|
Home > Archive > Lasik Eyes Surgery > August 2005 > LME not the place to go for info.
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 |
LME not the place to go for info.
|
|
| serebel 2005-08-06, 10:55 pm |
| A new poster on LME named "foureyes" asked on LME if anyone knows of
the 400mh Algretto.
Of course the replies are DON'T HAVE LASIK !! They chime in with only
their personal whine only.
Naturally, Phillys chimes in with her detailed tales of woe(just to
hear herself talk).
Foureyes question will never be answered on that BB, he/she will only
hear the moans of the loonie fringe there,pity.
BTW, Phillys's eyes still hurt.
SErebel
| |
| CatmanX 2005-08-07, 9:07 am |
| Stop being a total dick SER, you know that this site has a certain type
of demographic and consequently will respond along given lines, as do
several on this NG.
I hope that there is some discussion of the topic on the site and that
the site does inform, not just act as a deterrent to RS.
dr grant
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-08-07, 9:07 am |
| This does raise an important issue for all to consider.
Someone having LASIK today is not terribly likely to have the same
LASIK that many of the people who have frequented the Internet forums
for years had way back when. Different laser versions, different
lasers, different microkeratomes, different techniques, different a
lot of things make the experiences of many of those people irrelevant
to what the person is considering today. Some things may apply, but
the Wave Light Allegretto 400 MHz excimer laser is a new version and
there are only a handful in existence, with none generally available
in the US.
Glenn Hagele
Executive Director
USAEyes.org
"Consider and Choose With Confidence"
Email to glenn dot hagele at usaeyes dot org
http://www.USAEyes.org
http://www.ComplicatedEyes.org
I am not a doctor.
| |
|
| If someone is having LASIK they are having a flap cut in their corneas. This
flap
will never heal. It will likely have junk underneath it. It will likely have
undulations
(Bowman's wrinkles). It will weaken the cornea. These problems started with
the
first LASIK flap and will continue until the practice of LASIK is stopped.
Cutting
a LASIK flap is a bad idea.
Furthermore, the newer treatments 'custom wavefront' eat more tissue and put
patients
at higher risk for future ectasia.
LASIK has not improved. This is why the best surgeons are moving away from
LASIK.
Tell the 22 year old guy who has smeared vision in both eyes and chronic eye
pain
from VISX 'custom wavefront' LASIK that bad outcomes don't happen today. He
had
no dry eye before LASIK. Now his eyes are so dry they will not open in the
morning.
I hope people keep telling their stories on bulletin boards. Posting
topographies is also
a great idea. It is really hard to argue with a picture of a botched cornea.
"Glenn - USAEyes.org" <glenn.hageleSTOPSPAM@USAEyes.org> wrote in message
news:20ibf1lh2chnvrttpt5c4144kenajhs4b3@4ax.com...
> This does raise an important issue for all to consider.
>
> Someone having LASIK today is not terribly likely to have the same
> LASIK that many of the people who have frequented the Internet forums
> for years had way back when. Different laser versions, different
> lasers, different microkeratomes, different techniques, different a
> lot of things make the experiences of many of those people irrelevant
> to what the person is considering today. Some things may apply, but
> the Wave Light Allegretto 400 MHz excimer laser is a new version and
> there are only a handful in existence, with none generally available
> in the US.
>
> Glenn Hagele
> Executive Director
> USAEyes.org
>
> "Consider and Choose With Confidence"
>
> Email to glenn dot hagele at usaeyes dot org
>
> http://www.USAEyes.org
> http://www.ComplicatedEyes.org
>
> I am not a doctor.
| |
|
| Her eyes likely do hurt and this is a tragedy. If chronic pain was nowhere
to be
found in her consent forms, then she's a victim of malpractice. You're a
very sick person.
"serebel" <serebel@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1123381903.358030.209210@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>A new poster on LME named "foureyes" asked on LME if anyone knows of
> the 400mh Algretto.
