bruceb@telesoft.UUCP (Bruce Bergman @favorite) (02/21/86)
[line eater offering]
Excuse me for being so bold as to intrude into the middle of
your discussion (really?), but I have a question for all you
med-types.
First, let me give you some background to help determine
the problem:
I was fitted for my first pair of contacts some five years ago
and was given hard lenses. These lenses always performed as
good as could be expected, but in January of 1985 they, well,
existed no longer.
I decided it was time to try some new contacts. Ones that
would give me sleep-in ability without the maximum hassle
of soft contacts.
Enter Dr. X. Dr. X is a kindly older gentleman; good natured.
He was recomended to me by a good friend. I went to see Dr. X
about some new contacts. We discussed the relative merits
of several different brands and makes, and decided on a
somewhat new brand - SILSIGHT. I was fitted for these new,
dandy contacts and given a pair the same day. My vision
was back to normal and I could sleep in these for 30 days.
I was, needless to say, in heaven!
These SILSIGHT contacts are manufactured by Dow & <somebody>
and are rated as extended wear contacts. The are slightly
smaller than soft lenses, slightly bigger than hard. Since
I have a somewhat large eye, they fit exactly on the colored
part of my eye, with no edges showing. They have a delta-K
rating of 320 (or close), so they should have no problem
being in my eye for weeks on end, eh?
These contacts were great! For the first nine months I
just loved the babes (with an exception - later). About
month 10, I noticed that they were slightly hazy on
certain days. Month 11 and 12 and things were getting
pretty bad. I could count on these puppies to remain
clear as long as I didn't blink too much (hard to do!).
I decided that this wasn't normal contact behavior.
I went to Dr. X and explained to him my concerns and
the symptoms. He looked at my contacts, tried cleaning
them, etc., all to no avail. He sighed, came back into
the examining room and said "Well, I guess they're just
worn out. These contacts have a tendency to wear out
in a year or so and yours just went out faster."
I was NEVER told that these contacts would wear out in
a year or so (why should I even think so, since my hard
lasted so long), so I was stunned! I can't afford to
fork out $90 a lens for these contacts. I would assume
it is something a good doctor should tell their patients
before they make their choice.
My question is:
Is this normal for contacts? I can understand that hard
lenses would last longer than soft, but by such a large
margin?
Also, has anyone had similar experiences with these
SILSIGHT contacts? I hear that Dow isn't selling them
anymore (maybe due to the short life?) and B&L is
thinking about picking them up. Anyone have any ideas
as to what these contacts are really supposed to do?
Last, any suggestions about what I should get in the
way of replacements? Should I make Dr. X give me
a replacement?
I really don't want to make a big stink out of this
whole thing, but if Dr. X was just not doing what
he was supposed to do, I intend to get either my
money back or new contacts.
I know I'm going to have to get new contacts. This
is fact. I want extended wear, and would prefer a
contact that won't disappear in 12 months. I'd even
consider SILSIGHT again, if this was just an isolated
incident.
I'd appreciate any responses - I really am bothered by
the whole fiasco.
thanks!
bruce
--
bang!-
allegra!\ \
crash! \ gould9!--\
ihnp4! \ \
>--sdcsvax!---->--telesoft!bruceb (Bruce Bergman N7HAW)
noscvax! / /
scgvaxd! / sdencore!--/
ucbvax! / /
talaris!-harrison@ucsfcgl.UUCP (Peter Harrison%MIS) (02/24/86)
Soft lenses, especially extended wear ones are FAR less durable than hard. Cleaning tends to tear them eventually. If hard lenses get scratched and eventually need polishing, imagine how much more liable to surface damage soft lenses are. Add to all this the chemical damage that gets done to soft lenses on an ongoing basis - they just do not have the non-reactivity that hard ones do. Not to mention the fact of adsorption of various thing such as the proteins secreted in the tear film. There is tremendous individual variation between patients. Some have no problems. My brother-in-law's eyes seem to eat a pair of soft lenses every 6 months at least. My wife usually manages to last 9-12. One eye may be worse than another. Thorough cleaning (physical rubbing with plenty of saline or whatever) helps, execept that then you tend to tear the lens. You can get an insurance policy to replace lens much more cheaply - ask your doctor. If your eyes eat soft contacts, it is well worth it. Peter Harrison, M.D. UUCP: ucbvax!ucsfcgl!harrison ARPA: ucsfcgl!harrison@berkeley.arpa Phone: (415) 355-2149 US Mail: 419 Roberts Rd., Pacifica, CA 94044-3246
passaro@acf4.UUCP (Mike Passaro) (02/25/86)
Sounds very familiar. I can definately relate to your experience.
