Loading...
> >

Torrents of cataracts

Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 107,868
in The Commons
This discussion was created from comments split from: barbult's take on the lives of Jack and Richard.

Comments

  • RainRain Posts: 346

    My cataract surgery is done and I'm all caught up on the story of Jack and Richard and all I can say is....well done, barbult!!  I've had a lot of laughs.

  • barbultbarbult Posts: 26,156
    Great, I assume your surgery was successful, then. That's good.
  • RainRain Posts: 346

    barbult said:

    Great, I assume your surgery was successful, then. That's good.

    Second eye was a breeze, both eyes are working well now.  I chose to stay nearsighted so I can read and use the computer without glasses.  Turns out I don't really need glasses for distance either as I don't drive and don't really need to be able to read street signs.  Been wearing glasses for over 70 years so this is quite the change.

  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 107,868

    Rain said:

    barbult said:

    Great, I assume your surgery was successful, then. That's good.

    Second eye was a breeze, both eyes are working well now.  I chose to stay nearsighted so I can read and use the computer without glasses.  Turns out I don't really need glasses for distance either as I don't drive and don't really need to be able to read street signs.  Been wearing glasses for over 70 years so this is quite the change.

    I fear my blink reflex has atrophied, so going without glasses may be hazardous (alos, I am used to bringing things up to about an inch from my eyes if I am having trouble seeing them, though presbyopia is sabotaging that anyway).

  • namffuaknamffuak Posts: 4,403

    I went with a pair of distant vision implants; turns out that means anything over three feet is in focus. I'd been wearing glasses since  I was 5 for nearsightedness; by the time my cateracts were starting to cause issues I was 66 or thereabout. My left eye has drifted a bit in the last ten years so I do have glasses I wear for watching TV - they're bifocals I can use for reading when out and about as well but at home I just use drugstore readers for books and close work on the computer.

  • RainRain Posts: 346

    Richard Haseltine said:

    I fear my blink reflex has atrophied, so going without glasses may be hazardous (alos, I am used to bringing things up to about an inch from my eyes if I am having trouble seeing them, though presbyopia is sabotaging that anyway).

    I was used to pushing my glasses up on my forehead so I could read the small print on bottles, etc. I used to be able to see the print about four inches from my eyes, it's now about 8 inches but I can still read fine print (I do notice though that I need much brighter light to do it). I wore progressives and found the reading section of them were useless for things like that. It's such a pleasure to wake up in the morning and not have to immediately reach for my glasses to do anything.  I put my glasses on now when I'm watching a show with subtitles but so far that's about it.

  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 107,868

    Rain said:

    Richard Haseltine said:

    I fear my blink reflex has atrophied, so going without glasses may be hazardous (alos, I am used to bringing things up to about an inch from my eyes if I am having trouble seeing them, though presbyopia is sabotaging that anyway).

    I was used to pushing my glasses up on my forehead so I could read the small print on bottles, etc. I used to be able to see the print about four inches from my eyes, it's now about 8 inches but I can still read fine print (I do notice though that I need much brighter light to do it). I wore progressives and found the reading section of them were useless for things like that. It's such a pleasure to wake up in the morning and not have to immediately reach for my glasses to do anything.  I put my glasses on now when I'm watching a show with subtitles but so far that's about it.

    Thanks, that is encouraging.

  • RainRain Posts: 346

    Richard Haseltine said:

    Rain said:

    Richard Haseltine said:

    I fear my blink reflex has atrophied, so going without glasses may be hazardous (alos, I am used to bringing things up to about an inch from my eyes if I am having trouble seeing them, though presbyopia is sabotaging that anyway).

    I was used to pushing my glasses up on my forehead so I could read the small print on bottles, etc. I used to be able to see the print about four inches from my eyes, it's now about 8 inches but I can still read fine print (I do notice though that I need much brighter light to do it). I wore progressives and found the reading section of them were useless for things like that. It's such a pleasure to wake up in the morning and not have to immediately reach for my glasses to do anything.  I put my glasses on now when I'm watching a show with subtitles but so far that's about it.

    Thanks, that is encouraging.

    I chose -2 (I used to be -9) and ended up with a -2 and a -1.5 lens as they settled.  My vision used to be 20/50+ and now it's 20/25, I also used to have an astigmatis, no longer have that and I didn't even go for fancy lenses.  Just the regular monofocal. I was a nervous Nellie before I got them but I really worried for nothing.  By the way, I ended up getting a prescription for the glasses for just the top half of the lens as I no longer need the progressives.  Happy days.

