Ortho-K
Ortho-K
Guest
Posts: n/a
here is a link to one of the foremost authorities on Ortho-K. this guy is very helpful. He told me that pilots make up about half of his practice. Ortho-K is practically undetectable, A lot of US military pilots have been fooling the military for years, however I don't think that would be a good way to go. If they find out later then it would really hit the fan.
Best thing to do is to wait for corneaplasty. It is Ortho-K without the need to use retainer lenses.
Here is the link to the Ortho-K specialist
http://www.eyeimprovement.com/
And here is a link regarding Corneaplasty
http://www.supervisioncenter.com/fut...rneaplasty.htm
Best thing to do is to wait for corneaplasty. It is Ortho-K without the need to use retainer lenses.
Here is the link to the Ortho-K specialist
http://www.eyeimprovement.com/
And here is a link regarding Corneaplasty
http://www.supervisioncenter.com/fut...rneaplasty.htm
Guest
Posts: n/a
To all those visiting this thread;
Has anybody had any experience of using ortho-k, and more importantly has anybody managed to get through an initial class 1 medical using this procedure.
If so how did you mangage to get around the fact that the CAA ask you to remove any lenses atleast 48 hours before the examination - hence no retainer lenses? Also isn't a corneal topographical map done during the eye tests , if so surely the flattening of the cornear in the centre of the pupil will be detected???
Would be extremely interested to hear about anyones experiences.
Regards
ASI
[This message has been edited by ASI (edited 19 March 2001).]
Has anybody had any experience of using ortho-k, and more importantly has anybody managed to get through an initial class 1 medical using this procedure.
If so how did you mangage to get around the fact that the CAA ask you to remove any lenses atleast 48 hours before the examination - hence no retainer lenses? Also isn't a corneal topographical map done during the eye tests , if so surely the flattening of the cornear in the centre of the pupil will be detected???
Would be extremely interested to hear about anyones experiences.
Regards
ASI
[This message has been edited by ASI (edited 19 March 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
I used the ortho-k lenses for around six or seven years. I used them strictly for passing a class one medical and to gain entry to a program requiring 20/20 uncorrected vision. It has been more then ten years since I used them. The doctors did the basic peering at my eyes, but I don't recall any corneal topographical map test, but imagine testing is more rigorous these days. They served their purpose, at the time, but I found wearing the hard lenses very uncomfortable. It was like having a speck of dust in your eye all the time. I used to check my watch all the time to see how much longer I had to wear them. Later on when 20/20 uncorrected vision was not a medical requirement, I gave up the lenses, as they were very impractical. The promises of eventually only having to wear the lenses once a week as a retainer never happened. I had to wear them for a minimum of 4 hours everyday, to be lense free the rest of the time. If I didn't wear them for a few days, it would take a few days to reach 20/20 again. My prescription was only 20/50 in the first place.
Good luck
Good luck
Guest
Posts: n/a
Wore them for at least 10 miserable years. I wouldn't recommend unless it's only a temporary or occasional requirement. My eyes were terrible, they were able to get me to where I didn't need a waiver for 1st class. A couple of years ago I had a small chip in the edge of one and went to the Dr., he started me on a series of soft disposable lenses and let the ortho-K correction deteriorate back to a stabilized condition, (about 6 weeks)then glasses for about 4 weeks until I had LASIK done. I don't think you could do it if you're planning for the military, but I feel that it's the single best thing I've ever done for myself. I can see all of the time, 1st class without correction or squinting and I don't have my fingers in my eyes or contacts in my mouth anymore. Wearing contacts is definitely not risk free as critics of the LASIK would have you believe.
Guest
Posts: n/a
good question ASI. I never heard of anyone actually using orthok to get a class 1 pass. Are you sure they do a corneal topography? Where would i find out?
my optition said that if you wore lenses up to a few hours before the test they would not know unless there was something wrong with your eyes
my optition said that if you wore lenses up to a few hours before the test they would not know unless there was something wrong with your eyes
Guest
Posts: n/a
Could someone send me some information about those lenzez! I am about -5,5/-4,5 and I need to be a pilot...!!!! CAA ==>> -5 so only -0,5 dioptries! Thx bye bye batu (ba-2)
E-mail: [email protected]
Cheers mate
E-mail: [email protected]
Cheers mate
Guest
Posts: n/a
Thanx for confirming the class 1 info
but anyone in the know regards OASC medical?