In January, 1985, one of my daily-wear soft lenses tore. I thought
this would be a good time to try out a pair of extended-wear lenses. I
had been wearing dailies for about four years, and although I had some
problems with products containing thimerisol (sp?), I much preferred
my lenses to wearing glasses.
Went to Sterling Optical. I don't know if you have them in your area,
but they are a "chain" of low priced eyewear stores. Great deal: pair
of extended-wear lenses, 6 months of follow-up care for $98.
The brand of lenses I was fitted with was Permalens. For the first six
months, they were great. I couldn't believe how great it was not to
have to go through the nightly routine of cleaning, morning routine of
putting them in. No problems whatsoever. Follow-up visits showed no
problems either.
Six months to the day (I'm not kidding here, folks), the problems
began. Irritated, itchy eyes. Redness. A great tendency for the
lens to "float" into my brains. I brought these problems to the
attention of my "doctor" at Sterling Optical. He didn't see any damage
to my eyes, and he suggested that I could reduce the problems by not
wearing them to sleep. This helped somewhat--I could wear my lenses
for about 8 hours with few problems. Tried to rationalize the fact
that I paid for extended-wear lenses, but was using them as dailies.
Then, after about 9 months, the lenses became unbearable. Couldn't
even wear them for three hours without having to take them out. I was
concerned that I may not be able to wear contacts any more, but I found
another doctor, and he fitted me with a pair of dailies that I have
been using -- without a single problem -- since October, 1985.
A recent article in Time magazine ("A Skeptical Eye On Contacts" --
Time -- January 27, 1986, page 59) is excellent. Here are a few
selected quotes:
--"Carol Meltzer...was visiting friends in France when the trouble
began. ``My eye began bothering me on Sunday night...by Tuesday
morning, I was in the American Hospital of Paris.'' Her problem: a
severe infection apparently caused by her use of extended-wear contact
lenses. Though doctors managed to control the infection, Meltzer's
cornea was so badly scarred that she was virtually blind in her right
eye."
-- Along with the "soaring sales [of extended-wear lenses] has come an
alarming increase in complications, complaints, and lawsuits against
lens manufacturers and retailers"
-- "Opthalmologists offer several possible explanations for the
extended-wear problems. The lenses can be worn for weeks because they
contain many more tiny pores than traditional soft lenses, allowing an
increased supply of oxygen and water to reach and nourish the cornea.
But the myriad pores encourage the buildup of deposits on the lenses,
creating a perfect breeding ground for bacteria. The resulting
infection can cause partial or complete blindness in just 24 hours.
Even if the problem is caught and treated early,...a scar often
remains, interfering with vision."
--"Another problem is the availability of the extended-wear lenses in
discount optical outlets...many of these do not give their extended-
wear customers adqeuate instruction on the proper use of the contacts
and skimp on the follow-up visits needed to uncover any hidden
problems...``The cost is not the lens; it's the doctor's time.''"
