
LASIK 6 months later - bemmu
http://www.bemmu.com/lasik-6-months-later
======
jgrahamc
I had wavefront-guided all-laser LASIK
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lasiks#Wavefront-
guided_LASIK](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lasiks#Wavefront-guided_LASIK)) 6
years ago and the 'problems' I have with my eyesight are completely comparable
to 'problems' I had when I wore glasses and/or contact lenses: that is, I have
minor 'problems' that aren't worth writing a blog post about.

I go see the eye doctor once a year for a regular check up. My vision remains
6/3 (UK scale) which is 20/10 on the US scale.

I was about to recommend the doctor who performed my surgery. I Googled him
only to find that he died a few months ago of cancer.

RIP Professor Joseph Colin:
[http://www.aao.org/member/obituaries.cfm](http://www.aao.org/member/obituaries.cfm)

~~~
bemmu
Yeah, actually I agree with you and the point of this blog post was there is
no reason not to do the operation based on this 6 month experience.

~~~
outworlder
There is, the halos!

If you are a software developer, as many of us, you really don't want that.
Nor do you want dry eyes, specially when staring at a screen under air
conditioning.

If someone really wants to do the operation anyway, then get a LASEK. This
won't create the never-healing flap, with all its complications. Recovery time
suffers a bit, but that's a minor issue, considering the long-term benefits.
Less dry eye.

Halos might still be present though.

~~~
redidas
I had LASIK done and had the halos, but they are now gone 1.5 years later. I
also had bad dry eye in the morning for a while - that's also gone.

------
simonswords82
I live a pretty active lifestyle, I swim, skydive, go running, box, play
squash (not all at the same time). I had LASIK about 7 years ago and having
wore glasses and contact lenses for 8 years prior to that I still tell anybody
who will listen it was the best £2,000 I ever spent.

There was one downside to the operation and that was if I stared at a screen
for a long amount of time, or worked too many late nights, I suffered from
_really_ dry eyes. It was almost painful. Fortunately some drops that I kept
with me for about six months took the edge off of it and now I don't suffer
with this anymore.

The Halo thing is definitely a side effect. As other people have pointed out,
it's no worse than contact lenses/glasses.

I now no longer have to worry about looking for my glasses first thing in the
morning. I can play any sport without fear of losing or breaking my glasses.

Wearing non-prescription sun glasses is something I now take for granted and a
complete joy.

I genuinely do believe that my overall quality of life has improved as a
result of the operation.

------
ek
Honestly, basically all of the upsides that he lists can be gained from using
contact lenses, which are amazing. Also, with plain old American vision
insurance (VSP), I get a year's worth of contacts for free, every year. As a
longtime glasses wearer I switched to using primarily contacts a while ago and
it's amazing. Contacts have their share of (mostly minor in my experience)
issues, but as long as LASIK continues to have bugs like the halo thing OP
describes, I'll stick with them.

~~~
ojii
Agreed. My quality of life got a lot better once I switched to (monthly)
contact lenses. Half a year ago I switched to dailies which was again a
drastic improvement to my everyday life. I've been toying with LASIK but to be
perfectly honest the surgery just scares me. The idea of cutting open my eyes
and shooting lasers at them isn't to appealing to me.

~~~
jules
What made the daily contact lenses better than the monthly contact lenses?

------
babas
What gets me the most about LASIK naysayers is that you also get the same or
even much worse artifacts when using glasses or contacts. I had Femto-LASIK 2
years ago, after using glasses for 6 years and contacts for 6 more. I have
very slight haloing around bright lights at night (Not as bad as described in
the post though). The freedom of not having glasses or using contacts is
FANTASTIC!

~~~
outworlder
I have both myopia and astigmatism and I see no halos at night.

You are not supposed to see halos if your prescription is correct. You might
get some artifacts if you look through your glasses at an angle, but that's
it.

Halos are an artifact of LASIK, usually when the pupil is large enough that it
expands past the area of the cornea which was "corrected".

------
ggreer
To anyone who is nearsighted and considering corrective surgery: _do it_. If
you look at the stats, the vast majority of patients are glad they got the
surgery.

I started wearing glasses when I was 9. I got contacts at 16. It was a great
improvement, and I was quite happy with contacts. Two years ago, I got
wavefront-guided epi-LASEK. It is without a doubt the best money I've spent.

