As good as the company you keep

For those who didn't see it, it began: 'Is a Chemists really the right place for a lasting career in Optometry? Forget flu remedies and lipsticks. At D&A we live and breathe optometryÉ'
At a time when comparative advertising is in the news, how can we expect to be taken seriously when a well-respected company such as D&A uses this type of tactic to lure professional staff to its side?
I used to work for D&A. In fact, I trained as a contact lens optician with the company years ago. I enjoyed working there Ð the training was second to none, and I shall always be grateful to D&A for that. But I left for pastures new when the best that I was offered on qualifying was not the promised pay rise, but a pay cut and a diesel Metro! Did I feel valuedÉ er, no. My point? Well, believe it or not, I'm not having a go at D&A.
I've worked for most of the multiples as a locum and an employee and I'm now a practice owner, and my conclusion is that a practice is only as good as the staff within it, not the company that owns it.
That's it! It doesn't make any difference whether the company is owned by a chemist or, indeed, if it is run by an ex-supermarket chief executive.
The most 'professional' multiple I ever worked for was run by an unqualified retail manager, and the worst one I worked for was also run by an unqualified retail manager. I can recall one optician who regularly flouted contact lens aftercare regulations and publicity guidelines. He's an independent. However, the best optician I know is another independent!
There are bad multiples and good ones, there are bad independents and good ones. Most of us realise that and we are certainly not swayed by 'my Dad's bigger than your Dad' adverts. Please treat us like adults.
James Hall
Newcastle under Lyme

Hitting the provider
n It is perhaps not the place for industry to comment on optometric and dispensing CET, a hot professional subject at the best of times.
However, I am extremely saddened to read of the proposed charges likely to be imposed on those who deliver CET. The optical industry over very many years has provided speakers, topics and venues (mostly at its own expense) to encourage those in practice to learn about developments in optical technology. Recently, the College and ABDO have been most helpful in allocating CET points to many of these ventures to give added encouragement to professionals to make the time and effort to attend, and to bring a glow of satisfaction to those members of the industry involved in its initiative.
Now it would appear that industry is going to have to pay to register our speakers and pay to obtain a CET classification. Perhaps those who are debating the detail of these new arrangements might like to exempt from payment those like the industry who offer free courses and education charities, such as the SMC Ð a number of whose modular courses for optical technicians carry CET points because of their general interest to the wider profession.
It is even harder to accept that the new charges are being imposed by a constituent part of our own sector. It only increases the sense of alienation among those brought up to believe in the value of doing something that isn't connected with payment.
My recommendation to industry colleagues when receiving future CET sponsorship requests is to re-direct the sender to Act, as it sounds as if they will have a GOC licence to print money!
Frank Norville
Gloucester

Patient patients
n Is it just me, or are other opticians finding the service from most prescription houses sadly lacking? What I don't understand is why any return or order that has had one or two delays is automatically assigned to the 'let's really mess this up' production process.
Almost every day I receive uncuts that are too thick, too thin, have no coating, standard lenses rather than aspheric and only today, after continually chasing this order, I have received the left lens, but the whereabouts of the right lens is anyone's guess.
One order originally for uncuts that the company later agreed to glaze (don't even go there) has stretched my patience and my patient's patience to the limit. An edited version of events follows. We have had pink mirrored lenses rather than blue, coated lenses all crazed, uncuts sent (still no good) when they had the frame but then lost it, new lenses stuck in the coating machine rendering it broken for days (that's what I was told), summer turns into winter and finally the 'completed' job.
Well, almost, it was perfect in every respect apart from the fact the lenses were edged the wrong way round! Four months and still counting.
Mind, perhaps I'm looking through rose-tinted lenses thinking it was much better years ago. I now remember receiving a pair of glasses with the correct segment height of 15mm above the bottom rim in the right eye and the left bifocal glazed upside down! Obviously, this company knew something about my patient's visual requirements I had missed.
And what makes it all the more irksome is listening to that incessant message when you ring to chase, advising you customer services is busy, how important your phone call is to them and at number 28 you are moving up the queue slowly enough to hear the whole of Vivaldi's Four Seasons (always 'Vivaldi's Four Seasons').
I think that answers my rhetorical question at the beginning of this rant.
David Levy
Radlett

