astrols   10 #13 Posted February 17, 2015 And your study with a sample size of only 2 people is statistically significant and couldn't just signify that your husband's eyesight has deteriorated naturally over that time but yours hasn't? I am reliably informed that most people need reading glasses by my age (or bifocals if they already have distance lenses) so is the fact that I don't need them a sign that my optician hasn't persuaded my eyes to get worse? Or just that my eyes haven't followed the typical pattern- yet?  My distance vision prescription has also been identical for over 20 years, and surely if the lenses were making my vision more lazy that wouldn't happen either?  I've only written on here about myself and my husband, but all the people I've known to go to opticians, parents, family, friends, colleagues etc., only ever get worse. Perhaps your optician isn't as greedy as the rest and you should recommend him/her to the rest of us. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
El Cid   222 #14 Posted February 17, 2015 I've only written on here about myself and my husband, but all the people I've known to go to opticians, parents, family, friends, colleagues etc., only ever get worse. Perhaps your optician isn't as greedy as the rest and you should recommend him/her to the rest of us.  Opticians need to make money, just like any other trade. My daughter was prescribed glasses at the age of 6, didnt need them, hardly used them, but the optician made a few quid. Maybe that is what happens with your friends and family? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...