NEW SPECS SOON!

[beandelphiki]

Whoo, lj's finally sorta-up.

The Six Apart Status page lists all other Six Apart services as "up" and Livejournal as "degraded." Gotta love that.


Today I went to the optometrist to get my prescription checked, and to see about getting myself some new glasses. After the last mishap with my ancient frames, I figured it was time.

It's been time for a while, actually; I'm good and sick of my glasses falling apart and rubbing the spot behind my left ear until it shreds and bleeds. (I have one ear quite a bit higher than the other, so the longer I wear a pair of glasses without getting them straightened, the more they scrape in odd places.)


So now I have a new prescription, slightly updated. And I have new glasses on the way.

And these glasses? I'm so excited about them. You guys have no idea.


See my icon: it might not be the best picture to illustrate...well, anything (crappy bathroom self-portraits!), but those are the glasses I have right now. At the time I got them (when I was 16), they were wicked expensive (they're Emporio Armani, yo), and they were really stylin'.

But at this point, they're old and worn and out of style. So now I've chosen new ones. They're Dior Homme Black Tie.


And they're FUCKING HOT GEEK CHIC.

HOT.




...Yes? Hot.

They come in black and gray as well, but I tried various black glasses in that sort of style, and decided it was just a bit too harsh for my face and coloring. The brown blends better. (Plus the frames aren't as noticeable in my field of vision.)

These are the style of glasses I've wanted for YEARS, guys. I'm stoked.


In less shallow news, I learned some new and surprising information about my eyes themselves.

The appointment itself, then:


The receptionist/assistant (I truly don't know her position, but I'm sure she's qualified to do more than push paper!) started by running me through some basic tests to check the curvature of my eye, my peripheral vision, etc.

If you wear glasses, you're probably familiar with it all. If you aren't - well, it would take a while to describe. It's just sitting in front of various beeping machines, pressing buttons and such, with your chin cradled by attachments that look like the straps on football helmets.

It's obviously been WAY too long since I got my prescription checked, though. They have this new machine that tests your IOP (that's intraocular pressure to you non-blind types) by blowing a short blast of air into your eye. Uncomfortable, but infinitely preferable to the old-school, "put unreliable freezing drops in your eyes and then poke with a stick" method that leaves you with the sensation that your eyes are creaking like arthritic joints every time you shift your gaze.

And they have this crazy new thing called the Optomap® which just takes a GIGANTIC picture of the inside of your eye. It's sort of a pain to get in the right position for it, but again - much better than the old-school "shine a light in your eyes" method.


Then, on to the actual prescription check.


Since I haven't seen an optometrist since before my family moved from the north end of the city to the south, I've never before been seen by the guy I went to today.

He's young ("I'm Kent,") and briskly professional. Really nice, but not at all chatty. That's fine with me; I really, really like his efficiency.

He's also very good-looking, which I'm sure doesn't hurt him at all. He's got lips sorta like a young John Travolta - the kind you can't help staring at because you're wondering who he killed to get them.

He told me that the opthamologist I saw recently was correct: my prescription hasn't changed much at all in 6 years, which is a really excellent rate of change.

It has changed some though:

• Both eyes are just a bit worse. I asked about them on the 20/20 scale; he said that my level of vision doesn't translate well to that scale, but it's currently about 20/240 in my right eye, and 20/250 in my left.
  
  
• My focal length is 25cm. Outside of that, I need glasses. Basically: there's no way I can take my glasses off for anything but sleeping and bathing. But, uh, I knew that.
  
  
• My right eye - my "good" eye! - has deteriorated faster than the left.
  
  (That information makes me slightly nervous. I've gotten migraine aura symptoms in that eye, as well. I don't know if this means anything, but maybe I've been overcompensating with that eye too much.)
  
  
• I have some astigmatism in my right eye now, whereas I didn't before.
  
  
• Looking at the images from the Optomap®, I apparently have a STRETCH MARK on my left eyeball, which he says is "unsurprising" because it is more myopic than my right. I had no idea you could get a STRETCH MARK on your EYEBALL - did you?
  
  (Also he kept referring to parts of the images in this bizarrely sensual way. i.e. "Vascular's really nice, very healthy. Macular spot's very smooth, very nice and smooth." SO WEIRD.)
  