Toxic eye drops
n I am concerned that the preservative in many glaucoma eye drops is benzalkonium (BAK), which contains benzene. Benzene is well documented to cause bone marrow damage.
I've been sent six pages detailing eye problems caused by eye drop preservatives, published in Ophthalmology, 2001 Jun: 8(6):74-80. This states eye drop preservatives can cause toxic inflammatory changes of the ocular surface, fibroblasts, dry eyes, cell death and so on. Perhaps preservatives could be reduced if manufacturers instructed patients to store drops in the fridge. Most glaucoma drops don't have to be refrigerated after opening Ð just kept at room temperature. Manufacturers probably add extra preservatives to enable them to be stored at room temperature. We read that drops can be kept bacteria-free for a week or two, so why don't manufacturers supply drops in smaller bottles lasting just a week? Then they could omit preservatives. A new preservative, Purite, Stabilized Oxychloro Complex (SOC), dissipates into the natural components of tears and so is much less toxic and more suitable for long-term use.
Some glaucoma patients could be using eye drops for over 35 years.
I hope steps are being taken to reduce or replace toxic preservatives in eye drops.
A Wills
Ruislip, Middlesex

Talking covers
Far be it for me to disrupt the flow of the usual political, clinical and educational letters, but our practice is looking for some help. We habitually cover all our instruments overnight as this keeps them clean and freer from dust than otherwise. The standard covers provided with instruments fail almost immediately as they are too thin a plastic with poorly-welded seams.
We have been trying for ages to find a supplier of heavy duty, made-to-measure, sewn and seamed instrument covers as our last supplier has gone out of business. None of the major instrument suppliers have been very helpful in this regard, which is surprising when you consider the investment we are all making in technology these days.
If anyone knows of a reputable supplier, or if a supplier reads this, perhaps they could let us know. I am sure our practice is not the only one to suffer this.
Nick Rumney
Hereford
As good as the company you keep
n How sad it was to see Dollond & Aitchison stoop to such a level with their recruitment advertisement in optician recently (February 6, 2004). Not even an attempt to hide a right hook at Boots Opticians' chin.
For those who didn't see it, it began: 'Is a Chemists really the right place for a lasting career in Optometry? Forget flu remedies and lipsticks. At D&A we live and breathe optometryÉ'
At a time when comparative advertising is in the news, how can we expect to be taken seriously when a well-respected company such as D&A uses this type of tactic to lure professional staff to its side?
I used to work for D&A. In fact, I trained as a contact lens optician with the company years ago. I enjoyed working there Ð the training was second to none, and I shall always be grateful to D&A for that. But I left for pastures new when the best that I was offered on qualifying was not the promised pay rise, but a pay cut and a diesel Metro! Did I feel valuedÉ er, no. My point? Well, believe it or not, I'm not having a go at D&A.
I've worked for most of the multiples as a locum and an employee and I'm now a practice owner, and my conclusion is that a practice is only as good as the staff within it, not the company that owns it.
That's it! It doesn't make any difference whether the company is owned by a chemist or, indeed, if it is run by an ex-supermarket chief executive.
The most 'professional' multiple I ever worked for was run by an unqualified retail manager, and the worst one I worked for was also run by an unqualified retail manager. I can recall one optician who regularly flouted contact lens aftercare regulations and publicity guidelines. He's an independent. However, the best optician I know is another independent!
There are bad multiples and good ones, there are bad independents and good ones. Most of us realise that and we are certainly not swayed by 'my Dad's bigger than your Dad' adverts. Please treat us like adults.
James Hall
Newcastle under Lyme

Hitting the provider
n It is perhaps not the place for industry to comment on optometric and dispensing CET, a hot professional subject at the best of times.
However, I am extremely saddened to read of the proposed charges likely to be imposed on those who deliver CET. The optical industry over very many years has provided speakers, topics and venues (mostly at its own expense) to encourage those in practice to learn about developments in optical technology. Recently, the College and ABDO have been most helpful in allocating CET points to many of these ventures to give added encouragement to professionals to make the time and effort to attend, and to bring a glow of satisfaction to those members of the industry involved in its initiative.
Now it would appear that industry is going to have to pay to register our speakers and pay to obtain a CET classification. Perhaps those who are debating the detail of these new arrangements might like to exempt from payment those like the industry who offer free courses and education charities, such as the SMC Ð a number of whose modular courses for optical technicians carry CET points because of their general interest to the wider profession.
It is even harder to accept that the new charges are being imposed by a constituent part of our own sector. It only increases the sense of alienation among those brought up to believe in the value of doing something that isn't connected with payment.
My recommendation to industry colleagues when receiving future CET sponsorship requests is to re-direct the sender to Act, as it sounds as if they will have a GOC licence to print money!
Frank Norville
Gloucester

