It's an age thing ...

In article , Don Whybrow
says...
I am finding it increasingly difficult to read small print. Either the
print is in focus at arms length, but too small to read, or close up it
is large enough to read, but out of focus. Time is having it's effect.

It happens to us all, apparently. I recently got my first prescription
reading glasses, having used cheap "ready readers" for a couple of years
for close-up work - the prescription ones are much better.

By good fortune, the company I work for subscribes to a scheme that will
allow me to get free "VDU" glasses. Today I went to the nearest Optician
in the list and had an eye test. As suspected, I need reading/close work
glasses. What was a bit more of a blow was that while I am still legal
to drive, it is only due to one eye, the other is below standard for
distance work.

Fortunately my distance vision is still excellent.

Consequently I am mulling over the need to get a set for
general use. The optician said that it wasn't legally necessary.

To be safe you only need good distance vision in one eye as long as you
have peripheral vision in both - you don't need to see clearly to detect
movement at the periphery. Sometimes when people have surgical
correction they purposely have one eye corrected for distance and the
other for near vision so they can get by without glasses in most
situations. Have you considered the possibility of laser surgery to
correct the weaker eye? A friend had it done a few years ago (she was
previously very short sighted, and had used specs/contacts for many
years) with excellent results. Opticians don't generally seem to know
much about laser correction.

Quoting Don Whybrow :
By good fortune, the company I work for subscribes to a scheme that will
allow me to get free "VDU" glasses.

This scheme is called "the law", if your work involved a significant
amount of staring at screens. They don't have any choice.
--
David Damerell Distortion Field!
Today is First Sunday, February - a weekend.

Don Whybrow wrote:
I like to ride with cycling glasses. The clear one keeps the rain and
the bugs at bay, the dark one stops me squinting at the sun.

1. Does anyone know anybody that produces prescription cycling glasses?
2. Are there any cycling glasses that you can wear over the top of a
pair of glasses a la safety goggle stylee?

I know it is bad for to reply to your own post, but I thought I would
put all my responses in one post rather than respond individually.

First off, thanks for all the responses.

Danny & Simon: Useful links/leads there, the Scorch & Oakley M look
interesting, comments about the inserts misting have been noted.

Wafflycat: Neat solution, and may be a cheaper option. Will wearing
contacts have an effect when I need the reading glasses or are they
likely to be OK together?

JNugent: Yes, apparently there are such things. Do your distance glasses
serve any use as a barrier to wind, bugs or rain at 20-30mph. If not I
fail to see the connection with cycling specific glasses. It is highly
likely that (unless I opt for the contact lenses) I will also get a
general purpose pair for the uses you describe amongst others.

-dan: I know it wasn't aimed at me, but good point about using Google.
Had I done so, I would probably have not asked the question and not
considered the responses that are taking a more lateral approach.

Jeff: Like Martin & Dave, I prefer to be able to see what is going on.

Rob: I have not considered laser treatment. The thought of it is not
attractive.

David: I am glad to see that my employers are obeying the law then. It
gives me greater confidence in their other policies.


--
Don Whybrow

Sequi Bonum Non Time

If you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is stop
diggin'.

Don Whybrow wrote:

Don Whybrow wrote:

I like to ride with cycling glasses. The clear one keeps the rain and
the bugs at bay, the dark one stops me squinting at the sun.

1. Does anyone know anybody that produces prescription cycling glasses?
2. Are there any cycling glasses that you can wear over the top of a
pair of glasses a la safety goggle stylee?

I know it is bad for to reply to your own post, but I thought I would
put all my responses in one post rather than respond individually.

First off, thanks for all the responses.

[ ... ]

JNugent: Yes, apparently there are such things. Do your distance glasses
serve any use as a barrier to wind, bugs or rain at 20-30mph. If not I
fail to see the connection with cycling specific glasses.

The "connection" isn't necessary. I merely asked a question about a
concept I had not previously ancountered. Thank you for answering it.

At least if someone needs glasses (and wears them) they have some
protection against those things you mention. Riders lucky enough not to
require glasses usually don't have that at all. Of course, as you (or
others, IIRC) have remarked, they (or prescription lens wearers) can
wear goggles as protection, whether instead of additionally to glasses,
but I'd be more impressed by the reference to the barrier effect if all
cyclists (or even a majority of them) habitually wore either plain glass
goggles or prescription "cycling glasses". IME, they don't, so an
observed majority are vulnerable to those things anyway.

It is highly
likely that (unless I opt for the contact lenses) I will also get a
general purpose pair for the uses you describe amongst others.

A pair of prescription sunglasses is a really good idea, especially for
travelling west into the setting sun. I keep a pair in the glovebox.

Martin Bulmer wrote:
Jeff wrote:
My prescription is -8 diopters and I
usually ride sans glasses (wouldn't do that with a car).

So you can't read your watch until it's about 6 inches in front of your
eyes? Brave man. Don't unexpected pot-holes shake you up a bit? I know
people with - 8 D who claim they can't get out of bed without their
correction. Is it fair to expext drivers to reach a certain standard of
vision, but to make no attempt to do so ourselves?
Small potholes aren't too bad. Large ones usually distinguish
themselves enough for me to notice.

