How does specsavers use science

STEM careers in optometry What is optometry? So just what does it take to be an optometrist? Attractive salaries Once qualified, you can expect to receive an attractive salary from the start. We will make you the best you can be. Run your own business One of the biggest reasons that many people become optometrists is that it gives you the chance to run your own business.

Be the best you can be Join us. A Society of Chemist Opticians was founded in Nevertheless there were some similarities with the other bodies, not least in the intention to establish a library and museum.

Ophthalmic opticians might well become members of the Society as well as one of the other bodies. In this we see their thinking; they would get their new members young and hopefully keep them for life.

Not that the Society of Chemist Opticians was entirely opposed to the idea of opticians being traders. As retail chemists they could hardly have adopted such a position.

In a lecture was organised in which Mr F. In any case they were campaigning against an entrenched position; the bulk of the British spectacle-making industry remained centred upon the Hatton Garden district of London the centre of the jewellery trade and would remain so until the s.

What in fact was happening was that a separate profession of dispensing optician was forming, and to a lesser extent a role of manufacturing optician. Many opticians both tested sight and dispensed and a few made their own frames, perhaps from real tortoiseshell but it was possible to perform only the one function, particularly if you worked for one of the new optical chains such as J.

This reduced the number of individuals who might want to join a professional body for ophthalmic opticians, particularly one that offered no qualifications, certificates or affix. Thus in and perhaps also due to lessons learned in the Great War the Society became an Institute and began examining. The examinations were only open to candidates who were already qualified pharmacists.

It was possible to be a Chemist-Optician, but never the other way round. More condescendingly still the author implies that a pharmacist is peculiarly fitted to undertake such work having been scientifically trained, being able to master the underlying principles and, importantly, already possessing the confidence of the public.

Then however, the writer changes tack. This is rather ironic since the SMC actually required the holders of its diplomas to sign a form agreeing not to use drugs in their work!

This stance was not abandoned until Within months he would probably have recommended the exams of the new Institute of Chemist Opticians instead. He offers advice on the layout of the practice. The optical department should be on the same level as the pharmacy in case elderly patients cannot mount stairs or require to be wheeled in whilst seated in their bath chairs. Nevertheless the room need only be small, possibly as small as 10ft long and a converted corridor will do.

To this author a minimum of equipment is required, a good trial case being sufficient in most cases. Notably he cautions against maintaining a large stock, indeed any stock of frames and lenses, advising instead that pharmacist opticians order frames on a per client basis, even thought this means increased postage costs, and he states that lens grinding is not a practical proposition for the pharmacist optician and such work should be contracted out to prescription houses.

He advises instead that the pharmacist optician make up for this extra cost and inconvenience by becoming a specialist, for instance in frame fitting. He should also exploit his position as a pharmacist to attract the clients in the first place:. The Pharmacist enjoys unique opportunities for pushing optics, opportunities unknown to those who rely upon their optical qualifications alone.

Every day customers enter the pharmacy who can be looked upon as potential optical clients. A lady mentions the fact that she suffers with headaches.

A tactful conversation leads to a visit to the sight testing room and the discovery that she is suffering from a slight error of refraction. This predatory attitude to the public does not sound attractive nor does it tally with the high ideals of the Society of Chemist Opticians when it had been founded in Edwardian times.

In , various letters to the Chemist and Druggist journal reveal that the nature of the renamed Institute of Chemist Opticians, now over a year old, was baffling some pharmacists.

For instance J. The editor helpfully told readers that the Society had been founded in incorrect and that a list of members was published annually in the Optical Almanac. A second letter, from J. Laws, one of the original founders, defends the new Institute, pointing out that the qualifying examination of the Pharmaceutical Society already contained the elementary teaching of optics and it was logical to seek to build upon that. Chemist-Opticians Certificate emphasising that the appropriately named Mr Ogle has passed his examinations in sight-testing in 'the medically approved manner' Leaving aside the biased opening statement we can discern in this a recognition of what would be the over-riding theme of the next thirty years — a push for unity which alone would persuade the government to legislate for the compulsory registration of opticians.

How likely was unity in the period before the NHS? Not very likely it would appear. Howell, who had passed the examinations of both the BOA and the SMC which was a common combination wrote an article in October on the age-old theme of whether ophthalmic opticians should have window displays.

