Another survey item.  Young people may run along to the next item.
 
I got my first pair of bifocals Monday night, and I'm not happy.
Nobody told me when I was ordering the pair that progressive
bifocals are mostly out-of-focus along the periphery of your 
vision.   I feel like there is one small spot which is in 
focus, and everything else is blurry.  Bleah.  The spot is so
small that it usually doesn't take in one complete telnet window
on the computer.

We'll see how the work day goes with them.  At least I'm not 
feeling ill, which I read can be a common early experience
with these lenses.

How do other baby boomers feel about their bifocals?

47 responses total.

You get used to them. For a while, I kept seeing a step just ahead of me
when skiing, which hurt my rhythm. The continuing problem is that with
bifocals, neither is quite right for viewing one's monitor at a
confortable distance. I'm not sure that trifocals will be a satisfactory
solution - one's neck might get sore with all the bobbing and weaving. 
What we need are bioengineered implanted substitute lenses with
biofeedback for focusing.

I'm not a baby boomer, but I had to get a pair thanks to law school.  The
progressive ones didn't work for me either, for the same reasons you're
complaining about.  When I first went back to Lenscrafters and told the
optician that I only got a very small in-focus area, not enough to cover an
entire page of a book, she told me I'd just have to learn to move my head when
I read. 

That didn't go over well (maybe in her job you can move your lips when you
read too, but not in mine).  I found a competent optician there on the next
trip, and switched to non-progressive ones.

I've been wearing 4.50 lens for so long that I was used to moving my head to
see when I had to switch to bifocals.  Unless someone points it out, I don't
notice the fuzz on the periphery.

I'm having problems with mine as well.  The focus spot for the reading part
is way, way too small and fuzzy on the edges.  I got the progressive just for
the monitor problem, the middle area is supposed to be able to focus on the
monitor.  I have found that it is too narrow and I get a kink in my neck 
trying to use them so usually take them off for computer work.  Makes it hard
to do homework using the computer when I need the glasses to see to write the
answers to questions that are on the computer. 

I am seriously thinking about getting non-progressive next time (soon) or
looking at actual trifocals.

I hate getting old in some ways.  In others it isn't as bad as it is made out
to be.   ;-)

Keep in mind that the alternative is worse (or, at least, until it seems
better....). 

I may have let myself get sold on the progressive lenses unnecessarily.
I'm finding that the "intermediate" range doesn't buy me much.
If I'm leaning back in my computer chair, I can see the screen clearly
through the distance lens.  If I'm up close, I find myself dropping 
way way down to the bottom of the reading lens.
 
I don't actually require reading glasses yet, but at optimum reading 
(or more importantly, writing) distance, I can no longer focus
when looking through my distance prescription.  With the glasses 
removed, I can still read and write just fine, though I can tell that
the range of sharp focus has narrowed drastically in the last few 
years.  The optometrist gave me the weakest possible reading 
prescription, he said.
 
I have 30 days in which I can have these lenses remade in a 
"Franklin/Executive" old-fashioned bifocal style.  Right now I'm
suspecting I'll exercise that option, but I'll live with these for 
a couple days.  I think I can accept the up/down focus changes, but the 
left/right changes are really annoying me.

Thanks for all the input...  obviously I should have started this
item *before* getting my eyes examined...

Well, as I have said in person, Ken, I have old-fashioned lined bifocals, and
I like them just fine. There's a really sharp distinction between close/far,
and they are much easier to get used to (at least they were for me). I can't
get progressive lenses, according to my optometrist, since I already have
enough problems without trying to deal with more fuzziness. I've had them for
over ten years (not the same pair, in fact, I got a new pair just before
Memorial Day, which took a bit of getting used to during the drive(s) we took,
but are just fine reading/walking/etc.) and never regretted the decision to
get them.

I had bifocals for a while when I was in high school and college.  Then
my eyes got better for several years, then I needed reading glasses
again and now I wear unifocals all the time.  The bifocals took some
getting used to, but after two or three weeks, I had adjusted.  I wore
both lineless and lined ones.  I remember liking the lined ones better. 
My prescription has not changed in six years.  

Have any of you bifocals wearers (or anyone else) tried eyeball
exercises?  The exercises may not make your sight better than it is now,
but they can slow down or maybe even stop your sight from getting worse.

