|
Home > Archive > Lasik Eyes Surgery > September 2005 > Ragnar = Christopher Roiland = misinformation machine
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 |
Ragnar = Christopher Roiland = misinformation machine
|
|
| journal article 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| See below where Ragnar claims a conact lens can get stuck to the macula...
which is part of the retina in the inside of the back of the eye.
Christopher,
Can you name someone who is on disability from problems with vision after
contact
lenswear?
How many contact lens lawsuits have been filed from patients with damaged
vision?
Any contact lens suicides to report?
Are there websites where patients with permanent contact lens damage to the
eye go for support
and information?
People do become contact lens intolerant sometimes. People who become
contact lens intolerant and then
go on to have LASIK have some of the worst outcomes due to persistent
inflammation and dry eye. People
who are contact lens intolerant should be strongly advised NOT to have
refractive surgery.
Actually people with eyes should be strongly advised NOT to have refractive
surgery.
"Ragnar" <ragnarsuomi@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7qjvh1hlo1jnfqm2cc0s0dnu4cs0ru5jdk@4ax.com...
> Excellent point.
> Anybody who would say that LASIK has resulted in more problems than
> wearing contact lenses is either a liar or a fool.
>
> It doesn't even have to be a dirty lens. It can be a clean lens that
> folds, or gets stuck to the macula, or just plain irritates the eye.
> Over time, people LOSE their tolerance of contact lenses, they don't
> gain more tolerance of them after the first few months of wear.
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| Sure Ragnar gets it wrong now and again, but at least he does not
change his alias every day or two to hide that the posting is from
someone already discredited. Whatever one thinks of Ragnar, he takes
responsibility for authorship of his posts.
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.
| |
| CatmanX 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| Brent is such a dipstick.
Well, now dipsticks are mad at me.
dr grant
| |
| Dr. Leukoma 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| Glenn,
I was happy to meet your acquaintance in San Diego. After all, you
made the trip from Sacramento to attend my presentation when nobody
from SE or LME gave it the time of day. And so, I am more than happy
to return the hospitality. You and your lovely wife are welcome at my
home anytime, and I mean that sincerely.
But, I cannot fathom why you would waste your time here with the likes
of Ragnar and Serebel. It makes no sense to me whatsoever.
DrG
| |
| serebel 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
|
Dr. Leukoma wrote:
> Glenn,
>
> I was happy to meet your acquaintance in San Diego. After all, you
> made the trip from Sacramento to attend my presentation when nobody
> from SE or LME gave it the time of day. And so, I am more than happy
> to return the hospitality. You and your lovely wife are welcome at my
> home anytime, and I mean that sincerely.
>
> But, I cannot fathom why you would waste your time here with the likes
> of Ragnar and Serebel. It makes no sense to me whatsoever.
>
> DrG
Even the SE and LME crowd won't kiss your XXX. That's why you won't
post there any more. I don't recall Glenn asking you to pick whom he
associates with. Must be terrible to have your gigantic ego. I guess
Rags and I won't be invited for tea any time soon.
SErebel
| |
| serebel 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| Contact lens intolerance being a contraindication for RS is hogwash. I
and some people I know had lasik because of contact lens intolerance.
Best damn thing we did.
SErebel
| |
| Dr. Leukoma 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| Glenn was a very gracious and entertaining host. He picked up the
dinner tab twice. I would only be returning the favor. XXX-kissing is
not a requirement.
Goodnight and goodbye, SErebel.
DrG
| |
| serebel 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| For your fat ego it certainly is. I guess you're also to cheap to pay
for a meal.
SErebel
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| Thank you for your kind words, doctor.
About the only thing I see that Ragnar, SErebel, and I have in common
is a distaste for people who use multiple aliases, repost statements
while ignoring previous posts that soundly refute those statements,
and use other methods in an attempt to misinform. While we may have a
similar opinion of some of these people and their "data", I think it
is fair to say we express our disdain for them quite differently.
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 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| Okay SErebel, you don't like DrG. I, on the other hand, have found him
to be very knowledgeable, articulate, a caring practitioner, and enjoy
his company immensely.
I believe that your only interaction with him has been via Internet.
Since I have talked with him several times, met him, attended a
conference where he presented enlightening data, know patients he has
helped, and have had the pleasure of his company, I believe that you
may want to consider the possibility that my opinion of him is valid.
