Versus $15 reading glasses that will last years if you are just slightly careful with them. Hmmm

> Versus $15 reading glasses that will last years

But the drops have the advantage of not messing with your distance vision like reading glasses do (unless you pay for varifocals, obvs.) - "[...] does not significantly affect the eye’s focusing muscles, so it doesn’t blur your distance vision [...]"

For someone who has to switch between near and distance often, I can see the drops being useful, especially if your distance vision is fine and you don't need varifocals.

If you're mid-40s (which is the threshold ago where I am), and can afford the up front cost, consider IOL implants. Life changing (for me). (and re: costs, these drops are going to set you back $1000 a year as well, so after 7/8 years implants would be 'cheaper').

I’d really like those. My Mom got them and she said it didn’t help her near vision, which I didn’t understand. I guess she was a weird case because yeah I had just assumed that a new lens would fix the hardening of the lens with aging problem. Thanks for letting me know!

How long should your new lenses last? Did they say? Will they eventually get hard like the human body’s lens or are you set for the rest of your life? It’s really cool you are part cyborg. Did you get a monofocal or multifocal lens?

I was told these lenses are for the rest of my life. I guess I'll know for sure in 40 years. They don't develop cataract like natural lenses do, and I won't develop presbyopia as these lenses don't focus using muscles around them. I have multifocal (trifocal) lenses, for near-, medium- and long distance viewing. Theoretically this means that I need more light to see as well as naturally focusing lenses, which worried me somewhat before, but in practice I do not really experience it - in fact I need less light to see well now than I did when I had glasses. As usual in life, the key to happiness is realistic expectations - as the surgeon told me 'there is no way we will be making your eyes work as well as they did when you were 20'.

Two things I do have: for optimal near vision, I have to keep things closer to my eyes than I did before, 20-ish cm. So I had to adjust my screen viewing and reading posture. Also, I have what are called 'halos' around lights in the dark (this is a known and expected side effect, tons of YT videos that explain why they happen). Driving in the dark on highways with lots of artificial light sources has gotten more straining - meaning I need to focus more and feel more tired after driving say 2 hours in those circumstances than I did before the surgery. All other driving is the same and I don't notice the halos any more in other cases, like say when I'm just walking through the city in the dark. The driving at night price to pay is well worth it for me, may be different for others.

Re: your mom - if she got monofocal lenses (which many people here do as they are the only ones covered by insurance if you're getting lens replacement for cataract), she would have gotten the choice between near- or far focus lenses, and would have decided together with the surgeon which ones are most appropriate for her life. I mean I obviously can't tell as I don't know her, but my dad is the same - he still needs reading glasses after his cataract surgery (IOL implants == cataract surgery).

Most artificial lenses, especially more than 5 years back, had a single focal point and did not adjust. You chose to either have near vision (mostly carless old people), far vision (and still use reading glasses), or blended vision (one eye far one near).

The flexible lens stuff is still relatively new and there are reports of them sort of being like 80% focused 100% of the time, which can suck. Apparently lots of individual variability in results, where as the single-focus lenses are 60s technology and well figured out.