Yet Another Cycling Forum
General Category => The Knowledge => Health & Fitness => Topic started by: Wowbagger on 12 June, 2009, 05:18:28 pm
-
Well, even if I'd stayed with the old one, I'd have changed because the place has been taken over by Scriveners and I didn't know anyone there. I had my eye test - change of prescription - and started to look at frames, and there was absolutely nothing I wanted. Not for fashion reasons, but because, as a bifocal wearer, I need a deep lens and the stupid modern fashion is for very narrow ones.
After the eye test I went round the corner to another optician (a local family firm) and they had a big stock of old frames which take deep lenses. I went back to the first shop, got my prescription and £62.70 voucher (tax credits) and have ordered a set of varifocals with nice moony gold-plated frames, which he sold at a discount because they are old stock. They will have a water-repellant, anti-glare, anti-scratch coating and will turn grey in sunlight.
-
Here we are, 12 years to the week later, and I've changed opticians again. I didn't realise I had until after the eye test, but it seems that the firm formerly known as Harvey Rose, and up until recently run by his son Paul, is now just "Rose Opticians". It seems that Paul has retired. My eyes were examined by a very pleasant young woman and who used a glaucoma test which didn't have me leaping backwards.
Jan had an eye test immediately after I did and we are both due new spectacles. At an eye-watering price.
-
I feel that pain.
I've been going to the same local chain of opticians since "eh wiz wee" but one of the big less local chains bought them when the owner retired.
Said owner had to struggle with my dislike of sitting on strange chairs until I was in higher single digits (dentist also had this problem but back-lit snellen charts are harder to reposition than mouth mirror and scraper)
Any how... Today's visit confirmed what I suspected, another change in one eye, enough to need new glases.
So that's 200 odd quid on a pair of daily glases, sunglasses for the car and I should really sort out getting cycling glasses for day and night with my prescription, which was the reason I picked up this phone and opened Tapatalk about an hour ago.
Sent from my BKL-L09 using Tapatalk
-
A member of the Audax fraternity (I'm not sure if he's of this parish) is the son of an optician.
There's a REASON he wears specs with HUGE lenses...
-
I think my scrip has changed; previously very comfortable computer-use glasses are giving me a headache. My 'sportswear' single vision glasses don't seem to give me clear distance vision anymore.
So probably up for 2, maybe even 3 pairs (currently have varifocals as well).
Could be an eye-watering amount of money for 3 new pairs. Circa £800.
-
Single vision lenses & specs can be relatively cheap.
I have not ordered specs online but might consider this if I had a recent prescription.
-
Single vision lenses & specs can be relatively cheap.
I have not ordered specs online but might consider this if I had a recent prescription.
It has been my experience that you can't persuade opticians to fit new lenses to old frames; so the cost of frames is included.
That would be 3 frames
One set very expensive varifocals (never found them online, and TBH I wouldn't trust that. These need extremely careful alignment, measured on the frames you are going to use, on your face).
I'd expect to get two of the sets for about £250 quid (lenses and frames).
The varifocals cost £580 last time (lenses and frames).
-
I got single vision second set for £30 in 2019. I have separate reading and vision glasses.
-
an eye-watering price.
How have I missed that comment?
-
My varifocals cost – take a breath – £780 for single pair (including frames). That's admitted me ticking every box on the expens-o-meter and the fact that I have a prescription that's measured in multiple milk-bottle bottoms. Seriously, it takes light so long to pass through the lenses, I'm seeing everything three seconds after it happened.
Now I'm used to them, they are very good though.
-
That was more than my jag....
-
Single vision lenses & specs can be relatively cheap.
I have not ordered specs online but might consider this if I had a recent prescription.
I've had good experiences ordering specs online (mostly from the unedifyingly named Goggles4U) - single vision have been as cheap as three pairs for twenty quid in the past, and more recently, having just turned middle aged enough to require separate reading and distance prescriptions, I got a pair of varifocals and of reading glasses for under £50.
The varifocals were intended as a cheap proof of concept (I've heard of enough people finding it difficult to adapt to them that I wanted an idea of whether or not I might struggle before spending a significant amount on them), but I've found them absolutely fine.
-
Sorry to be possibly rude and definitely uninformed, would eye surgery be cheaper?
-
I seem to have struck lucky as having worn glasses since the age of 11 (and contacts from about 31) now 60+ years later and for the past couple of years my eyes have changed to be "driving legal" without glasses or contacts.