  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 107,868

    Rain said:

    Richard Haseltine said:

    Rain said:

    Richard Haseltine said:

    I fear my blink reflex has atrophied, so going without glasses may be hazardous (alos, I am used to bringing things up to about an inch from my eyes if I am having trouble seeing them, though presbyopia is sabotaging that anyway).

    I was used to pushing my glasses up on my forehead so I could read the small print on bottles, etc. I used to be able to see the print about four inches from my eyes, it's now about 8 inches but I can still read fine print (I do notice though that I need much brighter light to do it). I wore progressives and found the reading section of them were useless for things like that. It's such a pleasure to wake up in the morning and not have to immediately reach for my glasses to do anything.  I put my glasses on now when I'm watching a show with subtitles but so far that's about it.

    Thanks, that is encouraging.

    I chose -2 (I used to be -9) and ended up with a -2 and a -1.5 lens as they settled.  My vision used to be 20/50+ and now it's 20/25, I also used to have an astigmatis, no longer have that and I didn't even go for fancy lenses.  Just the regular monofocal. I was a nervous Nellie before I got them but I really worried for nothing.  By the way, I ended up getting a prescription for the glasses for just the top half of the lens as I no longer need the progressives.  Happy days.

    I will make notes for when mine get bd enough to justify action (possibly soon, last time both the optician and the annual reinopathy screening thrust pamphlets about cataracts into my hands).

  • backgroundbackground Posts: 588
    edited September 8

    Richard Haseltine said:

    Rain said:

    barbult said:

    Great, I assume your surgery was successful, then. That's good.

    Second eye was a breeze, both eyes are working well now.  I chose to stay nearsighted so I can read and use the computer without glasses.  Turns out I don't really need glasses for distance either as I don't drive and don't really need to be able to read street signs.  Been wearing glasses for over 70 years so this is quite the change.

    I fear my blink reflex has atrophied, so going without glasses may be hazardous (alos, I am used to bringing things up to about an inch from my eyes if I am having trouble seeing them, though presbyopia is sabotaging that anyway).

    I'm the same regarding bringing things close to my eyes, while it's sometimes a pain wearing glasses being shortsighted is great when working on 4mm scale models,  taking my glasses off is like having a built in zoom function. 

    Post edited by background on
  • richardandtracyrichardandtracy Posts: 7,077
    edited September 8

    I have to agree with that too. I do cross stitch, and have a number of 28ct images on the go at the moment. Now, 28ct is 28 stitches to the inch, with each stitch being two different coloured threads across the diagonal of a square that is 0.9mm wide and 0.9mm high. Being short sighted helps a lot with seeing what I'm doing. I do find I need a magnifyer after a while now, though.

    Regards,

    Richard

    Post edited by richardandtracy on
  • MelanieLMelanieL Posts: 7,711

    My husband has always had extreme short sight and could see incredibly tiny details (until his presbyopia started to kick in).

    The old paper English banknotes used to have what appeared to me to be wavy lines printed on them. He could see that they were actually the denomination printed out over and over ("twenty pounds" or whatever). The new plastic ones still have some "hidden" details for those with short sight or a magnifying glass.

    One of his work colleagues once printed out a fairly large report document he had been sent, but made the mistake of telling the printer to fit to page. This was in the days of submitting a print request to a printer in a machine room somewhere, then waiting till the next day to get it back. The colleague was really annoyed that he couldn't read it, but my husband asked him which information he wanted and proceeded to read it out to him.

  • RainRain Posts: 346

    All those reasons is why I chose to stay nearsighted with my cataract lenses.  I don't need to see clearly leaves on a tree 30 feet away, I want to read my iPad in bed, with it resting on my chest....without having to reach for readers, and still see the TV.  I don't wear makeup but I'd be able to stick my nose almost on to the mirror and see what I'm doing. I wanted to keep what I always called my super power......looking at things close to my face, but now I have the added bonus of seeing everything clearly up to 6 feet away. 

  • barbultbarbult Posts: 26,156

    MelanieL said:

    My husband has always had extreme short sight and could see incredibly tiny details (until his presbyopia started to kick in).

    The old paper English banknotes used to have what appeared to me to be wavy lines printed on them. He could see that they were actually the denomination printed out over and over ("twenty pounds" or whatever). The new plastic ones still have some "hidden" details for those with short sight or a magnifying glass.

    One of his work colleagues once printed out a fairly large report document he had been sent, but made the mistake of telling the printer to fit to page. This was in the days of submitting a print request to a printer in a machine room somewhere, then waiting till the next day to get it back. The colleague was really annoyed that he couldn't read it, but my husband asked him which information he wanted and proceeded to read it out to him.

