If you get LASEK vs. LASIK halos aren't a problem. I had LASEK done perhaps 8 years ago, and my eyes went from 20/400 to 20/15 overnight.
The entire procedure was incredible including an HD prescription profile generated by scanning your entire eye.
The process is $4k-$5k but with financing comes down to about the same you spend on glasses or contacts annually.
No risk of halos as there is no "flap" cut like with LASIK, no chance it will come loose, and more accurate vision than you could ever achieve with lenses.
The quality of life upgrade is incredible, no scratchy eyes, no falling asleep and waking up with stinging eyes, and for sports it's incredible.
I can't explain what going from 20/400 to 20/15 is like, but basically I walked around manhattan for 6 months feeling like I was on LSD in awe of being able to see the mortar between bricks on the tops of buildings.
I found the best LASEK surgeon in the country and have brought in friends / CEOs from other states and introduced them with incredible results.
If anyone wants more info, an intro, etc. let me know and I can probably get you $500 or $1k off if you end up doing it.
To add to this, not only does the current technology not have halos, but your peripheral vision will increase as well.
I had mine done a few years ago on a state of the art machine (at the time), called the Allegretto Wave Laser. No blades - just one laser to cut the flap, and another to shape the lens.
Result - in 17 seconds (per eye time of the laser doing it's work), I went from 20/400 with a bad astigmatism to 20/15. A week later it had improved to 20/10 in one eye, and 20/12 in the other. Overall, it took 5 minutes or less of time laying down, including all adjustments.
This year celebrates 10 years without glasses, and I am finally needing to start looking at reading glasses for some situations (small print at a close distance). The great thing is that I have thick corneas, and they can actually shape them again to get rid of that as well - which I'll do in a couple years when I hit 50.
The only greater miracle I have had is the birth of my son. If you can, I highly recommend it.
I will say, aside from the quality of the surgery and the awesome outcome -- the "marketing" for this is intense and actually feels crazy to me.
I suppose this is because the machine is expensive and you need to recoop your investment, plus most people are being sold glasses and contacts from their doctor as that is the default.
It does take effort to educate people about new options and it's an elective surgery where if you go with the alternative you don't really know what you are missing...
> The process is $4k-$5k but with financing comes down to about the same you spend on glasses or contacts annually.
My eyes aren't perfect, but I've spent about $500 on glasses in 10 years. How much do others spend? I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around financing $5k for eyes (not saying it bad, just not close to my experience).
I did PRK which is the original procedure before LASIK because the thought of a flap is too scary for me. From what I understand PRK has better long term recovery but short term it takes more time.
People want LASIK for the convenience, almost no recovery time. With PRK I took 1 week off work and the next week was bad too. Then more discomfort for upto 6 months. After that it's great.
Or worse. It's the reason I'll never have the surgery... the risk is very small but if something were to happen to my eyesight it would be devastating. Glasses aren't so bad.
It's also just not necessary for most of us four-eyes. The costs of the surgery appear to be about what I would pay for 40 years worth of glasses (I buy a new pair once every four years or so), so it won't safe me money — or not a lot.
I'm so used to glasses that I might not even be more comfortable or live a more convenient life (and glasses are simply part of my identity after nearly 30 years of wearing them).
So there is very little (to no) incentive to actually get surgery to correct my eyesight. But the surgery is not without risks, as small as they may be, so there is a disincentive.
I can imagine that this is different for people who wear lenses because they are slightly more cumbersome.
Sure. But halos seem pretty common - every person I know who got LASIK done in the past 10 years experiences got them to some extent, my dad almost had a nervous breakdown because for the first year after the surgery the halos were so bad he couldn't really drive at night - they sort of faded away with time but he said they were always there and in hindsight, he wouldn't have selected surgery.
Certainly a risk. This is one of those areas where watching the latest tech development is worthwhile, as it's moving rapidly.
I got a laser-only procedure done about 5 years ago now, and it's been the best decision of my life. I had halos for about 6-12mo, but I also had minor halos before the surgery too - so I really haven't noticed much of a difference.
One thing you should either really really do, or really really don't do (I still can't decide) is walk the Vegas strip at night the day after surgery like I did. You will have major halos/starbursts at that point, and it's the closest to a random private laser show as I've ever gotten in life. I suppose drugs may be less risky and cheaper though...
I would be a bit difficult to give source on my personal friends and my dad, it's an anecdote :P Treat it like everything on the internet said by a random person - with caution. Just because everyone I know who got LASIK done has halos doesn't mean it's commonplace - could be just a coincidence.
I went from glasses and astigmatism to LASIK and halos.
I would still do it again and recommend it.
The quality of life improvement is tremendous and the amount of money saved on not getting the glasses re-done every year offsets the cost of the LASIK.
Halos, really only at night, is corrected by wearing a yellow tint "sunglass" aka shooters glasses while driving.
Plus my SO really doesn't like my driving, so i chill out in the passenger seat anyway. They feel more in control and i can get some sleep.
