|
Home > Archive > Lasik Eyes Surgery > January 2006 > To Ace:
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]
|
|
| phyknapp@yahoo.com 2006-01-04, 1:09 am |
| Ace, I see where you used my name and reproduced some information about
me in this post. You make it look as though my words came from AAO
site. ????
First, do not use my name or do not reproduce any information about me.
You are funny sometimes, but this is not funny, you little weasel.
You have my name and a statement I made (which is true) all mixed in
with this other garbage. I'd appreciate it if you'd leave me out of
the discussion. It was YOU who put the emphasis on ***years.*** If I
want to be a part of google, I'll come on my own. Then you go on to
say--a college guy my age--!!!!!!!! I am not a guy and certainly not
college age. You are running your own statements into mine. Just so
we understand each other.
Phyllis
Ace wrote:
> "I have to correct you on this point. He and I did not "beat the odds".
>
> The odds were always clearly in our favour."
>
> Depends how picky you are and your expectations. Theres no clear study
> reguarding complication rates and satisfication rates. Two people can
> end with identical outcomes and one person be totally miserable, the
> other totally happy. Many of the people I know experienced small
> complications but the good outweighed the bad. Loss of night vision is
> very common and some say universal but a large number do not experience
> deleberating night vision issues. I know a lady in real life who got
> lasik back in 2000 and shes only 20/30 to 20/40 with night vision
> issues but shes still happy and seems to see alright, at least in the
> day. She can see(without glasses of course) almost as good as I see
> with glasses!
>
> "Not in my case. Nor in the case of my brother."
>
> Nearly everyone I know who got lasik traded some vision quality and
> sometimes accuracy in order to reduce/eliminate their dependancy on
> glasses.
>
>
> "Where is your proof? Lasik has been around for a long time now and
> there isn't any statistical proof of your claim."
>
>
> Its true the long term results are still in the unknown but some people
> have developed strange problems some time after lasik. I know one guy
> who developed double vision 3 years after lasik and now needs RGP
> contacts.
>
> http://www.canoe.ca/Health0007/17_vision.html
>
> http://www.lasikinfocenter.net/Pers...tti%20Blair.htm
>
> Potential long-term complications following refractive surgery
>
> Some opponents of corneal refractive surgery claim that excimer laser
> procedures, in particular LASIK, have not been around long enough for
> us to fully understand the long-term consequences. Potential issues
> include retinal damage , inaccuracy of future cataract surgery and
> delayed diagnosis of glaucoma due to modifications in the corneal
> profile/thickness, and corneal ectasia.
>
>
> "I would like you to provide proof that people develop dry eye several
> years after Lasik."
>
> http://www.aao.org/education/sit_refractive/0010.cfm
>
> Phyllis Knapp first felt it in early 2000, about a month after having
> LASIK surgery to correct her vision.
>
> "Something wasn't right," Knapp said. "My eyes burned all the time. The
> doctor just said I was still healing."
>
> But months and ***years*** later, her eyes kept getting drier. Now
> there are eroded areas on their surfaces. "Dry eye does a lot to impair
> your vision if it's severe, and mine is," she said.
>
>
> "You seem to speak to a lot of people experiencing difficulties with
> Lasik. I find this hard to believe."
>
>
> Well I try to help them. One college guy my age got lasik and while he
> ended up 20/25 and 20/30(loss of one line, loss of two lines
> respectivately) he had significent ghosting and loss of contrast. He
> now has a very hard time reading the professors lectures because its
> blurry, ghosted and faint. He was one of those glasses haters now he
> wishes he could go back to glasses.
>
>
> "I also had an intolerance to contact lenses and consider the fact that
>
> I was able to have Lasik as a godsend."
>
> I got a lasik evaluation nearly a year ago and they tell almost
> everyone they are "perfect" candidates. Tell that to those with
> complications. Most centers pay no attention to your pupil size,
> mismeasure your pupils on purpose or downplay the risks "you might
> experience jusssssssst a sliiiiiiiiight amount of glare and starbursts
> at night" One has to research for himself exactly how good a candidate
> he is and what risks he is up to against. Intolerance to contacts often
> signifies dry eyes which can be made worse by lasik. I also dont
> tolerate contacts but glasses work great other than the minor hassles
> but its something I just deal with.
>
>
> "I was -6.5 in each eye and suffered the most horrendous headaches on a
>
> regular basis."
>
>
> Theres a number of factors responsable for this. I dont normally get
> headaches, not even when I undercorrect myself or go without glasses. I
> dont strain or squint either
>
>
> "Since Lasik 2 1/2 years ago,
> I do not have the inconvenience of glasses, contacts or drops."
>
>
> Thats good to hear. Lasik wouldnt free me or many others from glasses
> anyway. Those with presbyopia still need glasses and also if you end
> under/over corrected you still need glasses. Some people have too much
> myopia to be fully corrected. I know a lady in person whos -9 and her
> surgeon told her she will still need glasses, albet much thinner. She
> said forget lasik, if I still need glasses its not worth bothering.