I do still drive with glasses but everything else without (I do cycle with glasses but plain/sun/light enhance lenses)
-
I've had good experiences ordering specs online (mostly from the unedifyingly named Goggles4U) - single vision have been as cheap as three pairs for twenty quid in the past,
I recently bought two pairs from glassesdirect, which came to about £20 including delivery. The thing I liked about them was that they send to a selection of frames to try on before you commit to buying. Very happy with them so far.
Of course, I’m fortunate that I have a simple prescription - only need reading glasses, distance vision is still very good. My wife has a more complicated prescription so glassesdirect are no good for her.
-
Sorry to be possibly rude and definitely uninformed, would eye surgery be cheaper?
It only really works for simple changes. For people with more complex problems and high-diopter issues, they will typically end up still needing glasses (but much lower scrip) afterwards. There are also issues with internal refraction afterwards that can make driving (or cycling) at night difficult.
-
Surgery crossed my mind, but I have a minus seven-and-a-lot prescription in both eyes, so they're pretty much going to have to use terawatt lasers mounted on sharks and I'll still likely end up needing glasses.
Ultrathin (they're not really, but they're a lot lighter) varifocals may be expensive, but they last several years, and well, being able to see is worth the periodic expense.
-
Surgery crossed my mind, but I have a minus seven-and-a-lot prescription in both eyes, so they're pretty much going to have to use terawatt lasers mounted on sharks and I'll still likely end up needing glasses.
Ultrathin (they're not really, but they're a lot lighter) varifocals may be expensive, but they last several years, and well, being able to see is worth the periodic expense.
You are a couple of diopters above me.
At 'our' levels, you have to have the ultrathin (otherwise the lenses are too thick and won't fit in frames). Plus coatings to reduce internal refraction. Plus I get the yellow tint/coating (reduces blue-light glare and makes it *much* easier to read in some lighting conditions.
It all adds up.
-
Yeah, I think the starting price was about £300 for the 'basic' varifocals at that prescription and then once I'd ticked all the boxes for the super Zeiss lenses, anti-refractive coatings etc. I was just shy of £800.
If I had normal lenses they'd be so heavy that wearing the glasses would probably cause my face to slide off under the weight.
I've no idea why I'm so short-sighted, no one else in my family is at all. Perhaps the stories are true, but honestly I didn't do that any more often than any other boy.
-
I’m afraid I’m a fashion victim when it comes to spectacles and have worn Lindberg almost exclusively for 20 years. Thankfully, the optician I’ve used since we moved down south, is a friend and has over the years heavily discounted stock items for us. Given that all three children wore glasses growing up and Dr Beardy is a lifer as well, I’m sure that I’ve paid for at least one of his sailing dinghies :-\, so I’m happy to accept a discount when it’s offered.
Which reminds me, I must get my last set of frames reglazed as computer lenses, I’m getting a crick in my neck using these varifocals.
-
Surgery crossed my mind, but I have a minus seven-and-a-lot prescription in both eyes, so they're pretty much going to have to use terawatt lasers mounted on sharks and I'll still likely end up needing glasses.
Ultrathin (they're not really, but they're a lot lighter) varifocals may be expensive, but they last several years, and well, being able to see is worth the periodic expense.
Mrs LJ was about -11 in both eyes which isn't far off getting a free Labrador. She started to develop cataracts when she was just over 50 which is early but apparently that sort of short-sightedness does make you liable to get cataracts and so had the lens replacement surgery. Because the cataracts were only just starting she had to go privately and ended up having the equivalent of varifocal lenses installed. She can now drive without glasses as well as read. She does use glasses for reading sometimes if the light is dim but apart from that the change is little short of a miracle.
-
Yeah, I think the starting price was about £300 for the 'basic' varifocals at that prescription and then once I'd ticked all the boxes for the super Zeiss lenses, anti-refractive coatings etc. I was just shy of £800.
If I had normal lenses they'd be so heavy that wearing the glasses would probably cause my face to slide off under the weight.
I've no idea why I'm so short-sighted, no one else in my family is at all. Perhaps the stories are true, but honestly I didn't do that any more often than any other boy.
I think reading small text in poor light as a young child might result in myopia.
Catching balls outdoors reduces the tendency.
Little boys' activities only have a bearing if P0Rn is involved...
-
What about the Freeman's catalogue lingerie pages? Asking for a friend.
-
Surgery crossed my mind, but I have a minus seven-and-a-lot prescription in both eyes, so they're pretty much going to have to use terawatt lasers mounted on sharks and I'll still likely end up needing glasses.