> Of course the replies are DON'T HAVE LASIK !! They chime in with only
> their personal whine only.
> Naturally, Phillys chimes in with her detailed tales of woe(just to
> hear herself talk).
> Foureyes question will never be answered on that BB, he/she will only
> hear the moans of the loonie fringe there,pity.
> BTW, Phillys's eyes still hurt.
>
> SErebel
>
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-08-07, 6:04 pm |
| The Lasik flap does heal, although it heals differently than other
parts of the body. See
http://www.usaeyes.org/faq/subjects/lasik_flap_heal.htm
Micro-striae (you called it Bowman's wrinkles) does occur, but the
rate of occurrence when it causes vision dysfunction is about 1 in
5,000, depending upon the report. Micro-striae can be often be
successfully treated if it occurs. Of course, not striae is better
than successful treatment of striae. See
http://www.complicatedeyes.org/striae.htm
Each patient's eyes must be evaluated before surgery to determine if
the cornea's thickness is enough to safely accommodate the amount of
anticipated tissue removal. This is true whether the patient has
myopic (nearsighted, shortsighted) vision, hyperopic (farsighted,
longsighted) vision, if the ablation will be conventional or
wavefront-guided, if the surgery will be LASIK, IntraLASIK, PRK,
LASEK, or Epi-LASIK. If the patient has healthy eyes and at least 250
microns of tissue remain untouched (more is always better) the cornea
will remain stable and there is virtually no chance that ectasia will
occur. Keratoconus, a naturally occurring malady that causes similar
effects to ectasia may develop with or without refractive surgery,
however diagnosis of keratoconus is important part of the preoperative
examination.
LASIK patient outcomes have improved dramatically due to a combination
of improved technology, improved technique, and improved patient
screening. That does not mean, however, that every patient will be
properly screened or that every patient will receive the desired
outcome.
Glenn Hagele
Executive Director
USAEyes.org
"Consider and Choose With Confidence"
Email to glenn dot hagele at usaeyes dot org
http://www.USAEyes.org
http://www.ComplicatedEyes.org
I am not a doctor.
| |
|
| 100% of LASIK patients have Bowman's wrinkles, Glenn. It is Universal.
The flap will never heal back to the underlying stroma. You know this. There
will
always be an interface in the eye after LASIK. Why do you insist on
misrepresenting
this surgery to people?
They have a right to know they will have a split cornea forever if they have
LASIK.
Study shows permanent pathologic changes present in all post-LASIK corneas
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pathologic Findings in Postmortem Corneas After Successful Laser In Situ
Keratomileusis.
Cornea. 24(1):92-102, January 2005.
Kramer, Theresa R MD, MBA; Chuckpaiwong, Varintorn MD; Dawson, Daniel G MD;
L'Hernault, Nancy; Grossniklaus, Hans E MD; Edelhauser, Henry F PHD
Abstract:
Purpose: To examine the histologic and ultrastructural features of human
corneas after successful laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK).
Methods: Corneas from 48 eyes of 25 postmortem patients were processed for
histology and transmission electron microscopy (TEM). The 25 patients had
LASIK between 3 months and 7 years prior to death. Evaluation of all 5
layers of the cornea and the LASIK flap interface region was done using
routine histology, periodic acid-Schiff (PAS)-stained specimens, toluidine
blue-stained thick sections, and TEM.
Results: In patients for whom visual acuity was known, the first
postoperative day uncorrected visual acuity was 20/15 to 20/30. In patients
for whom clinical records were available, the postoperative corneal
topography was normal and clinical examination showed a semicircular ring of
haze at the wound margin of the LASIK flap. Histologically, the LASIK flap
measured, on average, 142.7 [mu]m (range, 100-200). A spectrum of abnormal
histopathologic and ultrastructural findings was present in all corneas.
