Lasik Eyes Surgery - Learn How To Have LASIK: Ariel Berschadsky of LasikInfoCenter.com

Author

Learn How To Have LASIK: Ariel Berschadsky of LasikInfoCenter.com

Glenn - USAEyes.org

2005-12-27, 10:58 am

Ariel Berschadsky, publisher of the anti-Lasik and malpractice
generating LasikInfoCenter.com website, has written a very detailed
and almost totally accurate article for "World Law Direct".

http://makeashorterlink.com/?S55832F5C

I won't reprint the entire article here. Unlike Berschadsky, I prefer
to fully respect copyright laws, but here are the sub headlines from
Berschadsky's article:

Lasik eye surgery -- avoiding malpractice
By Ariel Berschadsky, Esq. [May 7th, 2005]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Have Lasik Done by a Specialist.

2. Get a Second Opinion.

3. Have Your Pupils Accurately Measured in the Dark.

4. Have a Shirmer's Test to Determine if you have Dry Eyes.

5. Don't Let Price Influence your Decision.

6. Have Only One Eye Operated on at a Time.

7. Avoid Optometrist Co-Management.

8. Don't Have Lasik Performed by a Doctor Far from Home.

9. Ask to See the Operating Room.

10. Don't Have Lasik if you have Medical Contraindications.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

While Ariel Berschadsky may think these 10 steps are adequate (do read
the entire article), I believe that if you read the
http://www.USAEyes.org website and our 50 Tough Questions For Your
Doctor you will see there is much more to deciding whether or not to
have LASIK and will be much better informed. But, that is just my
opinion.

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

2005-12-28, 1:05 am

Does that make Berschadsky a lasik pimp?

Linda

2005-12-28, 1:05 am

serebel wrote:
> Does that make Berschadsky a lasik pimp?

ROFLMAO! Apparently I am a Lasik Pimp according to Brent. Must let all
my waxing clients know that!
Linda

CatmanX

2005-12-28, 1:05 am

Cool Linda, can I be the brazilian tester?

Well, seeing you're pimping them out, a little harmless fun can't hurt
can it?

ROFL

grant

Linda

2005-12-28, 1:05 am

CatmanX wrote:
> Cool Linda, can I be the brazilian tester?

If you only knew how many people ask me that question! LOL!
>
> Well, seeing you're pimping them out, a little harmless fun can't hurt
> can it?
>

> ROFL
>
> grant

Glenn - USAEyes.org

2005-12-28, 1:05 am

On 27 Dec 2005 19:23:04 -0800, "Linda" <lindakendall3155@yahoo.com.au>
wrote:

>ROFLMAO! Apparently I am a Lasik Pimp according to Brent. Must let all
>my waxing clients know that!
>Linda

ROFLMAO! Yep, buy Brent Hanson's "standards", it would appear that
attorney Ariel Berschadsky is a Lasik pimp.

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.

lasikfraud@yahoo.com

2005-12-28, 10:58 am

You're right, Ariel left off step #11. However, step #11 is available
at LasikInfocenter.net:

"Avoid CRSQA "certified surgeons"

========================================================

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, Glenn A. Kawesch was at one time certified by CRSQA as meeting
its quality standards. The infamous Dr. Joseph Dello Russo was also
certified by CRSQA at one time. Using a CRSQA referral to find a
refractive surgeon is no better than 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

2005-12-28, 12:54 pm

It looks like Brent Hanson of LasikFraud.com is getting desperate, but
that is to be expected isn't it.

Let's learn a little about Ariel Berschadsky:

From http://glennhagele.com/arielberschadsky/

Ariel Berschadsky (often misspelled as Ariel Bershadsky) is an
individual who, years before I was ever involved in the refractive
surgery industry, had LASIK with a reportedly poor outcome. He is an
extreme anti-LASIK zealot and has created websites to vilify the
procedure and many who are involved in the industry. Unfortunately, I
am one of those who he has decided to vilify.

Ariel Berschadsky's Operates the LasikInfoCenter Website

The website state it is funded and operated by LasikInfoCenter, Inc.,
an entity incorporated in the State of New York on June 26, 2001."

