Lasik Eyes Surgery - WELCOME TO THE ALT.LASIK-EYES NEWSGROUP (Aug 14)

Author

WELCOME TO THE ALT.LASIK-EYES NEWSGROUP (Aug 14)

Glenn - USAEyes.org

2005-08-15, 5:55 pm

Please do not post comments or discussion under this subject thread.
This notice is posted weekly (mostly!).

WELCOME TO THE ALT.LASIK-EYES NEWSGROUP

The primary purpose of this newsgroup is to discuss issues related to
Laser In-Situ Keratomileusis (LASIK), however all refractive surgery
techniques such as Photorefractive Keratectomy (PRK), Laser Assisted
sub-Epithelium Keratomileusis (LASEK), Conductive Keratoplasty (CK),
Phakic Intraocular Lenses (P-IOL), Refractive Lens Exchange (RLE), and
others are commonly discussed.

Readers are advised that opinions expressed here may come from eye
care professionals (optometrists, ophthalmologists, opticians,
ophthalmic researchers) as well as the general public. Alt.lasik-eyes
is an unmoderated newsgroup. Any person may say what he or she
desires without significant probability of consequence, however
courtesy is encouraged.

From time to time any newsgroup will experience posters who espouse
certain viewpoints that are misleading, hoaxes, mythology, disproved
theories, and/or outright lies. If someone is desperately trying to
convince you of something or uses demeaning or abusive language, you
might be correct in assuming that person has an agenda that has little
or no relation to your individual circumstances, and that person's
views are not consistent with current science. If it sounds too good
(or too bad) to be true, it probably is.

Please refrain from replying to posters in an effort to denounce,
ridicule, embarrass or otherwise engage in non-productive discussion.
That's called "feeding the trolls" and is usually without positive
value. If you are bothered by the tone or content of a thread, don't
read it or learn how to eliminate all postings by the author. This is
called kill-filing or filtering. For more information on how to set
up filters, please see the documentation for your newsgroup reader or
go to:

http://www.hyphenologist.co.uk/killfile/killfilefaq.htm

When gathering information, be aware of the source and use good
judgment. Participants who provide their true identities offer the
opportunity to research their background in consideration of the
validity of their views. In all situations, do not make vital
healthcare decisions without being personally examined by a
knowledgeable practitioner.

There are many Internet sources for information regarding refractive
surgery. Some websites devoted to the subject with regular
participants in this newsgroup are: (in order oldest to newest)

http://www.USAEyes.org
Nonprofit organization, Glenn Hagele, founder.

http://www.LasikFraud.com
Operated by LASIK patient Brent Hanson

http://www.LaserMyEye.org
Nonprofit organization, Rebecca Petris, founder.

Thank you for participating. Special thanks to "The Real Bev" for her
inspiration.

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.

Brent Hanson - LASIKFRAUD.com

2005-08-16, 11:58 am

http://www.lasikfraud.com/crsqa_sur..._hazardous.html

'Glenn Hagele bills himself as a "patient advocate" and provides CRSQA
certifications to LASIK surgeons. Unfortunately, Glenn Hagele is not
really a patient advocate -- he actually provides marketing services to
LASIK surgeons and companies, all designed to fool the public into
thinking that the LASIK industry does a good job of policing itself.'

Brent Hanson - LASIKFRAUD.com

2005-08-16, 11:58 am

http://www.lasikinfocenter.net/Webp...s%20Webpage.htm

Council for Refractive Surgery Quality Assurance (CRSQA) was founded by
Executive Director Glenn Hagele (an individual who, by the way,
reportedly wears glasses). Despite its pretentious name, CRSQA is in
reality a cynical marketing ploy. CRSQA "certifies" a few dozen
refractive surgeons who pay it the enormous fees of $7,000 in the first
year and $5,000/year thereafter. In exchange, they receive CRSQA's
dubious seal of approval in the apparent hope that this will help them
promote their Lasik practices. In contrast, the prestigious American
Board of Ophthalmology charges only $300 every 10 years for
re-certification, requires ABO-certified ophthalmologists to take
periodic exams, and requires them to obtain an average of 30 Continuing
Medical education credits per year.

CRSQA's pitch to prospective member-surgeons demonstrates its crass
commercial purpose. It justifies its huge annual fees by noting that
"For most surgeons, that will total a little less than the amount
charged two refractive surgery patients per year. It is very
reasonable to expect that your listing on our website alone will
provide significantly more patients."

CRSQA's quality "standards," if they can be called that, are pathetic.
A doctor can become CRSQA-certified even if he reports a 3% incidence
of "debilitating refractive surgery complications such as glare, haze,
halo, etc." in his practice. Indeed, Hagele's primary concern is to
help refractive surgeons market themselves - not to raise their
standards of medical care. There is plenty of talk at CRSQA about
market segmentation analysis, but almost nothing about concrete
measures to improve surgical outcomes.

