Q. A Sore Rx Subject
I work in the wholesale end of the optical industry. I had my eyes examined for contact lenses recently. When I explained to the doctor that I planned to order an extra pair of contacts elsewhere and asked for my contact lens prescription, I was given the royal runaround. He made me fill out and sign a lengthy form supplying the name of the doctor supplying the lenses, signed by that doctor and signed by me releasing him from liability. I had to supply the address so he could send the contact Rx to that doctor. He absolutely refused to send it to me directly.

I understand the legal ramifications of dispensing and his concern about liability, but believe the prescription is my property. I paid him more than $800 for an exam and two pairs of contacts. I felt I was fair and professionally courteous to him. I'd like your opinion on the matter.

A.
There's little to gain and much to lose when the doctor refuses to release a contact lens prescription. If the doctor includes accurate and complete information on the Rx, including the brand name and a notation of no substitutions, he would probably be protected under the law.

On a different legal issue, your doctor is practicing what is called "restraint of trade" by not giving you the Rx. This could potentially get him into trouble. The bottom line is that he did a lot to undermine his credibility with you, and it's doubtful you will return to his practice or send him any referrals.

Another problem with his action is that it could potentially produce another federally mandated law forcing optometrists to provide the contact lens Rx as well as the regular Rx upon examination. As it is now, federal law only requires that the spectacle prescription be given to every patient.

Q. The Full Spectrum
We recently received a request for "Full Spectrum" lenses. When we asked our lab about them, they had never heard of them.

A.
Here is an explanation of full spectrum lenses, but we can't provide a source since these lenses are off the market.

Your question illustrates a mostly forgotten niche in ophthalmic lens history. Back during the 1950s and '60s, a friend of Walt Disney's named John Ott did time lapse photography for Disney. Ott experimented with colored lights to get certain effects in his filming and to promote plant blooming.

He also discovered that he could influence behavior by controlling the color of light. For example, illuminating a fish tank with red light turned the fish into attackers, while blue light made them docile. He claimed that exposing chinchilla cages to a "balanced spectrum" light source produced a balanced number of male and female young.

He developed a concept that a balanced spectrum of light could affect personalities and lead to a more healthy life. Signet Armorlite, then owned by Robert Graham, accepted Ott's concept and produced a series of "Balanced Spectrum" lenses. They did this by merely omitting UV blocking chemicals from the plastic resin. Ott believed a certain amount of UV transmitted into the eye was essential. His academic credentials were minimal, so Ott's theories were ultimately widely panned.

Interestingly enough, later studies have largely validated many of Ott's theories. General Electric still produces a series of "Balanced Spectrum" light bulbs.--John Young, Colts Laboratories

Q. In Harm's Way
We have a customer whose company works with ethanol. What would be the best lens material for the employees to wear? Also, will the chemical harm a polycarbonate lens or the scratch coating (or exposed edges of a lens)?

A.
Ethanol should not harm the hard coat or the exposed edge on a polycarbonate lens. Gentex publishes a Lab Line chart showing the interaction between the coating on our polycarbonate lenses and various chemicals. Uncoated poly is affected by many chemicals, but is unaffected when properly coated.

For example, poly and its coating is unaffected by motor oil, antifreeze, windshield de-icer, and Fels Naptha, but gasoline will react with uncoated poly. Coated poly is not affected by gasoline. Coated poly is unaffected by hydrocarbons, halogenated hydrocarbons, ketones and esters. Only one common chemical, butylamine, will attack a coated polycarbonate lens.--Norm Vallee, Gentex Optics

The "ethanol" question falls into the "environmental and occupational vision" category. Ethanol is a non-corrosive, crop-based alcohol. Alcoholic beverages and certain fuels can contain it -- so it's relatively commonplace and not entirely toxic in small quantities. As far as eyewear protection is concerned, it would probably depend upon the type of exposure. If there is possibility of vapors or splash, OSHA may recommend wrap-around eyewear with splashguards or side shields. I spoke to one of our chemical engineers, and he feels that most lens materials are relatively resistant to ethanol. This means hard resin, poly, and other plastics would provide adequate protection against it.--Darryl Meister, SOLA Optical EB

Got a question you'd like answered in "Ask the Labs?" Send it now!