Hmm, will this prevent me from getting a racing licence?

[PTRACER]

Originally Posted by Mr.Jingles

If you need the glasses to drive (in the opticians opinion) then you need to declare. Sadly, they will mark your licence such that if you are found driving without glasses it's an offence with points and a fine behind it

Well, again, she didn't say anything about needing them to drive. I drive without them almost every day. My slight short sightedness may mean I can't see someone's number plate from 50 yards away, but it doesn't mean I can't see the car in front, or a vehicle pulling out from a side road, or a child standing on the pavement waiting to cross the road, or a traffic light going from green to read.

I did my laps at Brands Hatch and Donington without any glasses on. I know some of you reading will be utterly horrified in the way of "Oh no, what if you crashed into someone else and injured them because of your defective eyesight!!!", but I think that's utterly ridiculous!

[Mr.Jingles]

Originally Posted by JamesH

Sadly??

Is it just me who thinks that you SHOULD get a fine and points if you deliberately drive with defective eyesight?

James

Come on, cut me some slack here please. It was a turn of phrase("Sadly" as in I'm sad that it's neccesary for you, and that it probably sucks from your perspective), not an endorsement!

Originally Posted by PTRACER

Well, again, she didn't say anything about needing them to drive. I drive without them almost every day. My slight short sightedness may mean I can't see someone's number plate from 50 yards away, but it doesn't mean I can't see the car in front, or a vehicle pulling out from a side road, or a child standing on the pavement waiting to cross the road, or a traffic light going from green to read.

I did my laps at Brands Hatch and Donington without any glasses on. I know some of you reading will be utterly horrified in the way of "Oh no, what if you crashed into someone else and injured them because of your defective eyesight!!!", but I think that's utterly ridiculous!

I'm sorry, I don't agree with you on this one. Being able to do something and being RIGHT to do something are two different things.

She may not have said it, but the prescription will, and more importantly you know it's the right thing to do. Or should do. If you don't, the legal requirements should be pretty clear on it (not from 50 yards mind!).

Assuming you must have passed your test without glasses if your licence hasn't already been marked? Or passed quite a while back before they started doing this? Alternatively, you coudl have done the 'memorise the numberplate' trick I suppose.

[Alan Cherry]

PT Racer ,
London Motorsport show 22/23rd November at Brands hatch. If you take a look at the web site, they are doing ARDS tests throughout the weekend and still have some slots available, Also there is a motorsports doc there, who can do your medical, andclear up once and for all if your eye is ok.
Could be worth a look !

[PTRACER]

So I could go along and get everything done on the same day, including the medical??

Would I not end up with a 2008 licence that I'll have to upgrade to a 2009 licence at the end of the year?

[midgetman]

Just hold on to your application forms until the 2009 licence is released, PT. IIRC it's 1st December, may even be sooner.

[JohnD]

PT,
I am NOT an ophthalmologist, nor do I have the perosnal experience of Mr.Jingles, but it seems form Googleing and searching on PubMed that you are far from being alone in your 'disability'. So much so, that far from there being no hope, there is a lot of research on how to treat adult amblyopics.

Try Googling for "Adult amblyopia treatment" or searching on PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez. Many sites will be worthless, but one or two hits show serious and in the long run, hopeful possibilities.

For instance, I can't criticise this article: http://www.pnas.org/content/101/17/6692.full but it is in a properly peer reviewed journal.

John

[Alan Cherry]

Originally Posted by PTRACER

So I could go along and get everything done on the same day, including the medical??

Would I not end up with a 2008 licence that I'll have to upgrade to a 2009 licence at the end of the year?

Why don't you call MSV, as they are doing the ARDS tests - ask them if it's a form for 2009 - I can't see it being for 2008.

Re the Medical, it should be ok for a 2009 licence - but call Motor racing medics on 01293 822036 for confirmation.

The downside is that you can't take your ARDS before getting your medical, and if you fail the medical, youv'e just wasted a lot of money. I think I'd either do the medical now with my own GP, then book the ARDS, or go for the medical at the motorsport show, then book up an ARDS test at a future date - I'm sure you could book it whilst you were down there - that way, you'll only be spending the cost of the medical - about £76 inc vat I think !

[Mr.Jingles]

Originally Posted by JohnD

PT,
I am NOT an ophthalmologist, nor do I have the perosnal experience of Mr.Jingles, but it seems form Googleing and searching on PubMed that you are far from being alone in your 'disability'. So much so, that far from there being no hope, there is a lot of research on how to treat adult amblyopics.

Try Googling for "Adult amblyopia treatment" or searching on PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez. Many sites will be worthless, but one or two hits show serious and in the long run, hopeful possibilities.

