|
Home > Archive > Lasik Eyes Surgery > November 2005 > Counting the days until LASIK
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 |
Counting the days until LASIK
|
|
|
| I'm scheduled for LASIK surgery on Wednesday. Can't wait. I'm excited
about the prospect of not having to wear glasses all the time and also
a little bit nervous about how it will turn out. The probability is I
will end up with 20/20 or better. That would be fantastic! I'd be
happy with anything that lets me do most things without glasses. I
know I'll need glasses to read, but if it works the way the doctor said
it would I may still be able to see up close enough to dial my cell
phone or read labels without glasses. That would be great.
Final eye exam is Monday afternoon. This is a 2 hour exam where they
check for any problems with the eyes and re-do the measurements to make
sure everything is correct. Won't that be fun. (I hate having my eyes
dialated.) If everything checks out...then we're good to go on
Wednesday morning.
Mark
| |
|
| In article <1132936603.048314.264780@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"Mark" <m.petrash@earthlink.net> wrote:
> I'm scheduled for LASIK surgery on Wednesday. Can't wait. I'm excited
> about the prospect of not having to wear glasses all the time and also
> a little bit nervous about how it will turn out.
Good luck Mark! I hope all goes well. It's natural to be nervous. Most
likely everything will go well and you'll be seeing without glasses by
Thursday morning. Be vigilant about resting your eyes, using eye guards
and drops as per instructions.I was given a valium which helped a lot
during the procedure. Let us know how it goes.
--
~RT
| |
| Ragnar 2005-11-25, 5:57 pm |
| Your eyes will be examined again on Wednesday before the surgery.
The vision you get right after surgery is not your final vision. In
fact, if your vision is perfect right after surgery, then you will
have poor vision once the regression sets in. My vision was poor for
3 days following surgery. This 15 minute nonsense is ... nonsense.
I did go to work the day after surgery, however, I really could not
read my computer monitor.
On 25 Nov 2005 08:36:43 -0800, "Mark" <m.petrash@earthlink.net> wrote:
>I'm scheduled for LASIK surgery on Wednesday. Can't wait. I'm excited
>about the prospect of not having to wear glasses all the time and also
>a little bit nervous about how it will turn out. The probability is I
>will end up with 20/20 or better. That would be fantastic! I'd be
>happy with anything that lets me do most things without glasses. I
>know I'll need glasses to read, but if it works the way the doctor said
>it would I may still be able to see up close enough to dial my cell
>phone or read labels without glasses. That would be great.
>
>Final eye exam is Monday afternoon. This is a 2 hour exam where they
>check for any problems with the eyes and re-do the measurements to make
>sure everything is correct. Won't that be fun. (I hate having my eyes
>dialated.) If everything checks out...then we're good to go on
>Wednesday morning.
>
>Mark
| |
| Sheila G. 2005-11-26, 5:58 pm |
| Good for you Mark! My husband is one month out of Lasik as of today.
I was kind of his little shadow through out all is appointments. They
were kind enough to let me sit with him while he waited for his
surgery. This is what sticks in my mind-
They finally called him and he wasn't even gone 10 minutes and was
back. His eyes looked watery and sore so I asked him how he felt. All
he talked about how when he sat up he could see (read) the clock.
Specifically the 2nd hand! I thought for sure he was going to complain
about the pain. It was instant amazement for him. He has good and bad
days but even the bad days don't require his glasses.
Lots of luck and let us know how it goes ok? I'm sure you will get
lots of replies on this and please do take the time to read them.
Buyer beware-you need to be aware of bad outcomes too!
Sheila
| |
|
| You may not be able to see anything clearly within 7 feet without
glasses after you have this surgery. Depending on your age, all it
would take is a slight overcorrection.
I know of young people in their thirties who had problems focusing and
using their computers for months.
As you age, myopia is really an asset. You will always be able to wake
up and pick up your watch or see the clock next to you on the bedside
table. Imagine not being able to see your food, read something in your
hand, really do any useful close work whatsoever... without reading
glasses.
Monovision doesn't work for everyone. Some people don't adapt well to
it.
Like you, I was excited about the possibility of having good
uncorrected vision. I never got it. I regressed and need glasses. My
corneas have induced aberrations - all forms of corneal refractive
surgery actually induce distortions in your cornea... did you know
this? My vision has been a waking nightmare since my surgery.
I also have dry eye pain from nerve damage. It is permanent. I have had
it for over a year and a half. I know post-refractive dry eye patients
who have been suffering for years. See
http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/LASIK/risks.htm
Excerpt from the FDA site:
You may be under treated or over treated. Only a certain percent of
patients achieve 20/20 vision without glasses or contacts. You may
require additional treatment, but additional treatment may not be
possible. You may still need glasses or contact lenses after surgery.