  
• I have something called "convergence insufficiency." Basically, both my eyes have this tendency to drift outward; they don't easily come together to focus on something closer to me.

I'm MOST surprised by the convergence insufficiency reveal. Apparently the optometrist I saw before noted this in my file, but he did NOT tell me. I'm a bit miffed by that. I was 16 the last time I saw an optometrist; isn't that OLD ENOUGH to be informed?!

Dr. Kent tells me that because of this insufficiency, I might have noted that it's more and more of a strain to focus properly the closer something gets to me. (Although I'm myopic; great combination, eh?) So I might notice double vision and a sense of strain with reading and trying to focus on other things near me.

I said that I HAVE, in fact, noticed these things. Back when I was considering the possibility that I have ADHD, I ran across something called Irlen Syndrome, which often makes learning to read difficult-to-impossible for the people who have it. Just for shits and giggles, I downloaded a self-test I found for it, and was shocked that I have many times more symptoms than is considered suggestive of the condition.

I thought that was odd, because I've never had any trouble reading, and learned to read swiftly and easily.

If, though, this convergence insufficiency has developed only in the past few years - or has always been quite mild - it could explain why I have those symptoms, but no history of difficulties learning to read.

Anyway, Dr. Kent tells me that I'm managing to compensate well enough on my own right now, so I shouldn't need to do anything about it. If it gets significantly worse, he'll show me eye exercises to help it, and possibly they can put prisms in my lenses that will remove some of the need for me to focus in more closely.


Okay, so that's about it.

NEW GLASSES, GUYS.

So. Excited.

Comments

[karalianne.livejournal.com]

I'm wearing my contacts right now, but the prescription's off. Hooray, I had a call from the eye doc's office today saying the replacement trial lenses are in, so hopefully soon we'll have it all sorted out! :)

I have astigmatism in both eyes, but the left is worse than the right. Which is funny because my right eye has a stronger prescription than my left.

I've had glasses since I was in grade four... so I guess I was nine when I got my first pair.

I'm hoping to get in again at some point in the near future for a complete eye exam (I just did the partial so I could get contacts because my glasses' frames broke and I can't wear glasses with tape on them all the time). Then I'll get new glasses and a pair of prescription sunglasses. I'm all excited about that. (Small things make me happy.)

I went to the Irlen site; it's changed a lot since I last visited it, looks a lot more professional! I went through a couple of the self-tests, and according to them I definitely need Irlen lenses. I don't know, I think I'm going to wait and see if having the proper prescription for my contacts and glasses helps me any with my light sensitivity (probably won't; I've been light-sensitive all my life) and whatnot. (Oh, those sample distortions, I get that halo effect with printed information a fair amount. Thought that was interesting, too!)

[beandelphiki.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I got glasses when I was ten or so, I think. *doesn't even remember, HA*

I didn't even think about prescription sunglasses. I'm fairly light-sensitive as well (as is my mother, who pretty much can't go outside without sunglasses if the sun is out). Maybe I'll ask about that next time.

The sample distortions are really interesting. Although the halo one looks different from a "sample halo distortion" I've seen in static print. The halo print one actually looked like it had a HALO - like the text had a bright white stroke to it. The one on the site just looks like it's blurred a bit.

I don't know - it could be my browser or something.

But yeah, most of the distortions look somewhat familiar. In print, the halo in particular!

I also get one which isn't pictured there. Basically, the text sucks together into a little black box with a big ring of white around it. Don't know what they call that one. I'd call it "clumping," maybe.

[siegeengine.livejournal.com]

Those look really cool. I kind of want to get my eyes mapped now. I wonder if I can find someone around here that does that. I like your old glasses too, though. They look good on you. Is that picture fairly current? I was surprised because of your general avoidance of photographic autodocumentation. You are tres cute, though. I hope you don't mind if I float up to canada sometime... I mean, it's not that far.

[beandelphiki.livejournal.com]

I like my old glasses well enough, sure. They're more subtle, anyway. It's just time for a change, and I'm tired of subtle, you know?

The picture is...I dunno, I took it last year, I think? *shrugs* Can't be more than a year and half old. I've had it for a while; I just never use it.

[teyla]

Ohh, pretty glasses!