When I search the New York Department of State website I get this:

~~~~ Current Entity Name: LASIK INFO CENTER,INC. Initial DOS Filing
Date: JUNE 26, 2001 County: NEW YORK Jurisdiction: NEW YORK Entity
Type: DOMESTIC BUSINESS CORPORATION Current Entity Status: INACTIVE

DOS Process (Address to which DOS will mail process if accepted on
behalf of the entity) LASIK INFO CENTER,INC. PO BOX 2262 NEW YORK, NEW
YORK 10108

Chairman or Chief Executive Officer ARIEL BERSCHADSKY ONE RIVER PLACE
APT 2103 NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10036-4377

Principal Executive Office ARIEL BERSCHADSKY ONE RIVER PLACE NEW YORK,
NEW YORK 10036-4377

Registered Agent NONE ~~~~~~~

Also, the contact information given at LasikInfoCenter matches the
contact information from the State of New York filing. It would appear
that Ariel Berschadsky is the registered owner and operator
LasikInfoCenter.

The Purpose of Ariel Berschadsky's LasikInfoCenter Website

Ariel Berschadsky is a medical malpractice lawyer in New York state
who for years apparently tried to hide his ownership of his anti-LASIK
website.

Ariel Berschadsky uses LasikInfoCenter to generate LASIK malpractice
referrals, although people using his LasikInfoCenter are not notified
that this is a purpose of the website or that they are being referred
by and to the same person. This duplicity may be considered by some as
a violation of the ethics rules of the New York State Bar Association.
Ariel Berschadsky has had published on this website over 75
copyrighted articles from journals, magazines, and newspapers for
which he has never received permission to republish. This is an
obvious 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 his website
a letter from the owner of one of the articles he filched that
demanded Berschadsky remove the item immediately. Berschadsky openly
refuses to remove the article, even though the rightful owner of the
article has demanded its removal.

When Brent Hanson published messages from the International Society of
Refractive Surgeons private email listserve, it was Ariel Berschadsky
who wrote a response (http://makeashorterlink.com/?W3D813868),
representing Hanson.

In my opinion, Ariel Berschadsky deliberately attempts to misrepresent
facts to create the appearance of problems where problems do not
exist. As an example, he will republish on his website the plaintiff's
filing of a malpractice lawsuit against a refractive surgeon, but
fails to mention that all accusations were found to be without
substance and that the defending doctor won the case. I call this
"lying the truth".

False Claims Made By Ariel Berschadsky about Glenn Hagele

Several of the claims made by Ariel Berschadsky on his website about
the Council for Refractive Surgery Quality Assurance (CRSQA) and me
personally are not facts and are false.

Ariel Berschadsky Misrepresentation:
CRSQA'S FOUNDER WEARS GLASSES

I'm the founder of the CRSQA and I did wear glasses and contacts, but
I do not any longer and have not for some time. My reason to delay
having refractive surgery was very simple: Previously I was considered
a poor candidate. New technologies, new techniques, and modified
requirements determined that I was now an appropriate candidate and I
decided to have surgery.

Some anti-LASIK zealots like Ariel Berschadsky attempt to make an
issue about my delay in having refractive surgery. You cannot say that
because I had not had surgery others should not, nor can you say that
because I have had refractive surgery everyone else should have
refractive surgery. The real situation is that every individual needs
to evaluate their own situation and make their own decision based upon
objective and accurate information that relates to their individual
circumstances.

I do not condemn or applaud anyone's decision regarding refractive
surgery. Yes or no is the same to me and I wish them well no matter
what. Condemning someone because they decide NOT have refractive
surgery when they know they are a poor candidate is foolishness. I
find it even more ridiculous that this condemnation comes exclusively
from people who have had a poor refractive surgery result.

Ariel Berschadsky Misrepresentation:
CRSQA CHARGES FEES

Every relevant certification and licensing organization charges fees.
That includes the American Board of Ophthalmology (ABO), the American
Board of Eye Surgeons (ABES), CRSQA, state licensing boards, the Drug
Enforcement Administration, etc. CRSQA may be nonprofit, but our
vendors and staff need to be paid. We believe it is perfectly
