My second toes are far longer than my big toes.

Everyone else's feet are wrong.

They offer that service as well.

No matter what the cause, if you suffer crippling emotional injury because one of your toes is slightly longer or shorter than you think it should be, elective cosmetic surgery can help.

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1445949527



Provided that you don't mind spending a couple of months unable to walk and looking like this:

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...1&d=1445949621

Which, based on personal experience, I can tell you is just as unpleasant and painful as it looks.

What price vanity?

A level of vanity I haven't seen yet. That's insane.

Is this an Asian thing? Following in the foot steps of the practice of foot binding?

Ironically, no. The so-called Cinderella Surgery* appears to be most popular among Caucasian woman in the UK and the US who have seen too many episodes of Sex & the City.

I'm not kidding. More than one of the news articles I came across (Google it for yourself) specifically cited the shoe fetish displayed by the lead character on that TV show as inspiring a whole generation of English-speaking white women with average-sized feet to rediscover the forgotten joy of trying to wedge yourself into expensive and uncomfortable shoes which are two sizes too small.

As a heterosexual male, I've personally never much cared for the look. There's a vast expanse in between crocs and stiletto heels which seems to be vastly under-appreciated by women in the 21st century. Timberlands are far sexier than Manolo Blahnik.

My 20th HS reunion was this past weekend, so facebook is abuzz with photos of people I haven't seen in 20 years.

Some of my classmates have NOT aged well. I'm feeling pretty good about myself at the moment.

IMO, anyone contemplating this would be better off spending their money to fix the obvious flaw at the other end of their torso.

For anyone falling within about the 95th percentile or so, I have a hard time fathoming any sort of elective cosmetic surgery. I wouldn't even want to have a simple outpatient procedure such as LASIK (or any of the derivative / related corrective procedures) and I'm nearsighted as hell.

Twice under the knife is enough for me. Both times were reconstructive procedures after a traumatic incident in order to restore something approaching normal functionality (eg: putting me back together after I shattered / tore pieces off.) I have enough aches and pains from old wounds, I can't imagine wanting to add more.

If you are ever afforded the opportunity to have your bones broken and then re-assembled in an open surgical reduction with screws / pins holding them together, my advice to you is that unless it's necessary to perform some life-saving procedure (eg: heart surgery), to pass. It sucks. (Vash will no doubt back me up here.)

If i dated a girl with a longer second toe.. i wouldnt give 2 shits about it. Still fuck her in the bush.

I had a LASIK procedure, and I'm glad I did...but I won't do it again.

Why not? i'm thinking about it in the future.

Just risk avoidance. The marginal improvement at this point isn't worth the risk of negative side effects.

like what? sorry never really learned about it.

Supposedly there is a small but real chance of vision side effects from LASIK. Halos, starburst patterns, sometimes minimal improvement (or even worsening of vision). AIUI, if those happen then there's pretty much nothing they can do about it at that point.

Also, as you age your eyes get less flexible and you tend to become more nearsighted. If you are currently farsighted, then there's an argument that it's better to leave them as-is, so that they'll move into an ideal range at a later point in life. There's also an argument that if you're in your mid-30s, even if they fix them there then you'll be back to glasses in 10-15 years anyway, so the risk isn't worth the small period of not needing vision correction.

That's what I've read/been told, anyway, I've never needed to consider it myself. I had fighter pilot vision when I was in my 20s -- 20/10, they'd ask me to read the bottom line on the chart and I'd say "copyright 1991, made in China". :) In my early 40s now, it's not that good any more, but I don't need glasses yet.

--Ian

world series
 

this is looking like it's gonna be fun!

Pain, possible side-effects, and a well-learned general aversion to the knife in general.

And codrus is right. I've been -4.5 in both eyes for about 20 years. This past year I went back to the optometrist (first time in ~5 years) and found that at age 38 I'm down to -3.25.

By the time the cataracts settle in, I'll have 20/20 vision.

What it would be like to see.

I'm -6.5 in one eye and -6.75 in the other (or is -7 instead of 6?, can't remember)

Got mine done several years ago, I was about -6 in both eyes as well. I consider it money well spent. Don't even remember wearing glasses.




PE exam is in 48 hours, any last second advice from engineers on here?

If it moves, and it shouldn't, use duct tape.
If it doesn't move, and it should, use WD-40.



Sand shifts. Don't build important stuff on top of it.



Assume that the steelworkers will ignore your torque specs.



Just because you can specify a tolerance to six decimal places doesn't mean that a 500 ton brake can meet it.

All of the above. I ended up with a very, very mild "starburst" on bright individual light sources in the dark (think: street lamps and headlights), but it's mild enough that I rarely think about it. My eyes might also be a bit more prone to dryness and irritation, but that's hard to gauge since I have allergies as well.

When I had my LASIK, I was 22 or 23 and had worn glasses since the 2nd grade. I tried contacts for a few years in high school and college, but I could never wear them for more than 3-4 hours at a time without some serious irritation. I was (and still am) pretty active and play sports and hated wearing glasses or putting contacts in for that stuff. It was worth the risks in order to massively change the quality of my life.

But now? My eyesight isn't perfect -- I've noticed distant signs are a bit harder to read, etc. -- but having another LASIK would be a very marginal improvement, not a life-changer. If my eyesight declines at a normal pace, by the time I'd really benefit from another procedure, I'll be needing reading glasses anyway (and probably not playing field sports at that point). It's just not worth the risk of a much worse visual artifact, much worse dryness or irritation, or some other potentially serious consequence.

And, it's not cheap. I (stupidly) paid for a "lifetime correction" package, which sounds great, but what they fail to tell you is that it (typically) only covers the exact same procedure. They aren't performing the exact same procedure anymore, which means I'd be paying out of pocket again for at least the difference in cost. Also, I skipped about 10 years' worth of examinations so I think I voided my "lifetime" contract that way.


So, I'm not saying I wouldn't do my first LASIK over again, given the choice: I probably would. But having done it once (to change my life), I wouldn't do it again (for a marginal improvement).

Also: You might end up killing yourself.