Laser eye surgery: worth the cost?
Discussion
Evening everybody.
For some time now I've been weighing up whether to spend the 2k+ to get my vision corrected. I don't have much in savings but could probably afford the one off payment, it seems like the results are worth the money!
Has anyone had the procedure done, and could shed some light on the following...
- How much did it cost?
- How would you rate the improvement in life quality?
- What is the cheapest but also completely safe company to go with? (have read about Optimax offering a reduced cost if you're referred by someone??)
Thanks!
For some time now I've been weighing up whether to spend the 2k+ to get my vision corrected. I don't have much in savings but could probably afford the one off payment, it seems like the results are worth the money!
Has anyone had the procedure done, and could shed some light on the following...
- How much did it cost?
- How would you rate the improvement in life quality?
- What is the cheapest but also completely safe company to go with? (have read about Optimax offering a reduced cost if you're referred by someone??)
Thanks!
There is quite a few threads on here about it, the consensus seems to be yes. I did mine over 10 years ago now, easily the greatest purchase of my life. My eyes were -6.5 each, and now I can wake up in the morning and see.
The amount of money i have saved in glasses, lenses and other bits has probably almost covered the 3 grand it cost me.
The amount of money i have saved in glasses, lenses and other bits has probably almost covered the 3 grand it cost me.
I'm short sighted and was advised that if I had the surgery there was a high probability I would need glasses for reading later in life. If I didn't there was a better chance I'd be ok for reading in future without glasses. I chose not to pursue it.
Daily contacts work perfectly for me. They're not for everyone I guess.
Daily contacts work perfectly for me. They're not for everyone I guess.
If you are going to do it, get on with it. Best age group is 25-35 as this way you stand the best chance of having a good period without glasses.
If you leave it until 40 then yes your distance vision is better but you will need reading glasses. If you work in front of a computer you may be able to drive to work without glasses but you'll put them on when you get there.
If your distance vision remains good into your 40s you will need reading/Near vision glasses, no ifs or buts, you will (ok there are a few unusual sets of circumstances where this may not be true but it will be by accident not design). Those of you who are short sighted can read without your glasses albeit quite close to you. This aspect will (start to) disappear once you get to 42 or so if you have the procedure.
Regression of your old prescription - well if you are -6 to begin with and your prescription slips to -6.50 then the principle is the same as 0 to -0.5. Once you get to -0.75 you will want glasses to drive in. You won't wear them all the time like you once did but you will have them. My experience is that this can take 6 years or so and it may not happen. Newer techniques are better but you can't guarantee anything.
You certainly can't be sure it will save you money either, especially if you are late 30s early 40s but that isn't really the point.
The laser algorithms are excellent and improving all the time so the procedure should be faultless (more or less), I haven't seen anyone recently who was unhappy with the the effects of the basic procedure.
I'd avoid any "high st" outfit. One of them is about to be sued big time allegedly. Certainly my experience of some of the clinical care leaves a lot to be desired. Seek out professional groups who do this privately. Again no guarantees but a "sales" approach isn't really appropriate for this sort of thing IMHO.
Hope that helps.
If you leave it until 40 then yes your distance vision is better but you will need reading glasses. If you work in front of a computer you may be able to drive to work without glasses but you'll put them on when you get there.
If your distance vision remains good into your 40s you will need reading/Near vision glasses, no ifs or buts, you will (ok there are a few unusual sets of circumstances where this may not be true but it will be by accident not design). Those of you who are short sighted can read without your glasses albeit quite close to you. This aspect will (start to) disappear once you get to 42 or so if you have the procedure.
Regression of your old prescription - well if you are -6 to begin with and your prescription slips to -6.50 then the principle is the same as 0 to -0.5. Once you get to -0.75 you will want glasses to drive in. You won't wear them all the time like you once did but you will have them. My experience is that this can take 6 years or so and it may not happen. Newer techniques are better but you can't guarantee anything.
You certainly can't be sure it will save you money either, especially if you are late 30s early 40s but that isn't really the point.
