Bioinfinity compared to the 'old focus day and night'

Simosa · #1 (**permalink**) 12-15-2009, 05:22 AM

Hey can anybody tell me whether Bioinfinity is good for dry eyes? I have been wearing the old 'focus day and nights' which were amazing (just 24 % water so good for dry eyes) but they discontinued that line and replaced with a bad lens called air optix. I see that Bioinfinity allows a lot of oxygen through like day and night but because it is 48% water content I was concerned about them drying out your eyes. Can people tell me about whether this is a suitable lens switch from focus day and night?

Knotlob · #2 (**permalink**) 12-15-2009, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simosa

Hey can anybody tell me whether Bioinfinity is good for dry eyes? I have been wearing the old 'focus day and nights' which were amazing (just 24 % water so good for dry eyes) but they discontinued that line and replaced with a bad lens called air optix. I see that Bioinfinity allows a lot of oxygen through like day and night but because it is 48% water content I was concerned about them drying out your eyes. Can people tell me about whether this is a suitable lens switch from focus day and night?

Hi Simosa

I have just switched to Biofinity and find them very comfortable. I have no experience of Focus Day & Nights. I used to use a yearly lens Omniflex with 70% water.

However, the conventional hydrogel lens material is rather different to the new silicone hydrogel lens material, so I don't know if you can compare moisture content directly. (Moisture content used to be equatable with oxygen permeability but this relationship does not hold for silicone hydrogel materials).

I think the silicone hydrogel lenses probably are better for dry eyes than the conventional hydrogel lenses, but I have no experience with the Focus Night & Day lenses so cannot comment directly.

knotlob

Lucyfur · #3 (**permalink**) 12-15-2009, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knotlob

Hi Simosa

I have just switched to Biofinity and find them very comfortable. I have no experience of Focus Day & Nights. I used to use a yearly lens Omniflex with 70% water.

However, the conventional hydrogel lens material is rather different to the new silicone hydrogel lens material, so I don't know if you can compare moisture content directly. (Moisture content used to be equatable with oxygen permeability but this relationship does not hold for silicone hydrogel materials).

I think the silicone hydrogel lenses probably are better for dry eyes than the conventional hydrogel lenses, but I have no experience with the Focus Night & Day lenses so cannot comment directly.

knotlob

Thank you for telling us what you know, knotlob, even if it isn't from personal experience. It's still valuable information.

rfriel · #4 (**permalink**) 12-16-2009, 10:33 AM

H2O is equatable to Dk/t for 1st/2nd GEN SiHy material, 3rd GEN, SiHy, i.e. biofinity, Avaira, the relationship between H2O and Dk/t is not relevant anymore.

with 3rd GEN SiHy material, high H2O content and High Dk/t is directly related, 1st/2nd GEN SiHy, H2O/Dk/t is inversely related.

rfriel · #5 (**permalink**) 12-16-2009, 12:49 PM

all contact lens wearers are going to be disturbed by the following research paper which shows that contact lens wear is equated to epithelial trauma of the eye. very sad new for all contact lens wearers

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC547033/

Railfan · #6 (**permalink**) 12-16-2009, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rfriel

all contact lens wearers are going to be disturbed by the following research paper which shows that contact lens wear is equated to epithelial trauma of the eye. very sad new for all contact lens wearers

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC547033/

I checked this link. If you want to look at it as well, be prepared to read things like "Here we show that Acanthamoeba keratitis is profoundly affected by mannosylated proteins on the ocular surface, which stimulate the amoebae to elaborate a 133-kDa pathogenic protease. The mannose-induced protease (MIP133) mediates apoptosis of the corneal epithelium, facilitates corneal invasion, and degrades the corneal stroma."

Right.

rfriel · #7 (**permalink**) 12-16-2009, 01:24 PM

read the conclusion, supported with the research in the paper, the conclusion is very disturbing news to contact lens wear, equates contact lens wear to corneal epithelial TRAUMA, Yikes!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Railfan

I checked this link. If you want to look at it as well, be prepared to read things like "Here we show that Acanthamoeba keratitis is profoundly affected by mannosylated proteins on the ocular surface, which stimulate the amoebae to elaborate a 133-kDa pathogenic protease. The mannose-induced protease (MIP133) mediates apoptosis of the corneal epithelium, facilitates corneal invasion, and degrades the corneal stroma."

Right.

