I researched LASIK about 20 years ago, but at the time the results seemed too risky for my -10 prescription. It would have been nice to ditch contacts/glasses, but mostly they worked fine.

Then in my late 40s everything changed. I had to start wearing astigmatism contacts (toric), and I always hated them. Then my eyes got dry and the toric lenses wouldn’t “spin” like they should, so I had to stop wearing contacts. Then I started to need reading correction, and between the nearsighted correction, the astigmatism correction, and the reading correction nothing was ever quite right and I could never see 100% well. And that was with getting them done at a proper eye place, paying $500 plus every year for a new pair *after* insurance.

So this year I got my lenses replaced. It was more than $10k, which was a lot for something optional for my income, but I figure I’ll recoup a chunk of that in lower costs over the years. Besides the fact that I don’t need glasses anymore, the artificial lenses don’t develop cataracts the way natural lenses do, so I shouldn’t need future cataract surgery.

In terms of satisfaction … eh? I’m more satisfied than not and would choose it again. But my results haven’t been as good as I hoped. I’ve definitely had the dry eye and halos at night, but also some actual vision problems, which were mostly from inflammation and I’m hoping will lessen over time. The pain itself wasn’t too bad, during or after the surgery. If anyone is considering lens replacement, I would give it a cautious recommendation as long as you know the possible side effects and are okay with the fact that they really might happen to you.

*contacts not contracts!

I had it done around 2006 after my eyes really started rejecting contracts and I hated glasses. I do have dry eyes (not uncomfortable but does affect vision clarity if I don’t take the drops) but so far I do not need reading glasses either (I am in early 50s now)

I think I likely got lucky on side effects and vision is definitely different but all in all pretty satisfied.

Anonymous wrote:The risk of dry eye was plenty for me. Never heard of anyone who had LASIK and didn’t report some degree of it.

A responsible doctor will test you for dry eye. Mine discovered that I had a mild case, and so refused to do Lasik on me. Instead, he did PRK, which doesn’t carry the same risk. Worse recovery but sounder overall result, IMO.

The risk of dry eye was plenty for me. Never heard of anyone who had LASIK and didn’t report some degree of it.

Kind of telling that you posted in beauty and not health.

I was afraid that my vision would not be as sharp with Lasik as it is with contact lenses. I am very particular about my vision. I like to be "over-corrected."

I also read a long, detailed article -- I think it was in the Washingtonian -- about Lasik side effects, things like halo effects and dry eyes. It spooked me.

Also, my trusted eye doctor did not recommend it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I used to work for the professional association for ophthalmologists and worked on LASIK labeling issues for a while. The side effects are severely underreported and downplayed. Part of my work was to help update the standards and labeling to reflect the known risk for side effects. They aren't blinding, but they are not fun either and can dramatically alter your quality of life (glare, halos, stars with night vision are most common). LASIK typically throws middle age folks straight in to reading glasses. They always said until you no longer see any ophthalmologists wearing glasses, you shouldn't do it...and a lot of ophthos decline to have it done.

Many folks will also have to have a revision done at some point. My mom had it done, had to have an fairly quick revision, and now had to have cataract surgery. There has been a complication with the cataract surgery now resulting from the flap from her LASIK and its an ongoing issue for her.

I have not great vision and frankly, knowing what I know, I prefer to wear my contacts. They are so easy for me to wear and I've been doing it for so long it just doesn't phase me at all. My vision is one thing I am absolutely, 100% risk adverse about.

Yes the underreporting is really dramatic. Lasik providers like to say that the rate of complications is less than 1 percent, but the FDA has been compiling data and it seems like it may be close to 46 percent, which is insane. I would never do it.

My good friend performs LASIK surgery and says he gets great results. But he hasn’t gotten it! Why put a laser near my eye when glasses and contacts work ok?

Anonymous wrote:I used to work for the professional association for ophthalmologists and worked on LASIK labeling issues for a while. The side effects are severely underreported and downplayed. Part of my work was to help update the standards and labeling to reflect the known risk for side effects. They aren't blinding, but they are not fun either and can dramatically alter your quality of life (glare, halos, stars with night vision are most common). LASIK typically throws middle age folks straight in to reading glasses. They always said until you no longer see any ophthalmologists wearing glasses, you shouldn't do it...and a lot of ophthos decline to have it done.

Many folks will also have to have a revision done at some point. My mom had it done, had to have an fairly quick revision, and now had to have cataract surgery. There has been a complication with the cataract surgery now resulting from the flap from her LASIK and its an ongoing issue for her.

I have not great vision and frankly, knowing what I know, I prefer to wear my contacts. They are so easy for me to wear and I've been doing it for so long it just doesn't phase me at all. My vision is one thing I am absolutely, 100% risk adverse about.

