|
Home > Archive > Lasik Eyes Surgery > August 2005 > Libelous statements by Brent Hanson against USAeyes.org owner
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 |
Libelous statements by Brent Hanson against USAeyes.org owner
|
|
|
| Brent Hanson wrote the following statement:
"Glenn Hagele (an individual who, by the way, reportedly wears glasses)."
Nope. Glenn Hagele had PRK.
--
~RT
| |
| serebel 2005-08-10, 10:55 pm |
| Hanson won't be up to that part (the PRK thing) for about a year or so.
Berschadsky has been investigated by the NYS Bar Assn. for scraping his
knees while chasing ambulances.
SErebel
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-08-10, 10:55 pm |
| Well, technically I do wear glasses occasionally. Since I had
monovision PRK I use full correction glasses for driving. Most of the
time I do not use corrective lenses of any kind.
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.
| |
| Ragnar 2005-08-12, 5:56 pm |
| I missed the memo on this one... when did you have PRK done?
I bet you the surgeon said "why do you want PRK instead of LASIK"?
On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 03:16:38 GMT, Glenn - USAEyes.org
<glenn.hageleSTOPSPAM@USAEyes.org> wrote:
>Well, technically I do wear glasses occasionally. Since I had
>monovision PRK I use full correction glasses for driving. Most of the
>time I do not use corrective lenses of any kind.
>
>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.
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-08-12, 5:56 pm |
| I had PRK about a month ago. I selected it because I prefer the
long-term results over LASIK, I like the elimination of any
possibility of flap problems, and my surgeon recommended it.
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.
| |
| Sandy 2005-08-13, 11:54 am |
| Here we see that LASIK is not good enough for "Hagele, The Defender of
LASIK".
| |
|
| Enjoying those laser-induced aberrations, Glenn? How much did your higher
order aberrations
increase after surgery? If you post your wavescans on your website and put a
link there we
can help you figure this out.
"Glenn - USAEyes.org" <glenn.hageleSTOPSPAM@USAEyes.org> wrote in message
news:dmglf154fahndahi3u2dj5ge34pshgmf0h@4ax.com...
> Well, technically I do wear glasses occasionally. Since I had
> monovision PRK I use full correction glasses for driving. Most of the
> time I do not use corrective lenses of any kind.
>
> 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.
| |
|
| He still wants to make money from the LASIK industry, but he would never
have it himself. He must have just cringed when SErebel admitted that he
STILL
wore plugs for dry eye and has blurry vision for several hours in the
morning if he sleeps
the wrong way on his PILLOW.
SErebel is a walking LASIK COMPLICATION in DENIAL.
"Sandy" <sandy@savvysneaks.com> wrote in message
news:1123952033.767341.254370@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Here we see that LASIK is not good enough for "Hagele, The Defender of
> LASIK".
>
| |
| serebel 2005-08-13, 10:54 pm |
| Cathy, please see my reply to your original titled post.
I have this other complication, when my eyelids are lowered, I have a
lot of trouble seeing clearly. I wonder if lasik had anything to do
with this.
SErebel
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-08-14, 10:55 pm |
| As I have consistently said to any potential patient who asks, there
are many types of refractive surgery and some have advantages over
others, depending upon the individual's circumstances. Which technique
(if any) will be best will be determined after a comprehensive
evaluation by a knowledgeable. That is exactly what happened and PRK
was the recommended procedure.
Hopefully, everyone considering refractive surgery will do as I have
said for years and as I have done: get a complete examination from a
good doctor and listen to that doctor's advice.
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.
| |
|
| LASIK is a crappy procedure that even Glenn Hagele wouldn't subject
himself to. The flap causes a myriad of problems and the longterm
results are not as good as with PRK. Those two considerations would
seem to have nothing to do with individual circumstances and everything
to do with which procedure is better and safer.
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-08-15, 5:55 pm |
| You can come to any conclusion you desire, but the results of one
person really are not an issue when it comes to what is "better" and
"safer". What is more important is the results of studies.
Several recent studies have shown that the wavefront-guided surface
ablation techniques PRK, LASEK, (and it is reasonable to assume
Epi-LASIK) provide visual acuity outcomes equal to or better than
LASIK at six months postop. While that may seem to indicate everyone
should be jumping onto the PRK bandwagon, it is also true that corneal
haze is more prevalent in PRK for higher myopes and vision recovery is
weeks with PRK as opposed to minutes with LASIK.
