|
Home > Archive > Lasik Eyes Surgery > July 2006 > Another guy with a bad lasik result, his fault however. His surgeon warned him!
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 |
Another guy with a bad lasik result, his fault however. His surgeon warned him!
|
|
|
| Guys / Gals , while well over 90% of the people having laser done have
terrific results , there are those that havent ( myself included )
If you are considering the surgery , make sure that you are a good
candidate for the procedure ...... they told me my eyes were slightly
dry and could cause a problem , being as stubborn as I am and wanting
to not wear glasses ..... I had the surgery done anyway ( mind you they
said that I " MITE " have a problem , not that I would have a problem )
now 3 years later I am going thru about 4 tubes of artificial tears a
day and if the eye gets even the least bit dry , the vision at best is
blurry .
The other nite when shooting , actually sighting in a new bow , I
couldnt see my arrows in the target butt at 5 yds and supposdly I have
20/25 vision ( after 20/200 ) ....... kinda sucks having to use Swaros
@ 5 yds to see your arrows :rolleyes:
So , for those of you considering it ..... know this ..... most people
have terrific luck and the percentages are in your favor
....................... BUT , if you do not test out as a good candidate
for the surgery , make sure to ask your Dr what the possible
consequences mite be in your particular case.....
I am not trying to talk anyone out of it , only to make sure you do
your homework prior to having it done , most people are very satisfied
and most of you probably will be also.
And I did go to 1 of the most respected Lasik Drs in the midwest , not
a fly by nite ........ he has been busting his backside to help fix my
problem , even tho I am a year and a half out of warranty ....... just
letting you here from someone on the unlucky side ...... good luck to
all having the procedure done .......... ia bhtr
My comments: I cant feel to sorry for him. He was too stubborn and
ignored his surgeons warning that his slightly dry eyes "might" cause a
problem. I "know" a bunch of others who did not listen and leave well
enough alone. There was one lady who was only -1 and one doctor and one
surgeon told her to leave things well enough alone. She didnt and is
now farsighted, has induced astigmatism and cant be corrected to 20/20
either! She needs bifocals as well! There was another lady at -1.5 who
posted on a message board asking if others thought she should have
lasik. She got 20 replies and everyone basically said NO! Leave things
be! Youd just trade up for readers! Shes now farsighted with aberrated
vision and needs bifocals and came back crying and everyone was like
"sorry but we warned you"
I "know" a few with huge pupils and their surgeons said to expect some
"effects" at night and said think long and hard about your decision. I
even warned 3 or 4. Some people are just stubborn and either didnt
educate themselves about the risks or only want to listen to what they
want to hear. Long story short, their night vision is ruined forever
and they now regret it!
Bottom line is if your own lasik surgeon is hesisant, you had better
listen to him! There is a VERY good reason if he would rather miss out
on around $5000 than risk lasik on you! It also shows that he *does*
express concern
| |
| Tom Lucas 2006-07-26, 8:26 am |
| "Ace" <acemanvx@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1153902579.768354.6500@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
<snip tale of woe>
Is this guy afraid of "ght" or what? Can't dry eyes be fixed with a plug
somewhere that makes your eyes water <g>
Also what kind of environment is he in to need 3 bottles of drops a day?
That's like 30ml of drops which is essentially a constant trickle. Eyes
surely can't dry out as quickly as that. I think something smells a bit
fishy about that story.
> My comments: I cant feel too sorry for him. He was too stubborn and
> ignored his surgeons warning that his slightly dry eyes "might" cause
> a
> problem. I "know" a bunch of others who did not listen and leave well
> enough alone. There was one lady who was only -1 and one doctor and
> one
> surgeon told her to leave things well enough alone. She didnt and is
> now farsighted, has induced astigmatism and cant be corrected to 20/20
> either! She needs bifocals as well! There was another lady at -1.5 who
> posted on a message board asking if others thought she should have
> lasik. She got 20 replies and everyone basically said NO! Leave things
> be! Youd just trade up for readers! Shes now farsighted with aberrated
> vision and needs bifocals and came back crying and everyone was like
> "sorry but we warned you"
> I "know" a few with huge pupils and their surgeons said to expect some
> "effects" at night and said think long and hard about your decision. I
> even warned 3 or 4. Some people are just stubborn and either didnt
> educate themselves about the risks or only want to listen to what they
> want to hear. Long story short, their night vision is ruined forever
> and they now regret it!
>
> Bottom line is if your own lasik surgeon is hesisant, you had better
> listen to him! There is a VERY good reason if he would rather miss out
> on around $5000 than risk lasik on you! It also shows that he *does*
> express concern
That's very valid but it is also worth noting that people who are at
increased risk are not necessarily going to have complications. Not
everyone with big pupils get night vision problems and not everyone with
dryish eyes will need constant access to a fire hydrant. It is all about
risk management.
| |
|
|
Tom Lucas said:
> Is this guy afraid of "ght" or what? Can't dry eyes be fixed with a plug
> somewhere that makes your eyes water <g>
He probably already has a plug and they still are dry 
> Also what kind of environment is he in to need 3 bottles of drops a day?
