boldeagle
Member
10 messages
joined Sep 2003
Here’s my attempt at contributing—I’ll try to keep it brief and avoid getting bogged down in unnecessary details.
Sleeping lenses can be an effective way to correct your vision—but I want to emphasize that "can" is doing a lot of heavy lifting there. It isn't a universal fix. Honestly, asking for someone else's experience is a bit like asking for medical advice based on a neighbor's success story; it might help you feel better, but it doesn't actually tell you if the treatment will work for your specific biology. The effectiveness depends entirely on your unique ocular profile: the specific type of correction required, the thickness of your cornea, and several other physiological variables that play a much larger role than most people realize. Every eye is its own unique puzzle.
Look, let's be clear about what we're dealing with here: these lenses aren't some magic wand that resets your vision to zero permanently. What you're actually seeing is just a temporary shift in cell positioning. Depending on how long you have them in, those cells tend to migrate back to their original spots after a day or two. It’s a temporary adjustment, nothing more.
The real upside to this approach is that you aren't wearing contacts during the day. You don't have to deal with that constant anxiety about dust or debris getting trapped behind the lens, and you can finally say goodbye to that nagging sensation of dry eyes.
That correction sounds like an absolute steal for them, so I honestly think it’s worth a shot—provided you can actually get a trial pair first. I really hope that’s how they handle things here in the States. One thing, though: don't agree to anything unless they measure you using a corneal topographer. A standard keratometer just isn't precise enough for this kind of work.
It’s always the same story: they only ever push materials with a high DK value, which basically means you're just letting massive amounts of oxygen leak through.
P.S. Jadesailor14, can you actually correct for minor astigmatism and nearsightedness if the prescription tops out at -4.00?
P.S. Neovascularization—that pesky growth of new capillaries triggered by oxygen deprivation—is actually a solved issue at this point. A much more significant concern would be the formation of vacuoles or even edema (I think that’s the correct term in English). 🙂 )