Knotlob · #8 (**permalink**) 12-16-2009, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rfriel

read the conclusion, supported with the research in the paper, the conclusion is very disturbing news to contact lens wear, equates contact lens wear to corneal epithelial TRAUMA, Yikes!!

Hello

Thanks for that link Rfriel

As you say it is a bit heavy - in fact one of the most scientific jargon laden documents I have read.

Main conclusions (as I see them):

Acanthamoeba kerititis is relatively rare, but if infected, it is resistant to medicinal treatment, can last several years after the disappearance of clinical/obvious visual symptoms and can cause severe pain and even blindness (which we all have heard of).

This study is new but the occurrence of this disease is not - so we know from experience, more or less, how to avoid infection, or at least minimise the risks.

The paper reports on research the authors have carried out to understand the mechanism of infection. Understanding the mechanism aids finding a cure or prevention.

contact lenses INCREASE the risk of an infection by causing mild trauma/damage to the cornea in everyday use.

Protein deposits on the lenses seem to be important in the development of the acanthamoeba on the cornea.

Since protein deposits are important, the risk could be minimised through the use of Daily Disposable Lenses. Silicone hydrogel lenses are usually claimed to be less affected by lipids/protein deposits and may be better than conventional hydrogel lenses - but silicone hydrogel lenses allow longer wear/extended wear, which I would have thought may lead to more protein deposits. This needs to be clarified, since it is not discussed in the paper and user experience with silicone hydrogel lenses is limited due to the newness of this material. Maybe RGP silicone lenses - latest generation, would be safer as they apparently have greater resistance to deposit build up on the lenses.

But remember that the acanthamoeba kerititis, though extremely nasty, is relatively rare and the risk can be minimised by good sterilisation and contact lens wear and care practices.

knotlob

rfriel · #9 (**permalink**) 12-16-2009, 02:15 PM

the issue that concerns me most this paper highlights is that contact lens wear is equated to corneal epithelial trauma. that's very heavy and very concerning. even absent the acanthamoeba keratitis, the trauma actually aids the microbes in growing and the infection is worse due to the contact lens wear, i didnt realize that i was causing TRAUMA to my cornea just by wearing contact lens, Yikes!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knotlob

Hello

Thanks for that link Rfriel

As you say it is a bit heavy - in fact one of the most scientific jargon laden documents I have read.

Main conclusions (as I see them):

Acanthamoeba kerititis is relatively rare, but if infected, it is resistant to medicinal treatment, can last several years after the disappearance of clinical/obvious visual symptoms and can cause severe pain and even blindness (which we all have heard of).

This study is new but the occurrence of this disease is not - so we know from experience, more or less, how to avoid infection, or at least minimise the risks.

The paper reports on research the authors have carried out to understand the mechanism of infection. Understanding the mechanism aids finding a cure or prevention.

Contact lenses INCREASE the risk of an infection by causing mild trauma/damage to the cornea in everyday use.

Protein deposits on the lenses seem to be important in the development of the acanthamoeba on the cornea.

Since protein deposits are important, the risk could be minimised through the use of Daily Disposable Lenses. Silicone hydrogel lenses are usually claimed to be less affected by lipids/protein deposits and may be better than conventional hydrogel lenses - but silicone hydrogel lenses allow longer wear/extended wear, which I would have thought may lead to more protein deposits. This needs to be clarified, since it is not discussed in the paper and user experience with silicone hydrogel lenses is limited due to the newness of this material. Maybe RGP silicone lenses - latest generation, would be safer as they apparently have greater resistance to deposit build up on the lenses.

But remember that the acanthamoeba kerititis, though extremely nasty, is relatively rare and the risk can be minimised by good sterilisation and contact lens wear and care practices.

knotlob

Knotlob · #10 (**permalink**) 12-16-2009, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rfriel

the issue that concerns me most this paper highlights is that contact lens wear is equated to corneal epithelial trauma. that's very heavy and very concerning. even absent the acanthamoeba keratitis, the trauma actually aids the microbes in growing and the infection is worse due to the contact lens wear, i didnt realize that i was causing TRAUMA to my cornea just by wearing contact lens, Yikes!!

I was also surprised by that paper. Everyone would prefer that the contact lenses did not cause even mild trauma to the cornea, but I guess it is a bit like eating smoked meat, or sitting in the sun, etc. Nice to do and enjoy (the benefits of contact lenses - better vision, vanity, sports, rainy weather) but don't overdo the wearing (or eating, sitting in the sun, etc).

knotlob

Mondas2 · #11 (**permalink**) 12-16-2009, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knotlob

Hello

Thanks for that link Rfriel

As you say it is a bit heavy - in fact one of the most scientific jargon laden documents I have read.