Without moving your head:
Roll your eyes counterclockwise 10 times;
Roll your eyes clockwise 10 times;
Alternate looking as far up as you can and as far down as you can, 10
times each;
Alternate looking diagonally down to the right and up to the left as far
as you can, 10 times each;
Alternate looking diagonally down the the left and up to the right as
far as you can, 10 times each;
Hold your finger as close to your face as you can and still focus on it,
then alternate focusing on your finger and on some far-away object 10
times each.

When doing the up/down, diagonal, and close/far stuff, each position
should be held for a second or two.  The last one should be done daily,
even if you don't do any of the others.  Don't try to push your eye
muscles beyond their comfort level; I once pulled an eye muscle and it
was not pleasant.  It takes a week or two to get used to doing these if
you do them daily.

I haven't been as "organized" as all that, but I have found it useful to
exercise the eyes.

It's also helpful to exercise the jaws muscles; this avoids jaw cracking
or worse.  That's just a matter of trying to open the mouth against
resistance (one's hand), trying to close the mouth, and doing this
separately for each side.

re #9: For exercising the jaw muscles, I use cheeseburgers.  Also, I 
talk a lot.

No exercise will stop the hardening of the lens with age, which is what
bifocals serve to mitigate. 

Carol passes this along:

My $.02:

Bi- or multi-focals definitely take a while to get used to. A friend of mine
is fond of telling about how when she got hers (bifocals), the doctor told
her to give it a couple of weeks before passing judgment. She found them
pretty disconcerting until exactly day 14, at which point she became
suddenly comfortable and has been absolutely sold on them ever since.

As for mine (progressives), they're not perfect, but the advantages far
outweigh the drawbacks. I don't have fuzziness on the periphery at the
middle distance, but I do on the highest power (reading distance). The clear
spot's too small for one page of a paperback. The other problem is reading
while lying one one's side--the pillow pushes the lenses into the wrong
position. My solution was to get a pair of cheap drugstore glasses for long
or lying-down reading sessions. They work just fine.

Unless you have *really* sticky cheeseburgers, they won't apply
resistance for *opening* the jaw.  In any event, if TMD is just a TLA,
you don't need to worry.  I find, for me, it makes the clicking sounds
go away, and I've never wanted to find out what the next stage of TMD is
like.

I had progressives for about a month and hated them as much on day
thirty as one.  They went back.  I got plain old bifocals for everyday
wear and a pair of high quality 2.0 non-prescription glasses for computer
use.

Works great.

So far all I do is take my glasses off for reading and close
in detail work such as soldering, working on coins, etc.
Everything else I use regular glasses.  Had the same prescription 
for over 20 years now (just lucky I guess).  Dunno how I would
benefit from bifocals but haven't seen any eye doctor for 10 years
or so therefore I may be missing out?

I cannot see up close with my only pair of non-bifocal glasses (same
prescription as about 20 years ago) so I take them off to read.  I was always
losing them so Jim got me a $2 orange string with little plastic loops at the
end to put around the earpieces, and I can take them off and hang them around
my neck and they also fit under a bike helmet, but it gets tricky to remove
the one before the other, also if you are wearing a hat it can get even
trickier.  So I slip off one of the loops.  The only problem now is middle
distance (about 5') at which point I cannot see either way so I get up and
move closer.  A friend with bifocals never uses his.  The glasses on the loop
solution is okay unless you are bending over then they get in the way.  I
sometimes put them up on my head instead (if not wearing a helmet).  There
is a variety with little metal clips that is painful under a helmet.  Mine
are a souvenir of La Crosse Wisconsin where a friendly optician replaced a
missing nose pad for $5 including labor, and where bifocals are half the price
of regular glasses here.
        Jim has started using reading glasses for closeup work and distance
glasses for lectures and nothing the rest of the time.  He gets his reading
glasses very cheap used, or for $8 at K-Mart, and is always misplacing them
so we have 5 or more pairs at each place and I collect them into a drawer.

15 appeared while I was writing 16, by coincidence.

I avoided the whole question of bi-focals completely.

I have distance glasses and I have reading glasses.  I find that that works
just fine, for the most part.  (Something like Glenda describes - reading and
writing homework on the computer) would be a pain, though.

It's not the bifocals, per se ... it's all the neck strain I've watched people
go through over the years.  And the ability to see the wider vista at whatever
range I'm working with.  I just wasn't willing to go there.

