|
Home > Archive > Lasik Eyes Surgery > December 2005 > Exaggeration and bias reguarding the mel80 lasik and over 75% better than 20/20
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 |
Exaggeration and bias reguarding the mel80 lasik and over 75% better than 20/20
|
|
|
| http://www.eyetechlasik.com/images/pie_chart.gif
I may have talked about the mel80 in an old thread on this forum and
how amazing it is. I remember raving about it on other forums how more
than 3/4 of people end better than 20/20! I now learned the truth about
those figures. They are biased and exaggerated.
1. He probably pre-selected only those who were seeing better than
20/20 with glasses, including high myopes whos glasses minified!
2. He let the lasik patent guess the line if he couldnt see it and gave
credit for correct gusses!
3. He probably excluded in his result those who had bad results with
lasik. Notice that theres no results for 20/30 and only a handful for
20/40 and 20/25, almost all of them are 20/20 or better!
4. His results probably are right after lasik or shortly after. Many
people no longer see this good due to regression. Would you believe
more than 50% no longer see 20/20 a year post lasik?
I remember going to an optometrist/technician who works for the lasik
surgeon where I got my manual refraction and he proclaimed me 20/20 to
20/25. HA! LOL! The 20/30 line went by without much trouble but when he
pulled up the 20/25 line I hesisated. Was this an O or a C? I guessed.
Next letter, hmmm an E, F, P or something? I guessed again! He just
said "good, good!" then pulled the 20/20 line. I just stood there
speechless and he said go ahead, smiling at me. I told him I cant see
any of those, but not to be deterred and still smiling, said just try
your best. Ah ok im not about to be rude and ill humor him. Its clear
he wants me to guess
I probably have a 1 in 10 chance of getting it right. I just blurted
out the most common letters like E, F, P, O, L then at the end said I
believe theres an O somewhere. He said "excellent!" and proceeded to
write down 20/20 to 20/25 and my pescription.
I have gotten eye exams before and didnt have much trouble on the 20/30
line but when the optometrist moved to the 20/25 line, I took a 5
second look at that line and said I cant see 20/20 then he says thats
the 20/25 line and to "try" anyway. What does it matter if I cant
accutately see it anyway? I mean I can see enough to tell its probably
not a dissimilar letter like an E vs. an O but I would have no idea if
its an O, C or even D. Anyway after "trying" by guessing I got like
half right(luck, eh?) and he pronounced me 20/25. Ok so maybe im a bit
better than 20/30 like 20/28 but theres no such line. I may be able to
read most of the 20/25 line with contacts which dont minify unlike my
-5 glasses.
Appearently the eyechart doesnt tell the whole story. One guy can be a
true 20/20 and see all of that line without missing a single beat while
the other may hesisate for 10 seconds then slowly and reluctantly read
or rather guess them and get lucky. I would consider him 20/25. Then
theres also the issue of vision quality which has to do with things
like contrast, especially how well you see at night. I bet I see better
than the large majority of post lasik people at night and in low light.
They may see better in the day accuracy wise but could still experience
annoying effects like glare, reduced contrast, ghosting, double vision,
dry eyes, etc.
By having lasik, you lose more than just your dependancy on glasses. I
read that more than 50% experience a noticable decrease in their night
vision and almost 100% will lose some contrast senestivity. Glare,
halos and starbursts are often increased after lasik. Sometimes this
can make night driving dangerous and you probably shouldnt even be
driving at night. You also probably wont even achieve the visual
accuracy you do with glasses. More than 50% of people dont quite end
plano or they regress after some time. Some get enhancements but thats
taking more risks and ive seen/heard my share who ended up making
things worse!
I sound so negetive so let me try to be positive on one aspect. Its
nice to be less dependant on glasses. Everyone will admit this even if
its wishful thinking. Lasik is actually useful for soldiers and
athlates. Glasses is a liability for a soldier and I heard on a message
board it got one killed. He was a high myope and his glasses fell off
durning battle. He couldnt find them so he ran away and got gunned
down! Athlates cant perform very well with their glasses bobbing up and
down or falling off. Contacts is obviously a good solution but not all
can tolerate them. I heard of moutain climbers getting lasik because if
they lose or break their glasses, they may as well be dead(unless only
slightly myopic) since they cant see well enough to nagivate the steep,
dangerous mountains. There may be a few other good reasons for lasik,
but most of us, lasik is purely elective and not much of a neccessary.
