Anyone have vision issues?

Emily wrote:
Aluckyguess wrote:
Why cant you get the Lasik? My son had bad vision with a high
stigmatism. 4k later and he needs no glasses.

Corneas are too thin. PRK is an option, but I'm scared of the pain,
and with only a 50/50 chance of seeing 20/20, I don't see it as a
good risk. Might be good for someone who just wants to be able to
drive without glasses, but too risky for someone (me) who holds a
second class medical.

But would the PRK not pring your unaided vision up to the point where it
could then be corrected to 20/20 with glasses?

Emily writes:

The question I always get. :-) I have a fairly strong correction (-7
and -8). My peripheral vision is terrible with glasses and since the
focal point (?) is slightly in front of my eyes, there's a fair amount
of distortion and depth perception problems. I can't remember exactly
why the distortion happens, but it does with glasses. I wear them
around the house, but can't even drive in them, especially at night.
Flying - at least landing - is out of the question with glasses.

Custom-designed glasses that correct these issues might be worth
investigating. I doubt if they'd cost any more than LASIK or the like. Depth
perception isn't necessary for flying. Peripheral vision is important but
since all peripheral vision is blurry by definition, all you need is a clear
view, not a sharp one. If you need to see something clearly, you turn your
head, with or without glasses.

"Viperdoc" wrote in message
...
How would you know anything about vision or what's needed for flying,
since you're not an ophthalmologist or a pilot?

Anthony Atkielski- self proclaimed expert in----everything.


Using his surgery simulator:

http://images.google.com/images?hl=e...=1&sa=N&tab=wi

In rec.aviation.piloting, on Fri 31 Aug 2007 07:36:15a, Emily
wrote:

I'd do that in a heartbeat if it corrected astigmatism. I'm sure it's
a lot less painful than the PRK I've been relegated to, plus it's
reversible.

The only thing that is truly reversible is wearing glasses. Plus, they
serve the added benefit of working as safety glasses when you're doing
something that might result in eye damage.

They make some prescription sunglasses in the skull fitting style like
you see popular with some of the guys riding motorcycles. They wrap
around and don't allow any air to catch them so that they are less
likely to get blown off your head if you turn your head perpendicular to
the prevailing wind. I've never tried them, but you might want to check
them out to see if the prescription wraps around the whole lense also.

El Maximo wrote:
"Viperdoc" wrote in message
...
How would you know anything about vision or what's needed for flying,
since you're not an ophthalmologist or a pilot?

Anthony Atkielski- self proclaimed expert in----everything.


Using his surgery simulator:

http://images.google.com/images?hl=e...=1&sa=N&tab=wi




Now THAT'S funny! 8^)

Emily wrote:
Ash Wyllie wrote:
Emily opined

Not a directly piloting question, but it certainly affects it.

My second class medical expires in December, so panic is starting to
set in.

I have bad eyes.

IIUC, you wear contacts? Why not use old-fashioned glasses?

The question I always get. :-) I have a fairly strong correction (-7
and -8). My peripheral vision is terrible with glasses and since the
focal point (?) is slightly in front of my eyes, there's a fair amount
of distortion and depth perception problems. I can't remember exactly
why the distortion happens, but it does with glasses. I wear them
around the house, but can't even drive in them, especially at night.
Flying - at least landing - is out of the question with glasses.

Has anyone you've consulted concidered contacts and glasses together?

One person I know has sever problems (details unkown) and the solution
was a set contacts and glasses for specific tasks.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

"Clark" wrote

Did you train my oral surgeon? :-) I'll swear that he used a 3 pound
mallet
to knock a hole in my jaw one day. He said it was a 6 oz'er but his
assistant had to hold my head in place so I'm thinking it was a bigger
hammer...

And you were awake for this???

No way anyone is going to be hitting me with ANY sized hammer, and me
knowing abut it, without expecting an ass kicking in return! g

Pass the nitrous oxide, please! ;-)
--
Jim in NC

Viperdoc wrote:
Yes, the cataract IOL's have been around forever. To me, it sounds a little
aggressive to remove a perfectly good lens (albeit somewhat stiff and
non-compliant, like my aging ones) and replace it with a plastic one.

Messing around with the cornea can have it's own set of complications that
can be devastating, but intraocular problems can be much, much worse.

Of course, this is my impression as an orthopaedic surgeon, where my
favorite tools are the three pound mallet and the two foot long Sear's bolt
cutter.


Heh heh... I had a plate and screws removed from my forearm while I was under a
regional block once. Apparently, the plate didn't want to let go so the doc had
to put some ass on it to get it to turn loose. BAM BAM BAM!!!!

"Jeez... what the hell's going on over there?", I asked. I couldn't feel it but
I sure could hear it. Sounded like he was using a 10 pound sledge. Now I know
I wasn't far off.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

Emily wrote:
Matt Barrow wrote:

I've seen two doctors in an attempt to get this taken care of, but
they both recommended LASIK (I'm not even a candidate).

Two doctors recommend it even though you're not a candidate? Could you
elaborate on that?

I phrased it poorly. The two doctors suggested I get a consultation, I
did so, and found out my corneas are too thin for LASIK (I can have
PRK). The problem with PRK is that my correction is so strong, it's
likely I won't get 20/20 out of it - in my case, 20/40 would be a
success and has an 80% chance - and an increased risk of halos and night
and all that great stuff.

prevailing opinion seems to be that since I'm not flying for a living
(part time CFI and fly for CAP) that I don't need 20/20 vision and can
take the risks associated with the surgery. I actually had one guy
explain to me that "needing 20/20 vision to be a pilot is a myth -
don't let it stop you if you really want to learn to fly!"

Has anyone experiences this kind of treatment?

Treatment, as in LASIK?

No, being treated like an idiot by doctors. I know I'm not the only
pilot out there with poor uncorrected eyesight, so I can't figure out
what I'm doing wrong in trying to get it fixed.

I have a third opinion
scheduled for next month - how do I make the doctor understand how
important this is?

Just tell him IT IS YOUR LIVLIHOOD.

Problem is, it's not. They seem to think because I'm flying "for fun"
that I'm not one of those pilots that needs 20/20 vision. It almost
makes me wish people still thought all pilots need 20/20 to fly.

Maybe I just lie next time.

Do you have some condition that requires treatment such that you need
to go to an opthalmologist or are you just trying to get a corrective
device, which only requires a decent optometrist?

I've been going to the same optometrist for decades because he listens
to what you are trying to do and comes up with glasses customized for
that.

I can't shoot skeet with my flying glasses and can't fly with the
skeet glasses, but both work perfectly for what they were intended
for.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

wrote:
The question I always get. :-) I have a fairly strong correction (-7
and -8). My peripheral vision is terrible with glasses and since the
focal point (?) is slightly in front of my eyes, there's a fair amount
of distortion and depth perception problems. I can't remember exactly
why the distortion happens, but it does with glasses. I wear them
around the house, but can't even drive in them, especially at night.
Flying - at least landing - is out of the question with glasses.

Has anyone you've consulted concidered contacts and glasses together?


At -8, I'd have considered a seeing eye dog. G



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com