CRSQA's "certification" is worthless from a medical perspective. For
example, CRSQA at one time certified Glenn A. Kawesch as meeting its
quality standards. Yet Dr. Kawesch was considered such a dangerous
doctor that on 6/25/04 the California State authorities revoked his
medical license, a sanction reserved for the very worst physicians.
Dr. Joseph Dello Russo is another CRSQA-certified doctor who has had a
fair amount of legal trouble, as well. Using a CRSQA referral to find
a refractive surgeon makes about as much sense as thumbing through the
yellow pages.

Finally, any argument that CRSQA's not-for-profit status confers upon
it a mantle of legitimacy is spurious because Hagele draws a salary as
CRSQA's Executive Director. His livelihood is therefore directly
linked to CRSQA's financial success. Not-for-Profit status does not
confer legitimacy, and is often used by sham organizations trying to
garner undeserved credibility.

Glenn - USAEyes.org

2005-08-16, 5:57 pm

I really, honestly, and truthfully hope that anyone and everyone who
considers Brent Hanson or Ariel Berschadsky as a reliable sources of
information about refractive surgery issues does NOT seek the care of
a CRSQA Certified Refractive Surgeon...or any other surgeon, for that
matter.

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

2005-08-16, 5:57 pm

LasikInfoCenter is owned by New York attorney Ariel Berschadsky who
for years clearly attempted to hide his ownership of the anti-lasik
website. One must wonder why.

Berschadsky uses LasikInfoCenter to generate LASIK malpractice
clients, although people using his LasikInfoCenter do not know that is
a purpose of the website or that they are being referred by and to the
same person. This may be considered a violation of the ethics rules of
the New York State Bar Association.

Berschadsky has published on this website over 75 articles from
journals, magazines, and newspapers for which he has not received
permission to republish them, according to my own investigation. This
is a clear violation of copyright law. Ironically, on his website
promoting his law practice, Berschadsky lists copyright as one of his
specialties. Berschadsky even went so far as to publish on
LasikInfoCenter a letter from the owner of one of the items he
filched, demanding that he remove the item immediately. Berschadsky
has refused.

Berschadsky has been investigated by the New York State Bar
Association for misconduct due to apparent inappropriate content on
his website. At this time, no action has been taken.

Not surprisingly, Berschadsky represented Hanson when Hanson publicly
published several private email messages between surgeons without the
permission or knowledge of the surgeons or the association that
operated the private message center.

Several of the claims made by Berschadsky in the statement referenced
by Hanson are not a facts and are false. Nothing considered by a
reasonably intelligent individual would support these accusations.

I really, honestly, and truthfully hope that anyone and everyone who
considers Brent Hanson or Ariel Berschadsky as a reliable sources of
information about refractive surgery issues does NOT seek the care of
a CRSQA Certified Refractive Surgeon...or any other surgeon, for that
matter.

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

2005-08-16, 10:56 pm

Wat a second here, if anyone is considering a lobotomy, please consult
Berchadsky or Hanson.

SErebel

Glenn - USAEyes.org

2005-08-16, 10:56 pm

I think you may have written that statement sideways.

8^)

serebel

2005-08-16, 10:56 pm

Could you tell by the "slant" ?

SErebel

Ragnar

2005-08-17, 8:57 am

Lobotomies don't always work. It was a tragic disaster for the sister
of JFK and Teddy and Robert Kennedy.

A kind of lobotomy didn't do much good for the former fireman turned
anti-lasik guru either.

On 16 Aug 2005 19:38:25 -0700, "serebel" <serebel@aol.com> wrote:

>Wat a second here, if anyone is considering a lobotomy, please consult
>Berchadsky or Hanson.
>
>SErebel

serebel

2005-08-17, 10:57 pm

Of course the lobotomy didn't work for Ron Link. His brain isn't
located where it should be. Case in point would be that he ran an
internet scam called Surgical Eyes into the ground.

SErebel

Ragnar

2005-08-18, 8:59 am

Well.. it's not nice to pick on the man about his brain since he did
have significant irreversible brain damage which he claims altered hs
personality.

On 17 Aug 2005 19:42:19 -0700, "serebel" <serebel@aol.com> wrote:

>Of course the lobotomy didn't work for Ron Link. His brain isn't
>located where it should be. Case in point would be that he ran an
>internet scam called Surgical Eyes into the ground.
>
>SErebel

serebel

2005-08-19, 9:02 am

Ragnar wrote:
> Well.. it's not nice to pick on the man about his brain since he did
> have significant irreversible brain damage which he claims altered hs
> personality.
>
>

I'm pretty sure that "mugging" was just made up by Link as a sympathy
story.

SErebel