away. In a swimming pool it's no problem, but at sea I feel uncomfortable)
- I have started exercising more thanks to the above two things. (check)
- You can see immediately when opening your eyes in the morning. (minor inconvenience. I usually have my lenses on five minutes after I wake up, tops)
- No frustration or time wasted looking around for lost glasses or needing to think about where to place them at night, before taking a shower or changing clothing. (minor inconvenience. if a lens falls to the ground it can be very annoying)
- No risk of accidentally stepping on your glasses. (check)
- No money wasted on renewing glasses or buying contact lenses, although later on I may need reading glasses, but for the next 10 years I should be good. This may end up saving enough money to just about pay for the cost of the operation. (3000$ dollars are 15 years of lenses at current prices for me)
I suggest, to those considering surgery and coming from glasses, to spend some time with contacts. You get to try many of the benefits without ¨committing¨.
- Increased self-confidence, this is subjective, but I prefer how I look without glasses. (check)
- Going out to nature is awesome, as you can see everything without a frame in your view. You feel more immersed in reality. (check)
- Swimming is less fuss, as there is no need to switch between glasses / prescription swimming goggles. Just swim. (this is a sore point for me I have to use goggles or the lenses wash away. In a swimming pool it's no problem, but at sea I feel uncomfortable)
- I have started exercising more thanks to the above two things. (check)
- You can see immediately when opening your eyes in the morning. (minor inconvenience. I usually have my lenses on five minutes after I wake up, tops)
- No frustration or time wasted looking around for lost glasses or needing to think about where to place them at night, before taking a shower or changing clothing. (minor inconvenience. if a lens falls to the ground it can be very annoying)
- No risk of accidentally stepping on your glasses. (check)
- No money wasted on renewing glasses or buying contact lenses, although later on I may need reading glasses, but for the next 10 years I should be good. This may end up saving enough money to just about pay for the cost of the operation. (3000$ dollars are 15 years of lenses at current prices for me)
I suggest, to those considering surgery and coming from glasses, to spend some time with contacts. You get to try many of the benefits without ¨committing¨.
> - No frustration or time wasted looking around for lost glasses or needing to think about where to place them at night, before taking a shower or changing clothing. (minor inconvenience. if a lens falls to the ground it can be very annoying)
I've been wearing soft contact lenses for 7 years and yeah putting them in / out everyday is a bit annoying. My optician recommended I try hard contact lenses as she uses them. Apparently you can wear them for a month continuously without having to take them out.
I've been wearing soft contact lenses for 7 years and yeah putting them in / out everyday is a bit annoying. My optician recommended I try hard contact lenses as she uses them. Apparently you can wear them for a month continuously without having to take them out.
I'd wear daily disposables for a week or two - if they fell out I'd just throw a new one in.
I cannot wear contacts due to a pretty strong astigmatism, it make them extremely uncomfortable. I've heard that PRK is more proven and though it takes longer to heal it's a more permanent solution since with LASIK the layers never truly heal.
I can't wear contacts either, at least, not anymore.
I am considering PRK (LASEK), but have not yet made my mind about it, as it is a procedure that is done less frequently than LASIK, so there might be issues that haven't been found yet.
I am considering PRK (LASEK), but have not yet made my mind about it, as it is a procedure that is done less frequently than LASIK, so there might be issues that haven't been found yet.
Contacts aren't an option for people with very dry eyes. My spouse and I both have the same problem, so contacts can only be used sparingly (once a week or less). It has nothing to do with computer use either, as my spouse doesn't stare at a screen all day.
And LASIK is not indicated for people with dry eyes either. It will make it much worse, to the point that some people consider suicide due to the never ending pain.
Glad you are happy with contacts. I found using them a bit annoying, and figured it would be nicer to just "get it over with" and fix the issue once.
The halo thing honestly isn't a big issue, but I didn't want to hide the whole truth when writing that post.
The halo thing honestly isn't a big issue, but I didn't want to hide the whole truth when writing that post.
I wore contacts for a long time but then my eyes started going dry after coding all day. I guess one blinks less when staring at a monitor. Anyway, it took a few weeks of glasses to recover from the effects of the dryness. After a few attempts, it's glasses all the time.
Yeah same here too. I use extreme h2o 54% and they never dry up like others did and I never notice that I wear them. Glasses seem cool sometime too. Part of my geek chic setup. :)
So blasting my eyes with lasers at this point seems kind of extreme, IMO.
my 2c.
So blasting my eyes with lasers at this point seems kind of extreme, IMO.
my 2c.
What type of contacts do you use?
Mine were Toric, I replaced them every 3 months more or less (it was per usage count, really)
I can say I was very satisfied with them, but the dry eyes are an issue
So, I'm considering Lasik now (day by day usage I have glasses but it also has some problems)
Edit: toric lenses have and added PITA: placing them in the correct orientation/axis. And no, the manual for mine didn't state it 100% fully how to do it
Mine were Toric, I replaced them every 3 months more or less (it was per usage count, really)
I can say I was very satisfied with them, but the dry eyes are an issue
So, I'm considering Lasik now (day by day usage I have glasses but it also has some problems)
Edit: toric lenses have and added PITA: placing them in the correct orientation/axis. And no, the manual for mine didn't state it 100% fully how to do it
They are spherical, so orientation doesn't matter. I do have a slight astigmatism, which orientation-sensitive contacts correct for, but it's minor enough that it's prescribed in my glasses and not my contacts. My brand is Air Optix Aqua, but this just happens to be what I was prescribed.
In the morning or on days that I don't have to conduct business (I'm a student), I just wear my glasses, which frankly have superior optics anyway. For sport, and for activities where I have to present myself to others, contacts are unbeatable.
I have somewhat dry eyes also, but my eyes seem to be generating more moisture because I am used to wearing contacts by now. I also use Blink eyedrops very occasionally, because they're not something I want to have to rely on, but are useful in an emergency.