I so need new ones too. I wrecked my glasses a while back, so I'm using an old pair. I took my driver's license vision-test with them and know that I have only a 70% vision with those. But every time I'm at the ophtalmologist's, they do this evil thing of widening my pupils and looking at the retina for tiny clogged arteries (diabetics are high risk for clogged arteries, and if those back there clog, I'll go blind). I think I despise the ophtalmologist about as much as other people despise the dentist.

Focal length 25cm? That's... not much :P. But at least you look good in glasses. I have a friend who is practically blind without glasses, but whose face simply wasn't made for glasses.

Do you use contacts at all?

[beandelphiki.livejournal.com]

You're diabetic, then? So you have to get your eyes checked frequently, yes?

Your opthamologist should get the Optomap®! Then no pupil-widening. Just a gigantic picture of your eyeball insides. :P

Focal length 25cm? That's... not much :P.

Yeah, and then I guess (thanks to the convergence insufficiency) inside that range I have trouble focusing, too! Sucky combination, eh?

And no, I don't use contacts. I wore them for about a year when I was 14 - I had plans to be an actor, and I didn't want glasses getting in the way.

I no longer have said plans, though, so I won't be wearing contacts again. I honestly hated them. And I look BETTER with glasses than without, actually. So it's probably good in a way that I need them. :P (All is vanity...)

Gah!!! LJ ate my comment.

[i-dreamed-i-was.livejournal.com]

I thought there were going to be pics of YOU, IN the glasses. Oh, well.

I checked out the Irlen site and it was interesting, but... Then I found this, which I think makes a lot of sense.

[beandelphiki.livejournal.com]

I thought there were going to be pics of YOU, IN the glasses. Oh, well.

You're too sweet. :P Naw, I don't even HAVE them yet! It takes around a week to get new lenses ground, see.

I don't have a way to get photos of myself onto my computer right now. If that situation changes (and hopefully it does soon; I'm tired of not being able to upload stuff from my camera), then I'll probably take new pictures.

'Cuz that icon will be out of date!

I checked out the Irlen site and it was interesting, but... Then I found this, which I think makes a lot of sense.

Interesting article, thanks. (And I'm OUT of it today, because I looked up in the corner and saw the "LookSmart" logo and thought, "Wow, a site full of articles intended to make you look informed and intellectual. People will really make a site for anything.")

Anyway, yeah. That article doesn't surprise me at all. I should probably clarify: at the time I first found that Irlen Syndrome site, I'd barely heard of it before, so I took it at face value at first - there's many more LDs out there than people realize, you know? That's why the shock over the self-test.

When you look more closely around the web, it looks far less legit, mainly because it's pushed as a cure-all. And the claims of cure-all proponents are always bunk. (Although I don't mean to say the "cure" is always totally bunk. The "cures" just never do ALL of what it's claimed they do.)

I don't have the background education to make the judgment call that "SSS" isn't a real visual perception problem. But I have always found it unlikely that such a wide range of symptoms/conditions could be explained and/or helped by one thing, i.e. colored lenses and overlays.

I still find the distortions interesting, however (particularly how severe they can be for some people). I haven't spent too much time digging, but when I did short Google searches on visual distortions of print, pretty much all that came up was Irlen. So while I can guess at what sorts of things might cause some of the distortions, I couldn't offer an explanation for all of them.

I'm guessing that "Irlen Syndrome" is actually a collection of various issues (including light sensitivity). And often people may be experiencing a placebo effect with the filters, but it seems some people find the filters dramatically improve print for them. I can't explain that either, and it intrigues me.

In the meantime, I'm lazy enough to call it "Irlen syndrome" if people have distortions that seem "classic." I don't know how colored filters can HURT - other than your wallet. But then, I'd personally suggest trying something like changing the background color of your windows on the computer to see if it helps before I'd fork out money for tinted lenses and such.

[beandelphiki.livejournal.com]

Oh, incidentally - out of all the conditions that Irlen followers claim the filters can help, ADHD people are supposed to be among the LEAST likely to get anything useful from them.

I can't recall where I read that - I think it was from the results of a study done on sped. students, basically. This study also kept track of which colors students chose (in case there was a connection to the particular diagnosis they had). Evidently ADHD students who found the filters "helpful" were the most likely to pick really "out-there" colors, like neon yellow filters.

When I read that I thought, "Well, I'm betting they aren't doing a damn thing to help their VISION, but they find the filters helpful because neon's more interesting to look at than white."

So much for THAT "medication-free" cure, anyway. :P