u/macddebbie1

I keep going back and forth with IOL choices. My surgeon suggested a multi-focal but I didn't want 1) the expense, 2) the aberrations, 3) the loss of contrast.

So he then recommended an EDOF, and I've been considering a regular monofocal or enhanced monofocal.

In the research I have done, it seems that no lens, no even a multifocal - will give you true "near" vision - what I am reading say these are the targets:

Near - greater than 16"
Intermediate - 20-40"
Distance - 3' and beyond

So even with a multifocal, it seems that you are not going to be able to look at your phone or read a book, as I certainly don't ready a good or scroll on my phone with my arms fully outstretched. Who does?

For people that have multifocals, what's the nearest visit you have - can you clearly (without glasses or strain) do these things -

1. read the back of a package in a grocery store (the ingredient list)?
2. read a book
3. scroll on your phone
4. see to put make-up on without a magnifying mirror?
5. see to get an eyelash out of your eye?
6. see in the shower and to shave your legs in the shower?
7. see yourself in the mirror?
8. see your food on your plate?

If you have an EDOF lens, how near can you see (from your face to what distance)?

If you have an Enhanced Monofocal like Aspire or Eyhance, what's the nearest distance you can see?

I know some people get monovision, but my surgeon does not do monovision. I have not asked about mini monovision, but I don't know if that would solve this issue.

I have a Nest 3rd Gen Wired Doorbell Cam that I've had for months. It's working fine. I have an iPhone and have set up a Package Notification Automation and a Person Notification Automation. The announcements were coming through my phone speaker and showing at the top of my screen as regular notifications.

I just got the new Google Home Speaker and am already hating it. I was told it was "plug and play" and as soon as it was set up, the Nest doorbell cam notifications would announce through the speaker. That is not happening.

Additional, the voice announcements are no longer coming through my iPhone. The pop up notifications are, just not the voice anymore.

When I go into Automations, I get an error messge - "Announce Person or Package Error(s)"

When I click on that the screen headed "Announce Person or Package - add description" is marked Inactive - and on my two automations, it says "Duplicate Starter".

Does anyone know what this means and 1) how I get the speaker notifications back on my iPhone and 2) get this $100 Google Home Speaker that I am sorry I bought to announce the packages and people?

Has anyone looked at the seating chart on the boat? This is the right side of the boat where the impact was - from first injured girl to last

Sitting on the Bow of the boat -

Katy - Severely injured - immediately unconscious, eye rolling back in her head, bloody, foam coming out of her mouth - not permanently paralyzed and permanently brain damaged - medflighted to hospital

Lucy - Head and neck Injuries - Knocked unconscious, trapped under the vessel and drowned - medflighted to hospital

Sitting at the console? -

George Pino - Minor head wound - Presumably unconscious but then alerted the girls to "Jump" according to 4 girls who testified.

Sitting at the very back of the boat -

Mia - Serious Head Injur - Brain Bleed - Unconscious

Is it possible that George Pino was not in his seat at the console for those 9 seconds that the boat was on a collision course with Channel Marker #15?

He could have been doing other things - getting another beer, taking a picture with the girls, making Cecilia another Chambord and Prosecco drink - who knows what - and lost track of the time, thinking he had more time than he did, his neuro function slowed by the alcohol, even if it was only 2 beers?

Perhaps he asked Cecilia to "watch the wheel" while he went and did what he was doing?

Just curious that everyone from Katy to Mia - Bow to last seat in back - was severely injured - and yet he was not.

I know it's a moot point. We'll find out today what his fate is. Curious what you all think?

How are you all handing eating and brushing?

I've read that eating acidic foods like yogurt, requires you to neutralize the acid with a rinse of baking soda and water and then waiting 30 min before brushing the teeth.

Well, that's not possible or I'd be way over my "off aligner" time. So I wait 5 minutes.

Do I really have to start analyzing everything I eat and figure out which are acidic foods that require a rinse, which have to wait to brush, which I can brush right away with no rinse?

