Lasik Eyes Surgery - LASIK "WORKS"

Author

LASIK "WORKS"

BarnardClassic

2005-04-19, 10:51 am

BARNARD CLASSICS

Well, duh, of course LASIK "works." It works extremely well at two

things, in particular:

1) LASIK permanently damages tens of thousands of eyes, and

permanently ruins tens of thousands of lives.

2) LASIK makes truckloads of money for laser manufacturers, surgeons,

optometrists, spectacle manufacturers, CL manufacturers, eye drop

manufacturers, drug manufacturers, psychotherapists, morticians, etc.

Sadly, LASIK isn't always successful. Some lucky patients do manage to

escape with relatively few complications. If LIP, DIP and RIP had

their way, "enhancements" would be mandatory until "success" was

achieved.

Ragnar

2005-04-19, 10:51 am

You forgot to mention that lasik is the most predictable, most
performed surgery ever devised.. and has the lowest complication rate
of any surgery.

On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 21:31:36 -0400, "BarnardClassic"
<BarnardClassics@Yahoo_nospam.com> wrote:

>BARNARD CLASSICS
>
>
>
>Well, duh, of course LASIK "works." It works extremely well at two
>
>things, in particular:
>
>
>
>
>
>1) LASIK permanently damages tens of thousands of eyes, and
>
>permanently ruins tens of thousands of lives.
>
>
>
>
>
>2) LASIK makes truckloads of money for laser manufacturers, surgeons,
>
>optometrists, spectacle manufacturers, CL manufacturers, eye drop
>
>manufacturers, drug manufacturers, psychotherapists, morticians, etc.
>
>
>
>
>
>Sadly, LASIK isn't always successful. Some lucky patients do manage to
>
>escape with relatively few complications. If LIP, DIP and RIP had
>
>their way, "enhancements" would be mandatory until "success" was
>
>achieved.
>

CatmanX

2005-04-19, 10:51 am

Most performed surgery, hey???

I would have thought tonsilectomy and appendectomy were higher myself.
And don't start me on predictability. There are plenty of more
predictable surgeries.

dr grant

Glenn - USAEyes.org

2005-04-19, 10:51 am

Ragnar is more or less correct about the quantity of LASIK procedures.
At least, in the US. LASIK has surpassed cataract surgery as the most
performed surgery procedure of any kind, not just ophthalmology.

As for most predictable, I think it would be fair to say that in
comparison to other procedures of similar complexity, LASIK is highly
predictable by medical standards.

Glenn Hagele
Executive Director
Council for Refractive Surgery Quality Assurance

Email to glenn dot hagele at usaeyes dot org

http://www.USAEyes.org
http://www.ComplicatedEyes.org

I am not a doctor.

LASIKtruth

2005-04-19, 10:51 am

Yes, LASIK is predictable. It damages eyes 100% of the time. Whether your
life will be completely devastated by the procedure or you'll just lose
contrast sensitivity and rack up some corneal nerve damage is not completely
predictable. But damage to the eye is a certainty.

"Glenn - USAEyes.org" <glenn.hageleSTOPSPAM@USAEyes.org> wrote in message
news:01n561du7gdhn91c2mjbj4v5sqrrskf3uf@4ax.com...
> Ragnar is more or less correct about the quantity of LASIK procedures.
> At least, in the US. LASIK has surpassed cataract surgery as the most
> performed surgery procedure of any kind, not just ophthalmology.
>
> As for most predictable, I think it would be fair to say that in
> comparison to other procedures of similar complexity, LASIK is highly
> predictable by medical standards.
>
> Glenn Hagele
> Executive Director
> Council for Refractive Surgery Quality Assurance
>
> Email to glenn dot hagele at usaeyes dot org
>
> http://www.USAEyes.org
> http://www.ComplicatedEyes.org
>
> I am not a doctor.

serebel

2005-04-19, 10:51 am

LASIKtruth wrote:
> Yes, LASIK is predictable. It damages eyes 100% of the time. Whether
your
> life will be completely devastated by the procedure or you'll just
lose
> contrast sensitivity and rack up some corneal nerve damage is not
completely
> predictable. But damage to the eye is a certainty.
>
>
Sandy is at her best here. The only thing damaged is her feeble mind.
While we're at it, so is Links.