Separate glasses don't work when you need clear distance vision for
skiing and clear close vision for the trail guide! Other situations
where you need both may be driving (to see traffic and maps clearly),
at lectures (to read the screen and take notes), at shows (to see
the action and read program notes), etc.

I had progressive lenses and they were fine for the computer work, but  my
work depends on long-distance focusing from all directions except directly
down.  I had to walk turning my head side-to-side as if I were some damn bird.
This optomitrist I since then fired.  I now have two single-focus specs and
I need a third for intermediate focus.  

Hmmm. I had reading glasses and distance glasses, but since I need the
distance glasses to walk around and not fall over things any more than I
normally do, trying to remember to change glasses everytime I wanted to get
up and go to the bathroom or take a break at work was more than I was prepared
to deal with. Bifocals are nifty. I usually just look through the distance
side (I think) for computer use. (I am usually very close to my screen,
anyhow. Can't see it unless I am.)

I'm very happy with my blended tri-focals.  

I have bifocals with the hard line.  I hate them, but progressive ones
would be much worse.  Thinking what trifocals would be like makes me ill.

Using a desktop computer, I have to lean my head back to get the monitor
below the bifocals line.  The glasses work better with a notebook machine.

I asked for the line to go all the way across the lens.  The optometrist
laughed at me and said that was nonsense.  So essentially, on each lens, I
have a small semicircular patch for reading, and the lower left and lower
right fields of vision are completely unusable.  And all those extra lines
on the lens, running completely around the "reading patch," interfere with
seeing the ground clearly, so you trip over things.  Next time, I will
know I need to insist on ONE SINGLE LINE ALL THE WAY ACROSS, WITH NO OTHER
CRAP ON THE LENS.

U of M offers a "vision plan", which means, instead of going to a regular
glasses place, you have to go to a little shop in the Kellogg Eye Center. 
If you have a large skull like mine, they only have one or two frame
styles that are available in any size even remotely big enough.  And
apparenty getting bifocals on large size frames means that the glasses
will take much longer than promised. I think they promised the new glasses
in five days and it took two months, something like that.  When I
complained about this, they said cheerfully that some glasses were "just
cursed".  No wonder they give me headaches.

I guess the alternative would be to stop paying for the vision insurance,
buy glasses from DOC or Dobbs or somewhere, and deal with a different set
of problems.  Of course, they don't have much available for guys with big
heads, either.  It's almost as bad as trying to find size 13 shoes in
1980, when the retailing fad everywhere was to drop all the "odd" sizes
and concentrate on the "big selling" ones.  Shoe stores got over that, but
the eyeglass industry still treats non-average-size people with contempt.
Hell, they treat EVERYONE with contempt.

Sorry for the cranky response, but I have over forty years of bad
experiences with eyeglasses and the smug, nasty idiots who make and sell
them.

        I could list the people around AA I've had problems with.
        Sometimes I think about developing skills to  work with
        frames and lenses, and see what I can do myself.

Those who require multifocals (ie, more than two different lens settings):
Does your Rx contain nonspherical components? (Otherwise there ought to exist
a distance at which vision is clear without correction, at least for each eye
separately.)

I wouldn't want all-the-way-across bifocals because it would put artifacts
in my distance peripheral vision. I do see things, especiallyh when
driving, through those surrounds, and would not want a line running
through them.

Another technique that worked for me was contact lenses for distance
correction, and glasses put on specifically for reading.  If I were doing
more reading and computer work, they offered to do it the other way around:
contacts for most work, and glasses for driving.  

I tried the distance-contacts and reading-glasses combination last summer,
when I lost my glasses.  I think I prefer bifocals.  (I still use the contacts
for sailing, when close vision isn't as important.)

FWIW, Larry, I use M-Care's vision component (basically, free exams) rather
than the U's "vision" plan.

I have large astigmatism, so contacts (and store-bought glasses) are
out. 

I use glass retainers for sailing and other 'extreme' sports. 
(I have wondered how well contacts stay put when you are under water -
do they? Or don't you ever dump???)

Larry, if you have Davis Vision through the U of M there are options other
than KEC.  I go to an optomotrist on Stadium, have a reasonable selection
of frames to choose from, and end up getting a new pair of glasses, every
year, no extra charges. 

Why does someone want to pay for vision insurance that gets you a new pair
of glasses every year?  I only change my glasses if my prescription changes
(it has gone 15 years with no change) or if the old ones break.  This sounds
like really expensive insurance.