I don't mean the FS quicky, but the full monty aircrew medical? Flashing lights etc
Is Topograpy used?
Those using Lasik, i heard concerning news
about damage to the eyes as a result of a car air-bag 'going off' in the face. Any info?
but anyone in the know regards OASC medical?
I don't mean the FS quicky, but the full monty aircrew medical? Flashing lights etc
Is Topograpy used?
Those using Lasik, i heard concerning news
about damage to the eyes as a result of a car air-bag 'going off' in the face. Any info?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Any refractive laser procedure works because it ablates corneal tissue, reshaping and therefore thinning the cornea. This corneal tissue is removed forever, it does not grow back.
A thinner corneal is a weaker cornea and is therefore more susceptible to damage due to trauma.
There have been instances where corneal transplant patients have sneezed causing their cornea to fall out. Incisional refractive techniques such as RK and AK can lead to problems with incisions splitting after treatment. LASIK and PRK have their associated potential problems.
As with all things medical, there are associated risks with refractive surgery. The procedures are far safer these days than ever before, but the practitioners are human, and as you get good plumbers and bad plumbers, so you get dodgy surgeons and excellent surgeons.
regards
------------------
Half man, Half jalfrezi.
A thinner corneal is a weaker cornea and is therefore more susceptible to damage due to trauma.
There have been instances where corneal transplant patients have sneezed causing their cornea to fall out. Incisional refractive techniques such as RK and AK can lead to problems with incisions splitting after treatment. LASIK and PRK have their associated potential problems.
As with all things medical, there are associated risks with refractive surgery. The procedures are far safer these days than ever before, but the practitioners are human, and as you get good plumbers and bad plumbers, so you get dodgy surgeons and excellent surgeons.
regards
------------------
Half man, Half jalfrezi.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Thankfully the Lasik procedure is taken almost completely out of the hands of the surgeon. The information gathered about your presciption by the automated machinery is cross checked with standard eye tests. This information is the entered into the laser and bingo - you're blind - no only kidding, the machine does it all for them apart from the prep work and that's only a bit of cleaning - could do it youself really :-)
Guest
Posts: n/a
eject - 'tis true. There is sometimes very little holding the donated corneal button in place once the sutures are removed.
The nomograms programmed into the lasers do mean that the surgeons do less than they did. They still cut the flap though, and that is done with a micro-keratome, basically an oscillating surgical blade. If you have a dodgy flap, you get a dodgy result.
It is far safer now than it was 5 years ago. However, what are the long term implications??
regards
------------------
Half man, Half jalfrezi.
[This message has been edited by Blindside (edited 31 March 2001).]
The nomograms programmed into the lasers do mean that the surgeons do less than they did. They still cut the flap though, and that is done with a micro-keratome, basically an oscillating surgical blade. If you have a dodgy flap, you get a dodgy result.
It is far safer now than it was 5 years ago. However, what are the long term implications??
regards
------------------
Half man, Half jalfrezi.
[This message has been edited by Blindside (edited 31 March 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
>>Any refractive laser procedure works because it ablates corneal tissue, reshaping and therefore thinning the cornea. This corneal tissue is removed forever, it does not grow back.<<
Blindside you are correct. However, the LASIK procedure ablates no more than 10% of the thickness of the corneal tissue where the RK cut as deep as 90% of the corneal thickness. I don't think you have to be an engineer to figure out which procedure will leave your eye much less susceptable to injury.
Blindside you are correct. However, the LASIK procedure ablates no more than 10% of the thickness of the corneal tissue where the RK cut as deep as 90% of the corneal thickness. I don't think you have to be an engineer to figure out which procedure will leave your eye much less susceptable to injury.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Absolutely, but how many UK Consultant Ophthalmologists have had LASIK or PRK or RK or AK or Intacs?? Answer - they all wear glasses or contact lenses.
A fairly strong indication of their confidence of refractive procedures reversible or not.
There will be a glut of problems in the next five years associated with LASIK and PRK. Most noticeably ectasia.
All it will take for the market to collapse, is a high profile recipient such as Tiger Woods having a major problem.
regards
------------------
Half man, Half jalfrezi.
A fairly strong indication of their confidence of refractive procedures reversible or not.
There will be a glut of problems in the next five years associated with LASIK and PRK. Most noticeably ectasia.
All it will take for the market to collapse, is a high profile recipient such as Tiger Woods having a major problem.
regards
------------------
Half man, Half jalfrezi.