Contact lenses is 10-20x safer than lasik. Lasik is *not* safe! Glenn posted a false article!

#25 12-03-2006, 01:22 AM

[at]all!

I would like to introduce operationauge.com - the international
website of the nonprofit-organization Operation Auge e.V. We have two
aims:

1. If you plan to undergo a laser eye surgery, such as IntraLASIK,
LASIK, LASEK, PRK, Epi-LASIK you should have the possibility to acquire
a good understanding of the benefits, risks and complications of laser
vision correction.

2. If you suffer from complications after laser eye surgery you should
receive help, such that you could correct the problem yourself.
Operation Auge e.V. aims to provide you with medical, psychological and
legal support...more? => http://www.operationauge.com

Kind regards, Ron

#24 11-04-2006, 02:23 AM

Ace wrote:
- quote -

> Its a shame some people make the lasik mistake instead of CLE's then
> they have problems with lasik and in a few years develop cateracts and
> got lasik for nothing! In fact you may end back in glasses because of
> miscalculated IOLs thanks to lasik. No one over 40 with a high
> prescription should ever consider lasik. Low myopes shouldnt get CLE
> either but stick with glasses(and take em off for reading)

This public service message brought to you by Retard Inc.

#23 11-03-2006, 04:12 PM

Dr. Leukoma wrote:
- quote -

> I disagree. They will still get cataracts. Better to do clear lens
> exchange.
> DrG

Its a shame some people make the lasik mistake instead of CLE's then
they have problems with lasik and in a few years develop cateracts and
got lasik for nothing! In fact you may end back in glasses because of
miscalculated IOLs thanks to lasik. No one over 40 with a high
prescription should ever consider lasik. Low myopes shouldnt get CLE
either but stick with glasses(and take em off for reading)

#22 11-03-2006, 04:10 PM

Dr. Leukoma wrote:
- quote -

> Trying to scare patients out of contacts and into surgery is a
> well-worn tactic. This topic merits careful and thoughtful analysis,
> not the treatment you would like to give it here.

If people are being tricked or scared into getting lasik, something has
gotta be done about that misleading opinion. I know a woman who was
tricked into trading her comfortable problem free contacts for problems
with lasik. She doesnt see as well now and regrets lasik when contacts
did the job fine and much better.

eric_8_7_5 wrote:
- quote -

> I think that under some circumstances Laser eye surgery is really safer
> than contact lenses. And sometimes it makes more sense than glasses.
> As an example. In developing countries like India or Africa hygiene
> cannot be assured. Lasik is definitely safer in such countries than
> contact lenses.
> Another example. There are refractive surgeons who do Lasik on people
> of third world countries because they cannot afford glasses. And even
> if they get glasses, after some time the glasses will be lost or
> destroyed. So for those people Lasik is better than contacts or
> glasses.
> In modern countries Lasik/Prk makes sense only when contact lens
> tollerance is limited to a few hours a day and glasses are no solution
> (But I think that in most cases glasses are a good solution). I thought
> that I was contact lens intollerant until I cured underlying conditions
> of dry eye (which was gut flora in my case).
> I don't like the concept of Ortho-K. I think my eyes would feel
> terrible if I left a hard lens in my eye overnight. This would be
> really dangerous to my eyes.

The only scinerio where lasik might be safer than contacts is if you
refuse to care for contacts like I know one guy. He leaves them in his
eyes till they begin to hurt then he throws away the contacts, waits
for the pain to stop and pops in a new pair and wears them 24/7 till
his eyes cant take it anymore. He wants to get lasik soon.

In developing countries, people dont have $200 for glasses, much less
$5000 for lasik! The good news is myopia is rare because they dont do
much, if any near work. Most myopes there are only a -1 or -2 and quite
functional without glasses. We are donating glasses for the very rare
high myope in developing countries.

I dont see a good reason for lasik. Everyone can tolerate glasses, its
just some people dont like its inconvinences. Glasses doesnt dry nor
irritate your eyes like contacts do for many, including me. Lasik is
way too dangerous to trade for glasses. If you think your having
problems with glasses, youve seen nothing of the problems lasik causes.

OrthoK is far safer than lasik and could help reduce my dependency on
glasses.

#21 11-02-2006, 08:55 PM

eric_8_7_5 wrote:
- quote -

> Dr. Leukoma ha scritto:
> > I disagree. They will still get cataracts. Better to do clear lens
> > exchange.
> That's a good point. But they would loose short distance vision which
> could be catastrophic for some who have to do close work. So they
> should be first operated by laser and later, when cataracts develop, by
> CLE.

Then, use the Restor lens.

DrG

#20 11-02-2006, 08:36 PM

Dr. Leukoma ha scritto:

- quote -

> I disagree. They will still get cataracts. Better to do clear lens
> exchange.

That's a good point. But they would loose short distance vision which
could be catastrophic for some who have to do close work. So they
should be first operated by laser and later, when cataracts develop, by
CLE.

#19 11-02-2006, 08:17 PM

I disagree. They will still get cataracts. Better to do clear lens
exchange.

