Is there really a difference in contact lens solutions, other than brand
name and price?
I have read here and heard elsewhere that it is better to use separate
solutions for cleaning, soaking, etc., rather than the "one fits all"
"multipurpose" solutions, and that is what I have always done, used separate
solutions for my RGP lenses. As far as brand name goes, I usually look for
what is cheapest, as these products are very overpriced. (If a store brand
generic is available, I’ll usually get that.)
But I’ve seen discussions here of different brands of solutions, at least
regarding soft lenses. Is there really a difference in efficacy of different
brands of single purpose solutions, so that it’s really worth paying more
for a particular brand?
I’ve noticed, for instance, that there are RGP solutions from both Bausch
and Lomb and Boston. "Boston" is owned by B&L. Both solutions are made by
the same company, but the "Boston" solutions cost more. Is there really any
difference in the solutions, or does one just cost more due to the name and
packaging, hoping that people will think it’s "better"?
I used soft lens for about 8 years before switching to RGPs. Back then
I used to get whatever multi-purpose solution was cheapest. I have
never rubbed a soft lens, and used enzyme once in a while, every
couple of months or so. I started with one-year replacement, and then
moved to a 3-month schedule (but one quarter-pair I used for more than
12 months).
My point: I had bad compliance behavior. But on the other hand, having
it didn’t hurt me at all (I was shocked that my doctor told me my eyes
looked extremelly healthy after overwearing the same lens for 9 months
without cleaning them properly. I was expecting her to tell me how
filthy I was… haha).
Pure luck I guess. I don’t recommend it to anyone… Don’t be stupid
like I was! (or a broke student).
Everybody talks about how easier it is to care for RGPs, compared to
soft. My experience was just the opposite: I find that the cleaner
makes a HUGE difference (I only get Boston Advance, period. Boston
original will do it if I can’t find anything else, which never happens
anyway), while the desinfecting step can be done with any other
solution… I usually get the cheapest one, since I’ll rinse it with
saline or some Mutlipurpose SOFT solution before inserting the lens on
my eyes anyway…
I find that it makes a difference what kind of soap I use to wash my
hand with… or what kind of chemicals I let get into my eyes now
(that’s why I rinse them with something else). I find that RGP
disinfecting/soaking solutions are very bothersome to my eyes. Maybe
it’s got something to do with the thickness. Maybe not. Either way, I
have never had the same problems with soft lens solutions. Hell, I
couldn’t even tell the difference among them…
Just my opinion… which I’m sure is full of misconceptions. But I’m
just telling you what works for me.
good luck!
rb
" MS" <m…@nospam.com> wrote in message <news:uvpg82dsbj9q8e@corp.supernews.com>…
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> Is there really a difference in contact lens solutions, other than brand
> name and price?
> I have read here and heard elsewhere that it is better to use separate
> solutions for cleaning, soaking, etc., rather than the "one fits all"
> "multipurpose" solutions, and that is what I have always done, used separate
> solutions for my RGP lenses. As far as brand name goes, I usually look for
> what is cheapest, as these products are very overpriced. (If a store brand
> generic is available, I’ll usually get that.)
> But I’ve seen discussions here of different brands of solutions, at least
> regarding soft lenses. Is there really a difference in efficacy of different
> brands of single purpose solutions, so that it’s really worth paying more
> for a particular brand?
> I’ve noticed, for instance, that there are RGP solutions from both Bausch
> and Lomb and Boston. "Boston" is owned by B&L. Both solutions are made by
> the same company, but the "Boston" solutions cost more. Is there really any
> difference in the solutions, or does one just cost more due to the name and
> packaging, hoping that people will think it’s "better"?