SErebel

Ragnar

2005-04-19, 10:51 am

not even close... there are many more lasiks done than tonsilectomies
or appendectomies.. that just shows how ignorant you are.

For a long time, cataract surgery was the most performed surgery..

and once again, Grant Mason is not a doctor, maybe everyone who posts
to this newsgroup should call themselves a doctor.

calling Dr. Glenn, Dr. Serebel, Dr. Ragnar....

On 17 Apr 2005 14:10:16 -0700, "CatmanX" <grantm@connexus.net.au>
wrote:

>Most performed surgery, hey???
>
>I would have thought tonsilectomy and appendectomy were higher myself.
>And don't start me on predictability. There are plenty of more
>predictable surgeries.
>
>dr grant

Ragnar

2005-04-19, 10:51 am

Once again.. you are wrong.

On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 21:17:58 -0400, "LASIKtruth"
<LASIKtruth@Yahoo_nospam.com> wrote:

>Yes, LASIK is predictable. It damages eyes 100% of the time. Whether your
>life will be completely devastated by the procedure or you'll just lose
>contrast sensitivity and rack up some corneal nerve damage is not completely
>predictable. But damage to the eye is a certainty.
>
>
>"Glenn - USAEyes.org" <glenn.hageleSTOPSPAM@USAEyes.org> wrote in message
>news:01n561du7gdhn91c2mjbj4v5sqrrskf3uf@4ax.com...
>

Glenn - USAEyes.org

2005-04-19, 10:51 am

So is this Keller, Hanson, or Link this time? They use so many
different identities to appear to be greater in number that I can't
even keep up anymore. My kill filter is getting full.

Glenn Hagele
Executive Director
Council for Refractive Surgery Quality Assurance

Email to glenn dot hagele at usaeyes dot org

http://www.USAEyes.org
http://www.ComplicatedEyes.org

I am not a doctor.

BarnardClassics

2005-04-19, 10:51 am

"Glenn - USAEyes.org" <glenn.hageleSTOPSPAM@USAEyes.org> wrote in message
news:psa761pbljkj3tmhdgnefh3pn30bspqnie@4ax.com...
> So is this Keller, Hanson, or Link this time? They use so many
> different identities to appear to be greater in number that I can't
> even keep up anymore. My kill filter is getting full.
>
> Glenn Hagele
> Executive Director
> Council for Refractive Surgery Quality Assurance
>
> Email to glenn dot hagele at usaeyes dot org
>
> http://www.USAEyes.org
> http://www.ComplicatedEyes.org
>
> I am not a doctor.

None of the above, Glenn. Not Keller, not Hanson, not Link. What's wrong,
can't wrap your head around the idea that there are more than a few people
who know that LASIK is a bad surgery and want to do something to prevent
more damage?

serebel

2005-04-19, 10:51 am

BarnardClassics wrote:
> None of the above, Glenn. Not Keller, not Hanson, not Link. What's
wrong,
> can't wrap your head around the idea that there are more than a few
people
> who know that LASIK is a bad surgery and want to do something to
prevent
> more damage?

Funny, for a bad surgery, it worked out fine for me and my friends.

SErebel

LASIKtruth

2005-04-19, 10:51 am

You were lucky. Lots of people have their vision permanently trashed and end
up with eye pain to boot. Dry eye is miserable.

You could still wind up with problems down the road. You could a corneal
scratch and get DLK in that interface that never heals, you could have a
traumatic flap amputation, your intraocular pressure could destroy your
weakened cornea over time and you could wind up with a corneal transplant.
As you age and your eyes start to dry naturally you may really miss having a
normal corneal nerve density. Could be very painful.