    I used to be able to take off my glasses and read the tiny etched size numbers on sewing machine needles. Now I have to use my phone camera to take a picture and enlarge it. sad

  • RainRain Posts: 346

    barbult said:

    MelanieL said:

    My husband has always had extreme short sight and could see incredibly tiny details (until his presbyopia started to kick in).

    The old paper English banknotes used to have what appeared to me to be wavy lines printed on them. He could see that they were actually the denomination printed out over and over ("twenty pounds" or whatever). The new plastic ones still have some "hidden" details for those with short sight or a magnifying glass.

    One of his work colleagues once printed out a fairly large report document he had been sent, but made the mistake of telling the printer to fit to page. This was in the days of submitting a print request to a printer in a machine room somewhere, then waiting till the next day to get it back. The colleague was really annoyed that he couldn't read it, but my husband asked him which information he wanted and proceeded to read it out to him.

    I used to be able to take off my glasses and read the tiny etched size numbers on sewing machine needles. Now I have to use my phone camera to take a picture and enlarge it. sad

    Those phone cameras come in handy '-) I was very pleased to discover that I could still thread a needle like always after the surgery.

  • LeatherGryphonLeatherGryphon Posts: 12,072
    edited September 12

      I had been nearsighted since I was 10 (I'm nearly 77 now).  I'm getting close to 9 years since my cataracts were replaced.  Each eye has a different focal length.  Without glasses I have no problems wandering around the house and watching TV from about 6 feet away, I can look out my kitchen window and watch the birds & other critters, and I do well outside in public, and I could drive OK, if I had a car.  However, I do need a cheap pair of drugstore reading glasses to use the computer from about 1-2 feet from the screen, or when doing paperwork, and I take my prescription glasses with me when I go grocery shopping so that I can read details on bags and cans (expiration dates, etc.) 

       I did OK with my new eye lenses for several years but a year ago I did have to go for laser ablation to clear out the foggy-ness that had crept in over the years.  But about two years ago I had a detached retina in my right eye.  That was an adventure that I don't want to repeat!  It's all healed now and despite having had the supporting gel in my eyeball sucked out and replaced with a gas to keep the ball inflated while it taking 3 or 4 months to refill with fluid naturally, while wearing an eye patch the whole time, my repaired right eye is clearer than the left one.  All my floaters had been removed with the gel.  I was lucky, we caught the detachment early when it was just an eighth detatched from one corner.  And the retina, although nearly half detached by time of the surgery (within 36 hours), fell back into place easily and was tacked down by laser bursts.  I still have floaters in my left eye but I'm not jumping at the chance of going through that 4 month suck-out/refill process again.  The only side-effect is that in very bright light I can see the rectangular grid of weld spots as an after image when I blink my eyes.

       But back to the topic of cataracts, yeah, the different focal length of each eye is problem, but not much of one.  It didn't take long for my brain to figure out what was going on and partially ignore the inappropriately focused image when not wearing glasses, and when wearing the cheap drugstore glasses, but my prescription glasses accomodate each eye's specific needs, and with my prescription glasses I see better than I have in decades.  I can see stars again.  Yay!

    Post edited by LeatherGryphon on
  • NotAnArtistNotAnArtist Posts: 408

    I have cataracts and glaucoma, and they're competing to see which can drive me the most crazy.

  • barbultbarbult Posts: 26,156

    So I've been puzzling over the title that Richard gave to this thread. The only connection I can imagine between torrents and cataracts would be the waterfall type of cataracts. Anyone else have a better idea? Richard, care to explain?

  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 107,868

    barbult said:

    So I've been puzzling over the title that Richard gave to this thread. The only connection I can imagine between torrents and cataracts would be the waterfall type of cataracts. Anyone else have a better idea? Richard, care to explain?

    Well, there were a lot of posts on the topic, so torrents (kinda) fits there - and as you say, cataracts can also be waterfalls/rapids so it chimed. Just a bit of word play.

  • barbultbarbult Posts: 26,156

    Richard Haseltine said:

    barbult said:

    So I've been puzzling over the title that Richard gave to this thread. The only connection I can imagine between torrents and cataracts would be the waterfall type of cataracts. Anyone else have a better idea? Richard, care to explain?

    Well, there were a lot of posts on the topic, so torrents (kinda) fits there - and as you say, cataracts can also be waterfalls/rapids so it chimed. Just a bit of word play.

