Ragnar wrote:
- quote -

Thanks again for the opportunity to respond, Rags. My kill filter only
works when I am using XNews which, for some odd reason, I am unable to
suddenly use from home. Therefore, I am using Google, so there you
have it. At work, I am still able to ignore your petulant little
barbs.

The cost figures I stated were what I was told by the patient. That
figure not only included the costs of the surgeries, but
transportation, and other physician consultations. Therefore, I am
only repeating what I was told.

I agree that the practitioner should try someone local who wouldn't
rape their pocketbook. Unfortunately, this physician wasn't able to
find someone who could do the job at the medical school or in the
community where he practices. Actually $1K is a bargain, considering
the time and materials involved and, thus far, I haven't been charged
with rape.

You are indeed a bitter little man with a huge chip on his
shoulder...that is if you are a man.

DrG

While the answer for some would be obvious, one must consider if the
potential risk of herpes blisters would be worth the potential benefit
of a hot date with Natalie Imbruglia. 8^)

Responding to Christopher "Rags" Roiland, DIP (not an acronym)
------------------------------
What a goober. Ragnar attempts a marginally literate smear, and when
confronted with facts, says, "Yeah, but . . ."

MORON ALERT!

Greg has detailed the time-consuming CL fitting process several times
in this NG. Time is money. And as he has just pointed out (and Rags
cannot refute), it's a whole lot more successful and a whole lot less
money than the experimental procedure Rags is so fond of.

Here's an analogy...dealing with Ragnar is like getting herpes blisters
on your face right before a hot date with Natalie Imbruglia.

Odd that your kill filter on me only works when you aren't trying to
dodge a question.
Lets just assume that your fanciful numbers of $15k are correct -
which they aren't. Where do you get off charging $1K to $2K for
contact lenses of any sort?
In the case you outlined, I would have suggested that the patient try
some contact lenses from a practitioner who wasn't going to rape their
pocketbook.



On 5 Jan 2005 20:05:22 -0800, "Dr. Leukoma" <drg[at]leukoma.com> wrote:

- quote -

Er, Barnyard Doggie,
Time for your enhancement.

SErebel

Here's another analogy: Somebody gets their vision screwed up by LASIK
and has a double image out of one eye, and then they go get another
wavefront LASIK on top of that LASIK and still have a double image out
of the same eye, just in a slightly different place, having spent about
$15K for that pleasure. Unfortunately, it's pretty difficult to do
complicated microsurgery with double vision. So, they find some
"voodoo guy" in the yellow pages or on the internet and get fitted with
a contact lens and "voila," the double image is gone. They can do
microsurgery, and don't have to collect on disability insurance. In
the meantime, the contact lens reshapes their cornea so that they can
enjoy some good vision after they remove it. All that for about $1K -
$2K. A bargain, wouldn't you say?
DrG, "voodoo guy"

P.S.: Thank's for the free advertising, Rags.

I am trying to think of legitimate reasons why Ragnar would participate
in this newsgroup. Here's what I've come up with so far:

- Free internet access in the psych ward
- Doing research for 7th-grade remedial English term paper entitled,
"LASIK victimz is all stoopid winers"
- He's got a really tiny dick.

One might question why a thundering moron who is not capable of
rational thought would post in this newsgroup other than to try to
scare people away from naming their newborn offspring "Christopher".

Here's an analogy: Still in his McDonald's uniform, Ragnar walks into
an operating room, taps the busy surgeon on the shoulder, then yells in
his face, "You're a STOOPID guy! That lady ain't sick! You're just
using that cutter things and stuff on her because you think you're so
smart! Well, I'M WAY SMARTER THAN YOU! WAY! You see these three
little gold french frys on my nametag here? That means I was the
second best french fry cook on closing shift THREE WEEKS IN A ROW!
When did you ever get second best ANYTHING three weeks in a row, Mr.
Smart Guy? Yeah, that's right, you can't answer me, can you, Mr.
I'm-so-cool-in-my-green-pajamas? I didn't think so. SO THERE, you
stoopid guy, you! Stoooopid!"

(Okay, that wasn't so much an analogy.)

I am trying to think of legiitmate reasons why someone would
participate in this newsgroup. Here's what I came up with so far:
people who have had refractive surgery done
people who are thinking about having refractive surgery done
people who refer those wishing to have refractive surgery to good
surgeons and to avoid bad surgeons

One might question why a doctor who does not perform refractive
surgery would post in this newsgroup other than to try and scare
people during their initial 6 month post op period so they can perform
their expensive "rehabilitation" on them.

Here's an analogy... someone has a broken arm and a doctor sets it and
puts it in a cast for a few months. During that 3 month period, some
voodoo priest selling a magical potion gets to that patient. After
the 3 months, if the arm comes out fine, the voodoo guy takes credit
for it, if it comes out bad, the voodoo guy damns the doctor for not
getting it right - while at the same time taking no responsibility for
his own failure.