Main conclusions (as I see them):

Acanthamoeba kerititis is relatively rare, but if infected, it is resistant to medicinal treatment, can last several years after the disappearance of clinical/obvious visual symptoms and can cause severe pain and even blindness (which we all have heard of).

This study is new but the occurrence of this disease is not - so we know from experience, more or less, how to avoid infection, or at least minimise the risks.

The paper reports on research the authors have carried out to understand the mechanism of infection. Understanding the mechanism aids finding a cure or prevention.

Contact lenses INCREASE the risk of an infection by causing mild trauma/damage to the cornea in everyday use.

Protein deposits on the lenses seem to be important in the development of the acanthamoeba on the cornea.

Since protein deposits are important, the risk could be minimised through the use of Daily Disposable Lenses. Silicone hydrogel lenses are usually claimed to be less affected by lipids/protein deposits and may be better than conventional hydrogel lenses - but silicone hydrogel lenses allow longer wear/extended wear, which I would have thought may lead to more protein deposits. This needs to be clarified, since it is not discussed in the paper and user experience with silicone hydrogel lenses is limited due to the newness of this material. Maybe RGP silicone lenses - latest generation, would be safer as they apparently have greater resistance to deposit build up on the lenses.

But remember that the acanthamoeba kerititis, though extremely nasty, is relatively rare and the risk can be minimised by good sterilisation and contact lens wear and care practices.

knotlob

Thanks for breaking it down for us, knotlob, especially your assurance that acanthamoeba kerititis is rare and can be prevented by proper contact lens handling.

Knotlob · #12 (**permalink**) 12-16-2009, 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mondas2

Thanks for breaking it down for us, knotlob, especially your assurance that acanthamoeba kerititis is rare and can be prevented by proper contact lens handling.

Thanks Mondas2

Well I'm only the messenger - it's the researchers in the scientific paper that stated the kerititis form of acanthamoeba is relatively rare and that's more important than my opinion

But at least that does fit in with the reality - we do hear of occasional acanthamoeba kerititis infections in contact lenses wearers, but given the hundreds of thousands who successfully wear contact lenses, the frequency of infection seems remarkably low.

knotlob

LittleElvis · #13 (**permalink**) 12-16-2009, 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knotlob

Thanks Mondas2

Well I'm only the messenger - it's the researchers in the scientific paper that stated the kerititis form of acanthamoeba is relatively rare and that's more important than my opinion

But at least that does fit in with the reality - we do hear of occasional acanthamoeba kerititis infections in contact lenses wearers, but given the hundreds of thousands who successfully wear contact lenses, the frequency of infection seems remarkably low.

knotlob

We thank you for carrying that message of reassurance to us. It's good to know that this nasty infection is rare.

rfriel · #14 (**permalink**) 12-17-2009, 10:35 AM

corneal epithelial trauma to eyes. YUCK!! i think i'll go back to wearing spectacles (i.e. glasses) and not cause trauma to my eyes.

HelpMeRhonda · #15 (**permalink**) 12-18-2009, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rfriel

corneal epithelial trauma to eyes. YUCK!! i think i'll go back to wearing spectacles (i.e. glasses) and not cause trauma to my eyes.

You seem to be stuck on that word "trauma." I'd like to go back to something that Knotlob posted: "Everyone would prefer that the contact lenses did not cause even mild trauma to the cornea, but I guess it is a bit like eating smoked meat, or sitting in the sun, etc. Nice to do and enjoy (the benefits of contact lenses - better vision, vanity, sports, rainy weather) but don't overdo [it]"

"Trauma" doesn't always mean "unbelievable pain." When you scratch an itch, it causes "trauma" to your skin, but it recovers quickly. Walking is "traumatic" to your feet, knees and back. The "trauma" that contact lenses cause to your corneal epithelium (Which is microscopically thin.) is very mild, supported by the fact that millions of people wear them comfortably every day with no permanent damage.