To be honest, I'm not hugely against laser eye surgery, and I'm considering having it down sometime before I'm 30. I'm also strabismic in one eye and although I have relatively strong eye muscles, it's something I was also considering fixing via surgery.
In the morning or on days that I don't have to conduct business (I'm a student), I just wear my glasses, which frankly have superior optics anyway. For sport, and for activities where I have to present myself to others, contacts are unbeatable.
I have somewhat dry eyes also, but my eyes seem to be generating more moisture because I am used to wearing contacts by now. I also use Blink eyedrops very occasionally, because they're not something I want to have to rely on, but are useful in an emergency.
To be honest, I'm not hugely against laser eye surgery, and I'm considering having it down sometime before I'm 30. I'm also strabismic in one eye and although I have relatively strong eye muscles, it's something I was also considering fixing via surgery.
Agreed. My quality of life got a lot better once I switched to (monthly) contact lenses. Half a year ago I switched to dailies which was again a drastic improvement to my everyday life. I've been toying with LASIK but to be perfectly honest the surgery just scares me. The idea of cutting open my eyes and shooting lasers at them isn't to appealing to me.
[deleted](1)
I've worn contacts for 25 years, since junior high school. I love them compared to glasses but I'm concerned about the long-term effects of putting something on my eyeball every day for maybe 75 years.
Your concerns are correct. I've been wearing lenses ever since I was 11 y/old. My eyes started to become irritated after 20 years or so. I got ARTIFLEX implant contacts a few years ago. An eye-opener! (And removeable, instead of Laser-treatment).
If you don't mind, how are you finding the ARTIFLEX implants? I recently got consulted for LASIK and my prescription is too strong (-12.5 and no signs of stopping) for that to be an option. The semi-permanent nature of the ARTIFLEX implants really interest me, because should my prescription get even worse I could theoretically replace the lenses.
Did you have any complications? Is the procedure any more risky than LASIK?
Did you have any complications? Is the procedure any more risky than LASIK?
No problem. - 13/14 here. The procedure takes about 10 / 15 min. and is done one eye at a time. Procedure in the morning, I was able to see again for a bit in the eavening, and almost good again the next day. The cut is so small it doesn't even require stiching. (The lens is flexible and is folded before inserting). I do think your eyes need to be stable at least a few years though. My vision was 120% (felt like that guy in "Interview with a vampire" who gets bitten and sees everything in a new way. Even gave me a bit of a headache, so sharp. This stabalises after a few weeks, to 100%). The halo's were annoying, especially when stepping in to a dark enviroment (a pub). In the beginning driving a car at night HURTS your eyes, because the pupil contracts a lot. Yellow glasses help.
A few years later my retina ripped at the back and inside of my eye. That can happen when you've got -13/14. They were able to operate on me because the doctos knew I could take it, I've had these implants and was like a statue then. Only difference was, that time it lasted 3 hours, was during midnight and they drained my eye. (Lesson: Don't take static black spots lightly).
A few years later my retina ripped at the back and inside of my eye. That can happen when you've got -13/14. They were able to operate on me because the doctos knew I could take it, I've had these implants and was like a statue then. Only difference was, that time it lasted 3 hours, was during midnight and they drained my eye. (Lesson: Don't take static black spots lightly).
What gets me the most about LASIK naysayers is that you also get the same or even much worse artifacts when using glasses or contacts. I had Femto-LASIK 2 years ago, after using glasses for 6 years and contacts for 6 more. I have very slight haloing around bright lights at night (Not as bad as described in the post though). The freedom of not having glasses or using contacts is FANTASTIC!
I have both myopia and astigmatism and I see no halos at night.
You are not supposed to see halos if your prescription is correct. You might get some artifacts if you look through your glasses at an angle, but that's it.
Halos are an artifact of LASIK, usually when the pupil is large enough that it expands past the area of the cornea which was "corrected".
You are not supposed to see halos if your prescription is correct. You might get some artifacts if you look through your glasses at an angle, but that's it.
Halos are an artifact of LASIK, usually when the pupil is large enough that it expands past the area of the cornea which was "corrected".
To anyone who is nearsighted and considering corrective surgery: do it. If you look at the stats, the vast majority of patients are glad they got the surgery.
I started wearing glasses when I was 9. I got contacts at 16. It was a great improvement, and I was quite happy with contacts. Two years ago, I got wavefront-guided epi-LASEK. It is without a doubt the best money I've spent.
Glasses have obvious problems, but even contacts come with significant disadvantages. They can dislodge unexpectedly. Doing anything in the water risks losing them. They can trap particles or chemicals against the cornea, causing irritation.
Corrective lenses also tax your mind with more logistics. An overnight trip requires saline solution, extra lenses (and/or backup glasses), a storage case, and some way to clean your hands. This sucks some of the fun out of camping and other activities.
Meanwhile, people who've had corrective surgery wake up and see. It's miraculous. Their eyes just work.
I started wearing glasses when I was 9. I got contacts at 16. It was a great improvement, and I was quite happy with contacts. Two years ago, I got wavefront-guided epi-LASEK. It is without a doubt the best money I've spent.
Glasses have obvious problems, but even contacts come with significant disadvantages. They can dislodge unexpectedly. Doing anything in the water risks losing them. They can trap particles or chemicals against the cornea, causing irritation.
Corrective lenses also tax your mind with more logistics. An overnight trip requires saline solution, extra lenses (and/or backup glasses), a storage case, and some way to clean your hands. This sucks some of the fun out of camping and other activities.
Meanwhile, people who've had corrective surgery wake up and see. It's miraculous. Their eyes just work.
Note: the vast majority of patients are not really that picky about their vision. I once went to my eye doctor to complain that my vision had gotten worse. The prescription went from 4.75 to 5.00 - and most people have trouble telling that difference, let alone being bothered enough to go to a doctor for that. Also, try to get opinions from people who really rely on their eyes in order to do their jobs.