Opticians are not salesmen, pharmacists are. The Institute's Exam Regulations, including the noteworthy contention that the course 'should not be difficult for the qualified chemist considering his Pharmaceutical training and his previous study of physics'. Opticians are proper professionals, like solicitors, accountants and architects or even to include a medical example dentists, none of whom would ever dream of advertising and whose clients come to them by reputation alone.

Mallinson, qualified under both the Pharmaceutical Society and the Spectacle Makers Company as well as being secretary of the National Pharmacists Union, supposedly spoke for all when he said that unity and co-operation would grow and strengthen the value of both optics and pharmacy to the general public. The advent of the National Health Service changed matters again. At the time of its foundation however in , the Institute of Optical Science was determined to maintain the dual profession identity.

Some new members from exclusively the optical side were still unsure that the Institute treated both sides equally. The Committee minutes record the receipt of a letter in from F. Hinton asking if the IOSc had in fact narrowed its field of interest to representing pharmacists alone. In the Institute for Optical Science had members. In reality this opened the way for membership of a number of medical practitioners, ophthalmologists including the distinguished Dr Margaret Dobson and physicists.

A school was opened at Wilton Crescent offering evening classes in premises rented from Obrig Laboratories, an important company in the contact lens field. The Institute offered a Diploma in Ophthalmics for which Part 1 could be obtained by various routes including Part 1 of the Chemist and Druggist examination of the Pharmaceutical Society or an equivalent- two subjects of which must be chemistry and physics.

Part 2 however was entirely ophthalmic or medical in its nature and content. To obtain the fellowship entailed sitting for six topics including ocular pharmacology and bacteriology.

At this time the Institute was the only examining body to include ophthalmic surgeons on its Council and on examining panels. Staff at four leading chains cautioned buyers that digital screens could damage their retinas and could lead to serious eye diseases such as macular degeneration and cataracts.

Two opticians at Hudson's Bay Optical suggested a link to cancer based on an in-store pamphlet provided by lens manufacturer VisionEase , while Vogue Optical's website suggests blue light may increase the risk of " certain types of cancers.

But experts in the fields of optometry and ophthalmology say there's no evidence that blue light from digital screens is harmful. Rahul Khurana, a spokesperson for the American Academy of Ophthalmology, said the idea of blue-light blocking is "flawed on so many levels.

Marketplace producers went undercover and visited multiple Hakim Optical, Vogue Optical, Hudson's Bay Optical's Glasses Gallery and LensCrafters locations in southern Ontario to see how the companies market the lenses to consumers. Several dispensing opticians and salespeople told the producers that blue light from digital screens can lead to fatigue and headaches. One optician said blue light has "very sharp rays, penetrating at the back of the eyes," while another salesperson said "it tears the eyes right out of you.

Watch Marketplace go undercover at optional retailers:. But more "serious" and even "scary-sounding" to ophthalmologist and macular specialist Dr. Sunir Garg were claims that blue light from digital devices might lead to retinal damage, age-related macular degeneration AMD and possibly cancer. Many of these claims are also found on Vogue Optical , Hakim , and LensCrafters websites and promotional material.

Marketplace asked Garg, a spokesperson for the American Academy of Ophthalmology and an ophthalmologist at the Wills Eye Hospital in Philadelphia, to review the hidden camera footage. He was concerned about how salespeople and opticians were "misleading" customers with claims about how the light from screens can damage eyes. Retinal damage and macular degeneration are "serious" claims, Garg said, "but the blue lights from your screen is not the cause of that stuff. Garg's research has led him to conclude that far from benefiting customers, these lenses are mostly benefiting the companies that are selling them.

The science into the harms from blue light is mostly done with retinal cells in a petri dish, he said, "or taking a poor mouse and and shining a blue light ray intensely into their eyeball for hours on end.

Both Khurana and Garg told Marketplace there's no research that suggests blue light filtering lenses are necessary. Phillip Yuhas, an assistant professor of optometry at Ohio State University, agrees. He said studies have shown people blink far less during computer use and that blue light filters have not shown any improved "visual comfort" for digital eye strain. Khurana said if the problem people are having is from digital eyestrain, then blue light filters are doing nothing to address the core issue and "could be doing more harm than good.

But that hasn't stopped eyeglass retailers from promoting them.