Lasik Eyes Surgery - MD has severe complications, regrets Custom Wavefront

Author

MD has severe complications, regrets Custom Wavefront

Trulytelling@yahoo.com

2006-07-26, 9:28 pm

http://www.lasikdisaster.com/patientletter5.htm

Excerpts:

I had "Custom Wavefront" LASIK on both eyes... I have severe dry eye
and had to have both my lower puncta cauterized.... I've also developed
erratic visual acuity and loss of contrast sensitivity; glasses and
contacts can't help since refraction for me is a moving target. I also
now have terrible accommodative dysfunction which no one seems to be
able to explain. I guess this generates a lot of the eye pain that I
experience.

I am in a procedure-intensive specialty and I have some knowledge of
the informed consent. The consent form offered up by most refractive
surgeons is a sorry document which is guided by legal standards and
doesn't give the patient realistic information by which to make their
decision. I fully believe that that constitutes malpractice in the
setting of an elective procedure. There is also too much reliance on
patient satisfaction surveys and not enough emphasis on real science.
Sure, if you were trying to market an expensive surgical procedure,
glowing patient testimonials are better for the bottom line than
evidence-based medicine. Not even a marketing 101 flunkie would submit
a brochure which lists these real, possible outcomes...

likely decrease in low light and night vision

definite decrease in tear quantity and/or quality...no real way to
estimate if you will be symptomatic or not

eye fatigue and/or eye pain

unpredictable quantities of metallic debris left behind

permanent denervation or paresthesias of the cornea

retinal detachment or ischemia during surgery

If I would have suspected that any of the above outcomes were possible,
I'd be sitting here right now CLEARLY viewing my computer screen with
my old trustworthy glasses on.

I genuinely believe that RS [refractive surgery] is a crime in its
present form. LASIK may be the worst of the offenders. It "cheapens"
the field of medicine and is perpetuated by greed. I don't consider
refractive surgeons colleagues...these people aren't healers. I've also
given lots of thought on how to reach potential victims of the RS
industry. At least patients deserve accurate information before making
such a potentially life-altering decision.

serebel

2006-07-27, 2:26 am

Trulytelling@yahoo.com wrote:

> I genuinely believe that RS [refractive surgery] is a crime in its
> present form. LASIK may be the worst of the offenders. It "cheapens"
> the field of medicine and is perpetuated by greed. I don't consider
> refractive surgeons colleagues...these people aren't healers. I've also
> given lots of thought on how to reach potential victims of the RS
> industry. At least patients deserve accurate information before making
> such a potentially life-altering decision.

The big crime conspiracy theory as pertains to losers who thought they
knew everthing.
"I was stupid til they fried my eyes, now I'm blind genius."

Ragnar

2006-07-27, 9:26 pm

you are reposting a fictional story from lasikdisaster. Gee.. I
wonder if a website with a name like lasikdisaster is unbiased?

On 26 Jul 2006 18:47:54 -0700, Trulytelling@yahoo.com wrote:

>http://www.lasikdisaster.com/patientletter5.htm
>
>Excerpts:
>
>I had "Custom Wavefront" LASIK on both eyes... I have severe dry eye
>and had to have both my lower puncta cauterized.... I've also developed
>erratic visual acuity and loss of contrast sensitivity; glasses and
>contacts can't help since refraction for me is a moving target. I also
>now have terrible accommodative dysfunction which no one seems to be
>able to explain. I guess this generates a lot of the eye pain that I
>experience.
>
>I am in a procedure-intensive specialty and I have some knowledge of
>the informed consent. The consent form offered up by most refractive
>surgeons is a sorry document which is guided by legal standards and
>doesn't give the patient realistic information by which to make their
>decision. I fully believe that that constitutes malpractice in the
>setting of an elective procedure. There is also too much reliance on
>patient satisfaction surveys and not enough emphasis on real science.
>Sure, if you were trying to market an expensive surgical procedure,
>glowing patient testimonials are better for the bottom line than
>evidence-based medicine. Not even a marketing 101 flunkie would submit
>a brochure which lists these real, possible outcomes...
>
>likely decrease in low light and night vision
>
>definite decrease in tear quantity and/or quality...no real way to
>estimate if you will be symptomatic or not
>
>eye fatigue and/or eye pain
>
>unpredictable quantities of metallic debris left behind
>
>permanent denervation or paresthesias of the cornea
>
>retinal detachment or ischemia during surgery
>
>If I would have suspected that any of the above outcomes were possible,
>I'd be sitting here right now CLEARLY viewing my computer screen with
>my old trustworthy glasses on.
>
>I genuinely believe that RS [refractive surgery] is a crime in its
>present form. LASIK may be the worst of the offenders. It "cheapens"
>the field of medicine and is perpetuated by greed. I don't consider
>refractive surgeons colleagues...these people aren't healers. I've also
>given lots of thought on how to reach potential victims of the RS
>industry. At least patients deserve accurate information before making
>such a potentially life-altering decision.