Findings at the flap surface included elongated basal epithelial cells,
epithelial hyperplasia, thickening and undulations of the epithelial
basement membrane (EBM), and undulations of Bowman's layer. Findings in or
adjacent to the wound included collagen lamellar disarray; activated
keratocytes; quiescent keratocytes with small vacuoles; epithelial ingrowth;
eosinophilic deposits; PAS-positive, electron-dense granular material
interspersed with randomly ordered collagen fibrils; increased spacing
between collagen fibrils; and widely spaced banded collagen. There was no
observable correlation between postoperative intervals and the severity or
type of pathologic change except for the accumulation the electron-dense
granular material.
Conclusions: Permanent pathologic changes were present in all post-LASIK
corneas. These changes were most prevalent in the lamellar interface wound.
These changes along with other pathologic alterations in post-LASIK corneas
may change the functionality of the cornea after LASIK.
"Glenn - USAEyes.org" <glenn.hageleSTOPSPAM@USAEyes.org> wrote in message
news:rnkcf15f8iepoo83naqtdih839d0pl2hoo@4ax.com...
> The Lasik flap does heal, although it heals differently than other
> parts of the body. See
> http://www.usaeyes.org/faq/subjects/lasik_flap_heal.htm
>
> Micro-striae (you called it Bowman's wrinkles) does occur, but the
> rate of occurrence when it causes vision dysfunction is about 1 in
> 5,000, depending upon the report. Micro-striae can be often be
> successfully treated if it occurs. Of course, not striae is better
> than successful treatment of striae. See
> http://www.complicatedeyes.org/striae.htm
>
> Each patient's eyes must be evaluated before surgery to determine if
> the cornea's thickness is enough to safely accommodate the amount of
> anticipated tissue removal. This is true whether the patient has
> myopic (nearsighted, shortsighted) vision, hyperopic (farsighted,
> longsighted) vision, if the ablation will be conventional or
> wavefront-guided, if the surgery will be LASIK, IntraLASIK, PRK,
> LASEK, or Epi-LASIK. If the patient has healthy eyes and at least 250
> microns of tissue remain untouched (more is always better) the cornea
> will remain stable and there is virtually no chance that ectasia will
> occur. Keratoconus, a naturally occurring malady that causes similar
> effects to ectasia may develop with or without refractive surgery,
> however diagnosis of keratoconus is important part of the preoperative
> examination.
>
> LASIK patient outcomes have improved dramatically due to a combination
> of improved technology, improved technique, and improved patient
> screening. That does not mean, however, that every patient will be
> properly screened or that every patient will receive the desired
> outcome.
>
> Glenn Hagele
> Executive Director
> USAEyes.org
>
> "Consider and Choose With Confidence"
>
> Email to glenn dot hagele at usaeyes dot org
>
> http://www.USAEyes.org
> http://www.ComplicatedEyes.org
>
> I am not a doctor.
| |
| serebel 2005-08-07, 10:58 pm |
| Grant, if a stupid XXX as yourself can't respond intelligently I
suppose calling people names is the best you can do.
I notice that you can't actually dispute my findings about LME.
SErebel
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-08-08, 11:53 am |
| Please cite a peer reviewed study that affirms your claim that 100% of
LASIK patients have micro-striae (which you call Bowman's wrinkles).
Regarding the LASIK flap interface, see
http://www.usaeyes.org/faq/subjects/lasik_flap_heal.htm for
information about flap healing.
I do not misrepresent refractive surgery to anyone, however you have
made several misrepresentations and outright lies in your many
postings under many alias.
As stated before, changing the cornea is what refractive surgery is
all about. Yes those changes are more often than not permanent. Most
people want a reduction in the need for corrective lenses to be
permanent (that IS what they paid for), however the effects of
refractive surgery may be changed by natural changes in the eyes or by
planned enhancement surgery.
| |
|
| In article <1123463588.4d095036dccd52d836845450ccf4db98@teranews>,
"Jane" <Jane@Yahoo_nospam.com> wrote:
> Study shows permanent pathologic changes present in all post-LASIK corneas
So, you are absolutely right, 100% of LASIK patients have pathologic
changes in their eyes after LASIK.