Many people will want to go through with the surgery anyway. Which is fine, but do the research. It is surgery in a very delicate part of the body and, as surgery, it carries risks. And there are many common possible side effects. You eye will get dryer. You may get halos or starbusts, specially at night. They might be minor, as the OP, or they might be debilitating. And if so, there aren't many options to correct those. Specially since, if you are getting halos, your pupil is probably large. Burning more cornea won't be an option, not if you don't want to risk structural failure (there is a name for the condition, which I forgot now). The operation is not reversible.
Also, do the operation one eye at a time. You never know if you are about to be lasered by a malfunctioning device. That way, you'll still have one eye.
And be skeptical about claims of 20/20 vision after the surgery. Those measures do not take into account any side effects you might have, only if you are able to see the letters, no matter if their outlines are blurred to hell, or if there are halos.
Many people will want to go through with the surgery anyway. Which is fine, but do the research. It is surgery in a very delicate part of the body and, as surgery, it carries risks. And there are many common possible side effects. You eye will get dryer. You may get halos or starbusts, specially at night. They might be minor, as the OP, or they might be debilitating. And if so, there aren't many options to correct those. Specially since, if you are getting halos, your pupil is probably large. Burning more cornea won't be an option, not if you don't want to risk structural failure (there is a name for the condition, which I forgot now). The operation is not reversible.
Also, do the operation one eye at a time. You never know if you are about to be lasered by a malfunctioning device. That way, you'll still have one eye.
And be skeptical about claims of 20/20 vision after the surgery. Those measures do not take into account any side effects you might have, only if you are able to see the letters, no matter if their outlines are blurred to hell, or if there are halos.
...get opinions from people who really rely on their eyes in order to do their jobs.
Especially eye doctors.
A former gf worked on clinical trials for a group of eye doctors. She'd only consider having surgeries the docs would have done on themselves.
I forget which is which, but she was very impressed when a surgeon teaching others advances in LASEK (?) and had actually had the surgery herself.
Especially eye doctors.
A former gf worked on clinical trials for a group of eye doctors. She'd only consider having surgeries the docs would have done on themselves.
I forget which is which, but she was very impressed when a surgeon teaching others advances in LASEK (?) and had actually had the surgery herself.
I was trying to word that logistics part in the post too, but you put it great. It's one less item to forget to bring on a trip of taking up space in your luggage and home.
Getting eye surgery has by no means made my life twice as good, but it was a slight improvement worth the money.
Getting eye surgery has by no means made my life twice as good, but it was a slight improvement worth the money.
There are plenty of modern contact lenses that can be worn for longer periods than just a single day without issues. As far as I understand it, this comes from enhanced materials, letting through more oxygen while retaining more moisture.
I use Air Optix (http://www.airoptix.com/safety-information.shtml), they say up to 6 nights is fine for their baseline version, with up to 30 nights for the Night & Day product. Not affiliated in any way, just a customer.
I use Air Optix (http://www.airoptix.com/safety-information.shtml), they say up to 6 nights is fine for their baseline version, with up to 30 nights for the Night & Day product. Not affiliated in any way, just a customer.
I got a blister on my eye from Night & Day contacts. Then in got LASIK. That was in 2005, best choice of my life.
Sadly, this is true for some, but not for others. I find even Air Optix uncomfortable. It's not the freshness of the contacts themselves, it's that my eye reacts to wearing them after awhile--even brand new pairs. If I go a few months without wearing them, I can tolerate them for a week or so.
I wore glasses from age 16 to 25. I've never once worn contacts - couldn't deal with touching my eyeballs every morning.
Got LASIK at 25 (i'm now 36). BEST DECISION EVER. I had it done in Manhattan - cost was about 4500 but I paid it via an FSA which reduced the costs further.
I did have the "Halo" effect for about 6-8 months - especially on traffic lights at night, but it eventually went away.
The only downside is that my eyes can feel dry from time to time - not sure if that is due to LASIK or just from being tired [I have 5 year old twins;)].
I am curious/nervous that the effects will wear off - but even if they do and I need to go back to glasses the last 10 years have been more than worth it.
Got LASIK at 25 (i'm now 36). BEST DECISION EVER. I had it done in Manhattan - cost was about 4500 but I paid it via an FSA which reduced the costs further.
I did have the "Halo" effect for about 6-8 months - especially on traffic lights at night, but it eventually went away.
The only downside is that my eyes can feel dry from time to time - not sure if that is due to LASIK or just from being tired [I have 5 year old twins;)].
I am curious/nervous that the effects will wear off - but even if they do and I need to go back to glasses the last 10 years have been more than worth it.
I get similar halos in the dark and I have no vision problems at all, maybe it's exaggerated by LASIK but it's certainly not something that 'normal' vision is immune to.
I was wondering about this and asked someone born with 20/20 vision before and they claimed no halos. Would be interesting to hear more opinions on this.
So people born with "perfect" vision. If you stand outside on a dark night and stare at a street light, is the separation between darkness and the light completely crisp, or is there a halo or a starburst of some sort?
So people born with "perfect" vision. If you stand outside on a dark night and stare at a street light, is the separation between darkness and the light completely crisp, or is there a halo or a starburst of some sort?
I had Lasek done about 5 years ago. The first days after surgery my vision was 100% perfect and light sources were completely crisp and well defined.
However, as my eyes healed, vision degraded a bit and the halo and starburst distortions came back. Nine months later I got a free followup surgery, but that didn't improve matters any.
It's still improved my life a lot, but it sucks going back to distorted vision after seeing perfectly. Also, Lasek sucks. Lasik wasn't an option for me but reading about procedures now I think PRK would have been a better choice (or some laser-only surgery, but I wasn't given that option either), and I certainly wouldn't have gone through a second surgery if I knew it wouldn't help.