Perhaps if you had the same interaction with DrG as I, your opinion
would be closer to my own.
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 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| Contact lens intolerance may not be a contraindication per se, but the
underlying cause of the intolerance may be.
If the patient has dry eyes that are exacerbated by contact lens use,
then this malady needs to be treated and resolved. If the dry eyes
cannot be adequately resolved, then LASIK and IntraLASIK may be
contraindicated, whereas PRK, LASEK, Epi-LASIK, and lens-based
refractive surgery may be more appropriate.
The cause of the contact lens intolerance needs to be determined
before knowing if it is a contraindication to refractive surgery.
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.
| |
|
| In article <1126401193.698342.224070@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
"Dr. Leukoma" <drg@leukoma.com> wrote:
> nobody from SE or LME gave it the time of day.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. The world is a cold
callous place. Best to have no expectations and then you'll never be
disappointed. 
Oh, that goes for LASIK too. Expect the worst--and anything better than
that will make you happy!!!
--
~RT
| |
| Dr. Leukoma 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| As usual, your choice of words puzzles me.
I am not an academic, just a clinician. Mine is not a "publish or
perish" situation. Therefore, it was virtually unthinkable for me to
have a paper published in a peer-reviewed ophthalmic journal as a
single author and with only one minor revision (one sentence). CLAO
was kind enough to have the journal published on the day of the
conference, with enough copies to hand out to each attendee, and to be
able to address a packed room. So yeh, it's fair to say that my
expectations were exceeded by quite a long shot and have been for quite
some time. Quite a few patients traveled quite a few miles to make the
paper possible. So, it's really about them.
Have a really nice day, RT.
DrG
| |
|
| In article <1126457880.407035.66700@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"Dr. Leukoma" <drg@leukoma.com> wrote:
> As usual, your choice of words puzzles me.
>
> I am not an academic, just a clinician. Mine is not a "publish or
> perish" situation. Therefore, it was virtually unthinkable for me to
> have a paper published in a peer-reviewed ophthalmic journal as a
> single author and with only one minor revision (one sentence). CLAO
> was kind enough to have the journal published on the day of the
> conference, with enough copies to hand out to each attendee, and to be
> able to address a packed room. So yeh, it's fair to say that my
> expectations were exceeded by quite a long shot and have been for quite
> some time. Quite a few patients traveled quite a few miles to make the
> paper possible. So, it's really about them.
>
> Have a really nice day, RT.
>
> DrG
??????
Your words puzzle me too. I was responding to your statement that
nobody from SE of LME came to your paper only Glenn who has been banned
from both those lists and "hangs out" on this one. I read it as a
disappointment but that you were grateful for Glenn's support. You spend
(spent) a lot of time and energy on those boards (SE and LME)--and your
good intentions are not being supported. But it's not surprising...that
was my point.
I was being sympathetic (believe it or not). Congrats on your paper
being published. I'm glad your presentation was so well attended. I'm a
writer and I give papers at conferences, so I actually understand. Let
me know if you give a paper in NYC. I'd come to hear it even if I
wouldn't understand it. I have never had "conversations" with anyone
except you where we exist on such entirely different planes of
understanding. I enjoy it.
My next book is coming out soon. Maybe you'll read it and let me know
what you think
Have a great day too.
--
~RT
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| >Quite a few patients traveled quite a few miles to make the
>paper possible. So, it's really about them.
>
>DrG
I'm going to disagree very slightly with DrG.
His peer reviewed study that was published by CLAO and presented by
DrG in San Diego recently is now about all the patients who will NOT
deal with vision problems thanks to his report and all the patients
who will receive vision rehabilitation from many doctors throughout
the world because his information is now internationally available.
It was his patients and his patience that made the study possible, but
it is now about patients and doctors who DrG may never meet, but will
benefit from his efforts.
If DrG never published another study, he could retire knowing that he
has in his own way made recovery of some refractive surgery induced
vision problems more possible.
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.
| |
| Dr. Leukoma 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| Thanks, RT. The irony of that was my point in the first place. Send
me a copy of your book or tell me where I can find it.
