I see UV with first lens. Please help me choose the second. Also hate loss of near vision.
Posted , 4 users are following.
Hello, cataract people. A couple of months ago I received a lens in my left eye through the NHS. It is an akreos adaptao, made by Bausch and Lomb.
Unfortunately my colour vision has been affected as I can see too far into the UV spectrum - after researching as much as I could I found lenses made by this company discussed elsewhere as having not enough filtration of UV light, meaning some people, particularly those sensitive to colour, being affected by some ability to see into this spectrum perhaps those whose blue cones are more sensitive? I don't know. All I know is that some reds look pink to me - and particular things which have been washed in biological washing powder. slight other effects. It's irritating as I paint and I'm a poet and I want to know that what I am describing is what other people will also see. My assistance dog's coat etc. is also red - and looks pink now from that eye, which I HATE! All other colours are fine.
I see from 3 ft away to the horizon, I'm pleased with the sight I have in that eye - EXCEPT I have been very short-sighted since I was 8, and the loss of being able to see close up for fine work, and getting eyelashes out of my eye... oh, goodness, what a shock.
So - i am thinking of trying to raise some money or sell something and go privately to get the other eye done with a different lens (apparently I have no hope of a different make lens with the NHS).
I don't know what to choose. I will presumably have to wear glasses after, my optometrist says i may need computer length to middle ground specs and also very near-to to book length specs as well.
Should I get a lens that gives me near vision or will that not be as good as far vision and specs?
Anyone ANY idea of the UV coverage of different makes of lens?
At the minute i have no lens in my specs for my done left eye, and my right eye which is short-sighted is over-corrected as it has improved in vision, so I am struggling to see the computer and to read. It's very tiring.
Thank you!
1 like, 7 replies
RonAKA lizlols
Edited
I presume you had cataracts in both eyes before your surgery? If so, the cataract will often make a major shift in the colour spectrum toward the yellow and red end. Whites often look yellowish to brownish. With your new IOL this shift will be gone in the IOL eye especially when you compare it to the cataract eye. What do whites look like when you compare eyes? I have a feeling that you have gotten used to the off colour balance of having cataracts and are having trouble adapting to something closer to the real colour balance. When I had one eye done and the other not I would compare skin tones of people on TV. I thought that my cataract eye gave people a nicer skin tone as it was warmer than my new IOL eye. But, when I compared whites I could see that the cataract eye was off balance.
.
I am not aware of differences in the UV filtering of lenses and pretty much all lenses have it. You should not see UV in any case. Where there are differences is that some lenses have blue light filtering. From what I can see in the specs the particular lens that you got has UV but not blue light. Blue light filtering IOLs are tinted a light yellow to filter out some of the blue. Alcon lenses like the AcrySof typically have blue light filtering as they believe it restores the natural colour balance. Others like J&J Tecnis, and the B+L lens you got are clear, so they are a little brighter and cooler in colour balance. I have an AcrySof IQ lens in one eye and an Alcon Clareon in the other. They both have blue light filtering. But when I only had one eye done, the warmness of the IOL was nowhere close to what the cataract was doing to the colour balance. I suspect there is a difference between a blue light filtering lens and a clear UV only, but you would likely be disappointed in the difference. It will not match the warm off colour you have gotten used to with cataracts.
.
B+L does offer some blue light filtering lenses, but I don't know if NHS covers them. And, I really don't think have one in one eye would solve your problem. You probably would see everything as being too cool in any case. I think you just need to get used to non cataract vision which is much brighter and a bit cooler. In any case if you google this you should find some information on the B+L blue light filtering lenses. They have a picture of what each one looks like.
.
Eyecee One & Eyecee One Crystal Intraocular Lenses
.
With respect to seeing closer, I would ask your optometrist and surgeon about monovision. This is when you get the same monofocal lens as you have now in the first eye, but instead of targeting 0.0 D distance vision, you target -1.5 D of myopia. This will give you good reading vision in the second eye. It does not cost extra as it uses the same monofocal lenses and should be fully covered by NHS. This is what I do and it works well for me. There are EDOF and MF lenses out there that promise distant and far vision, but they can be very expensive ($4,000 an eye) and often have optical side effects at night like halos and flare.