Don't let that word scare you, rfriel.

rfriel · #16 (**permalink**) 12-18-2009, 10:53 AM

Yes, you are correct, 100%, I AGREE

Quote:

Originally Posted by HelpMeRhonda

You seem to be stuck on that word "trauma." I'd like to go back to something that Knotlob posted: "Everyone would prefer that the contact lenses did not cause even mild trauma to the cornea, but I guess it is a bit like eating smoked meat, or sitting in the sun, etc. Nice to do and enjoy (the benefits of contact lenses - better vision, vanity, sports, rainy weather) but don't overdo [it]"

"Trauma" doesn't always mean "unbelievable pain." When you scratch an itch, it causes "trauma" to your skin, but it recovers quickly. Walking is "traumatic" to your feet, knees and back. The "trauma" that contact lenses cause to your corneal epithelium (Which is microscopically thin.) is very mild, supported by the fact that millions of people wear them comfortably every day with no permanent damage.

Don't let that word scare you, rfriel.

Georgiaonmymind · #17 (**permalink**) 12-18-2009, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rfriel

Yes, you are correct, 100%, I AGREE

Well, I guess that's settled. Nice work you two.

Do you feel better about wearing contact lenses now, rfriel?

LittleElvis · #18 (**permalink**) 12-21-2009, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HelpMeRhonda

You seem to be stuck on that word "trauma." I'd like to go back to something that Knotlob posted: "Everyone would prefer that the contact lenses did not cause even mild trauma to the cornea, but I guess it is a bit like eating smoked meat, or sitting in the sun, etc. Nice to do and enjoy (the benefits of contact lenses - better vision, vanity, sports, rainy weather) but don't overdo [it]"

"Trauma" doesn't always mean "unbelievable pain." When you scratch an itch, it causes "trauma" to your skin, but it recovers quickly. Walking is "traumatic" to your feet, knees and back. The "trauma" that contact lenses cause to your corneal epithelium (Which is microscopically thin.) is very mild, supported by the fact that millions of people wear them comfortably every day with no permanent damage.

Don't let that word scare you, rfriel.

That's a good analogy, HelpMeRhinda. I guess you did . . . help me, Rhonda.

Simosa · #19 (**permalink**) 12-22-2009, 07:00 AM

Hey guys last question about biofinity - if these are such good lenses how come they don't really have a high profile (like air optix)? They don't seem to be popular lenses compared to other brands such as acuvue, bausch and laumb etc.

Moneyfornothin · #20 (**permalink**) 12-22-2009, 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simosa

Hey guys last question about biofinity - if these are such good lenses how come they don't really have a high profile (like air optix)? They don't seem to be popular lenses compared to other brands such as acuvue, bausch and laumb etc.

That's a good question Simosa. Although if you look at this section of Lens 101, there are enough threads to start a second page, so there are a lot of people asking questions about them here. That seems fairly "high-profile" to me.
Maybe they're fairly new as far as contact lenses go and they haven't built up a sizable "fan base" yet.

Knotlob · #21 (**permalink**) 12-22-2009, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moneyfornothin

That's a good question Simosa. Although if you look at this section of Lens 101, there are enough threads to start a second page, so there are a lot of people asking questions about them here. That seems fairly "high-profile" to me.
Maybe they're fairly new as far as contact lenses go and they haven't built up a sizable "fan base" yet.

It may indeed be that they are fairly new compared to the other leading silicone hydrogels. I think I remember reading something about a legal battle which Coopervison eventually won. That would have delayed their introduction to market.

Coopervision are normally cheaper than say J&J, at least in Europe, so cost shouldn't be the issue, even though Biofinity lenses are not the cheapest.

knotlob

Iseeall · #22 (**permalink**) 12-22-2009, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knotlob

It may indeed be that they are fairly new compared to the other leading silicone hydrogels. I think I remember reading something about a legal battle which Coopervison eventually won. That would have delayed their introduction to market.

Coopervision are normally cheaper than say J&J, at least in Europe, so cost shouldn't be the issue, even though Biofinity lenses are not the cheapest.

knotlob

Thanks for your input knotlob. I hadn't heard about the legal wrangling going on at Coopervision. Was it the usual "you stole our idea" legal wrangling?

Knotlob · #23 (**permalink**) 12-22-2009, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iseeall

Thanks for your input knotlob. I hadn't heard about the legal wrangling going on at Coopervision. Was it the usual "you stole our idea" legal wrangling?