Don't hold your breath, as I'm not sure when another publishing
opportunity will present itself. I was in NYC recently...only the
second time in my life. My son and I had a blast visiting Columbia,
Ground Zero, Battery Park, etc. We spent one entire afternoon at the
Met. We also ran into the actor Clive Owen on the elevator at Saks.
When my son told me who it was, I said "Clive who"?
DrG
| |
|
| In article <1126462265.177717.29020@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"Dr. Leukoma" <drg@leukoma.com> wrote:
> We also ran into the actor Clive Owen on the elevator at Saks.
> When my son told me who it was, I said "Clive who"?
My reaction also! I have a lot of funny stories about celebrities I
haven't recognized until someone pointed them out to me...including when
my daughter barfed on Robert DeNiro's wife's Gucci bag at a private
swimming pool...
Glad you had a good time in NYC. I think this is a great city (could do
with a better mayor tho...) Hope your son gets into columbia--if that's
where he wants to go..
--
~RT
| |
| Dr. Leukoma 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| >From listening to my sister who works in Manhattan, there must be quite
a few Robert DeNiro stories.
Yes, NYC is a great city. I wanted my son to visit "ground zero" as a
touchstone for the importance of our culture and way of life and the
ability of people to pull together in times of need.
A couple of days ago, one of my longtime patients who lives in NYC paid
me a visit. She is a twenty-something fashion and television model who
is about to embark on her second tour of Europe and Australia. I've
been her eyedoc since her first year in high school. When she said she
lived on the upper east side, I could now actually relate to where that
is. She enthralled me with a couple of George Clooney stories....
DrG
| |
| serebel 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
|
Glenn - USAEyes.org wrote:
> Okay SErebel, you don't like DrG. I, on the other hand, have found him
> to be very knowledgeable, articulate, a caring practitioner, and enjoy
> his company immensely.
>
> I believe that your only interaction with him has been via Internet.
> Since I have talked with him several times, met him, attended a
> conference where he presented enlightening data, know patients he has
> helped, and have had the pleasure of his company, I believe that you
> may want to consider the possibility that my opinion of him is valid.
> Perhaps if you had the same interaction with DrG as I, your opinion
> would be closer to my own.
>
Hold the phone there Glenn, I never said I didn't like Leukoma. He
jabbed at me in a previous post, so I jabbed back, that's all.
SErebel
| |
| Ragnar 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| That was a bad mistake on my part... I meant sclera, not macula.
Other than that, you are full of it journal article
On Sat, 10 Sep 2005 16:37:15 -0400, "journal article" <journal
article@aol.com> wrote:
>See below where Ragnar claims a conact lens can get stuck to the macula...
>which is part of the retina in the inside of the back of the eye.
>
>Christopher,
>Can you name someone who is on disability from problems with vision after
>contact
>lenswear?
>
>How many contact lens lawsuits have been filed from patients with damaged
>vision?
>
>Any contact lens suicides to report?
>
>Are there websites where patients with permanent contact lens damage to the
>eye go for support
>and information?
>
>People do become contact lens intolerant sometimes. People who become
>contact lens intolerant and then
>go on to have LASIK have some of the worst outcomes due to persistent
>inflammation and dry eye. People
>who are contact lens intolerant should be strongly advised NOT to have
>refractive surgery.
>
>Actually people with eyes should be strongly advised NOT to have refractive
>surgery.
>
>
>
>
>"Ragnar" <ragnarsuomi@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:7qjvh1hlo1jnfqm2cc0s0dnu4cs0ru5jdk@4ax.com...
>
| |
| Ragnar 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| I thought you were done posting here you two-faced quack.
If you think Glenn is stupid enough to fall for a bit of posterior
kissing on your part, you are delusional as well.
On 10 Sep 2005 18:13:13 -0700, "Dr. Leukoma" <drg@leukoma.com> wrote:
>Glenn,
>
>I was happy to meet your acquaintance in San Diego. After all, you
>made the trip from Sacramento to attend my presentation when nobody
>from SE or LME gave it the time of day. And so, I am more than happy
>to return the hospitality. You and your lovely wife are welcome at my
>home anytime, and I mean that sincerely.
>
>But, I cannot fathom why you would waste your time here with the likes
>of Ragnar and Serebel. It makes no sense to me whatsoever.
>
>DrG
| |
| Ragnar 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| That is why I had LASIK done. I had lost my tolerance of rigid
lenses after over 20 years of wearing them.