| |
|
| http://www.accuvision.co.uk/eye/testimonials.htm
Seems biased to me. The surgeon selects the best testimonals to be
posted on his website. I only see a couple of negetive ones and like
50+ good ones. Isnt it unusual how pratically everyone gets an easy
20/20 vision, even the very high myopes in double digits? Regression is
high for that group plus Its difficult to get high pescriptions to
20/20. Perhaps the tech/opto giving them an eye exam is being too
generous and allowing them to guess and pronouncing them 20/20 even if
they get only a couple letters right on the 20/20 line. 25% of people
arent even correctable to 20/20(compenstating for spectacle
minification) so thats another oddity. Again, I believe what they do is
go strict on them before they get lasik then inflate the results after
the get lasik.
Lets state an example. A -10 myope sees half of the 20/25 line due to
spectacle minification. This works out to very near 20/20 without the
minification. The technician pronounces him 20/30 which is what he
really is as he cant reliabily see 20/25. After lasik hes able to read
all of the 20/25 line(no more minification, remember?) but cant quite
make out 20/20. The technician netherless cheers him on and says your
doing great, keep going on! Hes gonna just guess. If he gets none of it
right, the technician will say something like "your healing along
nicely, youll be 20/20 in no time!" He comes back again for the 7 day
post lasik checkup and guesses again. Maybe his guesses are lucky this
time and he gets a couple right on the 20/20. If not he has a 3rd
chance at the 30 day checkup. I dont believe for a minute that most of
them are a full 20/20. I would say some are partial 20/20 and some cant
really even see any of the 20/20 but guessed their way anyway. Hey the
technician whom I saw for my evaluation(no, im not getting lasik) said
I was 20/20 to 20/25 even though I saw none of the 20/20 and mostly
guessed on the 20/25!
A Baltimore researcher found that over 40% of 175 LASIK laser eye
surgery patients had more difficulty driving after surgery. According
to Review of Optometry, only 40% of LASIK laser eye surgery patients
achieve 20/20 vision after 1 year. And many LASIK laser eye surgery
patients continue to have to wear glasses after surgery.
"Only about 35 percent of all adults have 20/20 vision without glasses,
contact lenses or corrective surgery. With corrective measures,
approximately 75 percent of adults have this degree of visual acuity
while the other 25 percent of the population just doesn't see very
well, Dr. Johnson says."
| |
|
|
|
| In article <1134983633.559915.235750@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
"Ace" <acemanvx@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Seems biased to me. The surgeon selects the best testimonals to be
> posted on his website. I only see a couple of negetive ones and like
> 50+ good ones. Isnt it unusual how pratically everyone gets an easy
> 20/20 vision, even the very high myopes in double digits?
Uh, maybe because that reflects the overall 97% reported success rate
with LASIK?
Come on Ace, why wouldn't someone chose only the best testimonials for
their own website? Are you keeping all the negative remarks posted here
about you to put on your resume?
You are so amazingly naive it's kind of cute in a pathetic kind of way.
But you still have no idea of what you're talking about. How much time a
day do you spend searching for and posting about this fantastical crap?
I worry about your future. What kind of schooling do you have? any job
prospects, or do you stay home all day and do web searches on LASIK, a
procedure you've decided not to have?
--
~RT
| |
| Ragnar 2005-12-19, 12:55 pm |
| You talked about the mel80 in an old thread in this forum?
Under what other alias might that have been under?
On 18 Dec 2005 10:39:06 -0800, "Ace" <acemanvx@yahoo.com> wrote:
>http://www.eyetechlasik.com/images/pie_chart.gif
>
>
>
>I may have talked about the mel80 in an old thread on this forum and
>how amazing it is. I remember raving about it on other forums how more
>than 3/4 of people end better than 20/20! I now learned the truth about
>those figures. They are biased and exaggerated.
>
>
>1. He probably pre-selected only those who were seeing better than
>20/20 with glasses, including high myopes whos glasses minified!
>
>2. He let the lasik patent guess the line if he couldnt see it and gave
>credit for correct gusses!
>
>3. He probably excluded in his result those who had bad results with
>lasik. Notice that theres no results for 20/30 and only a handful for
>20/40 and 20/25, almost all of them are 20/20 or better!