Patient patients
n Is it just me, or are other opticians finding the service from most prescription houses sadly lacking? What I don't understand is why any return or order that has had one or two delays is automatically assigned to the 'let's really mess this up' production process.
Almost every day I receive uncuts that are too thick, too thin, have no coating, standard lenses rather than aspheric and only today, after continually chasing this order, I have received the left lens, but the whereabouts of the right lens is anyone's guess.
One order originally for uncuts that the company later agreed to glaze (don't even go there) has stretched my patience and my patient's patience to the limit. An edited version of events follows. We have had pink mirrored lenses rather than blue, coated lenses all crazed, uncuts sent (still no good) when they had the frame but then lost it, new lenses stuck in the coating machine rendering it broken for days (that's what I was told), summer turns into winter and finally the 'completed' job.
Well, almost, it was perfect in every respect apart from the fact the lenses were edged the wrong way round! Four months and still counting.
Mind, perhaps I'm looking through rose-tinted lenses thinking it was much better years ago. I now remember receiving a pair of glasses with the correct segment height of 15mm above the bottom rim in the right eye and the left bifocal glazed upside down! Obviously, this company knew something about my patient's visual requirements I had missed.
And what makes it all the more irksome is listening to that incessant message when you ring to chase, advising you customer services is busy, how important your phone call is to them and at number 28 you are moving up the queue slowly enough to hear the whole of Vivaldi's Four Seasons (always 'Vivaldi's Four Seasons').
I think that answers my rhetorical question at the beginning of this rant.
David Levy
Radlett

Toxic eye drops
n I am concerned that the preservative in many glaucoma eye drops is benzalkonium (BAK), which contains benzene. Benzene is well documented to cause bone marrow damage.
I've been sent six pages detailing eye problems caused by eye drop preservatives, published in Ophthalmology, 2001 Jun: 8(6):74-80. This states eye drop preservatives can cause toxic inflammatory changes of the ocular surface, fibroblasts, dry eyes, cell death and so on. Perhaps preservatives could be reduced if manufacturers instructed patients to store drops in the fridge. Most glaucoma drops don't have to be refrigerated after opening Ð just kept at room temperature. Manufacturers probably add extra preservatives to enable them to be stored at room temperature. We read that drops can be kept bacteria-free for a week or two, so why don't manufacturers supply drops in smaller bottles lasting just a week? Then they could omit preservatives. A new preservative, Purite, Stabilized Oxychloro Complex (SOC), dissipates into the natural components of tears and so is much less toxic and more suitable for long-term use.
Some glaucoma patients could be using eye drops for over 35 years.
I hope steps are being taken to reduce or replace toxic preservatives in eye drops.
A Wills
Ruislip, Middlesex

Talking covers
Far be it for me to disrupt the flow of the usual political, clinical and educational letters, but our practice is looking for some help. We habitually cover all our instruments overnight as this keeps them clean and freer from dust than otherwise. The standard covers provided with instruments fail almost immediately as they are too thin a plastic with poorly-welded seams.
We have been trying for ages to find a supplier of heavy duty, made-to-measure, sewn and seamed instrument covers as our last supplier has gone out of business. None of the major instrument suppliers have been very helpful in this regard, which is surprising when you consider the investment we are all making in technology these days.
If anyone knows of a reputable supplier, or if a supplier reads this, perhaps they could let us know. I am sure our practice is not the only one to suffer this.
Nick Rumney
Hereford
As good as the company you keep
n How sad it was to see Dollond & Aitchison stoop to such a level with their recruitment advertisement in optician recently (February 6, 2004). Not even an attempt to hide a right hook at Boots Opticians' chin.
For those who didn't see it, it began: 'Is a Chemists really the right place for a lasting career in Optometry? Forget flu remedies and lipsticks. At D&A we live and breathe optometryÉ'
At a time when comparative advertising is in the news, how can we expect to be taken seriously when a well-respected company such as D&A uses this type of tactic to lure professional staff to its side?
I used to work for D&A. In fact, I trained as a contact lens optician with the company years ago. I enjoyed working there Ð the training was second to none, and I shall always be grateful to D&A for that. But I left for pastures new when the best that I was offered on qualifying was not the promised pay rise, but a pay cut and a diesel Metro! Did I feel valuedÉ er, no. My point? Well, believe it or not, I'm not having a go at D&A.
I've worked for most of the multiples as a locum and an employee and I'm now a practice owner, and my conclusion is that a practice is only as good as the staff within it, not the company that owns it.
That's it! It doesn't make any difference whether the company is owned by a chemist or, indeed, if it is run by an ex-supermarket chief executive.
The most 'professional' multiple I ever worked for was run by an unqualified retail manager, and the worst one I worked for was also run by an unqualified retail manager. I can recall one optician who regularly flouted contact lens aftercare regulations and publicity guidelines. He's an independent. However, the best optician I know is another independent!
There are bad multiples and good ones, there are bad independents and good ones. Most of us realise that and we are certainly not swayed by 'my Dad's bigger than your Dad' adverts. Please treat us like adults.
James Hall
Newcastle under Lyme

