It�s been 44 years since the first lightweight lenses made of CR 39� were introduced to the eyecare professions. In spite of the initial appeal of a shatterproof lens at a time when all other lenses were made of glass, it was no easy task selling those early plastic lenses. Labs had no experience surfacing such a soft, pliable material, and eyewear consumers wanted no part of lenses that were so easily scratched.

It is, in fact, unlikely that plastic lenses would have ever replaced glass so completely if it hadn�t been for an unexpected government decision in 1971. That�s when the FDA mandated impact testing for all lenses and required glass lenses to be a minimum of 2.2mm at their thinnest point. That decision and the resulting increase in weight effectively doomed glass lenses. During the next few years, CR 39 lenses came to dominate the U.S. market, enjoying a market share close to 90 percent by 1990.

Two subsequent events, however, ultimately brought an end to CR 39�s total dominance of the U.S. market. The first influence was when consumers started asking for thinner, lighter lenses, primarily prompted by the availability of high index plastic lenses. The second influencing factor was the slow but steadily increasing popularity of the lens material everyone loved to hate: Polycarbonate.

Poly Comes of Age

Today, polycarbonate enjoys an enviable position in the North American lens market. With a market share representing more than 25 percent of all lenses disdispensed in this country and currently outselling all other high index materials combined, the material seems to have come of age. Poly�s market dominance, however, has only taken place in this country, although that appears to be changing.

The United States is the only country in the world that mandates impact resistance for optical eyewear. With the rest of the world having no interest in eyewear safety issues, international opinion has long been that polycarbonate would never sell outside this country.

There�s a basic flaw in that reasoning, however. That opinion comes from an assumption that polycarbonate became the primary alternative lens material in the United States because of safety issues. The safety factor certainly played a role, particularly in the early days, but this reasoning overlooks an important fact evidently not understood by industry observers in other countries.

Non-Safety Issues

Many of the polycarbonate lenses being dispensed are for reasons that have nothing to do with the material�s safety factors.

Listed in order of their significance are the major reasons why polycarbonate lenses in the United States are routinely recommended to so many eyewear consumers:

� Cost. Poly is considered by many eyecare professionals as �the affordable� high index lens.

� Profits. Polycarbonate produces improved profits without adding much to the eyewear�s total cost.

� Availability. Polycarbonate can be ordered in more lens designs than any material except CR 39.

� Safety Issues. When eye protection is important (such as for children and athletes), poly is the only choice. That being said, however, most poly lenses are dispensed to wearers who have no special eye protection needs.

� UV Protection. Most consumers understand the danger to the eyes of UV, and built-in UV protection is less costly with polycarbonate.

� Scratch Protection. Scratch protection on both surfaces is less costly with poly than other lens materials.

� Weight. Dispensers have learned the importance of providing ultra light-weight eyewear to their patients.

It�s important to note that despite Europeans� perceptions to the contrary, safety is only ranked fourth.

There is also another factor affecting the international market for poly. That is that when polycarbonate lens manufacturers began expanding their marketing efforts to countries outside of North America, it must have brought back a flood of old memories for them.

Twelve years ago, poly represented less than two percent of all lenses dispensed in the United States (mostly industrial safety eyewear), and the then two producers of polycarbonate considered themselves to be the Rodney Dangerfields of lens producers. (That is, they got no respect).

In those days, the majority of eyecare professionals considered poly to be a less than desirable material for ophthalmic lenses. Another controlling factor was that fewer than 5 percent of labs could process it.

Poly�s Dilemma

Compounding the problem, when doctors or dispensers did have reason to order polycarbonate lenses, as often as not, the lab receiving the order would call back and talk the customer out of it. It was a vicious circle that was eventually broken by two events. The first occurred when Omega Laboratories introduced its new LiteStyle lenses. At the time, Omega was the largest lab in the country with a large national sales force and was one of the few labs that advertised nationally to retailers.

Omega LiteStyle lenses quickly became successful, and thousands of practitioners began dispensing them. To counter the negative reputation of poly, the company positioned them as a distant relative of the material.

To compete, independent labs began ordering equipment and training their people to process poly. As they did so, they found that lab customers who started ordering polycarbonate tended to continue ordering it. In addition, labs found the lenses to be profitable�and that marked the beginning of steady growth for polycarbonate.

The next factor that pushed polycarbonate over the top in this country came when LensCrafters decided to make it their high index lens material of choice. When the company�s consumer advertising for Featherweights began, eyecare professionals who had never ordered a pair of polycarbonate lenses began ordering them to satisfy patients coming in asking for the lenses they had seen advertised on TV. Even labs that were still turning down polycarbonate orders gave up and installed backside coating equipment required for processing poly.

The last factor propelling poly to the forefront came when eyecare professionals began to realize that it didn�t make sense to recommend expensive high index lenses to patients with less than 2 diopters of correction. They found those consumers would willingly pay extra for poly when the advantages of thinner, lighter, and safer were explained to them. The portion of population falling in the mid-foci range (-3.00 to +3.00) makes up some 80 percent of eyewear consumers, and most of them do not normally order high index plastic lenses.

D�j� vu All Over Again

What makes the current situation with poly in countries outside of North America so ironic is that lens producers are experiencing the identical negative responses they heard 12 years ago in this country. Eyecare professionals in Europe, the U.K., and Canada respond with the same tired old comment, �We don�t consider poly to be an acceptable optical material.� And, many labs in those countries offer the same response that labs once used in the United States. They claim, �We�re not getting calls for poly; and even if we did, we don�t have the proper equipment to process the material.�

Fortunately, polycarbonate lens producers understand that the way poly is perceived by the optical professions in the international market will evolve, just as it did in the United States. It�s only a matter of time.

One thing expected to accelerate this change of attitude comes from the fact that Essilor, now one of the world�s primary producers of polycarbonate lenses (Airwear), owns established lab networks in Europe, Canada, and the U.K. These labs are in a position to impact and influence optical retailers.

According to John Carrier, Essilor�s senior vice president of marketing, �The future of polycarbonate outside the U.S. is now. In every country where modern, high-tech polycarbonate has been introduced, we see a rapid penetration of this material. In less than two years, starting from almost nothing, it has reached 20 percent of our sales in some large European markets. The growth in Australia has also been phenomenal, and Asian markets, including Japan are showing a strong interest for polycarbonate lenses. The foreign markets do not have the negative perceptions inherited from the past that we sometimes face in the United States.�

However successful the quest to establish polycarbonate as a viable lens material is outside the U.S., one thing seems certain. Based on what transpired in this country, once the world�s eyeglass wearers learn about stronger, lighter, and thinner lenses, they are going to want them. That should be good for both the eyecare professions and eyewear consumers.