|
Home > Archive > Lasik Eyes Surgery > March 2006 > Is this guy must be the best lasik surgeon in the world?
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 |
Is this guy must be the best lasik surgeon in the world?
|
|
| Sandy 2006-03-27, 12:32 am |
| So he would have you think!
Thousands of patients....yet he's had only two with epithelial
ingrowth.
If another "eye doctor" has told you you can't have lasik, call him!
Treats up to -14 myopia, +6 hyperopia and 6 diopters of astigmatism.
He sounds like a real cowboy!!
He claims that there's not one case of blindness from lasik, but then
he slips in "in an FDA study". But of course! Those patients are
carefully chosen and carefully treated, and sometimes the bad results
are tossed. They are a minute percentage of the total number of lasik
patients out there. There's a patient blind in one eye from lasik not
more than an hour from my house, Dr. Levinson!
Read his site for more of his claims of superiority.
http://www.levinsoneyeclinic.com/richard.htm
| |
| serebel 2006-03-27, 12:32 am |
|
Sandy wrote:
> So he would have you think!
>
> Thousands of patients....yet he's had only two with epithelial
> ingrowth.
>
> If another "eye doctor" has told you you can't have lasik, call him!
>
> Treats up to -14 myopia, +6 hyperopia and 6 diopters of astigmatism.
> He sounds like a real cowboy!!
>
> He claims that there's not one case of blindness from lasik, but then
> he slips in "in an FDA study". But of course! Those patients are
> carefully chosen and carefully treated, and sometimes the bad results
> are tossed. They are a minute percentage of the total number of lasik
> patients out there. There's a patient blind in one eye from lasik not
> more than an hour from my house, Dr. Levinson!
>
> Read his site for more of his claims of superiority.
>
> http://www.levinsoneyeclinic.com/richard.htm
Thar she blows!!! More Sandy spam about a surgeon she never met.
Of course, like Ace, she knows someone............
| |
|
| surgeons like to brag, everyone says they are the best. The limitation
is often in the laser and your eye rather than the surgeons skill. For
example, if you have thin corneas, no surgeon in the world is going to
be able to correct a large amount of your myopia. I know this -9 lady
in real life who looked into lasik but her surgeon told her since her
eyes are so bad, she probably would still have a residual refraction
and need thin glasses part time. She didnt think it was worth it and
since she demanded 20/20 after lasik, I told her dont bother since you
just wont be happy after lasik and she says my sentiments exactly. Shes
gonna stick to glasses for many more years till something new comes out
| |
| Ragnar 2006-03-27, 10:35 am |
| I have consistently told people that these studies are more often
either wrong or get misinterpreted. It is interesting that you
choose to criticize the studies which are positive.
Nobody on the planet earth has gone blind from LASIK... Sandy lives
near someone who did.. but then Sandyland exists in the Twilight Zone.
You don't suppose Sandy could be... lying? No.. that couldn't be..
Sandy? Lying?
For those of us with functional brains... lets just think about this a
little. The LASIK procedure ablates/removes a clear layer of the
cornea about the thickness of 3 sheets of paper. There is no way that
doing that could result in blindness. That is like saying someone
broke their leg when someone got hit in the thigh with a pillow.
On 26 Mar 2006 18:47:47 -0800, "Sandy" <sandy@savvysneaks.com> wrote:
>So he would have you think!
>
>Thousands of patients....yet he's had only two with epithelial
>ingrowth.
>
>If another "eye doctor" has told you you can't have lasik, call him!
>
>Treats up to -14 myopia, +6 hyperopia and 6 diopters of astigmatism.
>He sounds like a real cowboy!!
>
>He claims that there's not one case of blindness from lasik, but then
>he slips in "in an FDA study". But of course! Those patients are
>carefully chosen and carefully treated, and sometimes the bad results
>are tossed. They are a minute percentage of the total number of lasik
>patients out there. There's a patient blind in one eye from lasik not
>more than an hour from my house, Dr. Levinson!
>
>Read his site for more of his claims of superiority.
>
>http://www.levinsoneyeclinic.com/richard.htm
| |
|
| Lasik didnt directly cause blindness, its the suction cap which caused
a detached retina which did. The preparation before the actual lasik
did it.
| |
| Sandy 2006-03-28, 12:35 am |
| And no suction ring would have been applied to Steve's eye if he wasn't
undergoing lasik surgery.
| |
| serebel 2006-03-28, 12:35 am |
|
Sandy wrote:
> And no suction ring would have been applied to Steve's eye if he wasn't
> undergoing lasik surgery.