However, as my eyes healed, vision degraded a bit and the halo and starburst distortions came back. Nine months later I got a free followup surgery, but that didn't improve matters any.
It's still improved my life a lot, but it sucks going back to distorted vision after seeing perfectly. Also, Lasek sucks. Lasik wasn't an option for me but reading about procedures now I think PRK would have been a better choice (or some laser-only surgery, but I wasn't given that option either), and I certainly wouldn't have gone through a second surgery if I knew it wouldn't help.
I have (as far as I know) perfect eyes. Around bright objects there is a slight halo, best compared to the one you see in video games around streetlights at night. It's much smoother than the one in the illustration in the article and slightly less bright. Bright stars show as dots with tiny lines coming from it with different lengths. Really tiny but still visible. Less bright stars show as infinitely small dots.
OK, so I guess this is just normal and somehow wearing glasses actually changes your vision by removing those artifacts.
Ask a doctor about that. Preferably, not the one who performed the surgery.
As far as I know, there are no halos if you really have perfect vision. Cataracts and minor vision problems (such as a small amount of astimatism) will cause halos, even if the subject claims to see fine otherwise.
If you are doing such a poll, it would be helpful to ask, along with the presence of halos, when it was their last visit to an optometrist. If you believe you have perfect vision, you are not going to see one (even though periodic visits to an eye doctor are indicated, for checkups).
As far as I know, there are no halos if you really have perfect vision. Cataracts and minor vision problems (such as a small amount of astimatism) will cause halos, even if the subject claims to see fine otherwise.
If you are doing such a poll, it would be helpful to ask, along with the presence of halos, when it was their last visit to an optometrist. If you believe you have perfect vision, you are not going to see one (even though periodic visits to an eye doctor are indicated, for checkups).
Exactly, I can't remember the last time I've seen an optometrist, horrible things could be wrong with my eyes.
Same here, perfect vision, but can see halo, especially around blue light sources.
Not to be that guy but it could be related to previous psychedelic use in my case.
The halo effect took a lot longer to go away for me then a few months, but it eventually did go away. Same with the dry eyes, it took maybe a year for me to get over the dry eyes. I am going on 10 years now and I have no lasting side effects, and I would no doubt do it again.
That's great to hear, so there still is a chance it might go away. I had more trouble with eye dryness with contacts actually and never really noticed such a problem after the surgery.
That's interesting. I've had problems with dry eyes with contacts, and took that as a reason not to do eye surgery for fear of making the problem permanently present even when not wearing contacts because dry eyes is one of the side effects. So perhaps I should reevaluate.
I had quite bad vision and had wavefront LASIK as well. I was told my large pupils and bad vision wouldn't be a problem "with the newest techniques," but on the morning of the surgery after I'd psyched myself up they dropped a special waiver in my lap.
I'm generally happy with it; it's a bit of a miracle. But my eyes are often fuzzy in the morning, they stream tears when it's windy (and they're correspondingly dry afterward), I see halos, and most distressingly my night vision and contrast are worse. I notice "floaters" a lot more, which can be really annoying. I also wonder what I've forfeited in future correction possibilities. So it's really a mixed bag.
When I go in for tests they claim I have 20/20 vision, but that test is very limited, and due to issues above I simply cannot see as well as a person with 20/20 vision (though I can see better than many people who don't bother to wear glasses).
To be honest, I quickly took for granted the miraculous "waking up and being able to see." The main reason I got the surgery is I couldn't decide what style of glasses to get, and I hated what they were doing to my nose bridge, and finally I wanted to try something transformative for my life, which it hasn't really been, though it has certainly made it a bit simpler.
I'm generally happy with it; it's a bit of a miracle. But my eyes are often fuzzy in the morning, they stream tears when it's windy (and they're correspondingly dry afterward), I see halos, and most distressingly my night vision and contrast are worse. I notice "floaters" a lot more, which can be really annoying. I also wonder what I've forfeited in future correction possibilities. So it's really a mixed bag.
When I go in for tests they claim I have 20/20 vision, but that test is very limited, and due to issues above I simply cannot see as well as a person with 20/20 vision (though I can see better than many people who don't bother to wear glasses).
To be honest, I quickly took for granted the miraculous "waking up and being able to see." The main reason I got the surgery is I couldn't decide what style of glasses to get, and I hated what they were doing to my nose bridge, and finally I wanted to try something transformative for my life, which it hasn't really been, though it has certainly made it a bit simpler.
Had mine done in the late 90's and it's the best money I've ever spent. Period. I find in conversations with folks on the fence that it's mostly psychological (fear). To that I say, spend the extra money on the doctor that has such and such credentials using such and such latest laser and get over the hump if that's what it takes. Totally worth it in my book.
I also had that fear, which almost stopped me from going through with it. But fear is treatable.
Your haloing looks like keratoconus, which I have. It makes driving at night quite challenging, since oncoming headlights are 'smeared' over quite a wide area instead of appearing as point sources.
Keratoconus is one of the reasons I haven’t had LASIK myself; the process itself weakens the cornea, and when it’s weak already it can lead to serious complications.
If you have keratoconus, you are not eligible for LASIK, period.
Doctors screen for that.
Doctors screen for that.
I can't really see any halo in the O picture even how hard I try. Is it supposed to be photo manipulated?
Anyone having a link to the original?
Anyone having a link to the original?
The green halo is what looks like to me today without glasses. Myopia/Astigmatism does that "naturally"
Astigmatism gives an anisotropy to the distortion, so on one eye it's stretched vertically, on the other, stretched at an angle
Astigmatism gives an anisotropy to the distortion, so on one eye it's stretched vertically, on the other, stretched at an angle
Interestingly, I suppose I have become accustomed to that kind of halo effect in high contrast situations (either due to something about my eyes or glasses), so I had no clue that the image was manipulated. It just looked like "normal" to me, since I suppose I just assume that there will be a halo around that sort of object.