Glasses have obvious problems, but even contacts come with significant
disadvantages. They can dislodge unexpectedly. Doing anything in the water
risks losing them. They can trap particles or chemicals against the cornea,
causing irritation.

Corrective lenses also tax your mind with more logistics. An overnight trip
requires saline solution, extra lenses (and/or backup glasses), a storage
case, and some way to clean your hands. This sucks some of the fun out of
camping and other activities.

Meanwhile, people who've had corrective surgery wake up and _see_. It's
miraculous. Their eyes just work.

~~~
unwind
There are plenty of modern contact lenses that can be worn for longer periods
than just a single day without issues. As far as I understand it, this comes
from enhanced materials, letting through more oxygen while retaining more
moisture.

I use Air Optix ([http://www.airoptix.com/safety-
information.shtml](http://www.airoptix.com/safety-information.shtml)), they
say up to 6 nights is fine for their baseline version, with up to 30 nights
for the Night & Day product. Not affiliated in any way, just a customer.

~~~
stephengillie
I got a _blister_ on my _eye_ from Night & Day contacts. Then in got LASIK.
That was in 2005, best choice of my life.

------
cmalpeli
I wore glasses from age 16 to 25. I've never once worn contacts - couldn't
deal with touching my eyeballs every morning.

Got LASIK at 25 (i'm now 36). BEST DECISION EVER. I had it done in Manhattan -
cost was about 4500 but I paid it via an FSA which reduced the costs further.

I did have the "Halo" effect for about 6-8 months - especially on traffic
lights at night, but it eventually went away.

The only downside is that my eyes can feel dry from time to time - not sure if
that is due to LASIK or just from being tired [I have 5 year old twins;)].

I am curious/nervous that the effects will wear off - but even if they do and
I need to go back to glasses the last 10 years have been more than worth it.

------
lewispollard
I get similar halos in the dark and I have no vision problems at all, maybe
it's exaggerated by LASIK but it's certainly not something that 'normal'
vision is immune to.

~~~
bemmu
I was wondering about this and asked someone born with 20/20 vision before and
they claimed no halos. Would be interesting to hear more opinions on this.

So people born with "perfect" vision. If you stand outside on a dark night and
stare at a street light, is the separation between darkness and the light
completely crisp, or is there a halo or a starburst of some sort?

~~~
BetaCygni
I have (as far as I know) perfect eyes. Around bright objects there is a
slight halo, best compared to the one you see in video games around
streetlights at night. It's much smoother than the one in the illustration in
the article and slightly less bright. Bright stars show as dots with tiny
lines coming from it with different lengths. Really tiny but still visible.
Less bright stars show as infinitely small dots.

~~~
bemmu
OK, so I guess this is just normal and somehow wearing glasses actually
changes your vision by removing those artifacts.

~~~
outworlder
Ask a doctor about that. Preferably, not the one who performed the surgery.

As far as I know, there are no halos if you really have perfect vision.
Cataracts and minor vision problems (such as a small amount of astimatism)
will cause halos, even if the subject claims to see fine otherwise.

If you are doing such a poll, it would be helpful to ask, along with the
presence of halos, when it was their last visit to an optometrist. If you
believe you have perfect vision, you are not going to see one (even though
periodic visits to an eye doctor are indicated, for checkups).

~~~
BetaCygni
Exactly, I can't remember the last time I've seen an optometrist, horrible
things could be wrong with my eyes.

------
darkmagnus
The halo effect took a lot longer to go away for me then a few months, but it
eventually did go away. Same with the dry eyes, it took maybe a year for me to
get over the dry eyes. I am going on 10 years now and I have no lasting side
effects, and I would no doubt do it again.