appropriate for CRSQA Certified Refractive Surgeons to pay for the
patient services we provide through their certification fees.

CRSQA is not paid for each patient referral, click through to a
website, number of impressions on a web page, or any such quid pro
quo. Whether or not a patient decides to or not to have refractive
surgery of any kind is of virtually no consequence to CRSQA's form of
funding.

We acknowledge that our funding structure creates an environment where
someone could be worried about mischief, so we are diligent in
treating all doctors equally and make the source of our funding very
clear. It think that those who visit our website will find that we are
very objective and balanced in our presentation of refractive surgery
issues.

Ariel Berschadsky Misrepresentation:
CRSQA IS REALLY A MARKETING PLOY

There is no doubt that some doctors who have achieved our
certification will announce that fact in their marketing - and they
should. In fact, we encourage this, but there is no "ploy" or attempt
to misrepresent on our part.

Who is independently evaluated is important information that every
potential patient should know. If the better doctors are being
identified by their CRSQA certification, then more patients will go to
the better doctors. IMO that is a good thing.

CRSQA certification itself is not going to convince someone to have
surgery, but it might influence where someone who has decided to have
surgery goes. That is what we want. Through our 50 Tough Questions For
Your Doctor, the balanced information at our website, and CRSQA
certification, we want patients to find there way to the better
doctors.

We do list CRSQA Certified Refractive Surgeons on our website - as
does just about every other related healthcare organization.

Ariel Berschadsky Misrepresentation:
CRSQA's QUALITY STANDARDS ARE PATHETIC

CRSQA is the first patient/consumer organization to evaluate and
certify doctors based upon patient outcomes. A blue ribbon advisory
committee comprised of surgeons and industry experts determined from
multiple studies the current outcome norms. A surgeon must meet or
exceed these patient outcome norms to attain certification. CRSQA is
the only organization that certifies refractive surgeons based upon
patient outcomes.

The American Board of Ophthalmology (ABO) does not provide any
evaluation specific to refractive surgery. Certification is valid for
a lifetime, or 10 years if recently certified. ABO certification would
be conspicuous by its absence, but not terribly important by its
presence.

The American Board of Eye Surgery (ABES) is an ophthalmic group that
provides procedure specific certification. They do have peer-reviewed
certification for LASIK, and RK, but not PRK, LASEK, CK, LTK or any
other refractive procedure. ABES LASIK certification is valid for
seven years.

CRSQA is a nonprofit consumer/patient organization that evaluates a
surgeon based upon actual patient outcomes. The doctor is reevaluated
every three months.

Any prospective patient should consider the relevance and value of
these and other certifications the doctor may have achieved.

Ariel Berschadsky Misrepresentation:
CRSQA'S DOCTORS HAVE BAD OUTCOMES

There is absolutely no way that anyone can expect perfection from any
doctor whether they be CRSQA, ABES, ABO certified or not. This is
surgery performed on people by people. Even if the surgery is done
correctly, bad outcomes do happen.

The organization I represent educates the public that about 3% of
refractive surgery patients have unresolved complications at
six-months postop, with 0.5% having complications that require
invasive treatment or extensive management. The certification process
is designed to determine if a doctor's outcomes meet or exceed the
national norms. This would exclude about one-third of US refractive
surgeons.

Ariel Berschadsky Misrepresentation:
DOCTORS HAVE BEEN DECERTIFIED BY CRSQA

While we never state why a particular doctor is no longer certified by
our organization, one of the reasons we re-evaluate every CRSQA
Certified Refractive Surgeon every three months is to be certain that
the doctor continues to meet our requirements. If the doctor no longer
meets our requirements, that doctor will be decertified.

Ariel Berschadsky has made an issue about refractive surgeons who were
previously certified by our organization but decertified and then
later had litigation or licensure problems. We believe that this
situation is one of the best examples of why quarterly re-evaluation
