http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2000.. />
rchStories


Despite glowing ads and growing popularity, laser eye surgery is not
risk-free. Correspondent John Blackstone continues his "Eye on America"
report on the risks of laser eye surgery, with facts, figures, and some
precautions to take before letting anyone touch your eyes.


...has done it successfully thousands of times but not every patient
is happy.


"I can no longer be corrected with glasses so that my 20/20 has totally
gone," Zackarian says.


know the odds, and don't throw away your glasses.

"The chances are you may need glasses for something afterward, whether
it's for reading or driving at night or whatever," says Dr. Edmiston.

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

This one is 6 years old.    You are really reaching back into the
archives to dredge up anything negative.

What is your mental problem?


On 21 Jul 2006 01:19:18 -0700, "Ace" <acemanvx@yahoo.com> wrote:

>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2000../>
archStories
>
>
>Despite glowing ads and growing popularity, laser eye surgery is not
>risk-free. Correspondent John Blackstone continues his "Eye on America"
>report on the risks of laser eye surgery, with facts, figures, and some
>precautions to take before letting anyone touch your eyes.
>
>
>..has done it successfully thousands of times but not every patient
>is happy.
>
>
>"I can no longer be corrected with glasses so that my 20/20 has totally
>gone," Zackarian says.
>
>
>know the odds, and don't throw away your glasses.
>
>"The chances are you may need glasses for something afterward, whether
>it's for reading or driving at night or whatever," says Dr. Edmiston.

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

More flapcrap from the retard again. The only thing he learned is how
to toe the "flappie"line.

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

serebel wrote:
> More flapcrap from the retard again. The only thing he learned is how
> to toe the "flappie"line.


So you admit lasik was flawed 6 years ago? Why werent you(and ragnar)
there to warn them to wait for wavefront lasik of the present?

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

Didn't say that at all.
I was remarking that out of 10 million procedures. you had to go WAY
back to find something negative to post.   Back 6 years ago. LASIK
was in its infancy since it was fairly new at the time.  The number of
lasik procedures done at the time was perhaps a few thousand instead
of 10 million.   Obviously with so many procedures. there have been
improvements.
In your case.. I suggest you wait until you are 92 years old to have
your refractive surgery done.  You will then get the best that
technology has to offer and you will have fantastic vision for the 10
days before you die from old age.
On 21 Jul 2006 19:03:20 -0700, "Ace" <acemanvx@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>serebel wrote: 
>
>
>So you admit lasik was flawed 6 years ago? Why werent you(and ragnar)
>there to warn them to wait for wavefront lasik of the present?

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

Ragnar wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> Didn't say that at all.
> I was remarking that out of 10 million procedures. you had to go WAY
> back to find something negative to post.   Back 6 years ago. LASIK
> was in its infancy since it was fairly new at the time.  The number of
> lasik procedures done at the time was perhaps a few thousand instead
> of 10 million.   Obviously with so many procedures. there have been
> improvements.
> In your case.. I suggest you wait until you are 92 years old to have
> your refractive surgery done.  You will then get the best that
> technology has to offer and you will have fantastic vision for the 10
> days before you die from old age.
> On 21 Jul 2006 19:03:20 -0700, "Ace" <acemanvx@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 


Bad lasik experiences happen all the time, I can find some in the last
2 years. I do agree there have been improvements, lasik was more
dangerous years ago with more problems back then. However its still too
risky for most people, this is why only a few million have done it out
of billions of people in the world. The majority of people are sticking
with glasses, contacts, orthoK or other means of correction and coping
with their refractive errors.


Ill probably start developing cateracts in my 60s as do many people.
Then I can have those cateracts removed and whatever advanced IOL
technology there is at that time will be put to good use. However way
before that ill be wearing wavefront glasses to give me at least 20/15
or better corrected vision and superior quality vision. There is
already first gen wavefront glasses and there is a prototype of second
gen wavefront but its huge and bulky but gives healthy eyes 20/13 to
20/10 vision in most cases. I will post a thread about this when I find
the articles

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

I can't believe how stupid you are.   That might sound insulting. but
you are incredible.

You can find some bad LASIK experiences within the last 2 years?  Well
there's a shock.  Over a million LASIK procedures are done every
year. so I would expect that there are a couple of bad experiences -
especially at LVI.    Those bad experiences are not due to the LASIK
procedure but because of incompetent surgeons.

The majority of people are sticking to glasses or contacts.  Really? I
don't see many myopes over the age of 20 wearing glasses.  They are
wearing contacts, and if they can afford it, they have LASIK.

Billions of people have not had LASIK?  There are roughly 7 billion
people in the world.   Of them, there are probably about 100 million
people who are of the appropriate age, and have enough money, and live
where LASIK is available, and are nearsighted.    10 million out of a
possible 100 million isn't bad.

You are out of your mind if you think "wavefront" glasses are going to
give you 20/15 vision.   "Wavefront" glasses are a gimmick.  There is
no way the subtle aberrations of wavefront are going to have any
significant effect with glasses that move around.

You really have no idea of anything to do with refractive surgery.
Neither do most people. but they don't go posting in the lasik
newsgroup either.