For instance, I can't criticise this article: http://www.pnas.org/content/101/17/6692.full but it is in a properly peer reviewed journal.

John

There is some good research going on JohnD, I expect some to pay off pretty soon.

On the specific article you quote - whilst it initially appears promising it's a classic example of 'learned response'. If they did the tests with other images they would find little improvement, sincer the training specifically attacks perception of contrast issues. To be fair to the authors they do acknolwedge that higher-level (recognition, depth perception etc) functions may not show any improvement at all.

Still, I'm not going to discourage anyone from trying - vested interest in the results ands all that jazz

[JohnD]

Thanks for that insight, Mr.J!

On medicals at; the Blue Book stipulates that the medical examination of the applier for a licence should be "by their General Practitioner". E 2.9.1 in the 2007 Book - I've lost my 2008 copy, in which the regs were 're-organised'.

The implication is that another doctor, with less knowledge of the applicant's medical history, is unacceptable, maybe to prevent people who have conditions incompatible with a licence lying to a new doctor. This was a change in about 2005 to the regs which previously did not say who the doctor should be, so I presume the MSA did so with a purpose. I don't know if they have or ever will enforce it.

John

[Mr.Jingles]

Originally Posted by JohnD

Thanks for that insight, Mr.J!

On medicals at; the Blue Book stipulates that the medical examination of the applier for a licence should be "by their General Practitioner". E 2.9.1 in the 2007 Book - I've lost my 2008 copy, in which the regs were 're-organised'.

The implication is that another doctor, with less knowledge of the applicant's medical history, is unacceptable, maybe to prevent people who have conditions incompatible with a licence lying to a new doctor. This was a change in about 2005 to the regs which previously did not say who the doctor should be, so I presume the MSA did so with a purpose. I don't know if they have or ever will enforce it.

John

'Insight' - LOL

My GP didn't know me from adam - I'd only moved to the area 3 months before - but he did have access to all my old notes and medical history. I think that is what the MSA is trying to get at, although I suppose if they hadn't been to the GP for the problem - or if the condition was undiagnosed - that wouldn't help much either.

[AU N EGL]

Isn't Lord Drayson blind in one eye?

[JohnD]

Do you mean Lord Nelson?

Oh, that Lord Drayson? The Powderject Prince?
Well, resigning to compete at Le Mans - actually in the US Le Mans series, not Le Sarthe, AFAIK - is more original than 'spending more time with the family'.

"Powderject"? See: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...k.partyfunding

No idea if his visual problem is amblyopia.
John

[PTRACER]

Alan, I've taken your advice and booked a medical with my own GP...

Obviously the doctor will pick up on my amblyopia and will note it on my application form...I'm slightly confused as to what I do with it then, especially as some of you have said " [...] if you fail the medical [...] ". Is that considered a fail? Do I send the form off to the MSA before I book my test? I was under the impression I took it with me to the test and then send it to the MSA once I've passed the ARDS.

[midgetman]

You're right, you do send the medical off after your test.

We've told you all we know and TBQH I didn't expect to learn so much about eyesight on a motor sports forum. There's only one thing left to do:

ASK!

We're not on the panel of the MSA Medical Board. We don't know. Ring them up and ask them. And if they say "No problem Mr Racer" then great - go and do the ARDS. But if they say "Ah, no way," then listen to them. Because if you crash or, God forbid, hurt someone else, you can bet your bottom dollar the insurance s**t will hit the fan.....and that could wreck it for all of us.

Years back we used to sign our own medicals. Then a mate of mine had a heart attack and died racing at Thruxton and bingo! Compulsory medicals.

[BobM]

Glad the OP's now getting himself sorted. I've not been in here for a while so am coming to the thread late but thought I'd add my 2p's worth as a GP and novice racer.

Firstly so far as the race licence is concerned his amblyopia won't be an issue if he has a full visual field and has normal (6/6) vision using both eyes which it sounds like he has from his optician's report.

Secondly given that he has normal vision using both eyes he does not need to report this to either the DVLA or his insurance company.

Amblyopia is relatively common and despite claims of treatment it is essentially untreatable since it represents the brain ignoring the image from the affected eye. Sure, someone may have demonstrated some benefit from late treatment but this is unlikely to be of real benefit in terms of real life, day to day function.

I'm not sure why he was being urged to complain, I couldn't see that anyone had done anything wrong - his optician had made the correct diagnosis and he hadn't been deprived any beneficial treatment. Screening tests at age 5 are pretty unreliable, especially if the 5 year old concerned doesn't want to be very co-operative

Good luck with your ARDS - but get the medical done first!

[Mr.Jingles]

Hi BobM.