Getting overwhelmed by all of this.

There's lots of chatter about "he didn't mean to do harm to anyone", "he wasn't drunk or impaired", "the families knew there would be alcohol", "there is no speed limit".

To be clear - neither of these charges claim "intent to harm" and neither of these charges require legal intoxication.

Here's how his actions apply to both charges. It's not about one thing, it's about the totality of all the things he did/did not do.

1. How His Actions Apply to "Vessel Homicide"

To prove willful or wanton disregard (recklessness), a strict sequence of maritime violations rather than a single mistake:

Extreme Speed for the Conditions: The state’s GPS data shows Pino was traveling at 47 mph. While there isn't a posted speed limit sign, driving nearly 50 mph with 14 people packed onto a 29-foot boat crosses the line into a wanton disregard for safety.

Total Failure to Maintain a Lookout: Pino traveled the length of two football fields over nine seconds with a massive, highly visible steel structure directly in front of him. He hit it dead-on without ever deploying the "brakes" or attempting an evasive maneuver, which is "gross and flagrant" blindness.

Wrong Side of the Channel: operators are required to stay to the right in narrow channels like Cutter Bank. Pino was barreling down the completely wrong side of the channel when he hit the marker.

2. How His Actions Apply to "Manslaughter by Culpable Negligence"

To prove utter disregard for human life under this charge, it focuses heavily on Pino's choices as the commanding adult and captain of that vessel: 

Alcohol on Board: Pino admitted to drinking "two beers," and law enforcement recovered empty alcohol containers from the flipped boat. While he wasn't legally charged with a BUI, consuming alcohol while acting as the sole adult captain responsible for 12 teenage girls inherently shows an indifference to the consequences.

Allowing Underage Drinking: adults permitted or looked the other way regarding underage drinking on the boat during the birthday celebration. This speaks to a broader pattern of Pino ignoring his basic duty of care as a guardian.

No Safety Kill-Switch: the boat's engine kept running even after the impact because Pino did not have a kill-switch lanyard attached to his body. This allowed the vessel to continue moving autonomously through the water while injured teenagers were floating unconscious next to it. 

Looking at this through the lens of a vehicle vs a vessel may be easier -

Say a neighbor invites 11 17-yr old girls to a concert. Her father has agreed to drive, her mother to chaperone.

The father rents a mini bus for the girls, the mother makes sandwiches and stocks a cooloer with alocohol.

It's a nice day out, so right before leaving for the concert, the dad has 2 beers. He piles into the bus with his wife, all the girls have met at the house and are on the bus, standing up, going seat to seat, the music is blaring, they are singing and drinking and they set out for the 20-30 min ride.

The wife is taking pictures and vidoes of the girls

The road is narrow, so the dad drives on the wrong side of the road to give himself more room. He realizes they might be late, so he steps on the gas, and increases his speed.

Then he gets a text on his phone. For 9 seconds, he glances down at his phone, reading the text, and responding, oblivious to the fact that he is about to hit a concrete road barrier head on. He doesn't even see it. He doesn't swerve, he doesn't brake. The bus crashes into the concrete barrier, tips over, and most of the girls are ejected.

He yells for people to get off the bus as he smells fumes. Girls are screaming that one of the girls is missing. The dad is sitting on the side of the road next to the bus, not moving.

Twenty minutes later a car goes by. They ask if everyone is OK. The girls scream one of the girls is missing. The people in the car yell at the driver to search for the girl. He does, and finds her down the road, badly injured, unconscious, not breathing. The car that stopped starts immediate CPR and calls 911. She later dies.

The dad was not driving above the speed limit, he was not legally drunk, he didn't intend any harm.

But because he was reckless and negligent - driving too fast for the conditions (a bus full of minors on a bus with no seat belts) had had too beers (slowing his reflexes), was driving on the wrong side of he road, and wasn't paying attention, he was busy with his text, his actions caused the crash that killed a young girl. He is charged with negligent homicide.