I was only able to observe the halo effect added from the image manipulation when I physically blocked my view of the "O" with a piece of paper, stopping at the edge of the character. When only viewing the black area the modification became obvious: there's a gradient around the "O" which fades to black.
So the good news: it may not be anything about your monitor. The bad news: it may be your eyes! :)
I was only able to observe the halo effect added from the image manipulation when I physically blocked my view of the "O" with a piece of paper, stopping at the edge of the character. When only viewing the black area the modification became obvious: there's a gradient around the "O" which fades to black.
So the good news: it may not be anything about your monitor. The bad news: it may be your eyes! :)
Yes, it has been manipulated to add in a halo that corresponds to my post-lasik halo.
It is not that strong, but you can check with a color picker app or with a paint program that yes there really is one there.
It is not that strong, but you can check with a color picker app or with a paint program that yes there really is one there.
I tried to add another O into the picture with Photoshop: http://bbh-001.boitho.com/div/halo.png
I can't see any different. Maybe I am affected or my ~3 year old lcd monitors are failing to display the colors correctly.
I can't see any different. Maybe I am affected or my ~3 year old lcd monitors are failing to display the colors correctly.
If you already see the halo due to the LASIK, how were you able to make the picture to correspond to how you really see it? Wouldn't it mean that what you're seeing now as the result is not what others are seeing?
I was wondering the exact same thing. It's not obvious to me that it has been manipulated at all.
There's a greenish halo around it, but it's very subtle.
If yoiu cant see it, it's likely down to your display being miscalibrated/shitty.
I had LASIK done about 6 months ago. My right eye ended up 20/15 but my left eye ended up being +1 and has some astigmatism that it never had. I suspect they screwed up and gave me the wrong correction in my left eye.
Good news is it can be corrected, the bad news is I had to live with an eye that is useless for small text on a monitor. It has been very aggravating but not aggravating enough to go buy a prescription pair of glasses just for the correction in one eye.
Also keep in mind all of the follow-up visits you need to do to keep your "lifetime correction" warranty so get your Lasik done at a place near your house.
Good news is it can be corrected, the bad news is I had to live with an eye that is useless for small text on a monitor. It has been very aggravating but not aggravating enough to go buy a prescription pair of glasses just for the correction in one eye.
Also keep in mind all of the follow-up visits you need to do to keep your "lifetime correction" warranty so get your Lasik done at a place near your house.
It sounds like I am being way too negative here. I would do the process again but I would insist on getting full pupil dialation before the procedure. With this correction I will be extremely satisfied but all told it took at least 40 hours for follow up visits including travel time and getting everything set up ahead of time. With my right eye doing all the work and looking at monitors all day it gives up at about 8pm where I can't easily read a 15" laptop without eye strain.
I had the PRK surgery (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photorefractive_keratectomy).
The first two weeks were the worst of my life. The recovering was painful and I could barely see... And during that time the irritation and the feeling of having sand in my eyes...
Well, after this tough period all the irritation gone, my vision was improving everyday and now, 3 years later I think that it was the best decision ever. Specially if you like to ride motorcycles - and use helmets - it makes a lot more practical.
Well, after this tough period all the irritation gone, my vision was improving everyday and now, 3 years later I think that it was the best decision ever. Specially if you like to ride motorcycles - and use helmets - it makes a lot more practical.
I forgot to mention that now I have this halos at night and a little bit of light sensitivity as well.
In dry weathers I fell a little bit of dryness in the eyes _ I manage to hack myself by forcing some tears. Sounds strange but it works.
In dry weathers I fell a little bit of dryness in the eyes _ I manage to hack myself by forcing some tears. Sounds strange but it works.
I had LASEK* 2 or 3 years ago and it's been nothing but incredible. I now see 20/15.
With LASEK there is no cutting of the eye, so there is no risk of halos or of the flap coming loose later in life. Something like 80-90% of the complications are from the flap, so LASEK is much safer. It takes a day or so longer to heal, but the results are worth it. One of the coolest things I've ever done, and zero negative side effects. Infact, for the first 6 months of so I walked around NYC like I was on acid - just amazed at how clear everything was and being able to see things like bricks on the top corners of buildings 60 stories tall.
Also, the feeling of waking up in the morning without my eyes all f'd up from sleeping in contacts is priceless. I literally found myself crying tears of joy and gratitude on several occasions for how amazing this was. I was happier simply from being able to see better. And it's helped a ton with my ultimate frisbee game and helped me better deal with sand for beach sports.
If you want a laugh, google Dr. Emil Chynn -- he is a brilliant doctor but also a bit eccentric. He was recently on Howard Stern offering $100k to help him find a wife ;) and then book an appointment to see him.
If you'd like a personal introduction to him, feel free to email me ([email protected]) and I can help you get a free consult and friends & family discount. He also has financing available.
Seriously, if you wear glasses or contacts get this done as soon as you can and look into LASEK (no cut, no flap). If you are in NYC check out Park Avenue Safe Sight (LASEK) and Dr. Emil Chynn.
EDIT: I should mention that with the "HD Upgrade" that I got you get a level of clarity that is impossible to reach with glasses or contacts. It's supposed to be 25x more accurate a prescription because they do a laser scan of the entire surface of the eye, and then create micro prescriptions for every area -- sort of like dimples on a golf ball vs. 1 lens like glasses or contects which basically takes the average prescription for the entire eye. LASEK is superior - more accurate, no halos (since no scar tissue), no flap to fall off, better than 20/20 vision, less risk of infection.. Really an amazing technology (oh and I got a DVd of my eyes being lasered ;) )
With LASEK there is no cutting of the eye, so there is no risk of halos or of the flap coming loose later in life. Something like 80-90% of the complications are from the flap, so LASEK is much safer. It takes a day or so longer to heal, but the results are worth it. One of the coolest things I've ever done, and zero negative side effects. Infact, for the first 6 months of so I walked around NYC like I was on acid - just amazed at how clear everything was and being able to see things like bricks on the top corners of buildings 60 stories tall.