The U-M offers fabulous benefits.  They match two-for-one for your 
contributions to your retirement fund, for example, with no maximum 
limit on contributions as I recall.  It doesn't surprise me if they buy 
you new glasses every year.

Lenscrafters informed me that they offer a 30% discount 
with a AAA membership.  This more than paid for the membership, which 
I already had.  If you are thinking about getting a AAA membership
for the discount, please reconfirm this with Lenscrafters first.
 
And, repeating what I said to polygon in a party chat, I ended up with 
Lenscrafters some years back because they had a better selection of
frames for my large head.  
 
Four days with the progressive bifocals, and I seem to be adapting to 
them fairly well.   I think I am using the intermediate distance for 
computer screens more than I thought I was (resp:6), and I clearly
need these lenses or something like them for work, since I'm
constantly going from computer screen to reading/writing paper.

The biggest issue is that the best distance focus point is 
significantly to the left of center.  I'm driving and walking 
around with my head pointing off to the right.  Need to find 
out what's going on here.  I'm hoping its a manufacturing screwup
and not an artifact from the different distance curves I have for 
left and right eyes.

I may still want to get an all-distance pair of glasses for 
driving.  Haven't decided about that yet.

I need new glasses every year. I only *wish* my 'scrip hadn't changed in 15
years. That would be *so* nice. Sindi, beginning in adolescence, there's a
period when one's glasses needs change rapidly. For most people, it ends in
or by their early twenties. So a parent would need that insurance. Pregnant
women have rapid (but possibly non-lasting) vision changes. 

And then there's me. Grin. I have to have new glasses every year (sometimes
I can stretch it to two years) because of my work (which is intensively
eye-using and is notoriously hard on eyes -- nearly EVERYONE who's ever worked
here at this job has had to get glasses or get more powerful 'scrips because
of the toll it takes on the eyes) and because of my eyes -- I have about four
different things wrong with them, and most of them just keep getting worse.

But even if you get new glasses every two years, isn't it cheaper just to pay
for them instead of paying for insurance?  Or is someone else paying for your
insurance?  What does a year of vision insurance cost?
        I went age 25 to 48 with about the same prescription then I got
slightly less near-sighted, which they say is normal, but started needing to
take off glasses to read.  Same prescription still for distance.

I suppose that depends on the cost of the vision insurance.  Mine is included
wiht the health insurance, which I get through my employer, so I have no idea
how much the vision insurance costs.  However, since I don't have much of a
choice about whether to have it, I might as well use it.

Before my most recent pair of glasses, I'd gone several years without
replacing the old one, finally doing so last summer after the old ones (six
years old, maybe?) had become too scratched up to see through very well.  I
realized after getting the new ones, and seeing how much easier it was to see
through them, that I really should have replaced the old ones long before.
This year's allotment of vision insurance money is going to some prescription
cycling sunglasses, since I've been finding that around 35 or 40 mph my
regular glasses start channeling air into my eyes in a way that makes it
really hard to see.  I suspect that by the time insurance is ready to pay for
part of another pair, I will have gotten my current regular glasses scratched
to the point where I'll want to replace them again.

That said, my vision insurance isn't really all that useful.  I think it
covers about $80 of the cost of glasses, which tend to cost a lot more than
that.  It really seems like more of a discount card than anything else.

I don't have vision insurance . So I do buy them every year (or two). I've
never had the luxury of having prescription sunglasses -- I can't get two
pairs, and the old pair is usually too fuzzy to make walking around in them
an option (since I know a lot of people who just get their old glasses
coated), and I can't have color-changing lenses (doctor says the varying
thicknesses just would make it dark all the time in some spots and light in
others. ). So I just don't have sunglasses.

My own prescription has been pretty stable the last 5 years, but I still get
an annual checkup (and pay for it) because of my contact lenses.  I just got
new, and more currently-stylish glasses.  Took a couple days to get used to
new glasses, though.  The first time I put them on I got somewhat nauseous,
just based on the slight change in prescription and the greater change in lens
size.  Well, actually the astigmatizm change was probably a bigger issue (my
optometrist once explained astigmatizm changes from the basis of constant flow
within the eyball!).

Ever since I got contacts I've been going to Paul Uslan, on North Maple near
Miller.  Recommended by a co-worker, and I'd recommend him as well.

        I used to go to Dr. Paul. He helped me with 
        hard contacts but he ws very perfunctory
        with glasses.

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss