Do Multi-Focal Contact Lenses Have a Dominant Eye?

Delta88 · #1 (**permalink**) 01-23-2008, 11:58 PM

I was reading about someone with what they said were progressive contact lenses. The part that confused me was that they mentioned a "dominant left eye." I thought that was a concern with monovision contacts, not progressives. Do progressive contacts have a "dominant" eye?

HorseLuvr · #2 (**permalink**) 08-17-2010, 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Delta88

I was reading about someone with what they said were progressive contact lenses. The part that confused me was that they mentioned a "dominant left eye." I thought that was a concern with monovision contacts, not progressives. Do progressive contacts have a "dominant" eye?

I found this definition of progressive contact lenses: "Multifocal lenses, also referred to as progressive power or graduated lenses, enable many [contact lens] wearers to shift focus smoothly from distant to near objects. Concentric rings or differing aspheric designs with varying prescriptions in the lens allow light to simultaneously be focused on the retina from objects viewed at a range of distances."

I don't see anything about a "dominant eye" here, but I have heard that term in connection with monovision contacts. Perhaps the person who wrote that article has a dominant eye--most of us favor the eye that's on the side of our dominant hand--but I don't think that means you need a "dominant" lens.

sfl109415 · #3 (**permalink**) 12-27-2010, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Delta88

I was reading about someone with what they said were progressive contact lenses. The part that confused me was that they mentioned a "dominant left eye." I thought that was a concern with monovision contacts, not progressives. Do progressive contacts have a "dominant" eye?

Yes it is a concern with the proclear mf torics I wear which are the balanced progressive technology. I wear a D lens in my dominant eye and an N lens in my non dominant eye. The D stands for dominant or distance and the N for non dominant or near. But these are multifocals.

BoSoxFan · #4 (**permalink**) 12-27-2010, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sfl109415

Yes it is a concern with the proclear mf torics I wear which are the balanced progressive technology. I wear a D lens in my dominant eye and an N lens in my non dominant eye. The D stands for dominant or distance and the N for non dominant or near. But these are multifocals.

Well, there you go. So you use your dominant eye to drive, for example and your non-dominant eye to read while wearing your multi-focal lenses?

It's pretty convenient that "distance" and "dominant" have the same first letter and so do "near" and "non dominant," isn't it? Do they always to it that way, make your dominant eye also your "distance" eye?

sfl109415 · #5 (**permalink**) 12-27-2010, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoSoxFan

Well, there you go. So you use your dominant eye to drive, for example and your non-dominant eye to read while wearing your multi-focal lenses?

It's pretty convenient that "distance" and "dominant" have the same first letter and so do "near" and "non dominant," isn't it? Do they always to it that way, make your dominant eye also your "distance" eye?

Yes I always thought it was odd and a heck of a coincidence that D was distance and dominant and N was near and non dominant.

And although I think that 90 plus percent of the time the distance center lens is prescribed for your dominant eye I did read an article where once in a while the doctor actually does the opposite and the patient is happy. And sometimes the patient prefers 2 N lenses in both eyes for better total near vision or the patient prefers 2 D lenses in both eyes for better total distance vision. I think the 2 N lenses probably works for much older folks and the 2 D lenses probably works for people in their 40s who are just starting to lose their near vision. I am 51 and tried the 2 D lenses and it was awsome but I could not read hardly anything without reading glasses so it defeated my purpose.

So I just think that nothing with multifocals is written in stone. You just have to be willing to spend the time to go thru many trial lenses and have a fitter or doctor that won't get tired of seeing you in the chair. Of course that fitter or doctor should certainly be paid for their time and patience.

Zana · #6 (**permalink**) 12-27-2010, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sfl109415

I am 51 and tried the 2 D lenses and it was awesome but I could not read hardly anything without reading glasses so it defeated my purpose.

You sound like me when I'm wearing my glasses. I can see for miles with them, but can't read a newspaper in my hands with them. I can feel my eyes straining when I try to read with my glasses on. Without them I squint at distant objects.

sfl109415 · #7 (**permalink**) 12-27-2010, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zana

You sound like me when I'm wearing my glasses. I can see for miles with them, but can't read a newspaper in my hands with them. I can feel my eyes straining when I try to read with my glasses on. Without them I squint at distant objects.

LOL I love the pic of the kitty cat.

Yes I am the same way. Actually I have been near sighted and worn glasses or contacts since I was 13. I have the best near vision when I take my glasses off or my contacts out which I think is normal for someone like me who could never see far away. But you wouldn't want me driving off in the car with no distance correction, it would not be a pretty sight.

Spookytooth · #8 (**permalink**) 12-27-2010, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zana

You sound like me when I'm wearing my glasses. I can see for miles with them, but can't read a newspaper in my hands with them. I can feel my eyes straining when I try to read with my glasses on. Without them I squint at distant objects.

Nice picture, Zana. It made me laugh out loud.

HorseLuvr · #9 (**permalink**) 01-03-2011, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sfl109415

LOL I love the pic of the kitty cat.

Yes I am the same way. Actually I have been near sighted and worn glasses or contacts since I was 13. I have the best near vision when I take my glasses off or my contacts out which I think is normal for someone like me who could never see far away.

Do you take your contact lenses out to read?

sfl109415 · #10 (**permalink**) 01-04-2011, 11:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HorseLuvr

Do you take your contact lenses out to read?

No I am currently wearing Proclear Multifocal torics and my right eye has the Near lens so I can read pretty good. But when I take my contacts out at night I can read really good up close with no contacts or glasses. I had worn progressive glasses for years and to tell you truth even though I had a +2.25 in my progressives I found that most of the time when I did real close work I just took my glasses off.

Fresa · #11 (**permalink**) 01-05-2011, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sfl109415

No I am currently wearing proclear multifocal torics and my right eye has the Near lens so I can read pretty good. But when I take my contacts out at night I can read really good up close with no contacts or glasses. I had worn progressive glasses for years and to tell you truth even though I had a +2.25 in my progressives I found that most of the time when I did real close work I just took my glasses off.

Do you think that it's worth it wearing progressive lenses if you read better without them? I probably shouldn't say this on a contact lens site, but wouldn't it be better to wear glasses to see far away and you can just take them off to read? Maybe there's a special kind of multifocal lenses that have no close-up prescription so you an still read with them. Does anyone know if such a creature exists, or are they as legendary as Nessie?

sfl109415 · #12 (**permalink**) 01-06-2011, 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fresa

Do you think that it's worth it wearing progressive lenses if you read better without them? I probably shouldn't say this on a contact lens site, but wouldn't it be better to wear glasses to see far away and you can just take them off to read? Maybe there's a special kind of multifocal lenses that have no close-up prescription so you an still read with them. Does anyone know if such a creature exists, or are they as legendary as Nessie?

LOL, well you are correct. It would provide much better vision for me to wear my progressive glasses all of the time and remove them to read. That is not even up for debate. But unfortunately my vanity crept up on me at age 50 and I began to think that glasses added years to my face. A mid life crisis of sort. So in order to get rid of glasses it seems that the current crop of multifocal lenses are the best thing that current technology offers. I know people get tired of that word, compromise. But that is what this is.

Shade Maiden · #13 (**permalink**) 01-06-2011, 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sfl109415

LOL, well you are correct. It would provide much better vision for me to wear my progressive glasses all of the time and remove them to read. That is not even up for debate. But unfortunately my vanity crept up on me at age 50 and I began to think that glasses added years to my face. A mid life crisis of sort. So in order to get rid of glasses it seems that the current crop of multifocal lenses are the best thing that current technology offers. I know people get tired of that word, compromise. But that is what this is.

Well, as a member of this fine contact lens forum, I say go ahead and get those multifocal contact lenses! Buy some for your friends, too!

Delta88 · #14 (**permalink**) 01-07-2011, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fresa

Do you think that it's worth it wearing progressive lenses if you read better without them? I probably shouldn't say this on a contact lens site, but wouldn't it be better to wear glasses to see far away and you can just take them off to read? Maybe there's a special kind of multifocal lenses that have no close-up prescription so you an still read with them. Does anyone know if such a creature exists, or are they as legendary as Nessie?

Wow, scroll down this page and see a squinting LOL cat and the Loch Ness Monster. Far out.

Zana · #15 (**permalink**) 01-28-2011, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Delta88

Wow, scroll down this page and see a squinting LOL cat and the Loch Ness Monster. Far out.

Yeah, you never know what you'll find on this website. You might even find pictures of contact lenses.

Delta88 · #16 (**permalink**) 02-09-2011, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HorseLuvr

I found this definition of progressive contact lenses: "Multifocal lenses, also referred to as progressive power or graduated lenses, enable many [contact lens] wearers to shift focus smoothly from distant to near objects. Concentric rings or differing aspheric designs with varying prescriptions in the lens allow light to simultaneously be focused on the retina from objects viewed at a range of distances."

I don't see anything about a "dominant eye" here, but I have heard that term in connection with monovision contacts. Perhaps the person who wrote that article has a dominant eye--most of us favor the eye that's on the side of our dominant hand--but I don't think that means you need a "dominant" lens.

Okay, HorseLuvr. That sort of clears things up. Thanks for trying.

Delta88 · #17 (**permalink**) 02-09-2011, 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sfl109415

Yes I always thought it was odd and a heck of a coincidence that D was distance and dominant and N was near and non dominant.

And although I think that 90 plus percent of the time the distance center lens is prescribed for your dominant eye I did read an article where once in a while the doctor actually does the opposite and the patient is happy. And sometimes the patient prefers 2 N lenses in both eyes for better total near vision or the patient prefers 2 D lenses in both eyes for better total distance vision. I think the 2 N lenses probably works for much older folks and the 2 D lenses probably works for people in their 40s who are just starting to lose their near vision. I am 51 and tried the 2 D lenses and it was awsome but I could not read hardly anything without reading glasses so it defeated my purpose.

So I just think that nothing with multifocals is written in stone. You just have to be willing to spend the time to go thru many trial lenses and have a fitter or doctor that won't get tired of seeing you in the chair. Of course that fitter or doctor should certainly be paid for their time and patience.

Thanks for sharing your experience, sfl109415. Don't stop now. See who else you can help.

Spookytooth · #18 (**permalink**) 02-11-2011, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zana

You sound like me when I'm wearing my glasses. I can see for miles with them, but can't read a newspaper in my hands with them. I can feel my eyes straining when I try to read with my glasses on. Without them I squint at distant objects.

For that cat in the picture I think "Squinty Kitteh" would be a better name.