> That's like 30ml of drops which is essentially a constant trickle. Eyes
> surely can't dry out as quickly as that. I think something smells a bit
> fishy about that story.
dry, dusty environment, probably in the midwestern USA where the air
has low humidity. Its possible if his cornea nerves are shot that his
eyes no longer make tears then you need drops almost constantly. Major
hassle
> That's very valid but it is also worth noting that people who are at
> increased risk are not necessarily going to have complications. Not
> everyone with big pupils get night vision problems and not everyone with
> dryish eyes will need constant access to a fire hydrant. It is all about
> risk management.
If the surgeon knows something is amiss, it might be wise to listen.
Maybe this stubborn guy was willing to risk it all and hope for the
best, but unfortunately his surgeon was right. His surgeon probably
could have rejected him as a poor candidate so maybe the fact he wasnt
rejected and just warned means the chance of dry eyes wasnt absolute,
but just high risk. Everyone ive seen and read about had problems with
their night vision if their pupils are huge and/or larger than the
lasered zone. 7mm pupils with a 6mm laser zone will have 1mm of "out of
bounds" so its logical that halos will occur. Its the same logic in
giving a -7 myope -6 glasses, his vision will be slightly blurry. Why
are all the orthoK optometrists warning me to expect problems with my
night vision when I told them my pupils were 9mm?
| |
|
| Ace, just shut the f-ck up. It's quite obvious you know nothing about
the midwest, where the most oft-repeated comment of summer is, "It's
not the heat, it's the humidity." If 75-95% humidity is dry, what would
you consider humid? The midwest is neither dry nor dusty, nor is it the
"Grapes of Wrath" dustbowl. That would be hundreds of miles west.
Perhaps you should devote some of the many hours you spend crusading
against Lasik to the study of geography. Do you wear a towel for a cape
and jump off the top bunk? You really need to get yourself a new hobby.
Ace wrote:
> Tom Lucas said:
>
> He probably already has a plug and they still are dry
>
>
> dry, dusty environment, probably in the midwestern USA where the air
> has low humidity. Its possible if his cornea nerves are shot that his
> eyes no longer make tears then you need drops almost constantly. Major
> hassle
>
>
>
> If the surgeon knows something is amiss, it might be wise to listen.
> Maybe this stubborn guy was willing to risk it all and hope for the
> best, but unfortunately his surgeon was right. His surgeon probably
> could have rejected him as a poor candidate so maybe the fact he wasnt
> rejected and just warned means the chance of dry eyes wasnt absolute,
> but just high risk. Everyone ive seen and read about had problems with
> their night vision if their pupils are huge and/or larger than the
> lasered zone. 7mm pupils with a 6mm laser zone will have 1mm of "out of
> bounds" so its logical that halos will occur. Its the same logic in
> giving a -7 myope -6 glasses, his vision will be slightly blurry. Why
> are all the orthoK optometrists warning me to expect problems with my
> night vision when I told them my pupils were 9mm?
| |
| Tom Lucas 2006-07-26, 8:26 am |
| "nun" <nunayabizinez@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1153919426.642237.42910@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Ace, just shut the f-ck up. It's quite obvious you know nothing about
> the midwest, where the most oft-repeated comment of summer is, "It's
> not the heat, it's the humidity." If 75-95% humidity is dry, what
> would
> you consider humid? The midwest is neither dry nor dusty, nor is it
> the
> "Grapes of Wrath" dustbowl. That would be hundreds of miles west.
You guys seem to get real territorial over your zones. How far west of
"midwest" do you have to go to get to "west". And then if that is not
the west coast then what would you call the west coast because it can't
be more west than "west"?
I think you guys have had independence for long enough but now it's time
for us Brits to take over again and set you right ;-)
| |
| serebel 2006-07-26, 9:28 pm |
|
nun wrote:
> Ace, just shut the f-ck up. It's quite obvious you know nothing about
> the midwest, where the most oft-repeated comment of summer is, "It's
> not the heat, it's the humidity." If 75-95% humidity is dry, what would
> you consider humid? The midwest is neither dry nor dusty, nor is it the
> "Grapes of Wrath" dustbowl. That would be hundreds of miles west.
>
> Perhaps you should devote some of the many hours you spend crusading
> against Lasik to the study of geography. Do you wear a towel for a cape
> and jump off the top bunk? You really need to get yourself a new hobby.
>
>
Just more proof of what a retard and liar Ace is.
| |
|
|
Tom Lucas wrote:
> "nun" <nunayabizinez@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1153919426.642237.42910@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> You guys seem to get real territorial over your zones. How far west of
> "midwest" do you have to go to get to "west". And then if that is not
> the west coast then what would you call the west coast because it can't
> be more west than "west"?
>
> I think you guys have had independence for long enough but now it's time
> for us Brits to take over again and set you right ;-)
I have been to the western states and the air was much drier with clear
blue skies and not a single cloud most of the time. It is a fact that
there is less humidity and precipation(rain) in the western part of the
states.
| |
| serebel 2006-07-27, 9:26 pm |
|
Ace wrote:
>
> I have been to the western states and the air was much drier with clear
> blue skies and not a single cloud most of the time. It is a fact that
> there is less humidity and precipation(rain) in the western part of the
> states.
Your original post says MIDwestern states. So, which lie is it?
|
| |
|
|