#21 ·
Since I work as an Ophthalmologist and Contact lens specialist—as wiredfox72 put it, I wasn't familiar with that specific phrasing, so thanks for the lesson—I'm currently practicing here in the Netherlands. Because of that, I might occasionally stumble over an American term for something, though I'm hoping that won't happen too often; I haven't felt that alienated from the culture just yet. 🙂
I’ve asked you before how strong your cylinder prescription is, but since you didn't know, it’s worth noting that this could be a deciding factor in which type of lenses you choose to wear. If the cylinder is located on the cornea, you can correct it with either hard or soft lenses. However, if the cylinder is in the lens itself, hard lenses aren't really an option. At least, they aren't in standard practice; I'm somewhat familiar with how Ophthalmologists and Contact lens specialists operate in America.
Furthermore, if your cylinder strength exceeds your spherical correction, you’ll most likely have to go with hard lenses; soft ones aren't always as successful in those specific cases.
Beyond the technicalities, perhaps the most critical factor for anyone considering contact lenses is motivation: do you actually *want* to wear them? What is driving this decision, and what are your expectations?
Lenses require significantly more maintenance and "sacrifice" than glasses; even just the upkeep is a much larger undertaking. Being irresponsible with this can lead to permanent consequences.
Provided both are corrected properly, you won't actually see better with lenses than you do with glasses. In fact, theoretically, there's a higher chance that with certain soft toric lenses, your vision might even be slightly worse. It depends on several variables.
Regardless of your choice, you need to keep a pair of glasses on hand. If you deal with inflammation or any other complications, you simply cannot wear the lenses. It's also wise not to pop them in first thing in the morning; your eyes need to breathe and take in oxygen from the environment, since they don't get a direct oxygen supply through the blood. Giving them that window of time is always a good idea. And at night, once the lenses are out... reach for the glasses.
I'll try to touch upon a few other posts to clear up some common misconceptions.
Soft lenses can serve as a replacement for glasses—and for most people, they are. Of course, eyes can be 🙂 totally screwed over by them, but that's a topic unto itself; there are too many potential complications for me to dive into that right now. Generally speaking, proper maintenance and regular replacement are the solutions.
Soft lenses allow for some oxygen permeability depending on their water content—usually ranging from 38% to 50% or 70%. The principle remains the same: the higher the water content, the greater the oxygen permeability, but they also tend to get dirty faster.
Permeability has nothing to do with bacteria; it's about the porosity of the lens, if you catch my drift. A soft lens functions like a sponge; it absorbs water and holds its shape, but it also easily traps bacteria. There are various types available, from dailies to annuals. The shorter the wear cycle, the lower the risk of contamination, but naturally, the price goes up. Monthly lenses are the standard here. Personally, I wouldn't use anything longer than six-month lenses. Hard lenses don't suffer from this issue.
The prescription for glasses and lenses can differ. Lenses often have a slightly lower negative value compared to glasses, meaning they aren't stronger or weaker! Roughly speaking, you add about 0.25 for every 3 diopters.
In the case of hard lenses that correct for astigmatism using tear film, the cylinder can sometimes be ignored if it doesn't exceed 2 diopters.
Hard lenses do not stop your prescription from progressing! They might influence the curvature of the eye, but once you stop wearing them, it returns to its baseline. This applies to the cylinder, which usually reappears at the same value after you stop wearing them—though that isn't a absolute rule; it depends on many factors. In some younger patients, they can occasionally stabilize the strength to a small degree.
So, here is my final takeaway: if you want to wear lenses, I would recommend HP—gas-permeable hard lenses. They carry a lower risk of complications, are far cheaper than soft lenses, and often provide superior optical results for astigmatism.
If you decide on glasses instead, I don't think I have much left to add that you don't already know.
I I should probably add that your situation is pretty unique; at the end of the day, your decision is going to hinge on a whole cocktail of different factors. I didn't dive deep into every single issue because, frankly, there's no point writing a damn dissertation on it here. But if anything else catches your eye, just ask—I'm more than happy to weigh in.