On 22 Jul 2006 20:26:06 -0700, "Ace" <acemanvx@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>Ragnar wrote: 
>
>
>Bad lasik experiences happen all the time, I can find some in the last
>2 years. I do agree there have been improvements, lasik was more
>dangerous years ago with more problems back then. However its still too
>risky for most people, this is why only a few million have done it out
>of billions of people in the world. The majority of people are sticking
>with glasses, contacts, orthoK or other means of correction and coping
>with their refractive errors.
>
>
>Ill probably start developing cateracts in my 60s as do many people.
>Then I can have those cateracts removed and whatever advanced IOL
>technology there is at that time will be put to good use. However way
>before that ill be wearing wavefront glasses to give me at least 20/15
>or better corrected vision and superior quality vision. There is
>already first gen wavefront glasses and there is a prototype of second
>gen wavefront but its huge and bulky but gives healthy eyes 20/13 to
>20/10 vision in most cases. I will post a thread about this when I find
>the articles

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

Ace wrote:
>
>

There is
> already first gen wavefront glasses and there is a prototype of second
> gen wavefront but its huge and bulky but gives healthy eyes 20/13 to
> 20/10 vision in most cases. I will post a thread about this when I find
> the articles



Don't bother, anything you post is a lie anyway.

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

> You can find some bad LASIK experiences within the last 2 years?  Well
> there's a shock.  Over a million LASIK procedures are done every
> year. so I would expect that there are a couple of bad experiences -
> especially at LVI.    Those bad experiences are not due to the LASIK
> procedure but because of incompetent surgeons.


Bad lasik can happen by the best surgeons. Bad surgeons result in more
bad lasik. Most bad lasik experiences go unreported because the surgeon
wants a coverup, the patient is in denial or the patient just tells his
friends not to get lasik then moves on with his/her life. The truth is
about 10% are not happy with their lasik and from what ive read, almost
everyone loses contrast after lasik, gets more bad aberrations, has
drier eyes, etc. If you arent picky about your vision and just want
your refractive error reduced and dont mind the compromises and risks,
go ahead.


> The majority of people are sticking to glasses or contacts.  Really? I
> don't see many myopes over the age of 20 wearing glasses.  They are
> wearing contacts, and if they can afford it, they have LASIK.


Firstly, most myopes are around a -1 so they usually only wear glasses
for movies, driving or to see a lecture from the back row. So of course
I dont see them in glasses most of the time. Contacts are much more
popular among women cause they are vain, but I stand correct that they
choose to stick with contacts than get lasik, but they do get lasik
eventurally once they lose tolerance to contacts, that much ill agree
with you, Ragnar.



> Billions of people have not had LASIK?  There are roughly 7 billion
> people in the world.   Of them, there are probably about 100 million
> people who are of the appropriate age, and have enough money, and live
> where LASIK is available, and are nearsighted.    10 million out of a
> possible 100 million isn't bad.


I doubt its 10% but even if it is, I stand correct that 90% are still
wearing glasses or contacts, even orthoK.



> You are out of your mind if you think "wavefront" glasses are going
to
> give you 20/15 vision.   "Wavefront" glasses are a gimmick.  There is
> no way the subtle aberrations of wavefront are going to have any
> significant effect with glasses that move around.


You stand partially correct, but thats first gen wavefront glasses we
are talking about. Next gen wavefront glasses will have thousands of
tiny mirrors that move as your eyes move. This kind of technology is
due sometime in 2020. I even read about glasses that can accomodate by
zooming in/out. This will make bifocals a thing of the past! But to
give credit, I bet lasik in the year 2020 is going to be MUCH better,
heck there may be something better to replace lasik. If there is a
safe, reversable way to improve my vision, ill seriously consider it to
reduce dependancy on glasses and theres always wavefront glasses to
fine tune my vision to perfectation for distance such as driving and
movies.


> You really have no idea of anything to do with refractive surgery.
> Neither do most people. but they don't go posting in the lasik
> newsgroup either.


freedom of speech to express my opinions even if some dont agree.

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

You are so full of it Ace.

SERebel and I see fine with 20/20 vision and no glasses nor contacts.
You are stumbling around with a pair of glasses strapped to your
skull.  Somebody isn't right about something here.



On 24 Jul 2006 01:11:37 -0700, "Ace" <acemanvx@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
>
>
>Bad lasik can happen by the best surgeons. Bad surgeons result in more
>bad lasik. Most bad lasik experiences go unreported because the surgeon
>wants a coverup, the patient is in denial or the patient just tells his
>friends not to get lasik then moves on with his/her life. The truth is
>about 10% are not happy with their lasik and from what ive read, almost
>everyone loses contrast after lasik, gets more bad aberrations, has
>drier eyes, etc. If you arent picky about your vision and just want
>your refractive error reduced and dont mind the compromises and risks,
>go ahead.
>
> 
>
>
>Firstly, most myopes are around a -1 so they usually only wear glasses
>for movies, driving or to see a lecture from the back row. So of course
>I dont see them in glasses most of the time. Contacts are much more
>popular among women cause they are vain, but I stand correct that they
>choose to stick with contacts than get lasik, but they do get lasik
>eventurally once they lose tolerance to contacts, that much ill agree
>with you, Ragnar.
>
>
> 
>
>
>I doubt its 10% but even if it is, I stand correct that 90% are still
>wearing glasses or contacts, even orthoK.
>
>
> 
>to 
>
>
>You stand partially correct, but thats first gen wavefront glasses we
>are talking about. Next gen wavefront glasses will have thousands of
>tiny mirrors that move as your eyes move. This kind of technology is
>due sometime in 2020. I even read about glasses that can accomodate by
>zooming in/out. This will make bifocals a thing of the past! But to
>give credit, I bet lasik in the year 2020 is going to be MUCH better,
>heck there may be something better to replace lasik. If there is a
>safe, reversable way to improve my vision, ill seriously consider it to
>reduce dependancy on glasses and theres always wavefront glasses to
>fine tune my vision to perfectation for distance such as driving and
>movies.
>
> 
>
>
>freedom of speech to express my opinions even if some dont agree.

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]