Ultrathin (they're not really, but they're a lot lighter) varifocals may be expensive, but they last several years, and well, being able to see is worth the periodic expense.
Mrs LJ was about -11 in both eyes which isn't far off getting a free Labrador. She started to develop cataracts when she was just over 50 which is early but apparently that sort of short-sightedness does make you liable to get cataracts and so had the lens replacement surgery. Because the cataracts were only just starting she had to go privately and ended up having the equivalent of varifocal lenses installed. She can now drive without glasses as well as read. She does use glasses for reading sometimes if the light is dim but apart from that the change is little short of a miracle.
My dad (short-sighted since childhood) had lens replacement surgery for cataracts in his 50s, too, and hasn't needed glasses to drive since (he does need reading glasses, but that's to be expected at almost 70).
It also had the added bonus of making his eyes reflect in the dark like a human cat. ;D
-
Surgery crossed my mind, but I have a minus seven-and-a-lot prescription in both eyes, so they're pretty much going to have to use terawatt lasers mounted on sharks and I'll still likely end up needing glasses.
Ultrathin (they're not really, but they're a lot lighter) varifocals may be expensive, but they last several years, and well, being able to see is worth the periodic expense.
Mrs LJ was about -11 in both eyes which isn't far off getting a free Labrador. She started to develop cataracts when she was just over 50 which is early but apparently that sort of short-sightedness does make you liable to get cataracts and so had the lens replacement surgery. Because the cataracts were only just starting she had to go privately and ended up having the equivalent of varifocal lenses installed. She can now drive without glasses as well as read. She does use glasses for reading sometimes if the light is dim but apart from that the change is little short of a miracle.
My dad (short-sighted since childhood) had lens replacement surgery for cataracts in his 50s, too, and hasn't needed glasses to drive since (he does need reading glasses, but that's to be expected at almost 70).
It also had the added bonus of making his eyes reflect in the dark like a human cat. ;D
ALL people who have lens replacement cataract surgery will need reading (or distance) spectacles.
A replacement lens CANNOT change its shape to focus, unlike a young biological lens.
-
My granddad had surgery for cataracts way back, and they told him they were going to put corrective lenses in to fix his short sightedness. Sadly, they messed up and managed to put a lens in which doubled it! He ended up wearing his glasses and a contact lens on that eye. When they did the other eye, they couldn't correct it fully because it would have given him too great a difference between the 2!
-
My Mum has had successful cataract surgery, which has corrected most of her refractive error; she wears bifocal spectacles with a weak prescription for residual myopia and astigmatism.
-
I was told I was a poor candidate for surgery as my sight is too unstable. I'm around -5/-6. I also already have piss poor night vision (starbursts and halos) because of the pigment dispersion syndrome.
I buy the cheapest glasses possible- glasses direct. Thus far I have avoided varifocals as I can read perfectly well without any glasses, unless I'm wearing contacts. It's only a matter of time though.
-
A replacement lens CANNOT change its shape to focus, unlike a young biological lens.
However just like varifocal spectacles you can now get extended focus and multifocal intraocular lens so much better than the standard single focus lens.
-
I can't say I mind wearing glasses and contacts that much, so I'm not so bothered with surgery. The cost for lightweight lenses is steep, but it's an occasional expense. I don't much like the multifocal contacts, they're basically not especially good at either extreme, but they're OK for activities or when I need to alternate from studious and wise to damned sexy.
-
I was told I was a poor candidate for surgery as my sight is too unstable. I'm around -5/-6. I also already have piss poor night vision (starbursts and halos) because of the pigment dispersion syndrome.
I buy the cheapest glasses possible- glasses direct. Thus far I have avoided varifocals as I can read perfectly well without any glasses, unless I'm wearing contacts. It's only a matter of time though.
You could always get cheap reading specs for use with contact lenses from the Pound Shop.
-
Contacts... urgh... poking oneself in the een gies me the boak.
-
You could always get cheap reading specs for use with contact lenses from the Pound Shop.
I do. I resent paying more than £5- though I did once pay £8 just to avoid the tedium of a phone - less train journey.
They do, however, last about £1. Almost count as single use plastic if you're as careless as I am.
-
Sorry to be possibly rude and definitely uninformed, would eye surgery be cheaper?
It only really works for simple changes. For people with more complex problems and high-diopter issues, they will typically end up still needing glasses (but much lower scrip) afterwards. There are also issues with internal refraction afterwards that can make driving (or cycling) at night difficult.
