Catonic wrote:

I have a former co-worker who got lasik in both eyes and still uses reading glasses; as the eye ages it looses it's ability to focus as far and as close (due to hardening of the lens or some rot) or so I am led to believe.

That's well known. My father's Lasik only improved his sight -- he still needs contacts or glasses to drive. My mother, who had already progressed to bifocals, has great vision, and only requires $1 reading glasses to read menus and books.

Interestingly, my grandfather *now* has 20/20. His lens was becoming opaque, so they replaced it. And when doing so, did the calculations based on the state of his eyes such that, voila! better vision than he has ever had.

It is this technology -- lens replacement -- that my eye doctor recommends waiting for. It is becoming available as an elective surgery -- as opposed to what my grandfather required -- and should be well established by 2010 or so. Similar level of impact, but without the halo side effects and eventual calcification (or whatever it is).

RE: Divester