Health Check: 'I saw flashing lights and knew I had problems'

The flashing lights started on election night last year. I noticed them as the early evening light started to fade – a spark on the periphery of my vision each time I moved my eyes. We were on our way to a party and we turned east and headed for Moorfields hospital. There, after half an hour of poking and prodding, I was told I had a vitreous detachment in the left eye.

This is less serious than a retinal detachment but disturbing, none the less. Vitreous detachment refers to the vitreous humour, the glutinous liquid filling the eye, which suddenly breaks down. It is common in the elderly and in the seriously myopic like me, but that is small comfort.

It is no fun losing even a tiny part of one's sight. I now have large lumps of gunk floating about my left eye, which temporarily obscure my vision as they drift in front of the retina. To flick them out of the way I blink, or wink, or switch my eyes about in a demented manner. I was warned that I could expect a detachment in the other eye within a few months. "They usually go together," the ophthalmologist who examined me jauntily said. Today, a year on, my right eye has so far been spared. I am pleased. But this has only increased my suspicions about the cause of the detachment in my left eye. Could a new pair of glasses that I bought six months before the detachment occurred be to blame?

I have been myopic all my life. I started wearing glasses at the age of six and my eyesight has been deteriorating ever since. According to a review in the British Medical Journal last month, my occupation may have something to do with it. A lifetime spent peering at computer screens and poring over small print does nothing for the sight. Lawyers, accountants, microscopists – anyone who spends their days in close work is likely to damage their eyes.

"People whose professions entail much reading have higher degrees of myopia, and the myopia may progress not just in people's teenage years but throughout their twenties and thirties," wrote Professor Douglas Fredrick of the department of ophthalmology at the University of California in the BMJ. The most stunning evidence for this is the way in which myopia has increased in aboriginal populations, among whom it was unknown, as they have become better educated. Eyes were made to scan horizons and if they are prevented from doing so, it seems damage occurs.

There is a strong genetic element, too. I remember vividly the day, after taking my son to school, I watched him make for the front seat in the class. For a millisecond I thought he was showing unusual enthusiasm – until I realised he couldn't see the blackboard. That moment stirred an ancient memory of my own blurred schooldays.

But if reading makes eyesight worse, what does a faulty prescription do? When I collected my new glasses in November 2000 I knew there was something wrong. I took them back a few days later but was fobbed off. For weeks I struggled, but they gave me headaches.

After Christmas I took them back again. This time the opticians agreed to return them to the manufacturers to have the left lens remade. When I got them back there was still no improvement. How could I go on insisting something was wrong? I could see better with them than with my previous pair because they were stronger – but I still couldn't wear them for a full 24 hours. For a few months I tried to get used to them. Then I had the vitreous detachment.

At first I did not link the glasses with what had happened to my eye. But two months later I returned to the opticians again. This time they gave me a repeat eye test, and found the original prescription had been five degrees out in the left eye (I have astigmatism in addition to myopia). They made me a replacement pair of glasses, which I have worn comfortably since.

Did the faulty prescription cause the vitreous detachment? I have asked three experts. One said it was possible and two that it was unlikely. For me the timing and the fact that my right eye is still unaffected, against the expectations of the ophthalmologist, are persuasive. If reading can damage the eye, why not a twisted lens? But this falls a long way short of proof.

The most striking thing, in the months following this episode, is the number of people who have had a similar experience. Abandoned pairs of glasses appear to be lying in drawers and cupboards across the nation. Time for an enterprising charity to run a quality check on Britain's opticians.