Banning Use of Unprescribed Contact Lenses

Why can’t our legislators balance the budget instead of worrying about whether or not folks have prescriptions for their contact lenses?

People who want contact lenses to make their brown eyes blue might soon need a prescription in South Dakota.

[…]

Supporters say contact lenses should only be worn by people who have obtained a prescription from optometrists and ophthalmologists. They say some people in South Dakota have developed eye infections after buying nonprescription lenses to enhance or change the color of their eyes.

How is this any of South Dakota’s business? What’s next, getting prescriptions before having body piercings or tattoos? Please. If one does not know that putting foreign objects into one’s eyes or skin or elsewhere is potentially dangerous, then perhaps one should be concerned that one’s parents haven’t been doing their job.

I think that this bill is little more than an attempt by segment of the eye business to use the state to cut down on competition.

2 thoughts on “Banning Use of Unprescribed Contact Lenses

  1. This does dound like unnecessary intrusion… but it’s gotten unanimous votes in committee and before the full Senate. Is there any angle to SB 115 that we’re missing? Do cosmetic contacts pose a grave health risk? And will the states attorney be coming after me and the nice folks on the Internet if I order such lenses online?

    1. CAH,

      Unanimity does not rule out thoughtlessness. I’m guessing that the driver behind this is “Well, it’s a small thing, but it’s a good thing to keep people from hurting their eyes. Yeah, we can do this.” without considering whether doing so is really under the state’s purview.

      I just don’t see what the angle might be. And yes, you can be certain that you will be caught by law enforcement should you get this from a location outside the state lines.

Comments are closed.