"serebel" <serebel@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1113873524.881567.183540@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> BarnardClassics wrote:
> wrong,
> people
> prevent
>
> Funny, for a bad surgery, it worked out fine for me and my friends.
>
> SErebel
>

LASIKtruth

2005-04-19, 10:51 am

No. Absolutely correct. Nerve damage is a certainty and the corneal
integrity never restores itself. The LASIK flap never heals. You'll have an
interface ( a split in your cornea) for the rest of your life. A split
cornea is very fragile. Who needs that. Eye damage!
"Ragnar" <ragnarsuomi@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4pd661djvi1tul8e2j23s0p86kmb8vd8b2@4ax.com...
> Once again.. you are wrong.
>
>
> On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 21:17:58 -0400, "LASIKtruth"
> <LASIKtruth@Yahoo_nospam.com> wrote:
>
>

Glenn - USAEyes.org

2005-04-19, 10:51 am

The LASIK flap does heal, but not like a cut on your arm. For all the
details on LASIK flap healing, visit
http://www.usaeyes.org/faq/subjects/complete.htm

Yes, there is "damage" to the cornea. Planned "damage" so the patient
may have the convenience of a reduced need for corrective lenses.

Glenn Hagele
Executive Director
Council for Refractive Surgery Quality Assurance

Email to glenn dot hagele at usaeyes dot org

http://www.USAEyes.org
http://www.ComplicatedEyes.org

I am not a doctor.

serebel

2005-04-19, 10:51 am

One could have all that you mentioned. But who in their right mind
would worry night and day? One could have other health problems that
are far worse.

SErebel

2005-04-19, 10:51 am

In article <1113876210.24400cc2f7ace3dfa900e55fb5601bae@teranews>,
"LASIKtruth" <LASIKtruth@Yahoo_nospam.com> wrote:

> You could still wind up with problems down the road. You could a corneal
> scratch and get DLK in that interface that never heals, you could have a
> traumatic flap amputation, your intraocular pressure could destroy your
> weakened cornea over time and you could wind up with a corneal transplant.
> As you age and your eyes start to dry naturally you may really miss having a
> normal corneal nerve density. Could be very painful.

I live in NYC in a tall building. A plane could fly into it.

Why waste a beautiful day worrying about what could happen. If you can
prove there is a high certainty of any of those things you list
happening then perhaps I would do something about it, or not as the case
may be. If there was a high certainty of a plane flying into my
building, I'd move out. After all, it has been known to happen in NYC,
correct?

I think I will carry on with my life and count my blessings, which
include my great view, and the fact that I don't have to wear contacts
or glasses today.

--
~RT
The truth lies somewhere between Ragnar and LASIKtruth
Two sides of the same coin

Ragnar

2005-04-19, 10:59 pm

What is amusing is that no matter how many times these Barnard and
FlapMelt characters come up with, they manage to make total fools of
themselves in just a few postings.

On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:45:18 GMT, Glenn - USAEyes.org
<glenn.hageleSTOPSPAM@USAEyes.org> wrote:

>So is this Keller, Hanson, or Link this time? They use so many
>different identities to appear to be greater in number that I can't
>even keep up anymore. My kill filter is getting full.
>
>Glenn Hagele
>Executive Director
>Council for Refractive Surgery Quality Assurance
>
>Email to glenn dot hagele at usaeyes dot org
>
>http://www.USAEyes.org
>http://www.ComplicatedEyes.org
>
>I am not a doctor.

LASIKtruth

2005-04-19, 10:59 pm

Actually, RT... all LASIK patients sustain eye damage. The odds of a plane
flying into your building are pretty remote - I'd have to agree with you on
that one.