When the boat first crashed, most of the girls were ejected. The few still on the boat were told to jump by Geroge Pino as he regained consciousness and the boat started to capsize.

But very quickly, there were screams that one girl - Lucy Fernandez - was missing. She lay trapped under the boat, unconscious and drowning.

Two adults were on that boat - George Pino and Cecilia Pino. The two adults who told 11 parents that they would "take care" of their daughters for the weekend.

But neither George Pino nor Cecilia Pino dove under the water - not even once - to frantically try and find Lucy.

The Medical Examiner said that Lucy's injuries were "survivable" and what caused her death was drowning. Had they made an effort, she may have survived.

The channel was only 6ft deep.

Twenty minutes went by - twenty - before George's friend Hillary went by on his boat and yelled at George - twice - to dive and look for Lucy under the boat. Which is where she was found.

Alone, trapped, unconscious - all the while George was just feet above herm clinging to the bow of his boat, trying to save himself and Cecilia drove away on a rescue boat.

Pino Trial - Been open since they went to lunch. Can hear everything.

Do they even know that?

This courtroom is a mess.

People are getting too caught up in the alcohol involved in this case.

For all the people saying "Not Guilty, because he wasn't impaired". He's not being charged with BUI (Boating under the Influence).

Yes....

1. He and his wife supplied underage girls with copious amounts of alcohol - which could have compromised their ability to respond to a water safety issue (accident) or even while swimming that day. We know at least two of the girls had 10 drinks each.
2. He was drinking - he admitted to having 2 beers - (it was likely more than that since he refused a breathalyzer approximately 2 hours later). Even if not legally drunk or outwardly impaired, small amounts of alcohol can still slow neurological function and reflex time.

But, while the alcohol could be a "background" contributory factor in the overall collection of his actions, he is not being charged criminally with BUI nor being charged criminally with supplying alcohol to minors.

Here is the breakdown of the legal wording and allegations for his charges:

Vessel Homicide: The state charged Pino under Florida law with operating a vessel in a "reckless manner likely to cause the death of, or great bodily harm to, another". This stems from prosecutors alleging he drove at speeds of nearly 50 mph through a crowded channel, was distracted, and failed to take evasive maneuvers before crashing into a concrete channel marker.

Manslaughter (Culpable Negligence): This count alleges Pino “intentionally committed an act or acts, and/or acted with culpable negligence” that led directly to the death of 17-year-old Lucy Fernandez. Under Florida law, culpable negligence requires a showing of reckless disregard for human life or an indifference to the consequences. The state bases this charge on allegations that he drank alcohol and illegally supplied it to underage minors, while his defense maintains the crash was a tragic accident. 

What's your leaning so far on which charge he is guilty of - Vessel Homicide or Negligent Manslaughter - or both?

The boat had just violently crashed going 50 miles an hour into a steel piling at channel marker #15.

It was tilting, girls were screaming that Lucy was missing. There was chaos. But Cecilia Pino had her phone around her neck in a waterproof enclosure. She pulled it out.

Who did Cecilia Pino call? The Ocean Reef Club.

Not police. Not 911. She called The Ocean Reef Club.

Why?

Did she know George had been drinking all day and didn't want police involved? Was she trying to protect his reputation by keeping things private?

Whatever her reason, she delayed rescue for 16+ minutes. Sixteen minutes is a LONG time when a girl is missing. When a girl is trapped under a boat drowning.

Nine seconds.

On a clear, sunny, calm day with still waters.

6:37pm, an hour before sunset.

In a channel he had driven through hundreds of times before.

On a 29' boat packed with twelve 17-yr old girls, 10 of them singing and dancing in front of him, sipping on the free-flowing alcohol he and his wife provided for them.

He himself was drinking, how much we will never know as he refused a blood alcohol test. But any amount of alcohol even the "2 beers" he admitted to slows neuro function and reflex time. With 11 young girls in his care, plus his daughter, that was foolhardy at best, contributory at worst.