All the refractive surgery procedures have their advantages and
disadvantages. Someone considering refractive surgery should keep his
or her mind open about which procedure is wanted. LASIK may be the
best known, but is not always the best. PRK may be best long term, but
it is not appropriate for everybody.
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.
| |
| gospa68@aol.com 2005-08-16, 10:56 pm |
| Glenn,
I am pleased to see that you have been reading the posts here and have
taken the information provided to heart. You made an informed choice,
and used good judgement in choosing PRK over LASIK.
WK
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-08-16, 10:56 pm |
| Thanks. I'd like to take all the credit for the decision, but really
it was my surgeon. He didn't even suggest LASIK as an option, although
he does provide LASIK.
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.
| |
| Ragnar 2005-08-17, 8:57 am |
| It should be noted that the final results are pretty much identical
for PRK and LASIK.
One thing I have yet to get a good explanation of is why when a PRK
procedure requires an enhancement, the enhancement is done as LASIK.
So few people have PRK done that its difficult to get an answer about
that.
On 16 Aug 2005 17:33:52 -0700, gospa68@aol.com wrote:
>Glenn,
>I am pleased to see that you have been reading the posts here and have
>taken the information provided to heart. You made an informed choice,
>and used good judgement in choosing PRK over LASIK.
>WK
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-08-17, 11:55 am |
| Rags,
It is very uncommon for someone who had initial PRK on virgin eyes to
have enhancement as LASIK. The same conditions that indicated PRK was
superior for that patient would exist at the time of the enhancement.
Furthermore, because most enhancement surgeries are for very small
amounts of ablation, PRK is likely to be slightly more predictable and
accurate than LASIK.
It is true, however, that many patients are having PRK on the flap for
LASIK enhancement surgery, rather than flap lift. If Mitomycin C is
used, the incidence of haze in the flap is very low. By not lifting
the flap, LASIK induced temporary dry eye is not restarted with an
entire healing process timeline. Not every LASIK enhancement surgery
is appropriate for PRK on the flap and not every doctor is doing this,
but there have been several small studies showing its efficacy and
safety.
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.
| |
| Richard 2005-08-17, 6:02 pm |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org <glenn.hageleSTOPSPAM@USAEyes.org> wrote in
news:5fp6g15mr1q1ml1ual4gbb04f7gjqirc2o@4ax.com:
<snip>
>
> It is true, however, that many patients are having PRK on the flap for
> LASIK enhancement surgery, rather than flap lift. If Mitomycin C is
> used, the incidence of haze in the flap is very low. By not lifting
> the flap, LASIK induced temporary dry eye is not restarted with an
> entire healing process timeline. Not every LASIK enhancement surgery
> is appropriate for PRK on the flap and not every doctor is doing this,
> but there have been several small studies showing its efficacy and
> safety.
I have been searching for information regarding this, and as of yet, have
been able to find very little real information. My surgeon has mentioned
doing this as an option for me at this point, and having been unable to
uncover any real information, I have been quite reluctant to consider it
seriously. Could you point me to any studies on this subject?
--
Richard
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-08-17, 6:02 pm |
| Here is what I would consider one of the better articles. This is PRK
and PTK on the flap to resolve LASIK flap complications, while using
mitomycin C to reduce the probability of haze.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005 Feb;31(2):291-6. Related Articles, Links
Transepithelial phototherapeutic keratectomy/photorefractive
keratectomy with adjunctive mitomycin-C for complicated LASIK flaps.
Muller LT, Candal EM, Epstein RJ, Dennis RF, Majmudar PA.