Hi Iseeall

The legal wrangle was with CibaVision and they seem to have counter sued:

http://optochemicals.com/news_item.htm

and here:

http://www.cibavision.com/media_room/release_11212007.shtml

Source: Cooper Companies
CooperVision Files Litigation Against CIBA Vision

LAKE FOREST, Calif., April 11, 2006 (PRIMEZONE) -- CooperVision, Inc., the contact lens unit of The Cooper Companies, Inc. (NYSE:COO) announced today that on April 10, 2006 it filed suit in federal district court in Marshall, Texas, alleging that CIBA Vision's O2Optix(tm) contact lenses infringe United States Patent Nos. 6,431,706, 6,923,538, 6,467,903, 6,857,740 and 6,971,746, all of which are assigned to CooperVision. CooperVision is asserting two families of patents. One family relates to innovations that control the edge characteristics of certain types of contact lenses. The second family of patents relates to novel designs for certain types of contact lenses, including certain types of toric lenses used to treat astigmatism, the blurring of vision due to an irregularity in the shape of the cornea.

CooperVision also filed suit, on April 11, 2006, against CIBA Vision in federal district court in Wilmington, Delaware. CooperVision seeks a judicial declaration that its Biofinity(tm) line of silicone hydrogel contact lenses does not infringe certain CIBA Vision patents, United States Patent Nos. 5,760,100, 5,776,999, 5,789,461, 5,849,811, 5,965,631 and 6,951,894. The CIBA Vision patents generally relate to a type of silicone hydrogel lens.

CooperVision manufactures and markets contact lenses and ophthalmic surgery products. Headquartered in Lake Forest, Calif., it manufactures in Albuquerque, N.M., Juana Diaz, Puerto Rico, Norfolk, Va., Rochester, N.Y., Adelaide, Australia, Hamble and Hampshire England, Ligny-en-Barrios, France, Madrid, Spain and Toronto. Its Web address is www.coopervision.com.

CONTACT: The Cooper Companies, Inc.
Norris Battin
888-822-2660
Fax: 949-597-0662
ir@coopercompanies.com
---------------------------------
However, I also read another article, which suggested that Coopervision had under invested in R&D and therefore had delayed their entry into the silicone hydrogel market. I don't know that this was critical because their competitors seem to have later opted for a simpler silicone hydrogel material than originally planned.

http://www.glgroup.com/News/Delayed-availability-for-Comfilcon-A-silicone-hydrogel-lenses-from-CooperVision-18113.html

knotlob

Moneyfornothin · #24 (**permalink**) 12-23-2009, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knotlob

Hi Iseeall

The legal wrangle was with CibaVision and they seem to have counter sued:

http://optochemicals.com/news_item.htm

and here:

http://www.cibavision.com/media_room/release_11212007.shtml

Source: Cooper Companies
CooperVision Files Litigation Against CIBA Vision

LAKE FOREST, Calif., April 11, 2006 (PRIMEZONE) -- CooperVision, Inc., the contact lens unit of The Cooper Companies, Inc. (NYSE:COO) announced today that on April 10, 2006 it filed suit in federal district court in Marshall, Texas, alleging that CIBA Vision's O2Optix(tm) contact lenses infringe United States Patent Nos. 6,431,706, 6,923,538, 6,467,903, 6,857,740 and 6,971,746, all of which are assigned to CooperVision. CooperVision is asserting two families of patents. One family relates to innovations that control the edge characteristics of certain types of contact lenses. The second family of patents relates to novel designs for certain types of contact lenses, including certain types of toric lenses used to treat astigmatism, the blurring of vision due to an irregularity in the shape of the cornea.

CooperVision also filed suit, on April 11, 2006, against CIBA Vision in federal district court in Wilmington, Delaware. CooperVision seeks a judicial declaration that its Biofinity(tm) line of silicone hydrogel contact lenses does not infringe certain CIBA Vision patents, United States Patent Nos. 5,760,100, 5,776,999, 5,789,461, 5,849,811, 5,965,631 and 6,951,894. The CIBA Vision patents generally relate to a type of silicone hydrogel lens.

CooperVision manufactures and markets contact lenses and ophthalmic surgery products. Headquartered in Lake Forest, Calif., it manufactures in Albuquerque, N.M., Juana Diaz, Puerto Rico, Norfolk, Va., Rochester, N.Y., Adelaide, Australia, Hamble and Hampshire England, Ligny-en-Barrios, France, Madrid, Spain and Toronto. Its Web address is www.coopervision.com.