Yes the underreporting is really dramatic. Lasik providers like to say that the rate of complications is less than 1 percent, but the FDA has been compiling data and it seems like it may be close to 46 percent, which is insane. I would never do it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t mind the eyeglasses. In my early 20s side effects of aura vision at night were still quite common. So I didn’t do it at the time as it was important to be to be able to drive in the dark. Now 20 years later, I just don’t bother.

+1 Back 20-some years ago a friend of a friend took his own life after botched LASIK surgery. I know things have gotten much better now, but that really stuck with me. I'd like to not have to wear glasses because I scuba dive and do other things where needing prescription lenses is sort of a pain. But overall I'm used to glasses - and used to how I look in glasses - and just pretty squigged out by having a laser in my eye.

My dad got LASIK to treat cataracts and now has perfect vision, and said it was a really easy process, so I guess I do see some benefit! Maybe one day.

LASIK doesn't impact cataract at all, so this isn't correct. LASIK alters the shape of your cornea to impact how light bends into the retina. Cataracts are a problem with your lens where the lens starts to cloud which impacts the amount of light in to your retina causing vision issues like foggy, blurry, cloudy vision. The only way to treat cataract is through surgery which replaces the lens in your eye with a new one.

I used to work for the professional association for ophthalmologists and worked on LASIK labeling issues for a while. The side effects are severely underreported and downplayed. Part of my work was to help update the standards and labeling to reflect the known risk for side effects. They aren't blinding, but they are not fun either and can dramatically alter your quality of life (glare, halos, stars with night vision are most common). LASIK typically throws middle age folks straight in to reading glasses. They always said until you no longer see any ophthalmologists wearing glasses, you shouldn't do it...and a lot of ophthos decline to have it done.

Many folks will also have to have a revision done at some point. My mom had it done, had to have an fairly quick revision, and now had to have cataract surgery. There has been a complication with the cataract surgery now resulting from the flap from her LASIK and its an ongoing issue for her.

I have not great vision and frankly, knowing what I know, I prefer to wear my contacts. They are so easy for me to wear and I've been doing it for so long it just doesn't phase me at all. My vision is one thing I am absolutely, 100% risk adverse about.

Just to clarify several odd sounding comments here, readers are only a correction if you were originally far sighted (you couldn’t see near).

I was near-sighted - not as bad as some people here - -4.75 but people and things were blobs and I was overwearing my lens (and often sleeping in them).

If I need readers one day, this is not a correction to the LASIK, I’m still 20/20 almost 7 years later for distance, it would be age related degeneracy driving the need for readers to see near.

Anonymous wrote:I got Lasik in my early 20s. Fortunately I could afford it. Recovery was easy and I could see immediately. Worth every penny so I don't have to spend thousands over the years on doctors, glasses and contacts. Probably was cheaper in the end. Why don't people who can afford it do it? Do people like depending on glasses to see their hands? They're not comfortable, they break and they are expensive.

My now-husband and I had Lasik done on a buy one get one free Living Social deal. We were dating at the time, and figured why not - split the cost $2500 each. The procedure was done by a well known eye group - Katzen Eye Group in Baltimore. We've been married 10 years now and it's one of the best cosmetic decisions we've made - we've saved thousands on contacts, solutions, and glasses.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because some people are risk adverse. When there is a 100% safe alternative it is perfectly rational to choose it over a riskier option that would carry additional benefits.

I myself had PRK instead of Lasik, which is very out of character for me, because I am extremely risk averse. But I got lucky and am very happy with the results. Yes, I’m 50, and I need glasses, but they are thin, light and cheap. Not at all like the pricey Coke bottle lenses I needed before.

Funnily enough, I feel like I look better with glasses than without, but I was so happy with the improved functionality I got from surgery that I didn’t regret it. So now I need glasses again I don’t mind at all!

I don’t get the Coke bottle glasses reference in the year 2023. My eyes are like -9 so very severe but they have done amazing things with lenses and you can get much thinner high resolution lenses. With insurance it’s not even insanely expensive… I tend to have more expensive glasses because I always choose designer frames, which is totally optional.

Yes, you can tell my glasses I guess are thicker than yours, but they are hardly Coke bottles? Just don’t get this reference in this day and age! When I was younger and cared about such things, I wore contacts every day anyway. It’s only now that I’m nearing 50 that I tend to rely on glasses a bit more.

That’s great that you’re happy with what is available to you. No reason for you to have surgery if you’re happy as you are. I was buying 1.74s and still felt that they were heavy, looked ridiculous in wire frames, and made my eyes look small. I felt they looked unflatteringly thick, and were way less comfortable than the inexpensive and lightweight reading glasses I need now.

But if you don’t agree, and you’re happy with your glasses, then yay. Different people have different preferences (and different perceptions) and that’s OK.

Everyone I know who had it done had it start to wear off at around the 10 year mark. My mom now has readers lying all over the house and she's nearing the 20 year milestone.