Also, the feeling of waking up in the morning without my eyes all f'd up from sleeping in contacts is priceless. I literally found myself crying tears of joy and gratitude on several occasions for how amazing this was. I was happier simply from being able to see better. And it's helped a ton with my ultimate frisbee game and helped me better deal with sand for beach sports.
If you want a laugh, google Dr. Emil Chynn -- he is a brilliant doctor but also a bit eccentric. He was recently on Howard Stern offering $100k to help him find a wife ;) and then book an appointment to see him.
If you'd like a personal introduction to him, feel free to email me ([email protected]) and I can help you get a free consult and friends & family discount. He also has financing available.
Seriously, if you wear glasses or contacts get this done as soon as you can and look into LASEK (no cut, no flap). If you are in NYC check out Park Avenue Safe Sight (LASEK) and Dr. Emil Chynn.
EDIT: I should mention that with the "HD Upgrade" that I got you get a level of clarity that is impossible to reach with glasses or contacts. It's supposed to be 25x more accurate a prescription because they do a laser scan of the entire surface of the eye, and then create micro prescriptions for every area -- sort of like dimples on a golf ball vs. 1 lens like glasses or contects which basically takes the average prescription for the entire eye. LASEK is superior - more accurate, no halos (since no scar tissue), no flap to fall off, better than 20/20 vision, less risk of infection.. Really an amazing technology (oh and I got a DVd of my eyes being lasered ;) )
Aren't the halos created by a large pupil reaching an area which was not touched by the laser? That was my understanding, at least. If so, LASEK would still carry the risk of halos.
But not dry eyes, and no flap dislocation. If that flap DOES dislocate (usually, because of trauma), you are screwed.
But not dry eyes, and no flap dislocation. If that flap DOES dislocate (usually, because of trauma), you are screwed.
I thought the halo was from the edge of the flap having scar tissue - I could be off on the cause. But to my understanding there isn't halo risk with the no cut / no flap procedure.
I've been looking into getting eye correction done using a newer method than LASIK/LASEK. The company that performs it in Sweden calls it "NoCut" but it seems to have a few other trade names in different countries (seems to be performed mainly in Sweden, Australia and the Netherlands).
It works similar to PRK/LASEK in that instead of cutting and reattaching a flap of the cornea (which can heal in place incorrectly, or even come loose if you rub your eyes) they remove a thin layer which then heals back cleanly. It's better than PRK in that instead of removing the layer with alcohol and manually marking an area, all that is dealt with a computer-controlled laser, which supposedly increases the precision, minimizing the affected area and makes healing much quicker and less painful. The biggest downside compared to LASIK is you have to sit in a dark room for 3 days listening t audio books while your eyes slowly and painfully heal, and then wear sunglasses outdoors when there's bright sunlight for a couple months.
After spending a week reading in detail about all the different methods, the possible side-effects or failure modes, etc. I think I'll stick to contacts for now...
It works similar to PRK/LASEK in that instead of cutting and reattaching a flap of the cornea (which can heal in place incorrectly, or even come loose if you rub your eyes) they remove a thin layer which then heals back cleanly. It's better than PRK in that instead of removing the layer with alcohol and manually marking an area, all that is dealt with a computer-controlled laser, which supposedly increases the precision, minimizing the affected area and makes healing much quicker and less painful. The biggest downside compared to LASIK is you have to sit in a dark room for 3 days listening t audio books while your eyes slowly and painfully heal, and then wear sunglasses outdoors when there's bright sunlight for a couple months.
After spending a week reading in detail about all the different methods, the possible side-effects or failure modes, etc. I think I'll stick to contacts for now...
Contacts aren't totally risk-free either. Not exactly sure what the issue was (this was pre-wikipedia), but my doctor had me stop using contacts since he was concerned my vision was getting worse due to them.
I looked into PRK and was on the fence about it, was unconvinced that there is a big difference besides the psychological benefit of "no cutting". Lasik had no pain either during the surgery, so I think considering the slower recovery PRK would have just been more painful total.
I looked into PRK and was on the fence about it, was unconvinced that there is a big difference besides the psychological benefit of "no cutting". Lasik had no pain either during the surgery, so I think considering the slower recovery PRK would have just been more painful total.
My girlfriend can't wear contact lenses any more due to excessive use. She has developed both scarring and corneal neovascularization.
I have had horrible eye sight my entire life, about 20/2000 to be precise. To give you an idea how bad that is, without my contacts, I could see my hand clearly when it was 1 inch from my nose...basically I was blind without them. I went from massively heavy glasses that put red spots on my nose from the pressure to contact lenses about twenty years ago. That was a huge improvement but you always had to worry about not falling asleep with them in. About 5 years ago I got LASIK surgery where Tiger Woods got his. The halo'ing was unfortunately a price I paid but I expected this because my cornea was so thin in my left eye that the surgeon needed to think about it before even saying if they could do the operation. This is all about risks and rewards. My problem was so significant that I will deal with the halo'ing even though Green Lights at traffic intersections are a t-shaped mess and dry eyes is another byproduct. This current situation is by far more pleasurable than the misery of being dependent glasses or contact lenses.
How good is your vision now? I imagine with that severe sight problems, they weren't able to fix it completely?
After 17 years of contacts, I had wavefront LASIK. My contact prescription was -9.00, so my choices were very thick and expensive glasses or contact lenses.
Beware the advertised pricing. $2000 LASIK means 'per eye', and you have to add another $1000 for wavefront and another $1000 for laser-cut flaps instead of blade-cut. It ended up being $6,000 which wasn't said until the day of the procedure.