CONTACT: The Cooper Companies, Inc.
Norris Battin
888-822-2660
Fax: 949-597-0662
ir@coopercompanies.com
---------------------------------
However, I also read another article, which suggested that Coopervision had under invested in R&D and therefore had delayed their entry into the silicone hydrogel market. I don't know that this was critical because their competitors seem to have later opted for a simpler silicone hydrogel material than originally planned.

knotlob

Thanks for the legalese, knotlob. Looks like Iseeall was right about Coopervision feeling that CIBAVision stole their ideas.

Railfan · #25 (**permalink**) 12-28-2009, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simosa

Hey guys last question about biofinity - if these are such good lenses how come they don't really have a high profile (like air optix)? They don't seem to be popular lenses compared to other brands such as acuvue, bausch and laumb etc.

What do you mean by "high profile"? Do you mean "popularity? Are you wondering why these lenses aren't more popular if they're so good?

Lucyfur · #26 (**permalink**) 01-12-2010, 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rfriel

Yes, you are correct, 100%, I AGREE

Yes, that was good of you two to come to an agreement. I'm glad that even though a lot of people contribute to Lens 101, they get along most of the time and work things out without getting nasty.

TELETINA500 · #27 (**permalink**) 04-12-2010, 01:27 PM

i switched from focus day & night to biofinity last sept. 2009. i have no complaints about these lens. they are more comfortable than d&n and i do not have the problem with tired eyes when i take them out at night. they are half the cost of d&n which was a nice added bonus. i choose to take them out each night as i have had problems in the past with capillary growth when i left lens in more than a day. one of the best things about these lens is it is easy to tell if they are inside out or not. before, with the d&n, i would dicover after a few hours that the lens had turned inside out during removal or disinfecting and caused me blurred vision and some pain. don't have that problem anymore. yeah!!

Stairwaytoheaven · #28 (**permalink**) 04-12-2010, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TELETINA500

i switched from focus day & night to biofinity last sept. 2009. i have no complaints about these lens. they are more comfortable than d&n and i do not have the problem with tired eyes when i take them out at night. they are half the cost of d&n which was a nice added bonus. i choose to take them out each night as i have had problems in the past with capillary growth when i left lens in more than a day. one of the best things about these lens is it is easy to tell if they are inside out or not. before, with the d&n, i would discover after a few hours that the lens had turned inside out during removal or disinfecting and caused me blurred vision and some pain. Don't have that problem anymore. yeah!!

Thanks for the posting TELETINA500. I'm glad things worked out so well for you.

Iseeall · #29 (**permalink**) 04-30-2010, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knotlob

Hi Iseeall

The legal wrangle was with CibaVision and they seem to have counter sued:

http://optochemicals.com/news_item.htm

and here:

http://www.cibavision.com/media_room/release_11212007.shtml

Source: Cooper Companies
CooperVision Files Litigation Against CIBA Vision

LAKE FOREST, Calif., April 11, 2006 (PRIMEZONE) -- CooperVision, Inc., the contact lens unit of The Cooper Companies, Inc. (NYSE:COO) announced today that on April 10, 2006 it filed suit in federal district court in Marshall, Texas, alleging that CIBA Vision's O2Optix(tm) contact lenses infringe United States Patent Nos. 6,431,706, 6,923,538, 6,467,903, 6,857,740 and 6,971,746, all of which are assigned to CooperVision. CooperVision is asserting two families of patents. One family relates to innovations that control the edge characteristics of certain types of contact lenses. The second family of patents relates to novel designs for certain types of contact lenses, including certain types of toric lenses used to treat astigmatism, the blurring of vision due to an irregularity in the shape of the cornea.

CooperVision also filed suit, on April 11, 2006, against CIBA Vision in federal district court in Wilmington, Delaware. CooperVision seeks a judicial declaration that its Biofinity(tm) line of silicone hydrogel contact lenses does not infringe certain CIBA Vision patents, United States Patent Nos. 5,760,100, 5,776,999, 5,789,461, 5,849,811, 5,965,631 and 6,951,894. The CIBA Vision patents generally relate to a type of silicone hydrogel lens.

CooperVision manufactures and markets contact lenses and ophthalmic surgery products. Headquartered in Lake Forest, Calif., it manufactures in Albuquerque, N.M., Juana Diaz, Puerto Rico, Norfolk, Va., Rochester, N.Y., Adelaide, Australia, Hamble and Hampshire England, Ligny-en-Barrios, France, Madrid, Spain and Toronto. Its Web address is www.coopervision.com.