DrG

eric_8_7_5 wrote:
- quote -

> I think that under some circumstances Laser eye surgery is really safer
> than contact lenses. And sometimes it makes more sense than glasses.
> As an example. In developing countries like India or Africa hygiene
> cannot be assured. Lasik is definitely safer in such countries than
> contact lenses.
> Another example. There are refractive surgeons who do Lasik on people
> of third world countries because they cannot afford glasses. And even
> if they get glasses, after some time the glasses will be lost or
> destroyed. So for those people Lasik is better than contacts or
> glasses.
> In modern countries Lasik/Prk makes sense only when contact lens
> tollerance is limited to a few hours a day and glasses are no solution
> (But I think that in most cases glasses are a good solution). I thought
> that I was contact lens intollerant until I cured underlying conditions
> of dry eye (which was gut flora in my case).
> I don't like the concept of Ortho-K. I think my eyes would feel
> terrible if I left a hard lens in my eye overnight. This would be
> really dangerous to my eyes.

#18 11-02-2006, 08:05 PM

I think that under some circumstances Laser eye surgery is really safer
than contact lenses. And sometimes it makes more sense than glasses.

As an example. In developing countries like India or Africa hygiene
cannot be assured. Lasik is definitely safer in such countries than
contact lenses.

Another example. There are refractive surgeons who do Lasik on people
of third world countries because they cannot afford glasses. And even
if they get glasses, after some time the glasses will be lost or
destroyed. So for those people Lasik is better than contacts or
glasses.

In modern countries Lasik/Prk makes sense only when contact lens
tollerance is limited to a few hours a day and glasses are no solution
(But I think that in most cases glasses are a good solution). I thought
that I was contact lens intollerant until I cured underlying conditions
of dry eye (which was gut flora in my case).

I don't like the concept of Ortho-K. I think my eyes would feel
terrible if I left a hard lens in my eye overnight. This would be
really dangerous to my eyes.

#17 11-01-2006, 03:23 PM

Trying to scare patients out of contacts and into surgery is a
well-worn tactic. This topic merits careful and thoughtful analysis,
not the treatment you would like to give it here.

DrG

Ace wrote:
- quote -

> Dr. Leukoma wrote:
> > Just be more careful about putting words into people's mouths that they
> > did not say.
> > > I said that the piece was a commentary that made selective use of
> > published studies, but was not a study in itself. It was entirely
> > speculative, and the author concluded by stating that he looked forward
> > to additional studies.
> > > Yes, I do think that clarification is needed, and this is not the
> > proper forum. Fortunately, the piece did not get all that much
> > coverage. It does show the ability of our "ivory towers" of academe to
> > influence public opinion by feeding tidbits to a hungry press.
> > > DrG
> I have a habit of putting words in others mouth and assumptions. My
> opinion after reading his speculation is he sounds like hes promoting
> lasik and highly exaggerating the risks of contacts or taking the worst
> case scinerio with contacts. Additional studies will no doubt prove him
> wrong and that contacts are at least 10x safer than lasik short and
> long term. Thankfully it didnt get much coverage because there are
> guliable people out there who would take his speculation as fact and
> ruin their eyes with lasik. His opinion(in my opinion) was bad and
> potentionally dangerous if anyone takes it seriously. Should I dare say
> its a fact you know how dangerous lasik is?

#16 11-01-2006, 03:08 PM

Dr. Leukoma wrote:

- quote -

> Just be more careful about putting words into people's mouths that they
> did not say.
> I said that the piece was a commentary that made selective use of
> published studies, but was not a study in itself. It was entirely
> speculative, and the author concluded by stating that he looked forward
> to additional studies.
> Yes, I do think that clarification is needed, and this is not the
> proper forum. Fortunately, the piece did not get all that much
> coverage. It does show the ability of our "ivory towers" of academe to
> influence public opinion by feeding tidbits to a hungry press.
> DrG

I have a habit of putting words in others mouth and assumptions. My
opinion after reading his speculation is he sounds like hes promoting
lasik and highly exaggerating the risks of contacts or taking the worst
case scinerio with contacts. Additional studies will no doubt prove him
wrong and that contacts are at least 10x safer than lasik short and
long term. Thankfully it didnt get much coverage because there are
guliable people out there who would take his speculation as fact and
ruin their eyes with lasik. His opinion(in my opinion) was bad and
potentionally dangerous if anyone takes it seriously. Should I dare say
its a fact you know how dangerous lasik is?

Similar Threads
Thread	Forum	Replies	Last Post
USNews Quotes Glenn Hagele of USAEyes.org in Lasik Article Glenn - USAEyes.org: US News & World Report cover story quotes Glenn Hagele, founder and Executive Director of the Council for Refractive Surgery Quality Assurance...	Lasik Eye Surgery	15	03-02-2007 03:41 AM
Corneaplasty is the future! Safer, cheaper and superior to lasik! Dont get lasik, wait! Ace: http://www.supervisioncenter.com/future_corneaplasty.htm Excerpts(which is a good chunk of the article): Corneaplastytm, is a non-surgical...	Lasik Eye Surgery	10	10-25-2006 07:45 PM
How much safer are contact lenses and orthoK than lasik or laser surgury? acemanvx@yahoo.com: Some people(wont be giving names) have stated the risks of contact lenses. They are correct but I argue that the risks are tiny compared to the...	Vision	17	01-06-2006 04:13 AM
LASIK ECTASIA and surgeons personal email publicly posted TheTruthAboutLASIK: For anyone considering lasik, I encourage you to read personal email from LASIK SURGEONS who black ball and threaten surgeons who truly want to...	Lasik Eye Surgery	1	07-31-2004 02:00 PM
Posted on the Yahoo Groups lasik board today Sandy: Subject: LASIK gone wrong As a result of LASIK surgery in February 2002 I now have no central vision in my left eye, due to a hole being opened...	Lasik Eye Surgery	11	12-02-2003 02:44 AM

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode