My eyes are different. Here's my current and more or less most balanced prescription (these are eyeglasses, not contacts):
OD: -3.25 0.75 x20
OS: N -3.00 x175
The issue is basically this: I think I would greatly benefit from a half dioptre more of cylindrical on the OD (as I have had for the last 7 years) to get my eyes to work together correctly, but my optometrist disagrees. He's rather adamant about keeping the correction as low as possible, and had even unsuccessfully attempted to make the cylindrical neutral on that basis. Putting the OD cylindrical all the way up to -1.25, as I have in an old and extremely clear and comfortable lens, would be GREATLY overcorrecting, he says. He prescribed patching my left to build strength in my right, which I've been doing for two weeks. It hasn't really gotten rid of the problem, though. My right eye doesn't move, see, feel, or event THINK as sharply as it did with my old prescription.
The actual difference in acuity is very sublte, but my suspicion is that the additional cylindrical correction makes things at near and middle distance JUST clear enough to compensate for a childhood retinal problem. Basically, my right eye experiences what I can only describe as permanent retinal pigment oversaturation (that is, the same sensation one gets from flash blindness, but constant and not quite as severe) My childhood ophthalmologist once said it looked like retinal scarring. It can be very disconcerting, especially if that eye needs to strain for any reason.
Now, my old lens with the -1.25 feels perfectly fine. It does not cause headaches or straining or anything, which is usually the rationale for avoiding overcorrection. It's just plain clearer and makes things easier to see.
Anything I need to worry about here, or should I just go and argue the same thing to my doc?
Woops. the current OD is -3.50 -0.75 x20, (not -3.25 -0.75 x20.) The additional quarter diopter of spherical JUST gets me to the next line on the chart.
The old and comfortable lens I talk about is: -3.25 -1.25 x20.
What I'm thinking of asking for is -3.50 -1.25 x20
OD: -3.25 0.75 x20
OS: N -3.00 x175
The issue is basically this: I think I would greatly benefit from a half dioptre more of cylindrical on the OD (as I have had for the last 7 years) to get my eyes to work together correctly, but my optometrist disagrees. He's rather adamant about keeping the correction as low as possible, and had even unsuccessfully attempted to make the cylindrical neutral on that basis. Putting the OD cylindrical all the way up to -1.25, as I have in an old and extremely clear and comfortable lens, would be GREATLY overcorrecting, he says. He prescribed patching my left to build strength in my right, which I've been doing for two weeks. It hasn't really gotten rid of the problem, though. My right eye doesn't move, see, feel, or event THINK as sharply as it did with my old prescription.
The actual difference in acuity is very sublte, but my suspicion is that the additional cylindrical correction makes things at near and middle distance JUST clear enough to compensate for a childhood retinal problem. Basically, my right eye experiences what I can only describe as permanent retinal pigment oversaturation (that is, the same sensation one gets from flash blindness, but constant and not quite as severe) My childhood ophthalmologist once said it looked like retinal scarring. It can be very disconcerting, especially if that eye needs to strain for any reason.
Now, my old lens with the -1.25 feels perfectly fine. It does not cause headaches or straining or anything, which is usually the rationale for avoiding overcorrection. It's just plain clearer and makes things easier to see.
Anything I need to worry about here, or should I just go and argue the same thing to my doc?
Woops. the current OD is -3.50 -0.75 x20, (not -3.25 -0.75 x20.) The additional quarter diopter of spherical JUST gets me to the next line on the chart.
The old and comfortable lens I talk about is: -3.25 -1.25 x20.
What I'm thinking of asking for is -3.50 -1.25 x20