"RT" <RTMD24@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:RTMD24-AECC2F.11401919042005@newssvr14-ext.news.prodigy.com...
> In article <1113876210.24400cc2f7ace3dfa900e55fb5601bae@teranews>,
> "LASIKtruth" <LASIKtruth@Yahoo_nospam.com> wrote:
>
>
> I live in NYC in a tall building. A plane could fly into it.
>
> Why waste a beautiful day worrying about what could happen. If you can
> prove there is a high certainty of any of those things you list
> happening then perhaps I would do something about it, or not as the case
> may be. If there was a high certainty of a plane flying into my
> building, I'd move out. After all, it has been known to happen in NYC,
> correct?
>
> I think I will carry on with my life and count my blessings, which
> include my great view, and the fact that I don't have to wear contacts
> or glasses today.
>
> --
> ~RT
> The truth lies somewhere between Ragnar and LASIKtruth
> Two sides of the same coin

2005-04-19, 10:59 pm

In article <1113951564.fa705b45a7fe126ac7899270bf19d689@teranews>,
"LASIKtruth" <LASIKtruth@Yahoo_nospam.com> wrote:

> Actually, RT... all LASIK patients sustain eye damage. The odds of a plane
> flying into your building are pretty remote - I'd have to agree with you on
> that one.

Yes, I agree that my eyes sustained damage..in order to correct my
myopia and astigmatism... and then healed. To worry about what might
happen in the future is a waste of time unless there is proof of the
certainty of something happening. The list you provided may have
happened to someone, and I'm not denying that it could, but the chances
are unlikely given current published statistics. Not to mention the
fact that the procedure hasn't been around long enough to know what
happens decades out from the procedure.

One of the first things Glenn wrote in reply to some of my post-LASIK
fears was a warning to distinguish between the possibility of something
happening and the probability of something happening. It's good advice.
My life is too full to sweat the possibilities. I do worry about the
probabilities.

I would rather spend my time doing other things, like smelling the
flowers on a spring day, than contemplating what "could" happen.

--
~RT
The truth lies somewhere between Ragnar and LASIKtruth
Two sides of the same coin

Ragnar

2005-04-19, 10:59 pm

Barnard... what do you suggest someone do who can't see more than 2"
in front of their face due to myopia? Get a seeing-eye dog?

On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 20:12:18 -0400, "BarnardClassics"
<BarnardClassics@Yahoo_nospam.com> wrote:

>
>"Glenn - USAEyes.org" <glenn.hageleSTOPSPAM@USAEyes.org> wrote in message
>news:psa761pbljkj3tmhdgnefh3pn30bspqnie@4ax.com...
>
>None of the above, Glenn. Not Keller, not Hanson, not Link. What's wrong,
>can't wrap your head around the idea that there are more than a few people
>who know that LASIK is a bad surgery and want to do something to prevent
>more damage?
>

Ragnar

2005-04-19, 10:59 pm

Dry eye is miserable... good thing that LASIK has nothing to do with
dry eye.

On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 22:03:26 -0400, "LASIKtruth"
<LASIKtruth@Yahoo_nospam.com> wrote:

>You were lucky. Lots of people have their vision permanently trashed and end
>up with eye pain to boot. Dry eye is miserable.
>
>You could still wind up with problems down the road. You could a corneal
>scratch and get DLK in that interface that never heals, you could have a
>traumatic flap amputation, your intraocular pressure could destroy your
>weakened cornea over time and you could wind up with a corneal transplant.
>As you age and your eyes start to dry naturally you may really miss having a
>normal corneal nerve density. Could be very painful.
>
>"serebel" <serebel@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:1113873524.881567.183540@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>

Ragnar

2005-04-19, 10:59 pm

You are incorrect.

On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 22:10:20 -0400, "LASIKtruth"
<LASIKtruth@Yahoo_nospam.com> wrote:

>No. Absolutely correct. Nerve damage is a certainty and the corneal
>integrity never restores itself. The LASIK flap never heals. You'll have an
>interface ( a split in your cornea) for the rest of your life. A split
>cornea is very fragile. Who needs that. Eye damage!
>"Ragnar" <ragnarsuomi@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:4pd661djvi1tul8e2j23s0p86kmb8vd8b2@4ax.com...
>

Ragnar

2005-04-19, 11:00 pm

I don't like the way you are phrasing this "damage"
LASIK is performed on defective eyes to begin with. Think of it as
pounding out a dent on a car.