Thanks I really have no idea.
-
Mrs LJ was about -11 in both eyes which isn't far off getting a free Labrador.
Now I find that funny...
-
Be careful with which cheapass online glasses provider you use (and when entering the details). I bought some as a backup (in a style I wouldn't spend significant money on), but when I used them I got a headache. When I next went to the opticians I took them and he checked them - the prescription was correct but the rotation on one eye was massively out for my astigmatism.
-
I would not totally rule out laser surgery. I cannot remember my prescription before I had laser surgery but I had major shortsightedness and astigmatism. I was shortsighted enough that I could virtually do microsurgery without a microscope.
I went to Moordfields to the guy that had several of the patents on the laser machines, was known for doing the premier league guys and the special forces (I knew a guy who had done his opthalmic training with him)
With that level you have to have the flap raised from the cornea which is a whole level more extensive but allows them to sculpt the eye better. I was able to start kayaking without glasses tied to my head, ride a bike without glasses and a whole host of things. I had no more nighttime stars than beforehand.
-
Surgery makes me squickle, I don't want people poking around inside my eyeballs. This is why my undercarriage is still connected up, ain't no way they're swashbuckling with a scalpel down there either. I have spent too long working with surgeons to trust them with anything other than other people.
-
I would not totally rule out laser surgery. I cannot remember my prescription before I had laser surgery but I had major shortsightedness and astigmatism. I was shortsighted enough that I could virtually do microsurgery without a microscope.
I went to Moordfields to the guy that had several of the patents on the laser machines, was known for doing the premier league guys and the special forces (I knew a guy who had done his opthalmic training with him)
With that level you have to have the flap raised from the cornea which is a whole level more extensive but allows them to sculpt the eye better. I was able to start kayaking without glasses tied to my head, ride a bike without glasses and a whole host of things. I had no more nighttime stars than beforehand.
I think if I'd had access to that 20 years ago (and the funds), I would have gone for the surgery.
As it is now, I need lenses for any distance other than 5" from my eyeballs. A different lens for every distance :(
-
I had laser eye surgery, aged 35, in January 2017 and it's been a revelation to not have to wear specs. It set me back £4000 for LASIK, but I'd say it's been worth every penny. I love the freedom of not having my specs fog up in the rain, or when opening the oven door, and being able to wear sunglasses. Clearly, I'm expecting to be wearing reading specs within the next decade or so. YMMV, obviously.
-
You know contact lenses don't fog yeah?
I'm like mrcharly, different lenses for every task, too old for surgery to be worthwhile now.
I couldn't afford it then, and they told me I wasn't a good candidate anyway. I don't know anyone who has had the surgery and regretted it.
-
Surgery makes me squickle, I don't want people poking around inside my eyeballs. This is why my undercarriage is still connected up, ain't no way they're swashbuckling with a scalpel down there either. I have spent too long working with surgeons to trust them with anything other than other people.
I was put off the idea of eye surgery for life when as a far-too-young-to-be-seeing-that-kind-of-thing person, I accidentally caught a bit of Un Chien Andalou on a late-night BBC2 screening (no idea why I was out of bed watching telly at that time of night at that age).
-
I watched The Omen when I was little and spent a sleepless night sure I was the antichrist. I was tempted to shave my hair and see if I had the mark, but I wasn't brave enough to undertake any nocturnal self-barbering.
In retrospect, had I been the antichrist, shaving my own head probably wouldn't have bothered me.
-
I only discovered my dislike of pokey things going on eyes when one of the neighbours cars lost part of its car aerial and I had to walk past it on the way to the bus everyday, and one day I somehow though, "that would be shit if you fell and it went ib your eye", the image of a Peugeot 205 aerial gouging my eye out has haunted me ever since... Even worse the number of people in my hiking club that wear contacts means its not uncommon for me to wander into the lavvies at club huts while someone is gouging their lenses out, prompt about turn
Sent from my BKL-L09 using Tapatalk
-
I had a retinal tear repaired a few years ago and then, 12 months later, had a lens replacement to deal with the consequent cataract. The process confirmed a lot of my negative bias about many opticians and gave me a very positive view of the surgeon(S) and the optician I now use.