~~~
bemmu
That's great to hear, so there still is a chance it might go away. I had more
trouble with eye dryness with contacts actually and never really noticed such
a problem after the surgery.

~~~
jules
That's interesting. I've had problems with dry eyes with contacts, and took
that as a reason not to do eye surgery for fear of making the problem
permanently present even when not wearing contacts because dry eyes is one of
the side effects. So perhaps I should reevaluate.

------
davidy123
I had quite bad vision and had wavefront LASIK as well. I was told my large
pupils and bad vision wouldn't be a problem "with the newest techniques," but
on the morning of the surgery after I'd psyched myself up they dropped a
special waiver in my lap.

I'm generally happy with it; it's a bit of a miracle. But my eyes are often
fuzzy in the morning, they stream tears when it's windy (and they're
correspondingly dry afterward), I see halos, and most distressingly my night
vision and contrast are worse. I notice "floaters" a lot more, which can be
really annoying. I also wonder what I've forfeited in future correction
possibilities. So it's really a mixed bag.

When I go in for tests they claim I have 20/20 vision, but that test is very
limited, and due to issues above I simply cannot see as well as a person with
20/20 vision (though I can see better than many people who don't bother to
wear glasses).

To be honest, I quickly took for granted the miraculous "waking up and being
able to see." The main reason I got the surgery is I couldn't decide what
style of glasses to get, and I hated what they were doing to my nose bridge,
and finally I wanted to try something transformative for my life, which it
hasn't really been, though it has certainly made it a bit simpler.

------
rottyguy
Had mine done in the late 90's and it's the best money I've ever spent.
Period. I find in conversations with folks on the fence that it's mostly
psychological (fear). To that I say, spend the extra money on the doctor that
has such and such credentials using such and such latest laser and get over
the hump if that's what it takes. Totally worth it in my book.

~~~
bemmu
I also had that fear, which almost stopped me from going through with it. But
fear is treatable.

------
scrumper
Your haloing looks like keratoconus, which I have. It makes driving at night
quite challenging, since oncoming headlights are 'smeared' over quite a wide
area instead of appearing as point sources.

~~~
robin_reala
Keratoconus is one of the reasons I haven’t had LASIK myself; the process
itself weakens the cornea, and when it’s weak already it can lead to serious
complications.

------
runarb
I can't really see any halo in the O picture even how hard I try. Is it
supposed to be photo manipulated?

Anyone having a link to the original?

~~~
bemmu
Yes, it has been manipulated to add in a halo that corresponds to my post-
lasik halo.

It is not that strong, but you can check with a color picker app or with a
paint program that yes there really is one there.

~~~
runarb
I tried to add another O into the picture with Photoshop:
[http://bbh-001.boitho.com/div/halo.png](http://bbh-001.boitho.com/div/halo.png)

I can't see any different. Maybe I am affected or my ~3 year old lcd monitors
are failing to display the colors correctly.

~~~
bemmu
They look very different to me. Check your monitor settings if they look the
same to you :)

~~~
runarb
The font is different because I was not able to find which one was used here.
But except from that; do you see this halo effect?

------
honopu
I had LASIK done about 6 months ago. My right eye ended up 20/15 but my left
eye ended up being +1 and has some astigmatism that it never had. I suspect
they screwed up and gave me the wrong correction in my left eye.

Good news is it can be corrected, the bad news is I had to live with an eye
that is useless for small text on a monitor. It has been very aggravating but
not aggravating enough to go buy a prescription pair of glasses just for the
correction in one eye.

Also keep in mind all of the follow-up visits you need to do to keep your
"lifetime correction" warranty so get your Lasik done at a place near your
house.

~~~
honopu
It sounds like I am being way too negative here. I would do the process again
but I would insist on getting full pupil dialation before the procedure. With
this correction I will be extremely satisfied but all told it took at least 40
hours for follow up visits including travel time and getting everything set up
ahead of time. With my right eye doing all the work and looking at monitors
all day it gives up at about 8pm where I can't easily read a 15" laptop
without eye strain.

------
chrisreichel
I had the PRK surgery
([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photorefractive_keratectomy](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photorefractive_keratectomy)).
The first two weeks were the worst of my life. The recovering was painful and
I could barely see... And during that time the irritation and the feeling of
having sand in my eyes...