of all certified doctors is so important and why CRSQA certification
is viable to patients seeking refractive surgery. Every three months
we reevaluate if the doctor continues to meet those requirements. If
the doctor does not, the doctor is decertified.

The point is, these doctors were certified by CRSQA, but are no longer
certified.

Ariel Berschadsky Misrepresentation:
CRSQA's NONPROFIT STATUS CONFERS UPON IT A MANTLE OF LEGITIMACY IS
SPURIOUS BECAUSE GLENN HAGELE DRAWS A SALARY AS CRSQA'S EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR.

Most Executive Director's of larger nonprofit organizations receive
pay, and I am no exception. I do not apologize for being paid for the
services I provide. My personal pay is set by CRSQA's Board of
Trustees.

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

2005-12-28, 6:01 pm

On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 10:36:58 GMT, Glenn - USAEyes.org
<glenn.hageleSTOPSPAM@USAEyes.org> wrote:

>Ariel Berschadsky, publisher of the anti-Lasik and malpractice
>generating LasikInfoCenter.com website, has written a very detailed
>and almost totally accurate article for "World Law Direct".
>
>http://makeashorterlink.com/?S55832F5C
>
>I won't reprint the entire article here. Unlike Berschadsky, I prefer
>to fully respect copyright laws, but here are the sub headlines from
>Berschadsky's article:
>
>Lasik eye surgery -- avoiding malpractice
>By Ariel Berschadsky, Esq. [May 7th, 2005]
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>1. Have Lasik Done by a Specialist.
but not a "specialist" that does 30 procedures a day like a mill
>
>2. Get a Second Opinion.
good idea.. but don't expect to get a better opinion the 2nd time
>
>3. Have Your Pupils Accurately Measured in the Dark.
if you are a bat...
Pupils should be measured in a dim room to get the measurement to go
by. Measure in a dark room to verify that someones pupils are
dilating normally.
>
>4. Have a Shirmer's Test to Determine if you have Dry Eyes.
not a bad idea.. however, few people have dry eyes, so this is mostly
a waste of time. A doctor can tell if an eye seems dry, and should
then do a shirmer's test to verify that. If an eye is "wet", it is
pointless to do a test since it takes very little moisture to pass the
test. That would be like sticking your hand in a puddle and saying
"yep! it's wet!"
>
>5. Don't Let Price Influence your Decision.
great idea.. and the most expensive price isn't necessarily the best
surgeon for the job
>
>6. Have Only One Eye Operated on at a Time.
BAD IDEA, costs more money and time and results in anisometropia due
to the difference in error between the two eyes. Salz is wrong on
that one.
>
>7. Avoid Optometrist Co-Management.
that contradicts item #2... an independent optometrist is probably the
only source you will get for a useful 2nd opinion
>
>8. Don't Have Lasik Performed by a Doctor Far from Home.
great idea if possible
>
>9. Ask to See the Operating Room.
almost all places not only LET you see the OR, they have big glass
windows and tv monitors for others to watch the operation... however,
at LVI, the OR is a vault that nobody sees. If you do get into an LVI
OR, ask why there are marks on the floor from the laser system being
moved so often (trucked around to various centers) instead of being
bolted permanently to one spot as they are supposed to be
>
>10. Don't Have Lasik if you have Medical Contraindications.
That is true for anything
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
Almost all the 50 questions should be answered by the surgeon's
literature in his lobby. Ask the ones that are not clear to you. If
you ask a doctor a list of 50 questions, he's going to get extremely
annoyed. Ask the questions that remain after you do your research on
the doctor. I would bet money that no surgeon would sit there and
answer 50 questions.
>While Ariel Berschadsky may think these 10 steps are adequate (do read
>the entire article), I believe that if you read the
>http://www.USAEyes.org website and our 50 Tough Questions For Your
>Doctor you will see there is much more to deciding whether or not to
>have LASIK and will be much better informed. But, that is just my
>opinion.
>
>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.....!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"serebel" <serebel@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1135736588.885541.17420@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Does that make Berschadsky a lasik pimp?
>