meower wrote: 
I was the same way for years. it will change as the reading prescription gets stronger.

 aflanigan wrote: 
They're two different things but don't cancel each other out. Most of us will suffer from both, eventually. I guess my saying the nearsightedness comes from the same stiffening of the lens isn't correct, tho.

 meower wrote: 




Same thing for me. I can read ok with glasses, but it's all a blur with the contacts. I think it might have something to do with the focal point being closer with contacts/farther with glasses. I dread if the day comes when I can't read with glasses either.

 ScottFromWyoming wrote: 
I always thought presbyopia was limited to what I have, which is inability to focus on things close to the eye due to stiffening of the lens. I guess for some it works the other way.

 meower wrote: 
It's typical, and I'm the same way, except my distance vision is not so bad that I can't drive without glasses legally. I prefer to drive, ski, go to movies etc with glasses or contacts, but I don't have to. Normally I do without, because it's so annoying to me to have to have reading glasses or bifocals or take the glasses off to see up close.

The lens in your eye distorts in order to focus on things at different distances. The flexibility of the lens decreases as we age (sorry) and distance vision (if we ever had it) is the first to go: nearsightedness. Put a lens in front of your eye to help focus on distance, it affects your ability focus up close. You probably only notice the problem when you're wearing contacts because it's so easy to remove your glasses to read up close that you might not even realize you're doing it... it's just more comfortable, like taking off your sunglasses indoors.
 
You and I probably have a few more years of being able to read without correction, but I've noticed that without readers (and without contacts), I have to hold books at just the right distance*, and books with smaller type than normal make me sad.
 
*Probably a coincidence but it's the same distance as I usually have my computer monitor. I moved my work monitor further away a few years ago, to try to re-introduce some flexibility. Maybe I should have moved it closer.  

This is mostly for Kurtster, but others might know too.

 

I've been nearsighted, and worn glasses for many years. Actually, I mainly wear contacts. More recently, I've needed reading glasses. But (and here's the weird thing,) I only need the reading glasses when my contacts are in. If I'm not wearing my contacts, I can read things up close just fine.

WTF is that ?

 Steely_D wrote: 

Get in line.

 Steely_D wrote: 
EW...

 buzz wrote: 

 Coaxial wrote: 
i was originally thinking 35¢, but i can be flexible.

 buzz wrote: 
So you're saying 75 might be too much?

 Coaxial wrote: 
you'd pay $75 for the license to be Me™? 
 
you know that one of the benefits of being Me™ is complete access to my Wit & Wisdom™. 

 islander wrote: 
I'd be willing to invest 75. dollars American. I'm not just whistling Dixie either.

I'm whistling a We Built This City On Rock And Roll—MacArthur Park medley.

 islander wrote: 
Be the change you feel you're owed.

 buzz wrote: 
Coax has a nice tax return, but you'll owe him some change. 

 buzz wrote: 
You could sell franchises.

 islander wrote: 
HELLS NO! i aint done with me. all of a sudden being me has become extremely popular. they are standing in line for the chance. i think those that want to be Me™ wouldn't mind paying a small licensing fee. it will help me offset the cost of being Me™.

 buzz wrote: 
isn't that aroma therapy?

 Red_Dragon wrote: 
Fine, he's about done with that anyway, he wants to be manbird now.  On the count of three, everyone take two steps to the right...

 Red_Dragon wrote: 
you're just too creepy