Well, after this tough period all the irritation gone, my vision was improving
everyday and now, 3 years later I think that it was the best decision ever.
Specially if you like to ride motorcycles - and use helmets - it makes a lot
more practical.

~~~
chrisreichel
I forgot to mention that now I have this halos at night and a little bit of
light sensitivity as well.

In dry weathers I fell a little bit of dryness in the eyes _ I manage to hack
myself by forcing some tears. Sounds strange but it works.

------
ada1981
I had LASEK* 2 or 3 years ago and it's been nothing but incredible. I now see
20/15.

With LASEK there is no cutting of the eye, so there is no risk of halos or of
the flap coming loose later in life. Something like 80-90% of the
complications are from the flap, so LASEK is much safer. It takes a day or so
longer to heal, but the results are worth it. One of the coolest things I've
ever done, and zero negative side effects. Infact, for the first 6 months of
so I walked around NYC like I was on acid - just amazed at how clear
everything was and being able to see things like bricks on the top corners of
buildings 60 stories tall.

Also, the feeling of waking up in the morning without my eyes all f'd up from
sleeping in contacts is priceless. I literally found myself crying tears of
joy and gratitude on several occasions for how amazing this was. I was happier
simply from being able to see better. And it's helped a ton with my ultimate
frisbee game and helped me better deal with sand for beach sports.

If you want a laugh, google Dr. Emil Chynn -- he is a brilliant doctor but
also a bit eccentric. He was recently on Howard Stern offering $100k to help
him find a wife ;) and then book an appointment to see him.

If you'd like a personal introduction to him, feel free to email me
(anthony@creditcovers.com) and I can help you get a free consult and friends &
family discount. He also has financing available.

Seriously, if you wear glasses or contacts get this done as soon as you can
and look into LASEK (no cut, no flap). If you are in NYC check out Park Avenue
Safe Sight (LASEK) and Dr. Emil Chynn.

EDIT: I should mention that with the "HD Upgrade" that I got you get a level
of clarity that is impossible to reach with glasses or contacts. It's supposed
to be 25x more accurate a prescription because they do a laser scan of the
entire surface of the eye, and then create micro prescriptions for every area
-- sort of like dimples on a golf ball vs. 1 lens like glasses or contects
which basically takes the average prescription for the entire eye. LASEK is
superior - more accurate, no halos (since no scar tissue), no flap to fall
off, better than 20/20 vision, less risk of infection.. Really an amazing
technology (oh and I got a DVd of my eyes being lasered ;) )

~~~
outworlder
Aren't the halos created by a large pupil reaching an area which was not
touched by the laser? That was my understanding, at least. If so, LASEK would
still carry the risk of halos.

But not dry eyes, and no flap dislocation. If that flap DOES dislocate
(usually, because of trauma), you are screwed.

~~~
ada1981
I thought the halo was from the edge of the flap having scar tissue - I could
be off on the cause. But to my understanding there isn't halo risk with the no
cut / no flap procedure.

------
kalleboo
I've been looking into getting eye correction done using a newer method than
LASIK/LASEK. The company that performs it in Sweden calls it "NoCut" but it
seems to have a few other trade names in different countries (seems to be
performed mainly in Sweden, Australia and the Netherlands).

It works similar to PRK/LASEK in that instead of cutting and reattaching a
flap of the cornea (which can heal in place incorrectly, or even come loose if
you rub your eyes) they remove a thin layer which then heals back cleanly.
It's better than PRK in that instead of removing the layer with alcohol and
manually marking an area, all that is dealt with a computer-controlled laser,
which supposedly increases the precision, minimizing the affected area and
makes healing much quicker and less painful. The biggest downside compared to
LASIK is you have to sit in a dark room for 3 days listening t audio books
while your eyes slowly and painfully heal, and then wear sunglasses outdoors
when there's bright sunlight for a couple months.

After spending a week reading in detail about all the different methods, the
possible side-effects or failure modes, etc. I think I'll stick to contacts
for now...

~~~
bemmu
Contacts aren't totally risk-free either. Not exactly sure what the issue was
(this was pre-wikipedia), but my doctor had me stop using contacts since he
was concerned my vision was getting worse due to them.