I now have 4/4 or 5/6 vision in my right eye unaided, but my left remains stubbornly at between -9.0 and -9.5. I can’t wear corrective glasses as the images in each eye are too different in size for my brain to compute, so I wear -8.0 or -8.5 contacts depending whether I’m mostly inside or out that day… which give me vision that matches my right eye (but yellower). Then I add either pure reading glasses or a set of Zeiss Room lens glasses - try-focal and filtered to ease eye strain on the computer. I think the readers were 90 and the Zeiss glasses 400 with a nice Danish titanium frame.
I
-
I only discovered my dislike of pokey things going on eyes when one of the neighbours cars lost part of its car aerial and I had to walk past it on the way to the bus everyday, and one day I somehow though, "that would be shit if you fell and it went ib your eye", the image of a Peugeot 205 aerial gouging my eye out has haunted me ever since... Even worse the number of people in my hiking club that wear contacts means its not uncommon for me to wander into the lavvies at club huts while someone is gouging their lenses out, prompt about turn
Sent from my BKL-L09 using Tapatalk
The latter is easily solved for shortish camping trips by extended wear lenses. I mix and match between daily and extended, but if I’m away for a few days there’s no contest.
-
I don't mind poking my eyes with fingers, I first wore contacts back in medieval times when they were made out of sharp pieces of flint and it took a manservant with a mallet and persistence to get them in. You'd usually stop screaming after about fifteen minutes for long enough to wipe away the blood and tears. Modern wibbly lenses are, I'm sure, part of the reason for the feeble nature of contemporary youth.
War and impermeable contacts, that's what makes a man out of even a woman.
-
I don't mind poking my eyes with fingers, I first wore contacts back in medieval times when they were made out of sharp pieces of flint and it took a manservant with a mallet and persistence to get them in. You'd usually stop screaming after about fifteen minutes for long enough to wipe away the blood and tears. Modern wibbly lenses are, I'm sure, part of the reason for the feeble nature of contemporary youth.
War and impermeable contacts, that's what makes a man out of even a woman.
Gas permeables were worse - they didn’t even numb your eye through oxygen starvation after 15 minutes;)
Healthy, because you soon gave up wearing them
-
I've experimented, twice, with contacts.
They aren't good if you get dry eyes.
Trying to peel one off once, it was stuck on so firmly that the contact lens tore. Just glad it wasn't my eyeball.
-
I have dry eyes and lenses are fine. I use drops if necessary. Lenses are an awful lot easier to tear than eyeballs.
If this thread is representative men are so squeamish, they'd never manage menstruation.
-
Modern high water content lenses don't bother dry eyes. Though modern younger people probably cry all the time because of gluten or somesuch.
Managing menstruation at one remove is enough for me.
-
Modern high water content lenses don't bother dry eyes. Though modern younger people probably cry all the time because of gluten or somesuch.
Managing menstruation at one remove is enough for me.
If ever I needed a like button!
-
First experience of an island opticians.
Apart from the annoying habit of changing the diagnostic lenses as she said "One or Two?", very positive. Wallet looked like it had been attacked by piranhas (£800 for two pairs of specs) and a prescription to help with my dry eye problem. She could see the start of damage to surface of eye, despite my using eye drops in the morning.
-
Here we are, 12 years to the week later, and I've changed opticians again. I didn't realise I had until after the eye test, but it seems that the firm formerly known as Harvey Rose, and up until recently run by his son Paul, is now just "Rose Opticians". It seems that Paul has retired. My eyes were examined by a very pleasant young woman and who used a glaucoma test which didn't have me leaping backwards.
Jan had an eye test immediately after I did and we are both due new spectacles. At an eye-watering price.
I was examined by the same very pleasant young woman again today. She seemed to think it was 18 months since I was last seen, and I do recall that this was my third appointment with her. For the second consecutive occasion, my eyes have changed so little that I am still wearing the same glasses I bought in June 2021.
I did have to get these frames repaired some while back because a weld had broken. They are remarkably flimsy titanium. That mend cost me £15.
Jan had her eyes tested as well, and she needs new distance glasses, which have set us back about £380. But she's worth it... ;)
-
Is it improper to have a crush on one's optician?
I've been going to the local Specsavers for the last few regular biennial check-ups where my optician is a lovely flame-haired Irishwoman called Siobhan. She can't half talk, and she talks very fast too, but she's great and I have to confess to having developed a bit of a soft spot for her. I like that she doesn't hold back on the technical detail, which I find fascinating.
Last time I went, we ended up chatting for ages about the macula.
-
I feel a "Readers' Opticians" thread coming on...
-
I've only ever been to one optician, a friend who sat across the table from me in A level Biology classes. And, after qualification, I was his only dentist until I retired.
