| Cathy 2005-08-12, 10:54 pm |
| Doctor M,
The reason you don't think Alcon has engaged in malicious behavior with
intent to harm is because you haven't read enough transcripts. Can you
say 'deliberate cover-up' and 'denial'? It's profit over safety and efficacy
(what efficacy) every time inthe refractive surgery industry.
<doctor_my_eye@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1123610039.759633.262860@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Glenn, even you have to admit that this case presents a lot of
> interesting medical ethics issues to the front. The re-treatment rate
> for Alcon's Ladarvision is consistently higher than the rate for any
> other competitive system. This cannot be written off by saying that
> Alcon lasers just had more wackos. These machines are programmed by
> humans to follow certain algorithms and mathematical models of the eye
> that might have been defective from their inception to cause higher and
> more drastic errors. The Alcon people may have simply "bet on the wrong
> horse." They believed that their technobabble was more accurate than
> the technobabble of the VISX laser or the B&L Laser, and they are now
> paying for the consequences of that faith in their system. I find it
> impossible to show this as malicious behavior with an intent to harm,
> but I think every good corporate citizen needs to "fess up" when they
> bet the wrong horse.
>
|