I looked into PRK and was on the fence about it, was unconvinced that there is
a big difference besides the psychological benefit of "no cutting". Lasik had
no pain either during the surgery, so I think considering the slower recovery
PRK would have just been more painful total.

~~~
kokey
My girlfriend can't wear contact lenses any more due to excessive use. She has
developed both scarring and corneal neovascularization.

------
formichunter
I have had horrible eye sight my entire life, about 20/2000 to be precise. To
give you an idea how bad that is, without my contacts, I could see my hand
clearly when it was 1 inch from my nose...basically I was blind without them.
I went from massively heavy glasses that put red spots on my nose from the
pressure to contact lenses about twenty years ago. That was a huge improvement
but you always had to worry about not falling asleep with them in. About 5
years ago I got LASIK surgery where Tiger Woods got his. The halo'ing was
unfortunately a price I paid but I expected this because my cornea was so thin
in my left eye that the surgeon needed to think about it before even saying if
they could do the operation. This is all about risks and rewards. My problem
was so significant that I will deal with the halo'ing even though Green Lights
at traffic intersections are a t-shaped mess and dry eyes is another
byproduct. This current situation is by far more pleasurable than the misery
of being dependent glasses or contact lenses.

~~~
Lewton
How good is your vision now? I imagine with that severe sight problems, they
weren't able to fix it completely?

------
bluedino
After 17 years of contacts, I had wavefront LASIK. My contact prescription was
-9.00, so my choices were very thick and expensive glasses or contact lenses.

Beware the advertised pricing. $2000 LASIK means 'per eye', and you have to
add another $1000 for wavefront and another $1000 for laser-cut flaps instead
of blade-cut. It ended up being $6,000 which wasn't said until the day of the
procedure.

I was told that they didn't expect to give me 20/20 vision, I ended up around
20/40, good enough to legally drive without glasses but I squint a bit. I
still have a slight astigmatism in one eye, and that throws me off quite a
bit.

The first 6 months during healing were bad - lots of halos, sensitive to
light, very poor night vision, especially when driving. But 18 months later Id
on't have those problems anymore. I did lose my very close (~6 inches) vision
which was very sharp before.

My biggest complaint is dry eyes. I'm not using eyedrops 4-6 times per day, it
doesn't help to be in front of a computer screen as much as I am, and it's
worst in the mornings and night.

------
npongratz
I've been very nearsighted since I was about 8-9 years old. I had glasses
exclusively for about five years, then contact lenses (monthly disposables)
for 15 or so. I enjoyed contacts well enough, but did not enjoy the hassles
with them - cleaning them and swimming without them were my biggest
annoyances.

I haven't been sold on LASIK because of the risk of permanent side-effects,
such as the light haloes, starbursts, night vision issues, and dry eye.

I tried orthokeratology - wearing a special prescription hard lens for eight
hours a night to gradually reshape the cornea. I liked the idea that it was
completely reversible, and the downside of wearing the lenses at night wasn't
a big deal for me (they were never completely comfortable, but they didn't
bother me after the first couple nights).

The problems I experienced with the ortho-k lenses were two-fold, which would
have affected me _permanently_ had I went with LASIK: 1) my cornea is too thin
for the large amount of correction I need, and 2) my pupils are too large.

1) Thin cornea: ortho-k and LASIK require material with which to work. When
there's not enough cornea to mold/burn, the procedure results in weak
correction. Solution? Wear contacts. Lame. We're back at square one.

2) Large pupils: my pupils are apparently freaky large in low light. The area
of the cornea that gets molded was large enough for normal-to-bright light,
but in low light the molded area was too small. That resulted in terrible
haloes. Solution? Take glaucoma eye drops that shrink one's pupils for 8-12
hours. I didn't like being dependent on a drug in that way. After three
attempts over many months to enlarge the molded area, we gave up. My cornea
was just too thin to be able to mold a large enough area.

My eye doctor said that because of my thin corneas and large pupils, if I got
LASIK surgery I would have suffered the same problems with weak correction and
terrible haloes and other vision artifacts in low light.

So I'm very glad I went the non-permanent route first. Luckily with ortho-k, I
just had to stop wearing the sleep shaping lenses for a week to revert to my
normal nearsighted vision. I'm back to my monthly disposable contact lenses,
and am happy I can see the stars clearly and be able to drive at night again.

I would definitely recommend checking out ortho-k, though - I wasn't a good
candidate, but I'm sure many people are.

------
gaker
I'd call glowing outlines around objects in the dark "glare" and not "halos".
From the reading I did before getting LASIK back in April, "halos" can occur
in people with very large pupils. So in the dark, your pupils will grow larger
than where the flap is cut. So you'd see this phantom circle in the dark all
the time.