Wrong again oh porno star Sandy, The suction ring is used for other
procedures besides lasik.
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2006-03-28, 12:35 am |
| Lasik uses a mechanical microkeratome that utilizes a suction ring to
affix the device to the eye while the device creates the Lasik flap
with a metal blade.
The femtosecond laser uses a suction to affix the docking ring to the
eye while the device creates the Lasik flap with laser energy.
Epi-Lasik uses a mechanical microkeratome nearly identical to the one
used in Lasik, however a blunt blade is used to slide over the front
of the cornea, not cut into the cornea. This lifts the epithelial
cells. Epi-Lasik requires less suction and often less time.
PRK and LASEK do not use a microkeratome of any kind. Neither would
RLE or P-IOL.
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 2006-03-28, 10:34 am |
| Assuming that is true - she would have had the same problem anyway
over time. The few sections of suction would have just been the straw
to break the camel's back. That detached retina could be repaired -
but I suppose nobody told her that.
I have a feeling that these "I know someone..." stories are actually
"I read an article in which someone claimed..."
Here's another thing to consider. Flying is extremely safe, however
there are a few planes that crash every year. Does that mean nobody
should fly? Malcontent logic would say so.
Lastly.. I'm sure the lady that you claim was blinded with a detached
retina has TWO eyes. Assuming she did have this detached retina, she
still has the other eye... so she is hardly blind. The people who
have monovision are only seeing with one eye at a time.. so it can't
be too awful.
On 27 Mar 2006 14:45:02 -0800, "Ace" <acemanvx@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Lasik didnt directly cause blindness, its the suction cap which caused
>a detached retina which did. The preparation before the actual lasik
>did it.
| |
| Ragnar 2006-03-28, 10:34 am |
| SERebel wins a prize!
I was just about to post that fact and you beat me to it!
PRK uses the suction ring just like LASIK does - to immobilize and
pressurize the eye for a few seconds while the ablation is done. Those
presurrized rings are crucial to refractive surgery.
If someone's eyes are so fragile that a suction ring would detach
their retina, then rubbing their eyes would eventually do the same
thing. In fact, people do have detached retinas whether or not they
have LASIK done. I haven't looked into this.. but I would venture to
say that the rate of detached retinas amongst non-surgical patients is
higher than that of patients who have had refractive surgery - becuase
the surgical patients have been screened.
On 27 Mar 2006 18:34:24 -0800, "serebel" <serebel@aol.com> wrote:
>
>Sandy wrote:
>
> Wrong again oh porno star Sandy, The suction ring is used for other
>procedures besides lasik.
| |
| Ragnar 2006-03-28, 10:34 am |
| Whoops.. PRK also uses a suction ring to immobilize and pressurize
the eye....
http://www.allaboutvision.com/visionsurgery/prk.htm
On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 03:37:46 GMT, Glenn - USAEyes.org
<glenn.hageleSTOPSPAM@USAEyes.org> wrote:
>Lasik uses a mechanical microkeratome that utilizes a suction ring to
>affix the device to the eye while the device creates the Lasik flap
>with a metal blade.
>
>The femtosecond laser uses a suction to affix the docking ring to the
>eye while the device creates the Lasik flap with laser energy.
>
>Epi-Lasik uses a mechanical microkeratome nearly identical to the one
>used in Lasik, however a blunt blade is used to slide over the front
>of the cornea, not cut into the cornea. This lifts the epithelial
>cells. Epi-Lasik requires less suction and often less time.
>
>PRK and LASEK do not use a microkeratome of any kind. Neither would
>RLE or P-IOL.
>
>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 2006-03-28, 10:34 am |
| On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 11:18:28 GMT, Ragnar <ragnarsuomi@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>Whoops.. PRK also uses a suction ring to immobilize and pressurize
>the eye....
No, it does not. Not only is this not the manner in which PRK has been
taught for about 15 years, but I had PRK and I can assure you no
suction ring was used. A suction ring is used with Epi-Lasik.
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.
| |
| Graeme Hewson 2006-03-28, 12:31 pm |
| > Those presurrized rings are crucial to refractive surgery.
Not for LASEK, either.
|
| |
|
|