Hitting the provider
n It is perhaps not the place for industry to comment on optometric and dispensing CET, a hot professional subject at the best of times.
However, I am extremely saddened to read of the proposed charges likely to be imposed on those who deliver CET. The optical industry over very many years has provided speakers, topics and venues (mostly at its own expense) to encourage those in practice to learn about developments in optical technology. Recently, the College and ABDO have been most helpful in allocating CET points to many of these ventures to give added encouragement to professionals to make the time and effort to attend, and to bring a glow of satisfaction to those members of the industry involved in its initiative.
Now it would appear that industry is going to have to pay to register our speakers and pay to obtain a CET classification. Perhaps those who are debating the detail of these new arrangements might like to exempt from payment those like the industry who offer free courses and education charities, such as the SMC Ð a number of whose modular courses for optical technicians carry CET points because of their general interest to the wider profession.
It is even harder to accept that the new charges are being imposed by a constituent part of our own sector. It only increases the sense of alienation among those brought up to believe in the value of doing something that isn't connected with payment.
My recommendation to industry colleagues when receiving future CET sponsorship requests is to re-direct the sender to Act, as it sounds as if they will have a GOC licence to print money!
Frank Norville
Gloucester

Patient patients
n Is it just me, or are other opticians finding the service from most prescription houses sadly lacking? What I don't understand is why any return or order that has had one or two delays is automatically assigned to the 'let's really mess this up' production process.
Almost every day I receive uncuts that are too thick, too thin, have no coating, standard lenses rather than aspheric and only today, after continually chasing this order, I have received the left lens, but the whereabouts of the right lens is anyone's guess.
One order originally for uncuts that the company later agreed to glaze (don't even go there) has stretched my patience and my patient's patience to the limit. An edited version of events follows. We have had pink mirrored lenses rather than blue, coated lenses all crazed, uncuts sent (still no good) when they had the frame but then lost it, new lenses stuck in the coating machine rendering it broken for days (that's what I was told), summer turns into winter and finally the 'completed' job.
Well, almost, it was perfect in every respect apart from the fact the lenses were edged the wrong way round! Four months and still counting.
Mind, perhaps I'm looking through rose-tinted lenses thinking it was much better years ago. I now remember receiving a pair of glasses with the correct segment height of 15mm above the bottom rim in the right eye and the left bifocal glazed upside down! Obviously, this company knew something about my patient's visual requirements I had missed.
And what makes it all the more irksome is listening to that incessant message when you ring to chase, advising you customer services is busy, how important your phone call is to them and at number 28 you are moving up the queue slowly enough to hear the whole of Vivaldi's Four Seasons (always 'Vivaldi's Four Seasons').
I think that answers my rhetorical question at the beginning of this rant.
David Levy
Radlett

Toxic eye drops
n I am concerned that the preservative in many glaucoma eye drops is benzalkonium (BAK), which contains benzene. Benzene is well documented to cause bone marrow damage.
I've been sent six pages detailing eye problems caused by eye drop preservatives, published in Ophthalmology, 2001 Jun: 8(6):74-80. This states eye drop preservatives can cause toxic inflammatory changes of the ocular surface, fibroblasts, dry eyes, cell death and so on. Perhaps preservatives could be reduced if manufacturers instructed patients to store drops in the fridge. Most glaucoma drops don't have to be refrigerated after opening Ð just kept at room temperature. Manufacturers probably add extra preservatives to enable them to be stored at room temperature. We read that drops can be kept bacteria-free for a week or two, so why don't manufacturers supply drops in smaller bottles lasting just a week? Then they could omit preservatives. A new preservative, Purite, Stabilized Oxychloro Complex (SOC), dissipates into the natural components of tears and so is much less toxic and more suitable for long-term use.
Some glaucoma patients could be using eye drops for over 35 years.
I hope steps are being taken to reduce or replace toxic preservatives in eye drops.
A Wills
Ruislip, Middlesex

Talking covers
Far be it for me to disrupt the flow of the usual political, clinical and educational letters, but our practice is looking for some help. We habitually cover all our instruments overnight as this keeps them clean and freer from dust than otherwise. The standard covers provided with instruments fail almost immediately as they are too thin a plastic with poorly-welded seams.
We have been trying for ages to find a supplier of heavy duty, made-to-measure, sewn and seamed instrument covers as our last supplier has gone out of business. None of the major instrument suppliers have been very helpful in this regard, which is surprising when you consider the investment we are all making in technology these days.
If anyone knows of a reputable supplier, or if a supplier reads this, perhaps they could let us know. I am sure our practice is not the only one to suffer this.
Nick Rumney
Hereford