Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site rochester.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!rochester!rick
From: rick@rochester.UUCP (Rick Floyd)
Newsgroups: net.med
Subject: extended wear contact lense "horror stories"
Message-ID: <3831@rochester.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 14-Nov-83 20:46:38 EST
Article-I.D.: rocheste.3831
Posted: Mon Nov 14 20:46:38 1983
Date-Received: Wed, 16-Nov-83 07:19:43 EST
Organization: U. of Rochester, CS Dept.
Lines: 34

The following is from an article that appeared in the November 11,
1983 Rochester Times-Union. The section excerpted here describes some local
reactions to ads on extended wear lenses:

...
"It's certainly not our perogative to advertise 30-day wear is for every
person," he [Ryan of Hydrocurve] said. "We believe certain people should
only wear them for two days, others can wear them for two months."

...
"The ads also fail to mention potential problems with soft, extended wear
lenses, Reznick [a local optometrist] said.

"He said the lenses are difficult to handle. They require special
sterilization because they become covered with protein and minerals if left
in for long periods. They provide less-sharp vision than hard contacts or
eyeglasses, can last as little as four months with an average life of 13
months, are uncomfortable for hay fever suffers and can be destroyed by
heavy makeup and vaseline or other eye makeup remover.

"Buying extended wear contact lenses "is an expensive eye habit," said
Reznick. He said it can cost between $40 and $100 a year for maintenance and
eye checkups, not including frequent replacement of lenses."
...


Does this sound right to people that have extended wear lenses? I'm thinking
about getting extended wear contacts (I currently have glasses), but I'm not
very thrilled by the above description...

	rick floyd
	uucp: (seismo | allegra)!rochester!rick
	arpa: rick@rochester