On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 02:29:37 GMT, Glenn - USAEyes.org
<glenn.hageleSTOPSPAM@USAEyes.org> wrote:

>The LASIK flap does heal, but not like a cut on your arm. For all the
>details on LASIK flap healing, visit
>http://www.usaeyes.org/faq/subjects/complete.htm
>
>Yes, there is "damage" to the cornea. Planned "damage" so the patient
>may have the convenience of a reduced need for corrective lenses.
>
>Glenn Hagele
>Executive Director
>Council for Refractive Surgery Quality Assurance
>
>Email to glenn dot hagele at usaeyes dot org
>
>http://www.USAEyes.org
>http://www.ComplicatedEyes.org
>
>I am not a doctor.

LASIKtruth

2005-04-19, 11:00 pm

Eyes aren't damaged to begin with. They may have some 'sphere', that is they
may be focus in front or behind the retina. They may have some astigmatism.
But they don't have induced higher order aberrations, a thinned weakened
cornea, diminished corneal nerve density, increased floaters and the host of
other miseries that LASIK can induce.

The least aberrated eyes you're going to have are your pre-LASIK eyes. After
surgery, you have severed nerves, a flap that will never heal and induced
aberrations. Yes, you.

"Ragnar" <ragnarsuomi@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:kk9b61538aau7oqosnucnp7f5d42o8g7iu@4ax.com...
>I don't like the way you are phrasing this "damage"
> LASIK is performed on defective eyes to begin with. Think of it as
> pounding out a dent on a car.
>
>
> On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 02:29:37 GMT, Glenn - USAEyes.org
> <glenn.hageleSTOPSPAM@USAEyes.org> wrote:
>
>

serebel

2005-04-19, 11:00 pm

Damaged? A matter of opinion. But myopic, farsighted or astimatic eyes
do not function properly. It's a great age we live in where we have a
host of options for correction. While some of the above zealots whine
on and on, many many people are having successful RS. What a country!!!

SErebel

Glenn - USAEyes.org

2005-04-20, 8:54 am

Give them credit for consistency.

Glenn Hagele
Executive Director
Council for Refractive Surgery Quality Assurance

Email to glenn dot hagele at usaeyes dot org

http://www.USAEyes.org
http://www.ComplicatedEyes.org

I am not a doctor.

Ragnar

2005-04-20, 5:56 pm

Number of people killed by a plane flying into building: 3215
Number of people killed by LASIK: 0
Number of people suffering from myopia: hundreds of millions
Percentage of LASIK patients who can see 20/40 or better without
glasses: over 99%

On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 18:59:13 -0400, "LASIKtruth"
<LASIKtruth@Yahoo_nospam.com> wrote:

>Actually, RT... all LASIK patients sustain eye damage. The odds of a plane
>flying into your building are pretty remote - I'd have to agree with you on
>that one.
>
>
>"RT" <RTMD24@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:RTMD24-AECC2F.11401919042005@newssvr14-ext.news.prodigy.com...
>

Ragnar

2005-04-20, 5:56 pm

YOu are so wrong that it doesn't make any sense to reply to you. Good
thing that nobody is paying any attention to you.

On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 22:33:19 -0400, "LASIKtruth"
<LASIKtruth@Yahoo_nospam.com> wrote:

>Eyes aren't damaged to begin with. They may have some 'sphere', that is they
>may be focus in front or behind the retina. They may have some astigmatism.
>But they don't have induced higher order aberrations, a thinned weakened
>cornea, diminished corneal nerve density, increased floaters and the host of
>other miseries that LASIK can induce.
>
>The least aberrated eyes you're going to have are your pre-LASIK eyes. After
>surgery, you have severed nerves, a flap that will never heal and induced
>aberrations. Yes, you.
>
>
>"Ragnar" <ragnarsuomi@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:kk9b61538aau7oqosnucnp7f5d42o8g7iu@4ax.com...
>

CatmanX

2005-04-20, 5:56 pm

Lasik Works, isn't that the name of a new surgery???

dr grant