Anyway, hoping this at least offered some value. Good luck with everything, and if you end up pulling the trigger on a decision, let us know how it goes.
I’ve asked you before how strong your cylinder prescription is, but since you didn't know, it’s worth noting that this could be a deciding factor in which type of lenses you choose to wear. If the cylinder is located on the cornea, you can correct it with either hard or soft lenses. However, if the cylinder is in the lens itself, hard lenses aren't really an option. At least, they aren't in standard practice; I'm somewhat familiar with how Ophthalmologists and Contact lens specialists operate in America.
Furthermore, if your cylinder strength exceeds your spherical correction, you’ll most likely have to go with hard lenses; soft ones aren't always as successful in those specific cases.
Beyond the technicalities, perhaps the most critical factor for anyone considering contact lenses is motivation: do you actually *want* to wear them? What is driving this decision, and what are your expectations?
Lenses require significantly more maintenance and "sacrifice" than glasses; even just the upkeep is a much larger undertaking. Being irresponsible with this can lead to permanent consequences.
Provided both are corrected properly, you won't actually see better with lenses than you do with glasses. In fact, theoretically, there's a higher chance that with certain soft toric lenses, your vision might even be slightly worse. It depends on several variables.
Regardless of your choice, you need to keep a pair of glasses on hand. If you deal with inflammation or any other complications, you simply cannot wear the lenses. It's also wise not to pop them in first thing in the morning; your eyes need to breathe and take in oxygen from the environment, since they don't get a direct oxygen supply through the blood. Giving them that window of time is always a good idea. And at night, once the lenses are out... reach for the glasses.
I'll try to touch upon a few other posts to clear up some common misconceptions.
Soft lenses can serve as a replacement for glasses—and for most people, they are. Of course, eyes can be 🙂 totally screwed over by them, but that's a topic unto itself; there are too many potential complications for me to dive into that right now. Generally speaking, proper maintenance and regular replacement are the solutions.
Soft lenses allow for some oxygen permeability depending on their water content—usually ranging from 38% to 50% or 70%. The principle remains the same: the higher the water content, the greater the oxygen permeability, but they also tend to get dirty faster.
Permeability has nothing to do with bacteria; it's about the porosity of the lens, if you catch my drift. A soft lens functions like a sponge; it absorbs water and holds its shape, but it also easily traps bacteria. There are various types available, from dailies to annuals. The shorter the wear cycle, the lower the risk of contamination, but naturally, the price goes up. Monthly lenses are the standard here. Personally, I wouldn't use anything longer than six-month lenses. Hard lenses don't suffer from this issue.
The prescription for glasses and lenses can differ. Lenses often have a slightly lower negative value compared to glasses, meaning they aren't stronger or weaker! Roughly speaking, you add about 0.25 for every 3 diopters.
In the case of hard lenses that correct for astigmatism using tear film, the cylinder can sometimes be ignored if it doesn't exceed 2 diopters.
Hard lenses do not stop your prescription from progressing! They might influence the curvature of the eye, but once you stop wearing them, it returns to its baseline. This applies to the cylinder, which usually reappears at the same value after you stop wearing them—though that isn't a absolute rule; it depends on many factors. In some younger patients, they can occasionally stabilize the strength to a small degree.
So, here is my final takeaway: if you want to wear lenses, I would recommend HP—gas-permeable hard lenses. They carry a lower risk of complications, are far cheaper than soft lenses, and often provide superior optical results for astigmatism.
If you decide on glasses instead, I don't think I have much left to add that you don't already know.
I I should probably add that your situation is pretty unique; at the end of the day, your decision is going to hinge on a whole cocktail of different factors. I didn't dive deep into every single issue because, frankly, there's no point writing a damn dissertation on it here. But if anything else catches your eye, just ask—I'm more than happy to weigh in.
Anyway, hoping this at least offered some value. Good luck with everything, and if you end up pulling the trigger on a decision, let us know how it goes.