He accelerated to 50mph, a high speed for that channel, on a collision course with the 3ft x 3ft neon green #15 channel marker he knew so well. The last channel marker before heading to his club for a birthday celebration for his daughter after a day of drinking and sun.

Oblivious to the fact that he was driving on the wrong side of the channel. Oblivious to the fact that if he didn't change course soon he would smash head on into the steel piling of marker #15.

And that's exactly what happened. He never slowed down, he never swerved. The blunt force impact ejected his young unsuspecting passengers, ripping a huge hole in the hull, capsizing the boat, hitting Katy and Lucy in the head, and trapping Lucy underneath the hull. The same hull that George Pino clung to after the accident, directly above Lucy, as she lay unconscious, drowning beneath him for 15 minutes before a passing boat yelled at George to search under the boat for her.

Just what distracted George Pino for those 9 fateful seconds?

He was not a novice boater. He knew the area, he knew the boat, he knew safe boating standards. Why would he violate those on a day when his only job was to safely pilot the 11 young girls he and his wife promised they would take good care of that weekend - to the sandbar and back?

He told police that he "looked back to check on the two girls behind him, and another boat in the channel caused a big wave and yanked the steering wheel right out of his hands". GPS proves otherwise. There was no jerking of the steering wheel, no swerving of the boat, and witnesses say there was no other boat near him in the channel.

Perhaps....

1. He got up to get himself a beer for the rest of the ride to the Ocean Reef Club, knowing he would soon be out of the channel and he could relax.
2. His wife, frustrated that she could not send the video of the girls dancing to the moms, asked him to look at her phone and help.
3. He was enjoying watching ten pretty 17-year old bikini-clad girls dancing right in front of him, taking his eye off the waterway (and marker) in front of him.
4. He had more to drink than he admitted - not drunk, not outwardly impaired - but affected enough to cause several critical lapses in judgment.

His actions that day were reckless, not the actions of someone taking utmost care of their young passengers. A young girl drowned and lost her life and another (not part of this case) is permanently paralyzed and brain damaged.

What do you think distracted him for those 9 fateful seconds?

Does anyone know the details of when the injured girls were taken off the boat they were on to be treated? I saw a video of Lucy during the trial, but it was unclear how long after the crash that was, who responded and how they were contacted.

Obviously during the trial they didn't speak about Katy Puig who is permanently paralyzed and has brain damage, or the third girl who isn't talked about who was injured.

I saw the video of the two injured girls (not Lucy) just lying on the floor of a Good Samaritan boat with people completely ignoring them, including Pino's wife. She just stood around drinking a bottle of water.

What's shocking is I read some of the Puig Civil Case today and although the Ocean Reed Club got a request for help (not sure why they were contacted vs the police/911), at 6:53pm, help was not dispatched until 7:55pm, and help did not make it to her until 8:01pm. She was transported back to the Ocean Reef Club by a Good Samaritin boat containing Cecelia Pina and soem of the other girls and Trauma Star chopper a contract provider was called by paramedics at 8:01pm because they did not have the capacity to treat her advanced condition, and arrived at 8:40pm. It wasn't until that time that she was intubated.

Ocean Reef Club, and the paramedics who attended to her and Trauma Star were all named in the civil suit for slow response time, and failure to establish an airway in a timely fashion.

The whole thing was very disturbing. Why were these girls not taken at the same time that Lucy was?

I am thinking of just doing two monofocals, but wanted to be clear on this point -

If one does no micro or mini monovision, I've ead that there is a loss of depth of focus which makes walking on stairs or uneven ground dangerous and a fall risk. That makes sense if the lens is fixed at 6 ft to infinity - considering my "eyes to ground" is 55.5".

Is the solution just to always wear my progressives? I was hopeful that at the very least I could walk my dog, or go to a party, or swim or play tennis.

If micro/mini movovision is necessary - what targets would need to be met?

I wear progressives pretty much full time, and was just thinking what I do NOW without glasses -

Shower, blow dry my hair, put my makeup on, shave my legs, and obviously sleep/nap.