I usually wear my specs every waking minute (less time in the shower).
I tell people I suffer from long nose syndrome (as opposed to short arm
syndrome): my nose prevents me from getting books close enough to my
eyes to read.

-8 is not actually that bad. I've played in a table tennis tournament
sans glasses (broke them hours before); I was able to see the ball once
it got to my side of the table.

A driver is driving thousands of pounds of metal and plastic (and highly
flammable fluid) at potentially 60 or 70 mph. I ride my 22 pound bike
at, typically, less than 20 mph. If I miss a stop sign or some such
silliness, likely the only one to be hurt is me. If a driver misses a
stop sign, or such, he might well harm others. The potential
consequences should affect the standard to which the operators are held.
Similar concept to "standard of care". Someone with very basic first
aid training is held to a higher standard of care than someone with no
training but a far lower standard of care than, say, a practicing physician.

Frankly, at 20mph or less, I have no trouble seeing well enough to react
in time to avoid (causing) problems.

"JNugent" wrote in message
news
At least if someone needs glasses (and wears them) they have some
protection against those things you mention. Riders lucky enough not to
require glasses usually don't have that at all. Of course, as you (or
others, IIRC) have remarked, they (or prescription lens wearers) can wear
goggles as protection, whether instead of additionally to glasses, but I'd
be more impressed by the reference to the barrier effect if all cyclists
(or even a majority of them) habitually wore either plain glass goggles or
prescription "cycling glasses". IME, they don't, so an observed majority
are vulnerable to those things anyway.

If you observe keener cyclists, a significant proportion will wear some form
of eye-protection. A lot of them will have learned to do so prompted by the
joys of insects - riding in the countryside as the keener cyclists are wont
to do provides more opportunity for this. (I often wondered what my friends
were complaining about until I realised my specs were protecting me).

There is a market for plain cycling glasses - not goggles, just glasses.
Obviously there's also the tinted varieties, but the plain ones are there
too. Have a look in a decent bike shop for eg a set of D'arcs.

clive

In t,
Rob Morley tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell us:
Have you considered the possibility of laser surgery to
correct the weaker eye? A friend had it done a few years ago (she was
previously very short sighted, and had used specs/contacts for many
years) with excellent results.

Having been myopic enough since the age of six to make the eyesight of the
average bat seem like that of a golden eagle, I took the plunge with laser
surgery a couple of years ago and have not had cause to regret it (apart
from the slightly unpleasant, though thankfully brief, burning smell).

Admittedly the money would have kept me in new specs and contacts until Stan
goes to work on skis, but there would seem to be reputable outfits nowadays
who charge about a fifth of what I paid or, put another way, about one
pair[1] of top-end bins per eye.

1 - my last pair of specs were ultra-lightweight Ti jobbies :-)

--
Dave Larrington
http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk
Jack Hackett for Pope, next time!

Another vote for Optilabs. Not tried contacts for cycling -
incredibly useful for dinghy racing (esp. in rain) though - so maybe
the answer to night time wet rides as per Waffles?

On Feb 14, 1:01*am, Jeff wrote:
Martin Bulmer wrote:
Jeff wrote:
*My prescription is -8 diopters and I
usually ride sans glasses (wouldn't do that with a car).

So you can't read your watch until it's about 6 inches in front of your
eyes? Brave man. Don't unexpected pot-holes shake you up a bit? I know
people with - 8 D who claim they can't get out of bed without their
correction. Is it fair to expext drivers to reach a certain standard of
vision, but to make no attempt to do so ourselves?

Small potholes aren't too bad. *Large ones usually distinguish
themselves enough for me to notice.

I usually wear my specs every waking minute (less time in the shower).
I tell people I suffer from long nose syndrome (as opposed to short arm
syndrome): *my nose prevents me from getting books close enough to my
eyes to read.

-8 is not actually that bad. *I've played in a table tennis tournament
sans glasses (broke them hours before); I was able to see the ball once
it got to my side of the table.

A driver is driving thousands of pounds of metal and plastic (and highly
flammable fluid) at potentially 60 or 70 mph. *I ride my 22 pound bike
at, typically, less than 20 mph. *If I miss a stop sign or some such
silliness, likely the only one to be hurt is me. *If a driver misses a
stop sign, or such, he might well harm others. *The potential
consequences should affect the standard to which the operators are held.
* Similar concept to "standard of care". *Someone with very basic first
aid training is held to a higher standard of care than someone with no
training but a far lower standard of care than, say, a practicing physician.

Jeff wrote:

My prescription is -8 diopters and I
usually ride sans glasses (wouldn't do that with a car).

If you wouldn't do it with a car, why not with a bicycle?

Don't you have a duty of care to other road users, such as pedestrians,
who you might hit and injure through simply not seeing them?

--
Paul - xxx

'96/'97 Landrover Discovery 300 Tdi 'Big and Butch'
'98 Suzuki DR 200 Djebel 'Small but perfectly formed'
Dyna Tech Cro-Mo comp "When I feel fit enough'