--Mike Passaro
NYUroger@celtics.UUCP (Roger Klorese) (02/26/86)
In article <303@telesoft.UUCP> bruceb@telesoft.UUCP (Bruce Bergman @favorite) writes: >[line eater offering] > >Excuse me for being so bold as to intrude into the middle of >your discussion (really?), but I have a question for all you >med-types. > >First, let me give you some background to help determine >the problem: > >I was fitted for my first pair of contacts some five years ago >and was given hard lenses. These lenses always performed as >good as could be expected, but in January of 1985 they, well, >existed no longer. > >I decided it was time to try some new contacts. Ones that >would give me sleep-in ability without the maximum hassle >of soft contacts. > >Enter Dr. X. Dr. X is a kindly older gentleman; good natured. >He was recomended to me by a good friend. I went to see Dr. X >about some new contacts. We discussed the relative merits >of several different brands and makes, and decided on a >somewhat new brand - SILSIGHT. I was fitted for these new, >dandy contacts and given a pair the same day. My vision >was back to normal and I could sleep in these for 30 days. >I was, needless to say, in heaven! > >These SILSIGHT contacts are manufactured by Dow & <somebody> >and are rated as extended wear contacts. The are slightly >smaller than soft lenses, slightly bigger than hard. Since >I have a somewhat large eye, they fit exactly on the colored >part of my eye, with no edges showing. They have a delta-K >rating of 320 (or close), so they should have no problem >being in my eye for weeks on end, eh? > >These contacts were great! For the first nine months I >just loved the babes (with an exception - later). About >month 10, I noticed that they were slightly hazy on >certain days. Month 11 and 12 and things were getting >pretty bad. I could count on these puppies to remain >clear as long as I didn't blink too much (hard to do!). >I decided that this wasn't normal contact behavior. > >I went to Dr. X and explained to him my concerns and >the symptoms. He looked at my contacts, tried cleaning >them, etc., all to no avail. He sighed, came back into >the examining room and said "Well, I guess they're just >worn out. These contacts have a tendency to wear out >in a year or so and yours just went out faster." > >I was NEVER told that these contacts would wear out in >a year or so (why should I even think so, since my hard >lasted so long), so I was stunned! I can't afford to >fork out $90 a lens for these contacts. I would assume >it is something a good doctor should tell their patients >before they make their choice. > >My question is: > >Is this normal for contacts? I can understand that hard >lenses would last longer than soft, but by such a large >margin? > >Also, has anyone had similar experiences with these >SILSIGHT contacts? I hear that Dow isn't selling them >anymore (maybe due to the short life?) and B&L is >thinking about picking them up. Anyone have any ideas >as to what these contacts are really supposed to do? > >Last, any suggestions about what I should get in the >way of replacements? Should I make Dr. X give me >a replacement? > >I really don't want to make a big stink out of this >whole thing, but if Dr. X was just not doing what >he was supposed to do, I intend to get either my >money back or new contacts. > >I know I'm going to have to get new contacts. This >is fact. I want extended wear, and would prefer a >contact that won't disappear in 12 months. I'd even >consider SILSIGHT again, if this was just an isolated >incident. > >I'd appreciate any responses - I really am bothered by >the whole fiasco. > >thanks! > >bruce >-- > bang!- >allegra!\ \ >crash! \ gould9!--\ >ihnp4! \ \ > >--sdcsvax!---->--telesoft!bruceb (Bruce Bergman N7HAW) >noscvax! / / >scgvaxd! / sdencore!--/ >ucbvax! / / > talaris!- It is VERY normal for extended-wear lenses to last 10 to 12 months. I had one pair that lasted 18, and was told that was a MAJOR rarity. -- *** Speak for the company? Naaaah, it's hard enough speaking for ME! *** ... "What were you expecting, rock'n'roll?" Roger B.A. Klorese Celerity Computing, 40 Speen St., Framingham, MA 01701, (617) 872-1772 UUCP: seismo!harvard!bu-cs!celtics!roger, ucbvax!sdcsvax!celerity!celtics!roger ARPA: bu-cs!celtics!roger@harvard.ARPA, celerity!celtics!roger@sdcsvax.ARPA