This may be true even if you only required a very weak prescription
before surgery. If you used reading glasses before surgery, you may
still need reading glasses after surgery.
Some patients may develop severe dry eye syndrome. As a result of
surgery, your eye may not be able to produce enough tears to keep the
eye moist and comfortable. Dry eye not only causes discomfort, but can
reduce visual quality due to intermittent blurring and other visual
symptoms. This condition may be permanent. Intensive drop therapy and
use of plugs or other procedures may be required.
http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/LASIK/when.htm
Are you a risk taker, Mark? The FDA website has this to say:
You are probably NOT a good candidate for refractive surgery if:
You are not a risk taker. Certain complications are unavoidable in a
percentage of patients, and there are no long-term data available for
current procedures.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clear correctable vision is a gift. You can put on a pair of glasses
and enjoy good vision and comfort and not have to think about your
eyes. If something goes wrong with your surgery, you may be forced to
be aware of your mistake every waking minute for the rest of your life.
Please expect idiots on this site to attempt to mount a
counter-argument against the FDA warnings. Good grief.
| |
|
| In article <1133042101.883226.246340@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"Eye" <eyetooamdamaged@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Like you, I was excited about the possibility of having good
> uncorrected vision. I never got it. I regressed and need glasses. My
> corneas have induced aberrations - all forms of corneal refractive
> surgery actually induce distortions in your cornea... did you know
> this? My vision has been a waking nightmare since my surgery.
>
> I also have dry eye pain from nerve damage. It is permanent. I have had
> it for over a year and a half. I know post-refractive dry eye patients
> who have been suffering for years.
Eye, is your main complication from the surgery dry eye? How much did
your eyes regress and how soon was that after the procedure? Did you get
induced astigmatism? Unfortunately, regression wouldn't be considered a
complication because the goal of refractive surgery is to reduce, not
eliminate, dependancy on corrective lenses.
It's true that LASIK induces changes to the cornea. That's the purpose
of the surgery. In fact, it's my understanding that the function of and
correlation between aberrations and visual quality is poorly understood.
Changes do not automatically correlate to visual distortions, in fact
most of the time the changes makes a person's vision better, 20/40 or
better. Do you have visual distortions caused by aberrations? Are they
correctable with spectacles? Or are your problems related mostly to dry
eyes? Did you have dry eyes before the procedure? Do you think you had
any personal risk factors which weren't explored sufficiently before
LASIK?
The FDA site you quote is good information. It's very true that one must
be a risk taker to have LASIK. It's an elective surgery and clearly not
an exact science. Dry eye can be exacerbated by LASIK. But not everybody
ends up with dry eyes.
Your post here was a good one and probably helpful to a lot of people.
Relating it too your own personal experience to point out the
possibilities is powerful. I'm really sorry that LASIK not only didn't
help, but left you with pain, frustration and anger. I hope that you
continue to search for ways to help your condition. Best of luck.
--
~RT
| |
| Ragnar 2005-11-26, 5:58 pm |
| You might also get hit by lightning leaving the office after your
surgery. You might also get swept away by a tornado or perhaps an
earthquake. You might also get attacked by a swarm of killer bees.
All have about the same odds as your not being able to see anything
clearly after LASIK.
On 26 Nov 2005 13:55:01 -0800, "Eye" <eyetooamdamaged@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>You may not be able to see anything clearly within 7 feet without
>glasses after you have this surgery. Depending on your age, all it
>would take is a slight overcorrection.
>
>I know of young people in their thirties who had problems focusing and
>using their computers for months.
>
>As you age, myopia is really an asset. You will always be able to wake
>up and pick up your watch or see the clock next to you on the bedside
>table. Imagine not being able to see your food, read something in your
>hand, really do any useful close work whatsoever... without reading
>glasses.
>Monovision doesn't work for everyone. Some people don't adapt well to
>it.
>
>Like you, I was excited about the possibility of having good
>uncorrected vision. I never got it. I regressed and need glasses. My
>corneas have induced aberrations - all forms of corneal refractive
>surgery actually induce distortions in your cornea... did you know
>this? My vision has been a waking nightmare since my surgery.
>
>I also have dry eye pain from nerve damage. It is permanent. I have had
>it for over a year and a half. I know post-refractive dry eye patients
>who have been suffering for years. See
>http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/LASIK/risks.htm
>
>Excerpt from the FDA site:
>You may be under treated or over treated. Only a certain percent of
>patients achieve 20/20 vision without glasses or contacts. You may
>require additional treatment, but additional treatment may not be
>possible. You may still need glasses or contact lenses after surgery.
>This may be true even if you only required a very weak prescription
>before surgery. If you used reading glasses before surgery, you may
>still need reading glasses after surgery.
>
>Some patients may develop severe dry eye syndrome. As a result of
>surgery, your eye may not be able to produce enough tears to keep the
>eye moist and comfortable. Dry eye not only causes discomfort, but can
>reduce visual quality due to intermittent blurring and other visual
>symptoms. This condition may be permanent. Intensive drop therapy and
>use of plugs or other procedures may be required.
>
>http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/LASIK/when.htm
>Are you a risk taker, Mark? The FDA website has this to say:
>
>You are probably NOT a good candidate for refractive surgery if:
>
>You are not a risk taker. Certain complications are unavoidable in a
>percentage of patients, and there are no long-term data available for
>current procedures.
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Clear correctable vision is a gift. You can put on a pair of glasses
>and enjoy good vision and comfort and not have to think about your
>eyes. If something goes wrong with your surgery, you may be forced to
>be aware of your mistake every waking minute for the rest of your life.
>
>Please expect idiots on this site to attempt to mount a
>counter-argument against the FDA warnings. Good grief.
| |
|
| In article <3lpho195u3bcnk163mcmgpr15i42uucteu@4ax.com>,
Ragnar <ragnarsuomi@yahoo.com> wrote:
> You might also get hit by lightning leaving the office after your
> surgery. You might also get swept away by a tornado or perhaps an
> earthquake. You might also get attacked by a swarm of killer bees.
> All have about the same odds as your not being able to see anything
> clearly after LASIK.
Hey Rags, get a little compassion. When it does go wrong, it sucks.
There are precautions you can take to reduce the risks of getting swept
away by a tornado etc. in the same way there are risk factors that would
make LASIK a bad choice for some people
I would not want to live with the complications some people suffer from.
I occasionally have dry eyes late at night when the heating is on. It
hurts and everything is fuzzy. I would hate to hurt all the time. I also
hated when this happened with my contacts and I had to peel them off my
eye. The last time my eyes were dilated for an exam, I had terrible
glare that whole day. The reflections of shiny objects was blinding and
it hurt. Luckily it went away as the drops wore off.
It is true that some people have higher risk factors that some LASIK
centers and some LASIK consumers choose to downplay or overlook. And
sometimes things go wrong for no discernible reason. It would suck to
have any complication. But yes, luckily most people don't have
complications.
--
~RT
| |
| Ragnar 2005-11-26, 5:58 pm |
| I just got done going over this dry topic for the umpteenth time. It's
DRYNESS or if you must.. temporary dry eyes. Dry Eye is a condition
that is completely unrelated to LASIK.
And why bother asking "Eye" Hanson anything. He has never and will
never respond directly to a question.
FYI.. his problems are completely due to a corneal transplant which
resulted from having an enhancement done prematurely. He was healing
fine, which is why any enhancement was guaranteed to make the
situation worse, not better. His original procedure would have
resulted in the desired outcome. He had further enhancements done by
threatening and intimidating his surgeon. He still wanted more
enhancements done but they finally told him NO MORE.
FYI2. Free enhancement implies ONE enhancement.. not 10. With large
refractive errors, there is roughly a 5% chance that one might benefit
from an enhancement. Two enhancements is almost unheard of, and three
or more is absurd. Hanson seems to have gotten the impression that
he could get another enhancement every 3 months for the rest of his
miserable life. This same path to catastrophe is similar to that of
Old Keller. In her case, she made the problem worse by literally
pickling her corneas with excessive use of the steroid drops. Which
is proven by the fact that she developed droopy eyelids. Her eyelids
on steroids are like the bulging brow ridge on Hulk Hogan or the
bulging muscles on any steroid abuser. Steroids are like hot sauce..
good in very small doses... a disaster when overused.
As much as I hate to do this.. I wish Catman Mason would repost his
very short and accurate post covering the differences between
lubricating/moisturizing eye drops and medicated eyedrops/steroid
drops. They are as different as water and gasoline.
On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 22:26:32 GMT, RT <RTMD24@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote:
>In article <1133042101.883226.246340@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> "Eye" <eyetooamdamaged@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>Eye, is your main complication from the surgery dry eye? How much did
>your eyes regress and how soon was that after the procedure? Did you get
>induced astigmatism? Unfortunately, regression wouldn't be considered a
>complication because the goal of refractive surgery is to reduce, not
>eliminate, dependancy on corrective lenses.
>
>It's true that LASIK induces changes to the cornea. That's the purpose
>of the surgery. In fact, it's my understanding that the function of and
>correlation between aberrations and visual quality is poorly understood.
>Changes do not automatically correlate to visual distortions, in fact
>most of the time the changes makes a person's vision better, 20/40 or
>better. Do you have visual distortions caused by aberrations? Are they
>correctable with spectacles? Or are your problems related mostly to dry
>eyes? Did you have dry eyes before the procedure? Do you think you had
>any personal risk factors which weren't explored sufficiently before
>LASIK?
>
>The FDA site you quote is good information. It's very true that one must
>be a risk taker to have LASIK. It's an elective surgery and clearly not
>an exact science. Dry eye can be exacerbated by LASIK. But not everybody
>ends up with dry eyes.
>
>Your post here was a good one and probably helpful to a lot of people.
>Relating it too your own personal experience to point out the
>possibilities is powerful. I'm really sorry that LASIK not only didn't
>help, but left you with pain, frustration and anger. I hope that you
>continue to search for ways to help your condition. Best of luck.
| |
| serebel 2005-11-27, 12:59 am |
| Best of luck Mark. BTW, "eye" is an hysterical loon who thinks the sky
is falling.
| |
| Sandy 2005-11-27, 12:56 pm |
|
>
> FYI2. Free enhancement implies ONE enhancement.. not 10. With large
> refractive errors, there is roughly a 5% chance that one might benefit
> from an enhancement. Two enhancements is almost unheard of, and three
> or more is absurd. Hanson seems to have gotten the impression that
> he could get another enhancement every 3 months for the rest of his
> miserable life. This same path to catastrophe is similar to that of
> Old Keller. In her case, she made the problem worse by literally
> pickling her corneas with excessive use of the steroid drops. Which
> is proven by the fact that she developed droopy eyelids. Her eyelids
> on steroids are like the bulging brow ridge on Hulk Hogan or the
> bulging muscles on any steroid abuser. Steroids are like hot sauce..
> good in very small doses... a disaster when overused.
>
FYI-Chrissy: I did not over use the steroids. In fact, when the DLK
was first diagnosed, my surgeon under-prescribed them. He had me using
them every two hours, and when I saw his partner a couple of weeks
later, the partner upped the dosage to every hour. Every 1/2 to one
hour was the standard of care back then for Grade 3 or 4 DLK.
You can stop trying to blame my complications on me. If I had been to
blame, the insurance companies representing my optometrist and surgeon
would not have been willing to settle my lawsuit without putting up a
fight, and the State of California would not be prosecuting my
optometrist. The two doctors didn't even blame me--they blamed each
other, and that is why the case settled so quickly after their
depositions.
| |
| Ragnar 2005-11-27, 6:00 pm |
| On 27 Nov 2005 09:26:43 -0800, "Sandy" <sandy@savvysneaks.com> wrote:
>
>
>FYI-Chrissy: I did not over use the steroids. In fact, when the DLK
>was first diagnosed, my surgeon under-prescribed them. He had me using
>them every two hours, and when I saw his partner a couple of weeks
>later, the partner upped the dosage to every hour. Every 1/2 to one
>hour was the standard of care back then for Grade 3 or 4 DLK.
You did overuse the steroids, the droopy eyelid is proof of that.
>
>You can stop trying to blame my complications on me. If I had been to
>blame, the insurance companies representing my optometrist and surgeon
>would not have been willing to settle my lawsuit without putting up a
>fight, and the State of California would not be prosecuting my
>optometrist. The two doctors didn't even blame me--they blamed each
>other, and that is why the case settled so quickly after their
>depositions.
The insurance company made a huge mistake because they were
incompetent. They would not make that mistake again. And it is
fascinating that although you chose to give up your lawsuit and
settle... you haven't stopped complaining at all for SIX YEARS! Does
the word s e t t l e m e n t mean anything to you?
All that aside, anyone who follows this newsgroup knows that you are a
pathological liar, incapable of telling the truth, and furthermore,
you can't even tell the same LIE twice! You lie about your lies.
I didn't say that.. I said this.. no no.. yeah.... no wait... no this
is what I said...well what I meant to say was.. yeah.. that's the
ticket!
One of your last major lies was last month when you declared that your
vision is fine now and you had no more reason to complain. You never
needed a reason to complain.
I expect your next trip to court will be in 2 months when your now
at-home 47 year old husband files divorce papers so he doesn't have to
resort to strangling you. He's young enough that he can take half
those California assets and go find himself a 22 year old who isn't a
malcontent XXXXX.
|
| |
|
|