    Thanks for satisfying my curiosity. 

  • RainRain Posts: 346

    LeatherGryphon said:

      I had been nearsighted since I was 10 (I'm nearly 77 now).  I'm getting close to 9 years since my cataracts were replaced.  Each eye has a different focal length.  Without glasses I have no problems wandering around the house and watching TV from about 6 feet away, I can look out my kitchen window and watch the birds & other critters, and I do well outside in public, and I could drive OK, if I had a car.  However, I do need a cheap pair of drugstore reading glasses to use the computer from about 1-2 feet from the screen, or when doing paperwork, and I take my prescription glasses with me when I go grocery shopping so that I can read details on bags and cans (expiration dates, etc.) 

       I did OK with my new eye lenses for several years but a year ago I did have to go for laser ablation to clear out the foggy-ness that had crept in over the years.  But about two years ago I had a detached retina in my right eye.  That was an adventure that I don't want to repeat!  It's all healed now and despite having had the supporting gel in my eyeball sucked out and replaced with a gas to keep the ball inflated while it taking 3 or 4 months to refill with fluid naturally, while wearing an eye patch the whole time, my repaired right eye is clearer than the left one.  All my floaters had been removed with the gel.  I was lucky, we caught the detachment early when it was just an eighth detatched from one corner.  And the retina, although neary half detached by time of the surgery (within 36 hours), fell back into place easily and was tacked down by laser bursts.  I still have floaters in my left eye but I'm not jumping at the chance of going through that 4 month suck-out/refill process again.  The only side-effect is that in very bright light I can see the rectangular grid of weld spots as an after image when I blink my eyes.

       But back to the topic of cataracts, yeah, the different focal length of each eye is problem, but not much of one.  It didn't take long for my brain to figure out what was going on and partially ignore the inappropriately focused image when not wearing glasses, and when wearing the cheap drugstore glasses, but my prescription glasses accomodate each eye's specific needs, and with my prescription glasses I see better than I have in decades.  I can see stars again.  Yay!

    Apparently nearsighted people are more likely than farsighted to have a retinal detachment.  I've been warned about that numerous times over the years and having cataract surgery increased the odds.  Oh joy! I also had to have the laser treatment for a PCO but that was a breeze.

  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 107,868

    Rain said:

    LeatherGryphon said:

      I had been nearsighted since I was 10 (I'm nearly 77 now).  I'm getting close to 9 years since my cataracts were replaced.  Each eye has a different focal length.  Without glasses I have no problems wandering around the house and watching TV from about 6 feet away, I can look out my kitchen window and watch the birds & other critters, and I do well outside in public, and I could drive OK, if I had a car.  However, I do need a cheap pair of drugstore reading glasses to use the computer from about 1-2 feet from the screen, or when doing paperwork, and I take my prescription glasses with me when I go grocery shopping so that I can read details on bags and cans (expiration dates, etc.) 

       I did OK with my new eye lenses for several years but a year ago I did have to go for laser ablation to clear out the foggy-ness that had crept in over the years.  But about two years ago I had a detached retina in my right eye.  That was an adventure that I don't want to repeat!  It's all healed now and despite having had the supporting gel in my eyeball sucked out and replaced with a gas to keep the ball inflated while it taking 3 or 4 months to refill with fluid naturally, while wearing an eye patch the whole time, my repaired right eye is clearer than the left one.  All my floaters had been removed with the gel.  I was lucky, we caught the detachment early when it was just an eighth detatched from one corner.  And the retina, although neary half detached by time of the surgery (within 36 hours), fell back into place easily and was tacked down by laser bursts.  I still have floaters in my left eye but I'm not jumping at the chance of going through that 4 month suck-out/refill process again.  The only side-effect is that in very bright light I can see the rectangular grid of weld spots as an after image when I blink my eyes.

       But back to the topic of cataracts, yeah, the different focal length of each eye is problem, but not much of one.  It didn't take long for my brain to figure out what was going on and partially ignore the inappropriately focused image when not wearing glasses, and when wearing the cheap drugstore glasses, but my prescription glasses accomodate each eye's specific needs, and with my prescription glasses I see better than I have in decades.  I can see stars again.  Yay!

    Apparently nearsighted people are more likely than farsighted to have a retinal detachment.  I've been warned about that numerous times over the years and having cataract surgery increased the odds.  Oh joy! I also had to have the laser treatment for a PCO but that was a breeze.

    That I didn't know. It is good to be aware, but a fresh thing to fret about.

Sign In or Register to comment.