It also appears there is a 3% complication rate of becoming
"pathological" as your multiple aliases attest to.
--
~RT
| |
| CatmanX 2005-08-08, 5:59 pm |
| My response was such as I would have thought you would be able to
differentiate the difference between a site that attracts a certain
demographic and accordingly a similar type of discussion. Do you really
expect any different response at LME? Is there really a need to post
that they have responded in that manner here, given that we know it
already? Do you even remotely understand the problems Phyllis has been
through after RS?
I read these types of response and say to myself "gee, I knew they
would say that", there is nothing new in it. I would be surprised if
they began a critical discussion of the merits of the allegretto over
the technolas and VisX and the modifications in ablation algorythms.
Some questions you may want to think about:
Why the constant viewing of a site you only want to bag?
Why would 4eyes post there in the first place, knowing the type of
response having read 1 or 2 threads?
Where can one go for independent objective advice on the web?
Why do I bother?
Why did I go to Taekwondo last night (I hurt like crazy this morning)?
Cheers SER
dr grant
| |
|
| The crazy people are the folks like SErebel (screwed up eyes and won't admit
it) and Christopher Roiland,
alias 'Ragnar' (give us all a break please) who claim to be so happy with
their LASIK outcomes but can't seem
to move past their surgeries. They spend a great deal of time and energy
defending an indefensible surgery.
Why? Are they being paid to be internet nuisances? If so by whom, they're
not very smart so they don't
present their cases very effectively.
I heard they are both unemployed, perhaps someone is having some pity on
them and tossing them a buck per
pro-LASIK post.
"RT" <RTMD24@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:RTMD24-A7513B.12125808082005@newssvr13-ext.news.prodigy.com...
> In article <1123463588.4d095036dccd52d836845450ccf4db98@teranews>,
> "Jane" <Jane@Yahoo_nospam.com> wrote:
>
>
> So, you are absolutely right, 100% of LASIK patients have pathologic
> changes in their eyes after LASIK.
>
> It also appears there is a 3% complication rate of becoming
> "pathological" as your multiple aliases attest to.
>
> --
> ~RT
>
| |
| serebel 2005-08-08, 10:58 pm |
| Grant,
1) Rebecca claims her site is objective, it's not.
2) If I want to break balls about it, I will.
3) Phyllis has been a whiner and hypocondriac for many years now. I
hold her up as the poster child because I can.
3) Like the loonies here, all they do is cry the sky is falling, they
tell others how bad Lasik is, yet all they do is whine the same spiel.
They don't offer any remedies, hell, they don't even help themselves.
4) There has not been one post here from these people that ever
stated," lasik went bad for me, and here's what I did about it."
(droning on about how evil lasik is doesn't count)
SErebel
| |
| serebel 2005-08-08, 10:58 pm |
| Jane has never met me and yet she knows that my eyes are screwed up.
She found out that Rags and I are payed bags of money to promote lasik.
I'll do the "I heard thing too", I heard that when Jane uses her sex
toys, she squeals like a cat in heat.
SErebel
| |
| ycdbsoya 2005-08-09, 6:00 pm |
|
serebel wrote:
> Jane has never met me and yet she knows that my eyes are screwed up.
> She found out that Rags and I are payed bags of money to promote lasik.
>
> I'll do the "I heard thing too", I heard that when Jane uses her sex
> toys, she squeals like a cat in heat.
>
> SErebel
I heard you like to lick them clean when she's done. That
figures...it's the closest you can get to the real thing.
Self-flagellation doesn't count, SErebel.
| |
| serebel 2005-08-10, 10:55 pm |
|
ycdbsoya wrote:
>
> I heard you like to lick them clean when she's done. That
> figures...it's the closest you can get to the real thing.
> Self-flagellation doesn't count, SErebel.
Hey Frankie babes, you're still coming to the xmas party right ?
BTW, how's the great "hunt" going ?
SErebel
|
| |
|
|