The laser algorithms are excellent and improving all the time so the procedure should be faultless (more or less), I haven't seen anyone recently who was unhappy with the the effects of the basic procedure.
I'd avoid any "high st" outfit. One of them is about to be sued big time allegedly. Certainly my experience of some of the clinical care leaves a lot to be desired. Seek out professional groups who do this privately. Again no guarantees but a "sales" approach isn't really appropriate for this sort of thing IMHO.
Hope that helps.
I had mines in February 2003 when I was 20 as an early 21st birthday present. If I recall correctly, it was about £1300 at the time and it was worth every penny.
I couldn't have LASIK due to having thin corneas so I had PRK instead. It's a slightly different procedure where the upper corneal layer is removed with a laser, rather than a flap being created with a microkeratome. It has a longer healing time and, to be honest, hurt like an absolute b
d for the first few days after surgery. It was like having sand in my eyes.
After the initial healing period I've had no issues whatsoever.
I couldn't have LASIK due to having thin corneas so I had PRK instead. It's a slightly different procedure where the upper corneal layer is removed with a laser, rather than a flap being created with a microkeratome. It has a longer healing time and, to be honest, hurt like an absolute b
d for the first few days after surgery. It was like having sand in my eyes.After the initial healing period I've had no issues whatsoever.
CRB14 said:
I'm short sighted and was advised that if I had the surgery there was a high probability I would need glasses for reading later in life. If I didn't there was a better chance I'd be ok for reading in future without glasses. I chose not to pursue it.
I'm short sighted (-5.5) and was told (many years ago) that my vision would return to normal as I got older and long-sight would cancel out the short-sight. Later I was told that's b
ks - and indeed I now wear varifocals although I was into my early 50's before I had problems reading. Many sharp sighted colleagues were wearing reading glasses way before me.Go to the best you can afford though some of the top places offer 0% finance.
I didnt fancy one of the high street chains and so went to a more expensive one and didnt suffer any issues after surgery. I also have thin corneas and large pupils so had to have the more expensive treatment (yeah that old chestnut).
Anyway, im happy with it and got great aftercare which is another thing to consider
I didnt fancy one of the high street chains and so went to a more expensive one and didnt suffer any issues after surgery. I also have thin corneas and large pupils so had to have the more expensive treatment (yeah that old chestnut).
Anyway, im happy with it and got great aftercare which is another thing to consider
Sheepshanks said:
I'm short sighted (-5.5) and was told (many years ago) that my vision would return to normal as I got older and long-sight would cancel out the short-sight.
Later I was told that's bks - and indeed I now wear varifocals although I was into my early 50's before I had problems reading. Many sharp sighted colleagues were wearing reading glasses way before me.
To confirm what you suspected, the first bit is indeed utter cobblers.Later I was told that's b
ks - and indeed I now wear varifocals although I was into my early 50's before I had problems reading. Many sharp sighted colleagues were wearing reading glasses way before me.soad said:
Of course, it's worth it!
Do a quick calculation of how much those contact lenses/many pairs of glasses cost you...
Laser eye surgery is relatively affordable these days too.
Believe fees were £5k per eye just over a decade ago?
I'm not so sure - my contacts are £12p/m plus a bit of solution now and again and I've had the same glasses for the past 6 years which cost £30. Even taking a cheap treatment that's 25 years to pay back. The reduced hassle on the other hand is appealingDo a quick calculation of how much those contact lenses/many pairs of glasses cost you...
Laser eye surgery is relatively affordable these days too.
Believe fees were £5k per eye just over a decade ago?
Sargeant Orange said:
I'm not so sure - my contacts are £12p/m plus a bit of solution now and again and I've had the same glasses for the past 6 years which cost £30. Even taking a cheap treatment that's 25 years to pay back. The reduced hassle on the other hand is appealing
Your costs are very reasonable.I'm lucky if my glasses last two years at best.
Convenience for sports (swimming for example, or martial arts etc).
Being able to wear normal sunglasses too, no need for contacts.
Gassing Station | Health Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff