The College of Optometrists

i was wondering about dispensing the following Rx:

R) -6.00/-3.75x7

L) -4.75/-5.50x170

as far as i know i cant get a 1.67 lens from essilor (we are contracted to them). for my case recs I found out that nikon make it in a 1.67 asph lens. does anyone know any more. I have tried the norville pages etc but i just want to be 100% sure as i need to resubmit my case recs soon

thanks in advance

you wanna use the best lens(zeiss in my exp) they do 1.67as and a 1.74,not sure why u giving them a 1.67,give them a 1.74 and watch out for the thickest meridan-hence note the type of frame u give

yes i agree with thesach. i reckon he would also agree that perhaps a glass 1.9 would be a good option

ill second that,i wouldnt wear plastic with that Rx.You must dispense like me nerius

Don't forget though if dispensing glass to warn the px of the risks of breakage etc.. Not ideal to give to px's with epilepsy, young children, certain occupations....

I know that's an obvious thing to say, but worth mentioning!!

Remember air bags in cars which pose a problem with glass lenses especially.

why not dispense plastic. Thesach is contradicting him/herself. Give the best but don't give plastic!!! follow your own advise and consider where the thickest meridian is, choose a suitable eyeshape/size and use 1.67 (not sure 1.74 avail in this cyl) but Hoya 1.71 probably is.

Fair play Dburns,1.74 does not go to that cyl,but ive got an Rx which is 1D off that and have tried both 1.67 and 1.9,personally prefer the glass one,i never said dont give it.But by all means,for your case records,just know the adv/dis of giving either lens.Its him by the way

Put BVD on all references to the person's Rx i.e. on there current Rx and on new Rx so u can see if there is much of a power difference.

They picked me up on that.

many thanks everyone

Optically why should you prefer the glass? If anything, the 1.67 has less dispersion. 1.71 certainly has. yes glass will be thinner in both meridians but judicous choice of frame should give good results. plus apheric design in plastic will also be benificial. Some will find the weight to much. Ultimately it all comes down to personal opinion as to the pros and cons. So argue your corner and beg to differ with your examiner.

Suggest you recheck your case records-Styliss 1.67 does not come in a 5.50 cyl nor does Fusio 1.74 ,Stigmal 1.7 or 1.8,Before considering the optical consequences may I suggest you check lens availability??Try Norville prescription cataloge or Ophthalmic Lens Availabilty.If you contracted to Ess you can get an Ormex 1.56 or as far as I know Seiko do a I.67 to this cyl

Jillcf...May I suggest you read the posts properly before making a comment which comes acros as very sarcastic! I don't see anyone saying the Stylis or fusion are available in that cyl!!!

(Sorry, but I had to say something...don't mean to cause any offence!)

That's correct jillcf. Essilor range on cyls is more limited than some other suppliers. But if the blank is thick enough (or diamter required small enough) you will get all these indices from various manufacturers, in Rx stated. -10.25 resultant isn't that high a power.

pps thanks, tabatha.

I dont see why you would suggest a lens in your case records tha you know very little about.So what if your contracted to Essilor and can only get a 1.56 from them.Isnt it better to just sat=y this to the examiner,may not be the best lens but at least you know that and can talk about the lens,instead of getting caught on sumthing your not sure of.Tabatha its Fusio not Fusion

Oops....sorry....did I make a little typo....I DO apologise!!!

guys when considering the best lens form dont forget to advise the px in the difference in costs.

It may seem trivial to but not the px