Compulsory Eye Tests for Drivers
Discussion
totally agree on eye tests for drivers, maybe for over 50's? Some of the winter driving, particularly late in the day/evening, I see is shocking and you can tell the car ahead cant see very well, by braking all the time or coming to an almost stop when a car approaches from the other direction.
Peter3442 said:
Vision and visual perception are more complicated than reading a number plate or passing the simplest eye test. For example, someone with serious glaucoma with a visual field reduced to a spot may well pass the number plate test. Someone with macular degeneration might have difficulty with the number plate, but be relatively safe to drive. Perhaps psychological or attitude tests are as worthwhile when there are individuals who think it's acceptable to drive out of a side road when they cannot see due to the sun in their eyes.
People diagnosed with glaucoma, at any rate, need to pass regular visual field tests to keep their licences.
LordGrover said:
Toaster said:
cptsideways said:
I'd estimate 25% of drivers would fail the basic test, its gotten worse since satnav means you don't need to see the roadsigns.
and there lays the problem for those with 20/20 vision and those who don't if you think a Sat nav provides all the clues you need when driving FFS.I've worn specs or contacts for most of my life.
As advancing age and decrepitude has set in I found myself needing to remove my specs to read - not too much of an issue unless I'm wearing contact lenses.
Have tried various multi-focal lenses with varying degrees of success.The best I could achieve whilst still being able to read with them was '20/20' according to optician.
Sounds great, until you compare with my vision with specs or contacts - which is very noticeably better.
I wouldn't consider driving with just 20/20 vision - it's just not good enough.
I'm not sure I'm going to explain this very well but hopefully one of the Optometrists on here will come along and explain it better. First, it's not 20/20 it's 6/6 unless you're American.
6/6 is the acuity accepted as perfect, there has to be a standard and that is it. This will enable you to pass the number plate test easily and you could read the plate even further than that. Vision of about 6/9 will pass the test. I have vision of 6/5 when wearing my glasses which basically means I can see at 6 metres as well as some one with 6/6 (perfect) vision can see at 5 metres. If you don't accept 6/6 as being good enough then believe me the roads will be very empty. 6/9 means at 6 metres you an only see as well as someone with 6/6 sees at 9 metres.
However, this could be likened to to passing your eye test looking down a toilet roll tube. Having perfect vision (6/6) does not take into account narrowing of the field of vision due to glaucoma for instance. It only measures your vision while looking straight ahead. The 'dot test' checks your field of vision and that could be perfect even if you had significantly worse than 6/6.
Johnspex said:
l
I'm not sure I'm going to explain this very well but hopefully one of the Optometrists on here will come along and explain it better. First, it's not 20/20 it's 6/6 unless you're American.
6/6 is the acuity accepted as perfect, there has to be a standard and that is it. This will enable you to pass the number plate test easily and you could read the plate even further than that. Vision of about 6/9 will pass the test. I have vision of 6/5 when wearing my glasses which basically means I can see at 6 metres as well as some one with 6/6 (perfect) vision can see at 5 metres. If you don't accept 6/6 as being good enough then believe me the roads will be very empty. 6/9 means at 6 metres you an only see as well as someone with 6/6 sees at 9 metres.
However, this could be likened to to passing your eye test looking down a toilet roll tube. Having perfect vision (6/6) does not take into account narrowing of the field of vision due to glaucoma for instance. It only measures your vision while looking straight ahead. The 'dot test' checks your field of vision and that could be perfect even if you had significantly worse than 6/6.
Isn't that just nitpicking though, as 20/20 is 6/6 (ft vs meters).I'm not sure I'm going to explain this very well but hopefully one of the Optometrists on here will come along and explain it better. First, it's not 20/20 it's 6/6 unless you're American.
6/6 is the acuity accepted as perfect, there has to be a standard and that is it. This will enable you to pass the number plate test easily and you could read the plate even further than that. Vision of about 6/9 will pass the test. I have vision of 6/5 when wearing my glasses which basically means I can see at 6 metres as well as some one with 6/6 (perfect) vision can see at 5 metres. If you don't accept 6/6 as being good enough then believe me the roads will be very empty. 6/9 means at 6 metres you an only see as well as someone with 6/6 sees at 9 metres.
However, this could be likened to to passing your eye test looking down a toilet roll tube. Having perfect vision (6/6) does not take into account narrowing of the field of vision due to glaucoma for instance. It only measures your vision while looking straight ahead. The 'dot test' checks your field of vision and that could be perfect even if you had significantly worse than 6/6.
And I was told that's just 'normal' vision - whereas perfect vision is 'better than 20/20 or 6/6'.
So something like 20/3 or 6/1 would be 'perfect'.
Oddly, vision is one thing where you can actually be better than perfect. I imagine there is a perfect resting heart beat but I'm sure an Olympic sprinter is better than that.
6/6 is just what is accepted as perfect vision. Not many opticians would prescribe glasses for someone with 6/6. I've not come across many who can see better than 6/4.5 corrected or not.
6/6 is just what is accepted as perfect vision. Not many opticians would prescribe glasses for someone with 6/6. I've not come across many who can see better than 6/4.5 corrected or not.
High Street opticians/optometrists/ophthalmologists may not be the best solution to the issue: EndMyopia.org.
LordGrover said:
High Street opticians/optometrists/ophthalmologists may not be the best solution to the issue: EndMyopia.org.
Oh well, that's simple. I wonder what all the thousands of people worldwide who are involved in the optics industry will do now. Those tales have been going around since God was a lad. It's like the ' no-one needs glasses , just a disc with hundreds of tiny holes in them. The South African Air Force use them so it must be true' . And let's not forget Catseyes Cunningham, he of carrot fame.Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff