| wtrattler@earthlink.net 2005-11-30, 1:02 am |
| Dear Eye,
I love the fact that you are publicly criticizing me about Dr.
Schallhorn's paper. You just made Dr. Schallhorn smile - or maybe even
laugh.
But "Eye" - what this really says - is that you are so angry
and upset - that you have to strike out and bash people and say
negative things just to be mean and nasty. It becomes painfully
obvious to everyone reading your posts that you don't care what you say
- you just want to say things to be mean, hurtful and to make yourself
seem superior and more knowledgeable than anyone.
Thankfully - it also allows me to not be hurt by your comments -
because you are being mean and criticizing me for something that is so
offbase - it is just ridiculous.
You see - you have never met me. You do not know me. You have
never attended any of my lectures that cover pupil size issues in
refractive surgery. So the fact that you are bashing me over the
Schallhorn paper is just ridiculously funny. Anyone who knows me or
who has attended one of my lectures knows immediately about my thoughts
on the Schallhorn paper - since I actually start off all of my lectures
with a discussion of the Schallhorn paper. I have actually given more
than 20 lectures on both local and National levesls discussing the
Schallhorn paper. I have spoken up at Conferences when lecturers
brought up the Schallhorn paper.
So the fact is - I just love it that you write these mean, nasty
messages trying to chastise me
So now - if you truly want to be able to get down to things and
know exactly where I stand on pupil size issues and the Schallhorn
paper:
1. Go to medline - and search using the word pupil and Trattler. What
comes up - and what does it say?
2. Contact attorney Greg Tiemeier - and ask him what my comments were
when he brought up the Schalhorn article in his lecture: Risk
Management Issues in Refractive Surgery: Advertising, Pupil Size and
Other Issues
3. Please contact ASCRS - and request a tape of the lecture I gave on
pupil size issues in refractive surgery at the 2005 ASCRS Symposium.
The other doctors on the panel included: Jack Holladay, Jim Salz,
Brian Boxer Wachler, and Sandra Brown. I discussed the Schallhorn
paper in depth. Do you think I praised it or pointed out its many
flaws......
4. And feel to just email me directly if you have a concern. Why not
email me (wtrattler@earthlink.net) if you have any questions or
concerns. People email me all of the time - and I always answer.
Finally - to move off the Schallhorn paper.....I was talking today with
a person who was planning to see a plastic surgeon - and they were
going to have a procedure that was going to leave a large scar -
thankfully in a relatively discrete location. But the person felt that
the benefits of the surgery outweighed the risks of surgery (which in
this case includes death) and the postoperative scar.
In the same way - patients choose to have refractive surgery with the
understanding that
1. There are no guarantees of visual results. Thankfully most patients
end up with a very satisfactory result
2. That there are risks including complications that could lead to
quality of vision loss, real vision loss, or even blindness
3. That some patients (especially large pupil patients) are at
increased risk of having a larger starburst compared to preop
With these understandings (and many others - because this is not a
complete informed consent) - patients choose to proceed with surgery.
postoperatively - these same patients are generally ecstatic with their
vision. Obviously some patients do not get the desired results, and I
volunteer and help patients all of the time with questions or problems.
As well - atleast in our Center - we do not advertise at all. The
patients who come in for evaluations and surgery have generally all
been told by former patients of their excellent results (and excellent
care).
Finally - and this was one of the interesting finding from my starburst
study. When I was checking the size of starbursts prior to surgery -
the size of the starbursts in patients with virgin corneas is often
quite large - because these patients were wearing contacts or glasses
that were not fully correcting their refractive error. So pre-surgery -
many patients have large starbursts (as measured by the Larson
glarometer) due to wearing out of date glasses or wearing contact
lenses that did not adequaetely correct the residual refractive error.
Again - I think it is pretty obvious to everyone reading this post and
your other postings - that you can really quit with this "shame" stuff
until you at least get with the program and know my thoughts and
beliefs on various topics. You are more than welcome to email me...and
you might learn truly what my positions are. Again - Dr. Schallhorn
and other doctors who feel that pupil size is not related to night
vision problems are just plain laughing at your comments - that you so
missed the boat on my position on Dr. Schallhorn's paper and pupil size
issues in general.
|