.
Hope that helps some,
lizlols RonAKA
Posted
Hello! Thank you. I am able to tell what is lack of yellow cast and what is not. The new lens is indeed brighter and cooler than my non-operate on lens, but also has a definite lack of contrast . And yes, whites are white, my other eye, whites have faint yellow cast. Greens and most colours really are warmer. Except, weirdly, some reds, which are warmer than with my other eye!
The human lens is a very efficient filter for UV light for various reasons so we don’t normally see any. In the last war, men who had no lens at all in one eye were used on bombing missions because they could see UV. We are able to see into the UV spectrum, just we don’t have a dedicated cone - but we can see the UV nearest the blue/violet bit of the spectrum if the light gets through to our retina.
I see SOME reds (not all) as a pinkish violet. I also see some blacks as violet. It’s quite disconcerting and is not an effect of colours casts being added or taken away - I found the description of my problem exactly online in medical papers written by eye surgeons. One eye surgeon has added a piggyback lens to the one lacking enough filtration in some of his patients. I know what my problem is. Brush and Lomb lenses do not filter enough nanometers of light. But finding out how far other lenses are filtered seems to be impossible.
I am thinking of having a lens fitted for the other eye which will enable me to see near to. But I am not sure if it will be specific enough - I want to be able to see from 2 inches away to two feet away. Will the focal length mentioned cover that? Or would it be better to get another monofocal lens fitted such as the one I have had fitted already which means I will need glasses close up (which doesn’t bother me - my glasses are part of my image as an author).
I suspect I would not like a blue filter in my lens. I like seeing technicolour colours. I used to love Fuji film.
RonAKA lizlols
Edited
You could google this article for some detail on how other lenses impact the colour spectrum.
.
Comparative Spectrophotometer Analysis of Ultraviolet-light Filtering, Blue-light Filtering, and Violet-light Filtering Intraocular Lenses
Jeong Woo Park, Chul Young Choi
.
Your specific lens is not on there but I suspect it is very similar to the commonly used Tecnis ZCB00 which is clear like your lens. The lens I have which has blue light filtering is the AcrySof IQ SN60WF is also included in that study. Unfortunately they did not include the natural lens in your eye, but if you google AcrySof IQ Blue Light filter and go to Images you will find lots of graphs. Alcon like to show how close their blue light filter is to the natural lens while other lenses are too cool.
.
I do digital darkroom work with a Spyder corrected monitor and purposely selected the AcrySof lens with the blue light filter so I could see colours as accurately as I can. I am quite happy with the outcome.
.
There is no realistic lens that is going to let you see down to 2". For that you should find some high + power readers. A -1.5 D under correction like I have is going to let you see reasonably well from 10" to 3 feet or so. I can still see the TV reasonably well at 8-10 feet, but is is not as sharp as my distance eye. I also have progressives which correct both eyes for distance and have a +2.5 Add for reading. But, I seldom use them. Much nicer to go eyeglasses free. But, one has two options. I would use the progressives for driving out of the city at night.
lizlols RonAKA
Posted
Thank you, that is helpful. Not sure what progressives are! Is that the same as varifocal as we call them here?
My job is reading. and writing, and sometimes drawing. I spend most of most days doing that. So being able to see at that focal length - reading and computer, is paramount. Happy to have glasses for the nearest.
I'm not allowed to drive for medical reasons. I will never be allowed to. So that is not a worry. 😃
Night-Hawk lizlols
Posted
If you get some new eyeglasses, for near or progressive/multifocal type, you could get them with a blue blocker filter as well that may help with your color perception.
RonAKA lizlols
Edited
Yes, I think Varifocal is a specific brand of progressive. It is when the power goes from distance at the top to reading at the bottom in a progressive manner.
lizlols Night-Hawk
Edited
I don't think a blue filter will help make a pink look red, sadly. My colour sight besides the red issue is ok. Even better in some cases.