>
>4. His results probably are right after lasik or shortly after. Many
>people no longer see this good due to regression. Would you believe
>more than 50% no longer see 20/20 a year post lasik?
>
>
>I remember going to an optometrist/technician who works for the lasik
>surgeon where I got my manual refraction and he proclaimed me 20/20 to
>20/25. HA! LOL! The 20/30 line went by without much trouble but when he
>pulled up the 20/25 line I hesisated. Was this an O or a C? I guessed.
>Next letter, hmmm an E, F, P or something? I guessed again! He just
>said "good, good!" then pulled the 20/20 line. I just stood there
>speechless and he said go ahead, smiling at me. I told him I cant see
>any of those, but not to be deterred and still smiling, said just try
>your best. Ah ok im not about to be rude and ill humor him. Its clear
>he wants me to guess
>I probably have a 1 in 10 chance of getting it right. I just blurted
>out the most common letters like E, F, P, O, L then at the end said I
>believe theres an O somewhere. He said "excellent!" and proceeded to
>write down 20/20 to 20/25 and my pescription.
>
>I have gotten eye exams before and didnt have much trouble on the 20/30
>line but when the optometrist moved to the 20/25 line, I took a 5
>second look at that line and said I cant see 20/20 then he says thats
>the 20/25 line and to "try" anyway. What does it matter if I cant
>accutately see it anyway? I mean I can see enough to tell its probably
>not a dissimilar letter like an E vs. an O but I would have no idea if
>its an O, C or even D. Anyway after "trying" by guessing I got like
>half right(luck, eh?) and he pronounced me 20/25. Ok so maybe im a bit
>better than 20/30 like 20/28 but theres no such line. I may be able to
>read most of the 20/25 line with contacts which dont minify unlike my
>-5 glasses.
>
>Appearently the eyechart doesnt tell the whole story. One guy can be a
>true 20/20 and see all of that line without missing a single beat while
>the other may hesisate for 10 seconds then slowly and reluctantly read
>or rather guess them and get lucky. I would consider him 20/25. Then
>theres also the issue of vision quality which has to do with things
>like contrast, especially how well you see at night. I bet I see better
>than the large majority of post lasik people at night and in low light.
>They may see better in the day accuracy wise but could still experience
>annoying effects like glare, reduced contrast, ghosting, double vision,
>dry eyes, etc.
>
>By having lasik, you lose more than just your dependancy on glasses. I
>read that more than 50% experience a noticable decrease in their night
>vision and almost 100% will lose some contrast senestivity. Glare,
>halos and starbursts are often increased after lasik. Sometimes this
>can make night driving dangerous and you probably shouldnt even be
>driving at night. You also probably wont even achieve the visual
>accuracy you do with glasses. More than 50% of people dont quite end
>plano or they regress after some time. Some get enhancements but thats
>taking more risks and ive seen/heard my share who ended up making
>things worse!
>
>I sound so negetive so let me try to be positive on one aspect. Its
>nice to be less dependant on glasses. Everyone will admit this even if
>its wishful thinking. Lasik is actually useful for soldiers and
>athlates. Glasses is a liability for a soldier and I heard on a message
>board it got one killed. He was a high myope and his glasses fell off
>durning battle. He couldnt find them so he ran away and got gunned
>down! Athlates cant perform very well with their glasses bobbing up and
>down or falling off. Contacts is obviously a good solution but not all
>can tolerate them. I heard of moutain climbers getting lasik because if
>they lose or break their glasses, they may as well be dead(unless only
>slightly myopic) since they cant see well enough to nagivate the steep,
>dangerous mountains. There may be a few other good reasons for lasik,
>but most of us, lasik is purely elective and not much of a neccessary.
| |
|
| I can agree on the 97% success rate but what clearly defines a success
does not mean the patient ended with perfect vision. It could be at
least 20/40 and still a success. Lots of people with bad lasik outcomes
were a "success" only because they achieved 20/40 or better uncorrected
vision, nevermind the GASH, dry eyes, reduced quality, etc
Uh this is obvious. If you were a lasik surgeon, any negetivately is
bad for your business. No one will come to you and get lasik if you
have pages of unhappy patients!
I do spend a little time informing others on the risks of lasik. Even
though im not getting it, its still revelent to know about such
technology that maybe oneday something will come out thats as safe as
contact lenses to reduce dependancy on glasses!
|
| |
|
|