This makes no sense, unless you were a kid why would you have to get your glasses "re-done" every year? I've been wearing the same prescription for a decade and the same plastic frames for seven years. I go to the ophthalmologist every two years to get my optic drusen looked at and my corrected vision is fine. If I didn't go for my drusen I would have no reason to go. If your vision is so unstable that you were getting a new prescription every year then you are an likely a very poor candidate for LASIK and your LASIK vision would just revert anyways.
The only time I had to get a new prescription every few months was when I was a child so my vision was changing rapidly.
>Halos, really only at night, is corrected by wearing a yellow tint "sunglass" aka shooters glasses while driving.
Please do not wear these glasses while driving. They are dangerous [1]
I'm not sure where you get your Informaton but for one, in order to re-order contact lenses you must have a current rx (within 1-2 years) and it is standard to get an eye exam every year. Many people have eyesight that progressively gets worse and require a new rx yearly.
If your vision is so unstable you need a new RX every year your LASIK isn't going to last very long. Hence you probably are a very poor candidate for LASIK and it makes no sense from a strictly financial sense.
Unless you wear contacts, which can get pretty expensive, but probably not as expensive as LASIK that lasts 10 years.
I'm not sure why you'd get an eye exam every year unless you were having problems or needed a new prescription.
> Many people have eyesight that progressively gets worse and require a new rx yearly.
And many people have had the same prescription for 4-5 years or more, and don't have eyes that continue to get worse.
I think the GP's point was that either your eyes continue to get worse every year, and you need new glasses, and LASIK probably won't last forever, or you don't, and LASIK is a one-time expense that will take quite a while to break even on in a strictly financial sense.
I'm sure your ophthamologist will be happy to recommend getting exams as often as possible, like your dentist.
I've had the same prescription for 10 years. I had the same glasses for 10 years until I bought new ones for cheap on the internet this year using a 3 year old prescription.
> This makes no sense, unless you were a kid why would you have to get your glasses "re-done" every year?
I don't know about the parent poster above, but my vision is slowly but consistently getting worse every year, for the last five years now. I get my glasses "re-done" each year because my prescription has changed (gotten slightly stronger) each year, and it's cheaper to get new glasses than to re-lens old ones.
If I didn't stare at a screen for 60 hours a week, minor prescription changes might not matter so much. But since I do, wearing a prescription that's only slightly off can still cause some headaches or eye pain.
Just hit the over 40 bump ... readers are necessary.
I went from needed bifocals to just readers and in 15 years; of wearing 1+ to 1.25+. Now, for fine detail work, i look like the guy from Toy Story 2 with magnifiers up to +4. SMTs are tiny !
Normal computer work, still +1s. I do need a lot more light though.
I got LASIK, and I had stable vision. It's saved me thousands of dollars now.
Not everyone is as careful and/or inactive as you :)
I've lost more pair of prescription sunglasses at the bottom of the ocean/lakes within a few years than you seem to have owned in total over the course of a decade. Basically glasses to me meant $500/yr in replacements due to breakage or losing them in various situations. Yes, completely my fault and preventable - but just not who I am. After beating myself up about this for years, I just realized I have better things to do with my brain cycles than keep track of glasses.
For me LASIK was an amazing quality of life improvement, and while I didn't do it for the financial benefits it's certainly paid for itself a few times over 6 years later.
Edit: This is also completely ignoring the pita of keeping your glasses clean throughout the day. I know from experience most people aren't bothered by dirty glasses (ugh, this is super distracting in meetings for me) but I cannot stand it. I'll replace cheap sunglasses that get a single scratch on them it's so distracting to me.
Plus stuff like being able to do things like buy 10 pair of knockoff sunglasses for $15 vs. a $200 prescription set. Or being able to actually watch 3D movies that don't completely suck. Or go off-roading and wear a mask comfortably. Or go diving. The list goes on. For those who can't wear contacts, I can't imagine not getting LASIK if it were an option.
I was replying to the person who needs new glasses because of unstable vision and strictly from a financial perspective.
I know it's common for adults to change vision but usually once a year is a frequency more seen in children and teens. At least from my experience talking to people and being in an ophthalmologist chair since infancy. I was a frequent flyer at the ophthalmologist's office as a child (once a month was common for a while) and I had lots of questions.
EDIT: I haven't actually heard a lot about the elderly so I don't know their typical frequency of vision change. The only data point I have is a 60 year old I knew who got LASIK and was back in glasses in about 2 years.
On an unrelated note, I went to the same ophthalmologist for 20 years and it was eerie how it never changed. The ophthalmologist always looked the same, he always had the same staff and they looked the same, and the office didn't change. After a while it was like stepping into a time machine when I went there.
Between the ages of 12-25 or so, my sight got progressively worse and I needed a new prescription roughly every year. For the next 15 years, my sight stabilized at -8.5. For the last few years, my prescription has decreased slowly (I'm -6.75 now, which is a little inconvenient).
Until I started wearing contacts, I got new lenses for my glasses every year.