Cornea Service, Rush-Presbyterian-St. Luke's Medical Center, Chicago,
Illinois, USA.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of transepithelial phototherapeutic
keratectomy/photorefractive keratectomy (PTK/PRK) with prophylactic
mitomycin-C for the treatment of refractive errors and maintenance of
corneal clarity following flap complications in laser in situ
keratomileusis (LASIK). SETTING: Outpatient tertiary care center,
Chicago, Illinois, USA. METHODS: Ten eyes of 10 patients with LASIK
flap complications had transepithelial PTK/PRK for correction of
ametropia. Mitomycin-C 0.02% was applied to the stroma for 2 minutes
following laser ablation. Postoperative uncorrected visual acuity
(UCVA), best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA), refractions,
and slitlamp examinations were obtained. RESULTS: Preoperatively, the
mean UCVA was 20/400 (range 20/40 to counting fingers), the mean BSCVA
was 20/28.5, and the spherical equivalent refractive errors ranged
from +4.00 to -10.75 diopters (D). After the procedure, the mean UCVA
was 20/28, the mean BSCVA was 20/21, and the spherical equivalent
refractive errors ranged from +0.37 to -1.00 D. The mean follow-up
ranged from 8 to 28 months. No patient experienced delayed
reepithelialization, haze, or other signs of toxicity. CONCLUSION:
Mitomycin-C can be a useful adjunctive therapy for the prevention of
haze when applying surface excimer laser therapy to a cornea following
LASIK flap complications.
PMID: 15767148 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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.
| |
| Richard 2005-08-17, 6:02 pm |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org <glenn.hageleSTOPSPAM@USAEyes.org> wrote in
news:6377g1tgniaalneaue2beiahg5igmm4bd3@4ax.com:
> Here is what I would consider one of the better articles. This is PRK
> and PTK on the flap to resolve LASIK flap complications, while using
> mitomycin C to reduce the probability of haze.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005 Feb;31(2):291-6. Related Articles, Links
> Transepithelial phototherapeutic keratectomy/photorefractive
> keratectomy with adjunctive mitomycin-C for complicated LASIK flaps.
><snip>
>
I do not have any flap complications, just some regression and astigmatism.
My surgeon is suggesting PRK because the thickness of my corneas under the
flaps would be unlikely to support a LASIK enhancement. So, I am more
interested in any information relating to using PRK to correct the
astigmatism in my left eye, along with the remaining myopia in both eyes.
It does sound promising though.
--
Richard
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-08-17, 10:57 pm |
| This study I've cited is germane. It shows that even difficult
corrections, such as irregular astigmatism and mixed astigmatism, can
be corrected with PRK over LASIK flap. Myopia and regular astigmatism
are much easier to correct.
If you are looking for a study that provides an expansive prediction
of outcome, that I have not yet found and it seems unlikely that there
would be a direct correlation. Retreatments suffer from the
variability of the subject cornea pre-retreatment. Outcome studies
tend to be based upon virgin eyes, however I'm sure someone will have
this kind of study available soon. One can extrapolate from that.
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.
| |
| Ragnar 2005-08-18, 8:59 am |
| That is the exact opposite of what a book written by Dr. Slade says.
And the regression factor in PRK is much greater. Also, the loss of
the epithelium in PRK essentially results in the formation of a "scar"
tor replace it. Scar tissue is not the same as "original" tissue in
that it is rapidly formed in a chaotic way - like a patch. This is
why some surgeons choose LASEK which preserves the epithelium.
Unfortunately, the epithelial flap winds up acting just as a bandage
contact lens in that it sloughs away over time.
Optometrists hate to co-manage PRK for various reasons.
Lets stay off of the PRK vs LASIK topic.
On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 16:34:18 GMT, Glenn - USAEyes.org
<glenn.hageleSTOPSPAM@USAEyes.org> wrote:
>Rags,
>
>It is very uncommon for someone who had initial PRK on virgin eyes to
>have enhancement as LASIK. The same conditions that indicated PRK was
>superior for that patient would exist at the time of the enhancement.
>Furthermore, because most enhancement surgeries are for very small
>amounts of ablation, PRK is likely to be slightly more predictable and
>accurate than LASIK.
>
>It is true, however, that many patients are having PRK on the flap for
>LASIK enhancement surgery, rather than flap lift. If Mitomycin C is
>used, the incidence of haze in the flap is very low. By not lifting
>the flap, LASIK induced temporary dry eye is not restarted with an
>entire healing process timeline. Not every LASIK enhancement surgery
>is appropriate for PRK on the flap and not every doctor is doing this,
>but there have been several small studies showing its efficacy and
>safety.
>
>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.
|
| |
|
|