CONTACT: The Cooper Companies, Inc.
Norris Battin
888-822-2660
Fax: 949-597-0662
ir@coopercompanies.com
---------------------------------
However, I also read another article, which suggested that Coopervision had under invested in R&D and therefore had delayed their entry into the silicone hydrogel market. I don't know that this was critical because their competitors seem to have later opted for a simpler silicone hydrogel material than originally planned.

http://www.glgroup.com/News/Delayed-availability-for-Comfilcon-A-silicone-hydrogel-lenses-from-CooperVision-18113.html

knotlob

Do you know whatever became of this legal wrangling?

Knotlob · #30 (**permalink**) 04-30-2010, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iseeall

Do you know whatever became of this legal wrangling?

Well I guess they settled. I think the CooperVision lenses were delayed (e.g. Biofinity) while they duked it out in the courts. I'm not sure if this legal dispute involved Biofinity or it was another dispute, but the CooperVision Biofinity lens was late into the market, I think because of some legal wrangling.

knotlob

Zana · #31 (**permalink**) 04-30-2010, 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knotlob

Well I guess they settled. I think the CooperVision lenses were delayed (e.g. Biofinity) while they duked it out in the courts. I'm not sure if this legal dispute involved Biofinity or it was another dispute, but the CooperVision Biofinity lens was late into the market, I think because of some legal wrangling.

knotlob

Thanks for that report, Knotlob.

trongie · #32 (**permalink**) 05-08-2010, 11:50 PM

wow good to hear there are good reviews on this product. I had gotton switched from focus to air optix and FOR A YEAR NOW ive been putting up with terrible lens that made me think my eye had a problem. But finally for some reason i decided maybe its not my eye and looked it up online to find a mass of people that terribly hate the Air optix N&D

so far im looking into the biofinity since i suppose thats the only other alternative here but will do some more research on more lens before i go to my doctor and cry like a baby

sexynerd · #33 (**permalink**) 05-10-2010, 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by trongie

wow good to hear there are good reviews on this product. I had gotton switched from focus to air optix and FOR A YEAR NOW ive been putting up with terrible lens that made me think my eye had a problem. But finally for some reason i decided maybe its not my eye and looked it up online to find a mass of people that terribly hate the Air optix N&D

so far im looking into the biofinity since i suppose that's the only other alternative here but will do some more research on more lens before i go to my doctor and cry like a baby

Welcome to Lens 101 trongie. I'm glad you were able to find some help with your question. Please let us know how your next doctor's appointment goes. Hopefully, you won't have to cry.

Zana · #34 (**permalink**) 05-18-2010, 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by trongie

wow good to hear there are good reviews on this product. I had gotton switched from focus to air optix and FOR A YEAR NOW ive been putting up with terrible lens that made me think my eye had a problem. But finally for some reason i decided maybe its not my eye and looked it up online to find a mass of people that terribly hate the Air optix N&D

so far im looking into the biofinity since i suppose thats the only other alternative here but will do some more research on more lens before i go to my doctor and cry like a baby

Let's check the facts, here.

Air Optix Night & Day Aqua:
Monthly disposable
6 lenses per box
76% lotrafilcon A
24% H2O
$ 45.95 at Lens.com

Biofinity
Monthly Disposable
6 Lenses per Box
52% comfilcon A
48% H2O
$33.95 at Lens.com

Both are monthly disposable lenses, but the Biofinity has a higher water content and costs less at www.lens.com. I think these may feel better for you. Ask your doctor about them and tell us how it goes.

Iseeall · #35 (**permalink**) 06-17-2010, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knotlob

Well I guess they settled. I think the CooperVision lenses were delayed (e.g. Biofinity) while they duked it out in the courts. I'm not sure if this legal dispute involved Biofinity or it was another dispute, but the CooperVision Biofinity lens was late into the market, I think because of some legal wrangling.

knotlob

Ah, nothing like a little legal wrangling and duking it out to let you know you're alive.

Lucyfur · #36 (**permalink**) 07-06-2010, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iseeall

Ah, nothing like a little legal wrangling and duking it out to let you know you're alive.

Flatten him, Sister!

HelpMeRhonda · #37 (**permalink**) 07-21-2010, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Georgiaonmymind

Well, I guess that's settled. Nice work you two.

Do you feel better about wearing contact lenses now, rfriel?

It's good to get some agreement on this site. Even on something as small as the definition of the word "trauma."

