|
Home > Archive > Lasik Eyes Surgery > October 2004 > Another better article
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Another better article
|
|
|
|
|
| On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 12:21:06 GMT, "Dr. Leukoma"
<drgNOSPAM@leukoma.com> wrote:
>http://www.charleston.net/stories/0..._fccnotes.shtml
>
>More about her eye problems and how she still had to wear contact lenses
>after LASIK.
>
>DrG
This is getting sick. You refer to this as a "BETTER ARTICLE"?
Does it give you some kind of joy to find someone suffering? Very
sick.
In the article, it says:
Pierce, a two-time Grand Slam winner, has spent much of the last two
years battling various ailments, ranging from abdominal strains to
ankle problems, a bad rotator cuff and a sore back.
Even with those problems, she is still ranked 43 in the world. Also
remember that she took off nearly an entire year after her LASIK
procedure due to a back injury.
=========================
Here's a likely story we can expect to see soon:
Roy Horn can no longer perform his magic act because he had LASIK
surgery. The 1200 pound tiger Montecore noticed Roy blinking due to
the horrors of dry eye and dragged him backstage so the doctors could
treat him.
| |
| Dr. Leukoma 2004-10-05, 11:09 am |
| RM <rm@yahoo.com> wrote in news:i355m0l1cb6eqoikmthigbgmr8psjju3vf@4ax.com:
> On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 12:21:06 GMT, "Dr. Leukoma"
> <drgNOSPAM@leukoma.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> This is getting sick. You refer to this as a "BETTER ARTICLE"?
> Does it give you some kind of joy to find someone suffering? Very
> sick.
Yes, it is sickening to watch you continually trivializing people who have
had side effects from LASIK.
DrG
>
> In the article, it says:
> Pierce, a two-time Grand Slam winner, has spent much of the last two
> years battling various ailments, ranging from abdominal strains to
> ankle problems, a bad rotator cuff and a sore back.
>
> Even with those problems, she is still ranked 43 in the world. Also
> remember that she took off nearly an entire year after her LASIK
> procedure due to a back injury.
>
> =========================
> Here's a likely story we can expect to see soon:
>
> Roy Horn can no longer perform his magic act because he had LASIK
> surgery. The 1200 pound tiger Montecore noticed Roy blinking due to
> the horrors of dry eye and dragged him backstage so the doctors could
> treat him.
>
>
(Groan) Stop with the hyperbole, already. Look at the pot calling the
kettle black.
DrG
| |
|
| RM <rm@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 12:21:06 GMT, "Dr. Leukoma"
> This is getting sick. You refer to this as a "BETTER ARTICLE"?
I think better means that the article can be distorted to serve
the original poster's anti-lasik bias.
| |
|
| On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 08:39:50 GMT, r5 <r5ahhj@r5ahhj.bounceme.net>
wrote:
>RM <rm@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>I think better means that the article can be distorted to serve
>the original poster's anti-lasik bias.
So true. One of the 3 articles he posted didn't even have one word in
it about Mary Pierce. Go figure.
It would be nice to have at least one real eye doctor participate in
this group.
It seems to give great joy to the malcontents whenever there is even
the slightest shred of an individual person having a problem with
their eyes.
Also notice that these so-called experts like to point out problems,
yet they make no attempt whatsoever to point out a solution to the
problems. No wonder that one guy killed himself. A glimmer of hope
about his vision improving might have made the difference between him
giving up and waiting awhile for things in his life to change.
I don't suppose these experts ever heard of people going blind from
macular degeneration, glaucoma, cataracts, diabetes, etc. Vision loss
alone is no reason to cash in one's chips.
A doctor who interferes with a patient's healing process and feeds
them tales of gloom and doom so they can acquire them as a
"rehabilitation" patient - should not be a doctor at all. They should
retire from practice and go find some other line of work.
| |
| Dr. Leukoma 2004-10-06, 7:09 am |
| RM <rm@yahoo.com> wrote in news:vri7m0ddqerl71k5fs4p5s75k0odgi9pb8@4ax.com:
> On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 08:39:50 GMT, r5 <r5ahhj@r5ahhj.bounceme.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> So true. One of the 3 articles he posted didn't even have one word in
> it about Mary Pierce. Go figure.
Right. It was about Jennifer Capriati.
>
> It would be nice to have at least one real eye doctor participate in
> this group.
You rang?
>
> It seems to give great joy to the malcontents whenever there is even
> the slightest shred of an individual person having a problem with
> their eyes.
> Also notice that these so-called experts like to point out problems,
> yet they make no attempt whatsoever to point out a solution to the
> problems. No wonder that one guy killed himself. A glimmer of hope
> about his vision improving might have made the difference between him
> giving up and waiting awhile for things in his life to change.
Let me show you the list of patients I have helped.
