[HN Gopher] Glasses Got Worse on Purpose
___________________________________________________________________
Glasses Got Worse on Purpose
Author : chrisaycock
Score : 40 points
Date : 2026-04-09 19:01 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (worse-on-purpose.beehiiv.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (worse-on-purpose.beehiiv.com)
| rationalist wrote:
| > They own ... EyeBuyDirect.
|
| Back when I used to buy eye glasses, I bought three identical
| pairs from them (same frames and prescription). All three were
| different, and only one of them was tolerable to wear.
|
| LASIK seems to still have an very healthy margin for the
| provider, but still worth it. By my calculations, LASIK cost me
| the same amount that contact lenses would have cost me over the
| same time period (and that's after searching 30+ retailers for
| the lowest price on contact lenses).
| alex43578 wrote:
| The one thing that has stopped me isn't cost, but the relative
| risks of serious/permanent side effects. If LASIK generates an
| issue (dry eyes, pain, inaccurate correction) it's basically
| permanent. If contacts are an issue, take them out or swap the
| brand/prescription. I just couldn't gamble my vision on the
| outcome of LASIK.
| rationalist wrote:
| True, 99% of people experiencing no negative side-effects
| does mean that 1% do experience negative side-effects.
|
| I think religiously-following the pre-operating and post-
| operation instructions is very important, and making sure eye
| health before the procedure is good enough.
|
| I imagine dry eyes wouldn't be any more inconvenient than
| having to deal with contacts (and having worse vision without
| the contacts).
| bsder wrote:
| > I just couldn't gamble my vision on the outcome of LASIK.
|
| Perfectly reasonable. However, do know that modern versions
| of the procedure are _way_ better at identifying the people
| who are likely to have problems.
|
| However, even if the odds are 1 in 10,000, there is always a
| "1".
| 0cf8612b2e1e wrote:
| Meanwhile, I go to ZenniOptical, find a functional pair for $10,
| and buy eight copies. Never worry about glasses again. Keep a
| pair in the car, at work, in my luggage, and let them diffuse
| around the house.
| umeshunni wrote:
| I did that for my reading glasses, but for shortsightedness,
| especially as an astigmatic, I find it hard to buy glasses or
| frames without actually wearing them. Curious what your
| strategy is.
| hazbot wrote:
| Thankyou, this is the comment I came here for - advice on
| alternatives!
| 0x38B wrote:
| I read up until the following quote, attributed to an unnamed
| "industry observer" - something aroused my curiosity:
|
| > "In essence, EyeMed is merely an instrument to protect the
| market share of the Luxottica family of companies, and it
| provides little to no substantive cost amelioration to consumers,
| what many would regard as the principal purpose of insurance."
|
| Searching with Kagi, the quote comes from a post on
| forums.studentdoctor.net by ThazinJayne (1), who prefaces the
| text "Here is an e-mail I received from a friend".
|
| An industry observer? More like an unnamed friend of an anonymous
| forum member.
|
| 1: https://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/luxottica-eyemed-
| sc...
|
| ----
|
| P.S. I like my Oakleys, both sun- and prescription glasses, but
| cannot deny they are way overpriced for what they are - a little
| bit of plastic and metal.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2026-04-09 23:01 UTC)