Lucyfur · #38 (**permalink**) 07-28-2010, 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knotlob

Hi Iseeall

The legal wrangle was with CibaVision and they seem to have counter sued:

http://optochemicals.com/news_item.htm

and here:

http://www.cibavision.com/media_room/release_11212007.shtml

Source: Cooper Companies
CooperVision Files Litigation Against CIBA Vision

LAKE FOREST, Calif., April 11, 2006 (PRIMEZONE) -- CooperVision, Inc., the contact lens unit of The Cooper Companies, Inc. (NYSE:COO) announced today that on April 10, 2006 it filed suit in federal district court in Marshall, Texas, alleging that CIBA Vision's O2Optix(tm) contact lenses infringe United States Patent Nos. 6,431,706, 6,923,538, 6,467,903, 6,857,740 and 6,971,746, all of which are assigned to CooperVision. CooperVision is asserting two families of patents. One family relates to innovations that control the edge characteristics of certain types of contact lenses. The second family of patents relates to novel designs for certain types of contact lenses, including certain types of toric lenses used to treat astigmatism, the blurring of vision due to an irregularity in the shape of the cornea.

CooperVision also filed suit, on April 11, 2006, against CIBA Vision in federal district court in Wilmington, Delaware. CooperVision seeks a judicial declaration that its Biofinity(tm) line of silicone hydrogel contact lenses does not infringe certain CIBA Vision patents, United States Patent Nos. 5,760,100, 5,776,999, 5,789,461, 5,849,811, 5,965,631 and 6,951,894. The CIBA Vision patents generally relate to a type of silicone hydrogel lens.

knotlob

So I guess the accusation had some merit, didn't it?

Mondas2 · #39 (**permalink**) 08-20-2010, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knotlob

Hi Iseeall

The legal wrangle was with CibaVision and they seem to have counter sued:

http://optochemicals.com/news_item.htm

and here:

http://www.cibavision.com/media_room/release_11212007.shtml

Source: Cooper Companies
CooperVision Files Litigation Against CIBA Vision

LAKE FOREST, Calif., April 11, 2006 (PRIMEZONE) -- CooperVision, Inc., the contact lens unit of The Cooper Companies, Inc. (NYSE:COO) announced today that on April 10, 2006 it filed suit in federal district court in Marshall, Texas, alleging that CIBA Vision's O2Optix(tm) contact lenses infringe United States Patent Nos. 6,431,706, 6,923,538, 6,467,903, 6,857,740 and 6,971,746, all of which are assigned to CooperVision. CooperVision is asserting two families of patents. One family relates to innovations that control the edge characteristics of certain types of contact lenses. The second family of patents relates to novel designs for certain types of contact lenses, including certain types of toric lenses used to treat astigmatism, the blurring of vision due to an irregularity in the shape of the cornea.

CooperVision also filed suit, on April 11, 2006, against CIBA Vision in federal district court in Wilmington, Delaware. CooperVision seeks a judicial declaration that its Biofinity(tm) line of silicone hydrogel contact lenses does not infringe certain CIBA Vision patents, United States Patent Nos. 5,760,100, 5,776,999, 5,789,461, 5,849,811, 5,965,631 and 6,951,894. The CIBA Vision patents generally relate to a type of silicone hydrogel lens.

http://www.glgroup.com/News/Delayed-availability-for-Comfilcon-A-silicone-hydrogel-lenses-from-CooperVision-18113.html

knotlob

Does anyone know if this dispute has been resolved?

Knotlob · #40 (**permalink**) 08-20-2010, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mondas2

Does anyone know if this dispute has been resolved?

I'm pretty sure it was resolved, because that probably delayed the release of the Biofinity lens onto the market and of course it is now available. Better late than never.

knotlob

naturallygood · #41 (**permalink**) 08-20-2010, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knotlob

I'm pretty sure it was resolved, because that probably delayed the release of the Biofinity lens onto the market and of course it is now available. Better late than never.

knotlob

So . . . a happy ending?

Mondas2 · #42 (**permalink**) 08-23-2010, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knotlob

Thanks Mondas2

Well I'm only the messenger - it's the researchers in the scientific paper that stated the kerititis form of acanthamoeba is relatively rare and that's more important than my opinion

But at least that does fit in with the reality - we do hear of occasional acanthamoeba kerititis infections in contact lenses wearers, but given the hundreds of thousands who successfully wear contact lenses, the frequency of infection seems remarkably low.

knotlob

That's true. You don't hear about acanthamoeba infections these days. I can't think of even one case on this forum. People have asked about keratitis, but I don't think anyone has said they had it.