I am curious about what these loonies have in mind. If one loses
their intolerance of contact lenses... what is someone supposed to do?
Get a seeing eye dog and white tipped cane? Because of astigmatism
and minification, glasses were not an option.
On 10 Sep 2005 19:52:39 -0700, "serebel" <serebel@aol.com> wrote:
>Contact lens intolerance being a contraindication for RS is hogwash. I
>and some people I know had lasik because of contact lens intolerance.
>Best damn thing we did.
>
>SErebel
| |
| Ragnar 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| You got a telephone? How about giving Glenn a phone call instead of
trying to regain a shred of credibility in this newsgroup?
Make a move called "My Dinner With Hagele".
On 10 Sep 2005 20:21:09 -0700, "Dr. Leukoma" <drg@leukoma.com> wrote:
>Glenn was a very gracious and entertaining host. He picked up the
>dinner tab twice. I would only be returning the favor. XXX-kissing is
>not a requirement.
>
>Goodnight and goodbye, SErebel.
>
>DrG
| |
| Ragnar 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| The paper Dr Gemoules is referring to is probably his paper that he
will not post here but will sell you you for $50.
This is old news and I hope we don't need to beat this dead horse
again.
$50 will buy a lot of Charmin.
On 11 Sep 2005 09:58:00 -0700, "Dr. Leukoma" <drg@leukoma.com> wrote:
>As usual, your choice of words puzzles me.
>
>I am not an academic, just a clinician. Mine is not a "publish or
>perish" situation. Therefore, it was virtually unthinkable for me to
>have a paper published in a peer-reviewed ophthalmic journal as a
>single author and with only one minor revision (one sentence). CLAO
>was kind enough to have the journal published on the day of the
>conference, with enough copies to hand out to each attendee, and to be
>able to address a packed room. So yeh, it's fair to say that my
>expectations were exceeded by quite a long shot and have been for quite
>some time. Quite a few patients traveled quite a few miles to make the
>paper possible. So, it's really about them.
>
>Have a really nice day, RT.
>
>DrG
| |
| Ragnar 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| You are getting to be like Minarik now. Your ego makes you think
that someone out there has an interest in your personal life, your
vacation, your familiy, who you met, etc.
I lived in London for 8 months... you can hardly go a day without
crossing paths with a celebrity of some sorts. But nobody wants to
hear about my encounters in London. Why you think anybody needs to
know about your wild and exciting life is beyond me.
On 11 Sep 2005 11:11:05 -0700, "Dr. Leukoma" <drg@leukoma.com> wrote:
>Thanks, RT. The irony of that was my point in the first place. Send
>me a copy of your book or tell me where I can find it.
>
>Don't hold your breath, as I'm not sure when another publishing
>opportunity will present itself. I was in NYC recently...only the
>second time in my life. My son and I had a blast visiting Columbia,
>Ground Zero, Battery Park, etc. We spent one entire afternoon at the
>Met. We also ran into the actor Clive Owen on the elevator at Saks.
>When my son told me who it was, I said "Clive who"?
>
>DrG
| |
| Ragnar 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| I would not reply to this post.. but the coincidence in meeting a
DeNiro is just too tempting...
I was in Holland for a few days as a tourist. I walked right past
Robert DeNiro! He was the only celebrity I saw in Holland though.
He is much shorter than I expected.
On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 19:19:09 GMT, RT <RTMD24@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote:
>In article <1126462265.177717.29020@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> "Dr. Leukoma" <drg@leukoma.com> wrote:
>
>
>My reaction also! I have a lot of funny stories about celebrities I
>haven't recognized until someone pointed them out to me...including when
>my daughter barfed on Robert DeNiro's wife's Gucci bag at a private
>swimming pool...
>Glad you had a good time in NYC. I think this is a great city (could do
>with a better mayor tho...) Hope your son gets into columbia--if that's
>where he wants to go..
| |
| Ragnar 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| now would be a good time to end the travelogue stories.
On 11 Sep 2005 14:23:27 -0700, "Dr. Leukoma" <drg@leukoma.com> wrote:
>a few Robert DeNiro stories.
>
>Yes, NYC is a great city. I wanted my son to visit "ground zero" as a
>touchstone for the importance of our culture and way of life and the
>ability of people to pull together in times of need.
>
>A couple of days ago, one of my longtime patients who lives in NYC paid
>me a visit. She is a twenty-something fashion and television model who
>is about to embark on her second tour of Europe and Australia. I've
>been her eyedoc since her first year in high school. When she said she
>lived on the upper east side, I could now actually relate to where that
>is. She enthralled me with a couple of George Clooney stories....
>
>DrG
| |
| Ragnar 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| Gemoules will say anythng if you stroke his ego.
I didn't have a big problem with him until he self-destructed.
On 11 Sep 2005 17:31:27 -0700, "serebel" <serebel@aol.com> wrote:
>
>Glenn - USAEyes.org wrote:
>
> Hold the phone there Glenn, I never said I didn't like Leukoma. He
>jabbed at me in a previous post, so I jabbed back, that's all.
>
>
>SErebel
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| When anyone submits a study to a peer-reviewed journal and that study
is published, the article is copyrighted by the journal and the author
does not have ownership.
Furthermore, as a part of the submission process the author must agree
to not directly publish or cause to be directly published the article
in another forum.
DrG could not give anybody a copy of the article without either
purchasing it from the journal, or violating copyright.
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 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| If someone becomes contact lens intolerant, the first steps would be
to check fit, change material, treat the underlying cause, then
abandon contacts and go to glasses. Only recently has refractive
surgery become a viable alternative for some, but not all, who are
contact lens intolerant.
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 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| Assuming that is true... Dr. Quack was offering to sell it for $50.
If the rules you mention below were followed, hardly any study would
ever be accessible to anyone.
Enough of this technical splitting of hairs though. Next topic.
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 16:00:08 GMT, Glenn - USAEyes.org
<glenn.hageleSTOPSPAM@USAEyes.org> wrote:
>When anyone submits a study to a peer-reviewed journal and that study
>is published, the article is copyrighted by the journal and the author
>does not have ownership.
>
>Furthermore, as a part of the submission process the author must agree
>to not directly publish or cause to be directly published the article
>in another forum.
>
>DrG could not give anybody a copy of the article without either
>purchasing it from the journal, or violating copyright.
>
>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 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| By only recently.. I assume you mean that only within the past 5
years. And by some but not all... I assume you mean about 95% it is
a viable alternative.
In fact, not ony a viable alternative.. but a preferable alternative.
I would venture to say if not for the cost of the procedure, that just
about everyone with myopia would have it done.
By the way, it's interesting that despite how much Hanson vilifies
LASIK, he has also gone to great lengths trying to get free
re-treatments from TLC - which they denied. One might assume there
is a "sour grape" issue here.
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 16:02:09 GMT, Glenn - USAEyes.org
<glenn.hageleSTOPSPAM@USAEyes.org> wrote:
>If someone becomes contact lens intolerant, the first steps would be
>to check fit, change material, treat the underlying cause, then
>abandon contacts and go to glasses. Only recently has refractive
>surgery become a viable alternative for some, but not all, who are
>contact lens intolerant.
>
>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 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| Medical journals are expensive. We spend about $2,500 a year on
subscriptions, however anybody can purchase a single copy or visit
their local medical library.
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 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| I don't know the correct numbers, but anecdotal information would
indicate that probably 95% who have become contact lens intolerant,
and are otherwise eligible, could have LASIK after the underlying
cause of the intolerance is resolved.
Cost most certainly is a limiting factor, but I don't think it is the
only factor. Some people are simply not going to have elective surgery
on their eyes no matter what the cost - or lack thereof. There are
always those who will not accept the risk, no matter how small that
risk may become.
As for Hanson, I long ago gave up the expectation of logic and reason
from him.
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 2005-09-24, 2:40 pm |
| Why buy a medical journal to read his study when the supermarket sells
toilet paper so cheaply?
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 16:03:48 GMT, Glenn - USAEyes.org
<glenn.hageleSTOPSPAM@USAEyes.org> wrote:
>Medical journals are expensive. We spend about $2,500 a year on
>subscriptions, however anybody can purchase a single copy or visit
>their local medical library.
>
>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 2005-09-24, 2:41 pm |
| I guess it depends on the kind of mess you want to clean up.
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.
|
| |
|
|