Yes, I am a doctor. As far as I remember, I studied medicine and graduated.
As other comments point out, medicine is a very specialized field nowadays and I didn't specialize in any field (I got into coding healthcare software instead) - in Germany you study all disciplines at University (min. 6 years) and then specialize during something comparable to US residency in a hospital.
I understand the process of accommodation. This poses the risk of e.g. over-correcting short-sightedness if you're not aware of it because, with each lens of increasing strength, you accommodate and think "geez, everything just got sharper.. again!". I was aware of this and, as you can find in my article, actually ended up using very similar values for dioptries (the spheres) as the opticians. So either all of us totally forgot about accommodation or all of us were aware of it :)
My values mainly differed regarding to astigmatism, and accommodation doesn't play a significant role there.
I am also aware of the bone behind my ears, thanks for reminding me :)
While you do learn a lot of stuff in med school, learning how to bend those things of glasses which go behind your ears is not part of that. I suppose that's not a skill which can be taught well, anyway - it's more like craftsmanship, getting it right by having done it lots of times.
As a side note: for optical reasons, the spherical equivalent of the lens (which will determine if you are overcorrecting or not) is calculated by adding the sphere value + half the cylinder value (whatever the axis value).
You ended with a correct prescription as far as I can tell by looking at the different measurements , however you did not totally grasped the optical subtleties of the accomodation process : astigmatism is important (a small overcorrection is not a big deal anyway)
It is usual to undercorrect the cylinder values given by the autoref and your ophthalmologist would have given you the right prescription I think.
I'm just saying that to underline that as I doctor myself, I'm usually very wary at thinking that I can fully understand, in a few days, what my colleagues do. I'm totally into the hacking spirit but let's stay careful, especially for more dangerous things than glasses.
If I may, particularly as a doctor yourself, you should call the eye doctor "ophthalmologist", as you surely know if you use "part of the body + doctor" there might be issues should you report a visit by a "proctologist" ...
Why replace a good, short and clear word with a bad and long word that adds no information, but fewer people will understand? [Edit: I think I'm wrong about the adding no information, depending on country there might be other types of eye doctors than ophthalmologists]
The way I typically like to use terms of art in writing is to write the term out first, and then a parenthetical with a definition. For example here you went to see an ophthalmologist (eye doctor). It's also good for acronyms and initialisms.
> Yes, I am a doctor. As far as I remember, I studied medicine and graduated.
Well, that's settled, then. ;)
> I understand the process of accommodation. This poses the risk of e.g. over-correcting short-sightedness if you're not aware of it because, with each lens of increasing strength, you accommodate and think "geez, everything just got sharper.. again!". I was aware of this and, as you can find in my article, actually ended up using very similar values for dioptries (the spheres) as the opticians. So either all of us totally forgot about accommodation or all of us were aware of it :)
Well, minus does like more minus. (Ask your new optician friends).
> My values mainly differed regarding to astigmatism, and accommodation doesn't play a significant role there.
No, but squinting, even a small amount, does. If your axis favors it.
> I am also aware of the bone behind my ears, thanks for reminding me :)
You're welcome.
> While you do learn a lot of stuff in med school, learning how to bend those things of glasses which go behind your ears is not part of that. I suppose that's not a skill which can be taught well, anyway - it's more like craftsmanship, getting it right by having done it lots of times.
Indeed. That's why there are professionals who do it. If you are still going to do it at home and you have a plastic frame, heat the ends up slightly. You can microwave a damp rag and wrap it around the ends for a moment. Or use a hair dryer carefully. At the optician's office, they have a hot air blower that does it. Used to be they had glass beads, but those got in between lenses and caused no end to trouble. If you bend cold tips, they can more easily break.
I apologize for questioning your credentials. I guess I was a bit harsh. I just feel the article came off mostly of a slight arrogance with only a smattering of humility. You seemed to think that you could make up for years of working in the industry with only a few days of playing around. That being said, congratulations on being mostly successful. However, I am sure I don't have to tell you that an eye exam is only partially to refract you. There are other health issues that can be detected by having a routine eye exam.
As other comments point out, medicine is a very specialized field nowadays and I didn't specialize in any field (I got into coding healthcare software instead) - in Germany you study all disciplines at University (min. 6 years) and then specialize during something comparable to US residency in a hospital.
I understand the process of accommodation. This poses the risk of e.g. over-correcting short-sightedness if you're not aware of it because, with each lens of increasing strength, you accommodate and think "geez, everything just got sharper.. again!". I was aware of this and, as you can find in my article, actually ended up using very similar values for dioptries (the spheres) as the opticians. So either all of us totally forgot about accommodation or all of us were aware of it :)
My values mainly differed regarding to astigmatism, and accommodation doesn't play a significant role there.
I am also aware of the bone behind my ears, thanks for reminding me :)
While you do learn a lot of stuff in med school, learning how to bend those things of glasses which go behind your ears is not part of that. I suppose that's not a skill which can be taught well, anyway - it's more like craftsmanship, getting it right by having done it lots of times.