The glare is annoying, but I purchased a new set of glasses (I know, right?)
with no correction and anti-reflective lenses. These help quite a bit when
driving at night or working on the computer when my eyes are tired.

Going into my surgery, I told the doc I didn't care if I needed reading
glasses (we all probably will), glasses to drive or to work at the computer.
Having gone from between a -5 and -6 to 20/15 vision, I am very very happy
with the results.

------
teekert
I never had eye surgery but (perhaps) as someone with a slight aspherical
deviation (astigmatism it is called I see now), I also see those halo's. I
didn't even notice anything about the white O on the black background until I
zoomed in a lot.

------
zokier
I'd love to get my eyes fixed. My vision feels not so great even with
glasses/contacts, so I'm kinda hoping that surgery could get me better than
glasses vision. I also don't know if it could (positively) affect my night
vision, which feels significantly worse than day-time vision.

Of course my expectations for vision are probably too great, and certainly I'm
currently in the "normal" range (with glasses).

Also I'm personally quite interested in IOL/ICL/Visian, their advertisements
make it look really attractive. But they don't afaik yet correct astigmatism,
so that's not an option for me yet.

------
a3n
The halos and similar issues would bug and distract me no end, especially
considering that I personally can get the same effect (improved site) by
wearing glasses.

I just bought a new set of glasses with progressive lenses. I hated them. Oh
nos! Oh, wait, I took them back and they replaced the lenses with single
prescription. Free. Problem solved.

Not at all to discourage anyone from getting lasik, but this is how I look at
the risk from that procedure, for me and my prescription. Possible permanent
issues vs just changing my lenses. People with worse prescription than mine
might think differently.

------
jheriko
those artifacts are not uncommon from what i know - especially star like
haloes around bright lights. part of it is down to how your retina works and
part of it down to the focusing of the light by the cornea, lens and through
the humours... its not reasonable to expect all of this to work perfectly, and
it has design flaws in terms of bleeds and blooms appearing in the final
image.

the halos are because of how the photoreceptors work everyone gets lingering
spots of 'colour' when you look at a bright light then look away - note that
these bloom out as well, and as they fade they spread for the same reasons.
its the surrounds of the 'correct' receptor sucking up the excess energy thats
been pumped into that area of the retina coupled with the impossibility of
consistently perfect focus

------
cadecairos
I have needed glasses since I was very young and started wearing contact
lenses about two years ago. I've always seen the halo around lights at night
with/without glasses/contacts. My thoughts have always been that it was
happening _because_ of my bad vision.

------
telephonetemp
Everyone in this comments thread seems to be comparing LASIK to contact lenses
and glasses but what about orthokeratology (overnight lenses)? Does anyone
here have experience with it? The idea sounds appealing but there's
comparatively little information about it.

------
huhtenberg
> _prescription swimming goggles_

And this is how you over-nerd nerds, ladies and gentlemen :)

~~~
bemmu
Well, I do swim around coral reefs sometimes, which I wanted to be able to
see.

------
bestest
I also heard about increased sun sensitivity after LASIK. does anyone else
experience this?

I am thinking about this surgery, but I'm afraid of the possible sideffects,
unless they're as described in the post.

~~~
sergiosgc
This was my experience (had LASIK in '06): On the day of the surgery, it is
enough to make you crawl into a closed room and shun all light. On the couple
of days after, it's uncomfortable to look at a computer monitor. On the first
few weeks you'll never forget your sunglasses at home. After six months, I'd
say it is nearly normal.

It is difficult to say. I used to never ever need to wear sunglasses, even in
the Portuguese summer. Now, I find them comfortable on very bright days -- not
that I can't do without, it's just comfortable. Might be psychological, might
indeed be somewhat increased sensitivity to sunlight.

I was on the fence for four or five years, until I decided to go at it. Best
3000€ I ever spent.

------
tomrod
Interesting issue with the halo. I started getting that when I developed
astigmatism -- I wonder if that is a common experience.

------
jesusthatsgreat
the thing this guy fails to mention is whether he had that halo effect BEFORE
getting eye surgery...

~~~
bemmu
Thanks. I'd like to think I was paying pretty close attention, since I already
had writing these blog posts in mind even before taking the surgery, so I was
taking notes and trying to observe what my vision was before. Of course memory
is fallible.