> Relistically, lasik is touted to reduce your dependancy on glasses and
> this has rung true for most people. Nothing will free me from my
> dependancy of glasses. Not lasik, not contacts, not natural vision
> improvement, nothing!
>
>
> "Absolutely! Just not as many as you are making out."
>
>
> One can have a complication thats "not too severe" and still be happy
> overall. If someone is mulling over the "what ifs" and "will I be happy
> or not" or "will I have complications" he best just not get the surgury
> and banish his worries.
>
> I think its much easier for me(and my friends) to deal with glasses
> than plunge into the unknown with lasik and roll the dice and hope you
> get what you want. Once you have laser surgury, there is no going back.
> Let me make an analogy. You are hungry and two choices of snacks are
> offered. Choice A doesnt look very tasty but its nutritionous and
> healthy. Choice B looks absolutely yummy but you are told theres a 10%
> risk of you getting sick. Its the same with glasses vs. lasik. Glasses
> represents choice A where its sometimes a bit of an inconvinence but
> perfectly safe and effective. Lasik is choice B where it looks "tasty"
> but theres a risk of anything going wrong.
| |
|
| Hi Phyllis,
Your post is interesting. We used to play a game called "chinese
whispers" as children. You would sit in a circle and one child would
whisper a message in the next child's ear. This would continue around
the circle until it reached the last child. The 1st and last child
would then compare the message. In nearly every instance, the message
had changed almost entirely. In your case, the message seems to have
been repeated and changed. This seems to happen frequently in this NG.
If it is not too much trouble, could you post your story here. I have a
sketchy view of it and it would be good to clarify it.
Regards,
Linda
| |
|
| In article <1136350576.488557.139020@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
phyknapp@yahoo.com wrote:
> Ace, I see where you used my name and reproduced some information about
> me in this post.
> First, do not use my name or do not reproduce any information about me.
> You are funny sometimes, but this is not funny, you little weasel.
Thank you Phyllis for coming forward. I wonder if Ace will "hear" you
and realize that one cannot simply cut and paste other people's words
without their consent. I'm glad I'm not the only one who finds this a
problem.
--
~RT
| |
|
| http://www.newhousenews.com/archive/sefton083105.html
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health...-lasik.htm#more
I found your name and bad lasik testimonal on the above two websites
and there may be more sources. I have *not* put up those websites and
have no control of those websites which use your name. Public info like
those is educational to inform people of the risks of lasik. Me and my
friends are thankful some people are willing to be vocal about their
lasik experiences, both good and bad to help others make an informed
decision. I extend my consolences for everyone who had a less than
satisfactory experience.
I apologize for any mixups and misunderstandings. I will be more
careful to avoid mixups and running statements. Some people wanted
proof so I searched google and came up with lots of things which are
public info. I didnt imply anything about you. The college guy I know
is an entirely different person whom ive talked to and even exchanged
an email. He also had a bad experience and despite being 20/25 has a
hard time seeing now.
"fact are supported by independent studies, such studies have been
cited."
Thats great to cite studies. Some people may disagree with some
studies. I disagree with one study stating 90% of people end with 20/20
after lasik. It was found they omitted 70% of the (bad) results and
inflated the positives. Talk about bias.
"one cannot simply cut and paste other people's words
without their consent. I'm glad I'm not the only one who finds this a
problem"
I dont know most of those people whos stories are all over the
internet. Also I dont twist their words or make any claims about them,
I just do a strait cut and paste of excerpts. If the info was false,
its the fault of the website who put it up there in the first place! I
understand the merits of freedom of speech which say its ok to discuss
anything as long as its not slander, false, plaglarism nor libel or
anything making threats of harm. I have done no such bad things and
anything I say is my opinion. Theres millions of sources on the
internet about different subjects and people cite them all the time to
learn and give their opinions to others. If anyone wants to clarify any
issues with me, go ahead politely and refrain from name calling and
cursing.
| |
|
| In article <1136400279.149335.101300@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"Ace" <acemanvx@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> "fact are supported by independent studies, such studies have been
> cited."
>
> Thats great to cite studies. Some people may disagree with some
> studies. I disagree with one study stating 90% of people end with 20/20
> after lasik. It was found they omitted 70% of the (bad) results and
> inflated the positives. Talk about bias.
Yes, let's talk studies and bias. Why don't you provide links to the 90%
20/20 study and to the proof that this "study" is false. Otherwise it's
all hot air. You have provided no support, no facts, no citations, no
links, nothing. Not worth the keyboard it's typed on. It's 100% your
biased fantasy and nothing else.
>Theres millions of sources on the
> internet about different subjects and people cite them all the time to
> learn and give their opinions to others.
Citing people and studies means giving the source of where you got that
information WHEN you quote it. Otherwise it is plagiarism and/or could
be construed as libel. You're on a very litigious NG here. I'd be
careful if I were you.
--
~RT
| |
| serebel 2006-01-05, 1:08 am |
|
Linda wrote:
> Hi Phyllis,
> sketchy view of it and it would be good to clarify it.
> Regards,
> Linda
Oh Linda, if you only knew what you were asking of Phyllis here. 
|
| |
|
|