I was told that they didn't expect to give me 20/20 vision, I ended up around 20/40, good enough to legally drive without glasses but I squint a bit. I still have a slight astigmatism in one eye, and that throws me off quite a bit.
The first 6 months during healing were bad - lots of halos, sensitive to light, very poor night vision, especially when driving. But 18 months later Id on't have those problems anymore. I did lose my very close (~6 inches) vision which was very sharp before.
My biggest complaint is dry eyes. I'm not using eyedrops 4-6 times per day, it doesn't help to be in front of a computer screen as much as I am, and it's worst in the mornings and night.
Beware the advertised pricing. $2000 LASIK means 'per eye', and you have to add another $1000 for wavefront and another $1000 for laser-cut flaps instead of blade-cut. It ended up being $6,000 which wasn't said until the day of the procedure.
I was told that they didn't expect to give me 20/20 vision, I ended up around 20/40, good enough to legally drive without glasses but I squint a bit. I still have a slight astigmatism in one eye, and that throws me off quite a bit.
The first 6 months during healing were bad - lots of halos, sensitive to light, very poor night vision, especially when driving. But 18 months later Id on't have those problems anymore. I did lose my very close (~6 inches) vision which was very sharp before.
My biggest complaint is dry eyes. I'm not using eyedrops 4-6 times per day, it doesn't help to be in front of a computer screen as much as I am, and it's worst in the mornings and night.
I've been very nearsighted since I was about 8-9 years old. I had glasses exclusively for about five years, then contact lenses (monthly disposables) for 15 or so. I enjoyed contacts well enough, but did not enjoy the hassles with them - cleaning them and swimming without them were my biggest annoyances.
I haven't been sold on LASIK because of the risk of permanent side-effects, such as the light haloes, starbursts, night vision issues, and dry eye.
I tried orthokeratology - wearing a special prescription hard lens for eight hours a night to gradually reshape the cornea. I liked the idea that it was completely reversible, and the downside of wearing the lenses at night wasn't a big deal for me (they were never completely comfortable, but they didn't bother me after the first couple nights).
The problems I experienced with the ortho-k lenses were two-fold, which would have affected me permanently had I went with LASIK: 1) my cornea is too thin for the large amount of correction I need, and 2) my pupils are too large.
1) Thin cornea: ortho-k and LASIK require material with which to work. When there's not enough cornea to mold/burn, the procedure results in weak correction. Solution? Wear contacts. Lame. We're back at square one.
2) Large pupils: my pupils are apparently freaky large in low light. The area of the cornea that gets molded was large enough for normal-to-bright light, but in low light the molded area was too small. That resulted in terrible haloes. Solution? Take glaucoma eye drops that shrink one's pupils for 8-12 hours. I didn't like being dependent on a drug in that way. After three attempts over many months to enlarge the molded area, we gave up. My cornea was just too thin to be able to mold a large enough area.
My eye doctor said that because of my thin corneas and large pupils, if I got LASIK surgery I would have suffered the same problems with weak correction and terrible haloes and other vision artifacts in low light.
So I'm very glad I went the non-permanent route first. Luckily with ortho-k, I just had to stop wearing the sleep shaping lenses for a week to revert to my normal nearsighted vision. I'm back to my monthly disposable contact lenses, and am happy I can see the stars clearly and be able to drive at night again.
I would definitely recommend checking out ortho-k, though - I wasn't a good candidate, but I'm sure many people are.
I haven't been sold on LASIK because of the risk of permanent side-effects, such as the light haloes, starbursts, night vision issues, and dry eye.
I tried orthokeratology - wearing a special prescription hard lens for eight hours a night to gradually reshape the cornea. I liked the idea that it was completely reversible, and the downside of wearing the lenses at night wasn't a big deal for me (they were never completely comfortable, but they didn't bother me after the first couple nights).
The problems I experienced with the ortho-k lenses were two-fold, which would have affected me permanently had I went with LASIK: 1) my cornea is too thin for the large amount of correction I need, and 2) my pupils are too large.
1) Thin cornea: ortho-k and LASIK require material with which to work. When there's not enough cornea to mold/burn, the procedure results in weak correction. Solution? Wear contacts. Lame. We're back at square one.
2) Large pupils: my pupils are apparently freaky large in low light. The area of the cornea that gets molded was large enough for normal-to-bright light, but in low light the molded area was too small. That resulted in terrible haloes. Solution? Take glaucoma eye drops that shrink one's pupils for 8-12 hours. I didn't like being dependent on a drug in that way. After three attempts over many months to enlarge the molded area, we gave up. My cornea was just too thin to be able to mold a large enough area.
My eye doctor said that because of my thin corneas and large pupils, if I got LASIK surgery I would have suffered the same problems with weak correction and terrible haloes and other vision artifacts in low light.
So I'm very glad I went the non-permanent route first. Luckily with ortho-k, I just had to stop wearing the sleep shaping lenses for a week to revert to my normal nearsighted vision. I'm back to my monthly disposable contact lenses, and am happy I can see the stars clearly and be able to drive at night again.
I would definitely recommend checking out ortho-k, though - I wasn't a good candidate, but I'm sure many people are.
I'd call glowing outlines around objects in the dark "glare" and not "halos". From the reading I did before getting LASIK back in April, "halos" can occur in people with very large pupils. So in the dark, your pupils will grow larger than where the flap is cut. So you'd see this phantom circle in the dark all the time.
The glare is annoying, but I purchased a new set of glasses (I know, right?) with no correction and anti-reflective lenses. These help quite a bit when driving at night or working on the computer when my eyes are tired.
Going into my surgery, I told the doc I didn't care if I needed reading glasses (we all probably will), glasses to drive or to work at the computer. Having gone from between a -5 and -6 to 20/15 vision, I am very very happy with the results.