For medicine bottles and other small print, I have to take my glasses off, and sometimes (often) use a magnifying glass.

I think it's going to be hard - especially as a woman - to not be able to see to do these things.

If I got monofocals set for near, how far out would I likely be able to see? It really would be no different than now, where I need glasses - I can walk around in a pinch but it's blurry - maybe due to my astigmatism. I pretty much put my glasses on when I get up and take them off when I go to bed, except for those examples.

This is SO hard, trying to decide what to do.

I have been looking at the PureSee, but to be honest, I have so many problems with my eyes I am not sure I want to introduce light splitting as a variable. I wear progressives full-time now, so not opposed to wearing my glasses most of the time.

Right Eye (best eye) -

1. Steep astigmatism - (-2.50) - Sphere = (-3.50)
2. Titled Disc
3. Pale Optic Nerve (likely from the tilted disc, which likely results in lower contrast)
4. Dry Eye/MGD
5. ABMD

Left Eye (more problems than right eye)

1. Steep astigmatism - (-3.50) - Sphere = (-3.25)
2. Lamellar Macular Hole
3. Lasered Retinal Hole
4. Nevus being watched
5. Dry Eye/ABMD

Do any of these present a problem with PureSee (it's what my surgeon recommended but I am not sure he knew about the pale optic nerve - if that even matters).

If I go the monofocal route am I doomed to wearing progressives still FT as I do now? My ONLY vision goals were to be able to go to a dressy party without glasses, see the people and food on the table, and swim, play tennis, pickleball, etc. without glasses and go on walks with my dog and be able to see what she picks up and puts in her mouth.

I am only 5'3" so am afraid I would lose depth perception and stairs and uneven pavement would be a fall risk and since I have osteoporosis that is dangerous for me (I am 68 and also only 107 lbs so not a lot of extra padding or great balance).

Should I just go with the PureSee if I can afford it? My surgeon does not do monovision.

Is the concensus that hydrophobic is the safer choice? Was looking at a Rayone EMV Enhanced Monofocal but a bit put off that it is hydrophilic and therefore risk of PCO and Calcification.

Is there any other Enhanced Monofocal that is hydrophobic that has smooth continuous focus like the EMV. Have ruled out Eyhance because of the progressive "bump" and resulting "focus hunting" in daylight. That would drive me insane.

Does anyone have experience with any of these? I am curious about the differences, what people like and don't like. I am looking for a non-diffractive IOL.

I work in finance so being able to see detail is important and I'm trying to understand how much contrast I will lose with any of these,

My right eye is healthy although there is some question an asymetric nerve which may indicate early glaucoma? The left eye has a lamellar macular hole which I guess could get worse with cataract surgery (become a true macular hole) - not sure how that plays into all this or at all.

I wear progressives now. Will need toric as have steep astigmatism (OD -2.50, OS -3.50) which I am told is "mostly regular".

Does anyone know if there is published data anywhere about the category of lens - Multifocal, EDOF, Enhanced Monofocal, Monofocal - that have the most IOL replacements?

And then if there is published data anywhere about the actual IOLs that have the most exchanges?

I'm on the small side - 5'3", 107lbs, and am looking for a good quality Memory Foam Topper. I bought a "Serenity" at Costco about a year ago, and even thought it's soft, it's not dense enough and so I get piriformis and back pain.

Currently looking at Tempurpedic Cloud MF Topper. Tempurped Adapt MF Topper and Puffy Deluxe Mattress. They are all about the same price, Cloud cheaper.

I know (unfortunately) that the Tempurpedic toppers are not the same as the MF on the beds. But I like that slow response "doughy" kind of memory foam, springy.

I don't like firm, as my bed it right now too firm for me.

I have lots of spinal issues - sclolius, degenerative disk disease, piriformis syndrome, etc., so need good pressure relief. I like a little cradle feel, but not feeling like I am in a sinkhole.

Has anyone on the smaller size weight-wise had experience with any of these?