From the Directmotoring.gov site (http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring...ide/DG_4022529)

"etting the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) know about eyesight conditions
When applying for your driving licence from the DVLA you should let them know if you have:

"any visual condition which affects both eyes (not including short or long sight or colour blindness)
any visual condition which affects your sight (not including short or long sight or colour blindness) eg if you have sight in one eye only
If you have had sight correction surgery you should declare this when you apply for your provisional licence."

Ambigious, no?

The question arrises around his original report of defects in his central FOV....

[BobM]

Originally Posted by Mr.Jingles

Ambigious, no?

Not particularly ambiguous, no

I agree that maybe when initially applying he should have declared it but he clearly meets the driving standards (6/5 vision corrected and full visual fields so it's academic really and there's no point him telling them now.

Originally Posted by Mr.Jingles

The question arrises around his original report of defects in his central FOV....

He doesn't state what his acuity in the amblyopic eye is, it's rarely so poor as to be useless but is often about 6/18 or 6/24 which would account for the apparent central loss. Clearly he doesn't have a 'net' central loss using both eyes as his measured visual acuity is by definition his central vision.

The brain doesn't completely ignore the bad eye, it just ignores the data it struggles to compute - i.e. the detail in the centre of the visual field which doesn't tally up with what it's getting from the other eye. The peripheral vision is different however since the brain can usefully 'add' the images together to give a full visual field - your peripheral vision is only really useful for making out shapes and especially for detecting movement. Try fixing your eye on one spot and reading even quite large text a little way from the centre of your vision.

[Mr.Jingles]

I liked the use of the winking smiley - ironic

I agree that there is no point reporting now - however, I thought I'd bring it up as I've heard it used before as a tool to bat someone with (proverbially) at an RTA by a young (and slightly over zealous) police officer. Apparently they can check this at the same time as running your licence?

I declared and its done me no harm and hasn't affected my insurance (Direct Line). Figured better safe than sorry.

[Al Weyman]

Funny enough I went for an eyetest today for the first time for about 10 years and they found minor eyesight defects and I ordered some glasses for reading and driving although I could really make do with out the driving ones and the interesting thing was the optician went out of his way to point out and without prompting that even without me ordering glasses it was not neccessary to inform my insurers.

[Mr.Jingles]

Do you remember what your prescription was? Alot of the advice will come down to if glasses are just 'handy' or actually 'required' - in their opinion.

[Al Weyman]

I hav'nt picked them up yet but can say they were not severe and I think thats why he made a point of telling me with or without his supplied corrective specs I did not need to inform DVLA, insurance company or anyone else. I thought it was relevant in that our friend here if he had a problem that could be construed as dangerous on the road I would have thought would have been told as this optician as I said went out of his way to point this out. Maybe this is a new mandate operated by opticians or at least those in the Doland and Acthinson chain.

[PTRACER]

Originally Posted by BobM

NHe doesn't state what his acuity in the amblyopic eye is, it's rarely so poor as to be useless but is often about 6/18 or 6/24 which would account for the apparent central loss. Clearly he doesn't have a 'net' central loss using both eyes as his measured visual acuity is by definition his central vision.

If you're referring to me, then my amblyopic eye is 6/9 with correction and 6/12 without.

Incidentally, my medical is this Sunday with Dr. Mark Green of the Motor Racing Medics, at the London Motorsports Race Car Live show at Brands.

My GP wanted to charge me £145 for a medical at my local surgery

[Mr.Jingles]

6/9 - 6/12? not bad as I thought it might be! mine is 6/24 (I still prefer the 20/20 system - I know, same difference but I prefer feet to metres for head-calculations) and I passed muster on my medical.

I would have been at the show but I've gotta work, so have given away my ticket. Enjoy, should be good from what I've read.

[PTRACER]

Originally Posted by Mr.Jingles

6/9 - 6/12? not bad as I thought it might be! mine is 6/24 (I still prefer the 20/20 system - I know, same difference but I prefer feet to metres for head-calculations) and I passed muster on my medical.

Well, if you can get a licence with 6/24, I should have no problem

I'll just spend the rest of the week worrying I have some undiagnosed cardiovascular problem instead then, or diabetes or something.

[Alan Cherry]

Originally Posted by PTRACER

Well, if you can get a licence with 6/24, I should have no problem

I'll just spend the rest of the week worrying I have some undiagnosed cardiovascular problem instead then, or diabetes or something.

Good luck with the medical PT Racer - If all goes well, what are you coming out in next year ? I should be back out in the BARCSE Tintops and a few rounds of the RCN in 2009 ( New back end turned up for the Rover today - I had an argument with the pit wall at Brands 2 weeks ago - plenty of time to get it fixed though ! Hopefully with the bodywork man next week sometime!


Alan