The glare is annoying, but I purchased a new set of glasses (I know, right?) with no correction and anti-reflective lenses. These help quite a bit when driving at night or working on the computer when my eyes are tired.
Going into my surgery, I told the doc I didn't care if I needed reading glasses (we all probably will), glasses to drive or to work at the computer. Having gone from between a -5 and -6 to 20/15 vision, I am very very happy with the results.
I never had eye surgery but (perhaps) as someone with a slight aspherical deviation (astigmatism it is called I see now), I also see those halo's. I didn't even notice anything about the white O on the black background until I zoomed in a lot.
I'd love to get my eyes fixed. My vision feels not so great even with glasses/contacts, so I'm kinda hoping that surgery could get me better than glasses vision. I also don't know if it could (positively) affect my night vision, which feels significantly worse than day-time vision.
Of course my expectations for vision are probably too great, and certainly I'm currently in the "normal" range (with glasses).
Also I'm personally quite interested in IOL/ICL/Visian, their advertisements make it look really attractive. But they don't afaik yet correct astigmatism, so that's not an option for me yet.
Of course my expectations for vision are probably too great, and certainly I'm currently in the "normal" range (with glasses).
Also I'm personally quite interested in IOL/ICL/Visian, their advertisements make it look really attractive. But they don't afaik yet correct astigmatism, so that's not an option for me yet.
The halos and similar issues would bug and distract me no end, especially considering that I personally can get the same effect (improved site) by wearing glasses.
I just bought a new set of glasses with progressive lenses. I hated them. Oh nos! Oh, wait, I took them back and they replaced the lenses with single prescription. Free. Problem solved.
Not at all to discourage anyone from getting lasik, but this is how I look at the risk from that procedure, for me and my prescription. Possible permanent issues vs just changing my lenses. People with worse prescription than mine might think differently.
I just bought a new set of glasses with progressive lenses. I hated them. Oh nos! Oh, wait, I took them back and they replaced the lenses with single prescription. Free. Problem solved.
Not at all to discourage anyone from getting lasik, but this is how I look at the risk from that procedure, for me and my prescription. Possible permanent issues vs just changing my lenses. People with worse prescription than mine might think differently.
[deleted]
those artifacts are not uncommon from what i know - especially star like haloes around bright lights. part of it is down to how your retina works and part of it down to the focusing of the light by the cornea, lens and through the humours... its not reasonable to expect all of this to work perfectly, and it has design flaws in terms of bleeds and blooms appearing in the final image.
the halos are because of how the photoreceptors work everyone gets lingering spots of 'colour' when you look at a bright light then look away - note that these bloom out as well, and as they fade they spread for the same reasons. its the surrounds of the 'correct' receptor sucking up the excess energy thats been pumped into that area of the retina coupled with the impossibility of consistently perfect focus
the halos are because of how the photoreceptors work everyone gets lingering spots of 'colour' when you look at a bright light then look away - note that these bloom out as well, and as they fade they spread for the same reasons. its the surrounds of the 'correct' receptor sucking up the excess energy thats been pumped into that area of the retina coupled with the impossibility of consistently perfect focus
I have needed glasses since I was very young and started wearing contact lenses about two years ago. I've always seen the halo around lights at night with/without glasses/contacts. My thoughts have always been that it was happening because of my bad vision.
Everyone in this comments thread seems to be comparing LASIK to contact lenses and glasses but what about orthokeratology (overnight lenses)? Does anyone here have experience with it? The idea sounds appealing but there's comparatively little information about it.
> prescription swimming goggles
And this is how you over-nerd nerds, ladies and gentlemen :)
And this is how you over-nerd nerds, ladies and gentlemen :)
Well, I do swim around coral reefs sometimes, which I wanted to be able to see.
I also heard about increased sun sensitivity after LASIK. does anyone else experience this?
I am thinking about this surgery, but I'm afraid of the possible sideffects, unless they're as described in the post.
I am thinking about this surgery, but I'm afraid of the possible sideffects, unless they're as described in the post.
This was my experience (had LASIK in '06): On the day of the surgery, it is enough to make you crawl into a closed room and shun all light. On the couple of days after, it's uncomfortable to look at a computer monitor. On the first few weeks you'll never forget your sunglasses at home. After six months, I'd say it is nearly normal.
It is difficult to say. I used to never ever need to wear sunglasses, even in the Portuguese summer. Now, I find them comfortable on very bright days -- not that I can't do without, it's just comfortable. Might be psychological, might indeed be somewhat increased sensitivity to sunlight.
I was on the fence for four or five years, until I decided to go at it. Best 3000€ I ever spent.
It is difficult to say. I used to never ever need to wear sunglasses, even in the Portuguese summer. Now, I find them comfortable on very bright days -- not that I can't do without, it's just comfortable. Might be psychological, might indeed be somewhat increased sensitivity to sunlight.
I was on the fence for four or five years, until I decided to go at it. Best 3000€ I ever spent.
I was only sensitive to light immediately after the operation, it went within a week. I was nervous about the operation too, but I can easily say that it was one of the best decisions I've ever made, no regrets whatsoever.
Interesting issue with the halo. I started getting that when I developed astigmatism -- I wonder if that is a common experience.
[deleted]
the thing this guy fails to mention is whether he had that halo effect BEFORE getting eye surgery...
Thanks. I'd like to think I was paying pretty close attention, since I already had writing these blog posts in mind even before taking the surgery, so I was taking notes and trying to observe what my vision was before. Of course memory is fallible.
I go see the eye doctor once a year for a regular check up. My vision remains 6/3 (UK scale) which is 20/10 on the US scale.
I was about to recommend the doctor who performed my surgery. I Googled him only to find that he died a few months ago of cancer.
RIP Professor Joseph Colin: http://www.aao.org/member/obituaries.cfm