We remained loyal to each other not just because of friendship but also because of the transparent way in which we conducted our practice, making the patient our primary concern rather than our profitability.
I'm seeing him again in a couple of weeks (poor soul, he's still working, but has been doing 3 days a week for the last ten years or more).
-
I've got a very low prescription, minus 10. Seems £380 is commonly the price I pay for glasses.i go for 1.67 refractive index or higher, usually 1.74 tbh. Without that my lenses would be so thick they're in another time zone!
Contact lenses? I got high water content lenses years ago now but they were toric. The better, more comfortable lenses couldn't be found in toric lenses. They had me clawing my eyes out if I wore for longer than 3 hours. I once wore them for 6 hours straight! I needed new eyes after that. Took a few weeks to get over it!
I was at the limit for wearing contact lenses due to dry eyes. Much drier than mine and I wouldn't have been suitable for contacts. Very dry eyes do affect wearing of them.
I'm seeing a new, to me, local opticians. The one I got my contacts from 15 plus years ago. I'm not looking forward to the bill! I need main glasses but also computer glasses too. I might get a contribution from work, must check on that. I might get driving glasses I think blue filter helps with that. I might need reading glasses too. I think I could get away with 2 glasses but that could be costly as they're not a cheap place.
I'm also thinking of getting a pair of fl42 tinted glasses for light sensitivity related to migraines. That adds nearly £150-200 to the price of normal glasses. That's for a few months on though. When I'm more flush.
New glasses are essential but the price hurts my wallet, and me, a bit too much.
-
It is worth getting a blue light filter on your computer glasses.
-
I think I'll have to in order to get a contribution from work. Although I might have to buy from a certain opticians in the town I work in. A pain!
-
It is worth getting a blue light filter on your computer glasses.
The science on this is far from conclusive. Your eyes are exposed to a lot more “blue” light from normal daylight.
You should be far more concerned about the damage caused by UV light. (One thing that came out from chatting with my optician last time I saw her is that her children wear sunglasses more or less every time they go outside.)
-
It is worth getting a blue light filter on your computer glasses.
The science on this is far from conclusive. Your eyes are exposed to a lot more “blue” light from normal daylight.
My experience, as someone who had light-triggered migraines, is that lenses with a blue filter (actually a yellow coloured tint I believe), is that the lenses make a huge difference.
I can look at a screen without them, put the glasses on, and it is like cooling water poured on a burn. The difference is startling.
-
You should look into FL42 I think it's called. It was developed to protect the eyes of students in Birmingham University from fluorescent lights but they found out it helps quite a few m light sensitivity conditions. I've heard on migraine forums that if you get a good pair of true tl42 tinted glasses they do help. However there are some very bad ones around. It's a kind of reddish, orangish brown tint but some dodgy, online sites sell other, cheaper tints add fl42.
The true fl42 tint filters out two light frequency ranges that have been identified as triggering migraines.
-
My experience, as someone who had light-triggered migraines, is that lenses with a blue filter (actually a yellow coloured tint I believe), is that the lenses make a huge difference.
Righto. I didn’t read TPBM’s post for context. Incorrectly guessed you were talking about protecting eyes from the damage supposedly caused by blue light emitted from screens, which is a pseudoscience health fad based on very limited evidence.
I know nothing of migraines, thankfully.
-
Lucky you! Seriously, you're lucky not to get migraines.
-
Is it improper to have a crush on one's optician?
I've been going to the local Specsavers for the last few regular biennial check-ups where my optician is a lovely flame-haired Irishwoman called Siobhan. She can't half talk, and she talks very fast too, but she's great and I have to confess to having developed a bit of a soft spot for her. I like that she doesn't hold back on the technical detail, which I find fascinating.
Last time I went, we ended up chatting for ages about the macula.
I drank gin once with my content lens optician, but that's only because I bumped into her in the pub. It stopped at gin though, so don't get carried away. Hope she didn't have many more customers that afternoon.
I have one of those dentists who cheerfully carries on a conversation while shoving implements into my mouth so my only responses to his questions can be mmpfff hrrughm mmfflmm.
-
Is it improper to have a crush on one's optician?
You should marry her, for better or worse. Better? Or worse? Better with, or without?
-
Is it improper to have a crush on one's optician?
You should marry her, for better or worse. Better? Or worse? Better with, or without?
;D
-
Is it improper to have a crush on one's optician?
You should marry her, for better or worse. Better? Or worse? Better with, or without?
POTD!