Yes, 20/12, maybe a bit better, and unfortunately, can read credit card numbers.
Sure, if there was too much overcorrection performed. If you're a younger patient, they will program in more overcorrection, than if you're an older patient. Also, the healing process can promote more regression or less regression, due to physical factors. The Schwind Amaris has algorithms that compensate for age in the ablation process, but a heavy smoker, in-the-sunlight all the time 40-year-old dehydrated alcoholic, for example, might have a different physiological response to the laser radiation than, for instance, an albino fair skinned light eyed person in perfect health. Surgeon experience *might* be able to tweak this (ie: one surgeon on YouTube claims that intelligent Asians experience more regression than others) though.Is there ever a situation where a patient does not regress the over-correction?
Curiously Dr. Tan in Singapore, who only treats one eye at a time, cites this as a reason for such. He treats one at a time to observe the response of the eye, and then treats the other. But a little bit of overcorrection isn't the end of the world -- it just means slightly earlier reading glasses.
Overcorrection typically implies loss of close-up vision, but doesn't have much impact on far vision. You have to regress to worse than -0.5 to be any worse than 20/15 or 20/20. As a person gets older, other factors, rather than corneal optical power, come into play in terms of visual acuity. Such as cataracts and increasing spherical aberration. And changes to the retina and vitreous. So you won't have young eyes forever!Also, I really do apologize for potentially asking the same question again, but what is the difference between over-correction and 20/12 (or 20/10) vision?
Does that mean if we are "over-corrected" and have 20/12 vision, it would potentially "regress" to 20/15 or 20/20? Did I use the terms properly? Haha