Eye Drops - Bad Science or Just Sour Grapes?
Have just had a Class 1 medical at Gatwick and failed it because one eye was just outside the refraction limits.
The current limits to my knowledge are +3 to -5 dioptres.
I took the precaution of having an eye test before going down to Gatwick and parting with £400.
The eye test came out as + 3.0 dioptres for the worst eye.
However, during the CAA examination for some reason they put drops into your eye to effectively paralyse the muscles which provide you with active compensation for the eye's refraction.
This had the effect of pushing the refraction for my worst eye to +4.0 dioptres.
This leaves me with the following questions:
1) Why do the CAA test the eye under artificial conditions? Since without the drops my refraction is + 3.0 dioptres. Is this bad science?
(I'm never going to have the drops in my eyes whilst in control of an aircraft)
2) Has anyone else had problems like this and how did they resolve it?
3) Why is Longsighted-ness (i.e. +3 dioptres) treated differently to shortsighted-ness (i.e. -5 dioptres)?
4) Although the JAA Medical Sub-committee has agreed to change the refraction limits to +/- 5 dioptres is there any mileage in lodging an appeal with the CAA? (Since it may be some time - if ever before the new relaxed limits are implemented)
5) If I were to lodge an appeal what is the best way to structure it and which points should be emphasised.
Thanks in anticipation