|
Home > Archive > Lasik Eyes Surgery > January 2006 > Repeated of misinformation are still misinformation no matter how many times you repea
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 |
Repeated of misinformation are still misinformation no matter how many times you repea
|
|
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-12-27, 1:04 am |
| Is it your intent to repeat time and again the same misinformation?
What are you going to do, go through all the same bovine fertilizer
and then change names and go through it again? It is still the same
bovine fertilizer.
On 26 Dec 2005 19:16:10 -0800, Trulytelling@yahoo.com wrote:
>Glenn, you know that patients with 300 microns or more of residual
>stroma have developed ectasia.
This one again too? If you are going to pick and choose what you say
and eliminate all mitigating factors, you could at least create
something new. Here is the link to my previous response to this:
http://makeashorterlink.com/?Z20634F5C Just go toward the bottom.
>Did you not also know that Dr. Charles
>Casebeer testified in a deposition that bulging of the eye is known to
>occur in all LASIK patients?
Here is my response to the last time Dr. Casebeer was misinterpreted.
http://makeashorterlink.com/?Z20634F5C
>Did you know that some topographers with
>autocall features autodiagnose nearly all patients who have had LASIK
>as 'suspect keratoconus'?
Did you know that if use an engine diagnostic for a Ford on a Chevy it
will tell me the engine does not exist? One needs to use the right
tool to get the right result.
If what you are saying is true (big if, that one) then this particular
device is not the proper tool to use in an attempt to diagnose
keratoconus in a post LASIK patient because it apparently cannot
decipher the difference between the results of planned surgery and the
presence of naturally occurring disease. There are several diagnostic
tools that are really quite good at showing keratoconus.
>Refractive surgery and smoking have a lot in common. Both were examples
>of very profitable industries where the FDA failed in its duty to
>protect the public health from corporate greed.
When, exactly, did the FDA approve cigarettes? When was the peer
reviewed clinical trial of Marlboros? I'm not a big fan of the FDA,
but you don't know what you are talking about.
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.
| |
| Trulytelling@yahoo.com 2005-12-28, 1:05 am |
| Glenn, the FDA had an opportunity to regulate tobacco as a drug and
dropped the ball. It was very disappointing. It was fairly big news,
and a huge disappointment to the medical and research communities. YOU
don't know what you're talking about.
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-12-28, 1:05 am |
| So then you are saying that the FDA would do a good job of regulating
cigarettes just like they do a good job of regulating medical devices.
LOL It looks like "trulytelling" (that is a laugh in itself) is
getting all tied up trying to have it both ways.
Never has there ever been any serious expectation that the FDA is
going to regulate cigarettes. There is no reasonable comparison to
Lasik and cigarettes.
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.
| |
| Marshall Cosme 2006-01-09, 1:02 am |
| http://www.321recipes.com/aspartame.html
This is a must read on eye health and maintainance. You may or may not be
affected , but you might be shocked!
Please excuse the interruption , but I thought you may be interested to know
what may be causing all kinds of health problems for yourself or for your
loved ones. I can't seem to get it through to my wife's brain about this
vital health issue, Now she is always saying she is having trouble with her
vision. Gee, I wonder why? I am so pissed off right now, I really want to
slap some sense into her. She has been feeding this poison to my four
children for years after I asked her not too, so you can see why I said what
I said previously, but I would never hit my wife. Why are people ignore what
science brings to are attention about health issues. I am really upset, but
I hope this helps you....since I can't get through to my wife of 16
years.....!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
<Trulytelling@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1135730046.385694.237260@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Glenn, the FDA had an opportunity to regulate tobacco as a drug and
> dropped the ball. It was very disappointing. It was fairly big news,
> and a huge disappointment to the medical and research communities. YOU
> don't know what you're talking about.
>
|
| |
|
|