>
> I don't suppose these experts ever heard of people going blind from
> macular degeneration, glaucoma, cataracts, diabetes, etc. Vision loss
> alone is no reason to cash in one's chips.
You mean like the ocular melanoma I found a few months ago? That patient
was incredibly strong. This is why I suggested that patients who felt
suicidal should seek help immediately.
>
> A doctor who interferes with a patient's healing process and feeds
> them tales of gloom and doom so they can acquire them as a
> "rehabilitation" patient - should not be a doctor at all. They should
> retire from practice and go find some other line of work.
The average length of time after surgery is 46 months for patients who
visit me for contact lenses following refractive surgery. The earliest was
several months by a surgeon who needed to continue to operate. I have two
published articles from physicians discussing the use of contact lenses
within the first few months following refractive surgery. I distinctly
remember that Glenn referred me a patient who was a few months out from
surgery.
DrG
| |
| Dr. Leukoma 2004-10-06, 7:09 am |
| r5 <r5ahhj@r5ahhj.bounceme.net> wrote in news:r5ahhj-
7DF289.03395006102004@newssvr11-ext.news.prodigy.com:
> RM <rm@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> I think better means that the article can be distorted to serve
> the original poster's anti-lasik bias.
>
I think "better" because in this article it cannot be said that the
journalist drew the conclusion because the patient was quoted.
How is that biased? The patient said it, not I.
DrG
| |
|
| On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 11:54:06 GMT, "Dr. Leukoma"
<drgNOSPAM@leukoma.com> wrote:
>RM <rm@yahoo.com> wrote in news:vri7m0ddqerl71k5fs4p5s75k0odgi9pb8@4ax.com:
>
>
>
>Right. It was about Jennifer Capriati.
It had about 5 words about Capriati, and the topic was Mary Pierce.
>
>
>You rang?
I think he specified a real eye doctor meaning not you.
>
>
>
>Let me show you the list of patients I have helped.
A doctor who helps patients. Now there is a concept. You are
expected to help patients. You act as if you deserve an award for
helping people. That is the function of a doctor.
What isn't a function of a doctor is to meddle in areas that they have
no business going into which wind up hurting or even killing a
patient. A heart surgeon has no business doing brain surgery and a
brain surgeon has no business doing heart surgery. You have no
business meddling in ophthamology or psychiatry.
>
>
>You mean like the ocular melanoma I found a few months ago? That patient
>was incredibly strong. This is why I suggested that patients who felt
>suicidal should seek help immediately.
>
>The average length of time after surgery is 46 months for patients who
>visit me for contact lenses following refractive surgery. The earliest was
>several months by a surgeon who needed to continue to operate. I have two
>published articles from physicians discussing the use of contact lenses
>within the first few months following refractive surgery.
It takes FOUR YEARS for you to fit a pair of contact
lenses???????????? It's a good thing you aren't an obstetrician!!
The kid would be in high school by the time you delivered it!
> I distinctly
>remember that Glenn referred me a patient who was a few months out from
>surgery.
>
>
>
>DrG
I don't think Glenn will make that mistake again.
| |
| Dr. Leukoma 2004-10-06, 11:09 am |
| Mike <cigto@aol.com> wrote in
news:1097072362.cmJM7Ot9t5bLXAQ26Q2cWg@teranews:
> On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 11:54:06 GMT, "Dr. Leukoma"
> <drgNOSPAM@leukoma.com> wrote:
>
>
> It had about 5 words about Capriati, and the topic was Mary Pierce.
The topic was athletes who had LASIK.
>
> I think he specified a real eye doctor meaning not you.
That is my title. Sorry if you don't like it.
>
> A doctor who helps patients. Now there is a concept. You are
> expected to help patients. You act as if you deserve an award for
> helping people. That is the function of a doctor.
> What isn't a function of a doctor is to meddle in areas that they have
> no business going into which wind up hurting or even killing a
> patient. A heart surgeon has no business doing brain surgery and a
> brain surgeon has no business doing heart surgery. You have no
> business meddling in ophthamology or psychiatry.
First you claim that I am not a doctor, then you tell me that is my job. I
do not meddle in psychiatry. Show me evidence where that is the case. I
specifically stated here in this NG that I do not dole out psychiatric
advice.
Also, fitting contact lenses is well within the scope of my practice. What
I do not do is LASIK.
>
>
> It takes FOUR YEARS for you to fit a pair of contact
> lenses???????????? It's a good thing you aren't an obstetrician!!
> The kid would be in high school by the time you delivered it!
No, I didn't say that. Can't you read. I said the average patient who
come to me to be fitted for contact lenses following refractive surgery had
their surgery 46 months before coming to see me. On average, it takes one
week - some more some less.
>
>
>
>
> I don't think Glenn will make that mistake again.
Actually, the patient was very happy.
DrG
|
| |
|
|