Exposing the LASIK Scam

One Surgeon at a Time
It is currently Sat Nov 17, 2018 6:59 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Steve Post and pupil size
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2005 6:06 am 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 11:08 pm
Posts: 23
i heard that before steve post, there was an emerging consensus among refractive surgeons about the importance of pupil size. then after steve post won, pupil size was suddenly irrelevant. weird how legal judgments can affect the nature of reality like that.

i guess machat being spit on after testifying for post didnt really do much for plaintiff's witnesses who wanted to tell the truth though.


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2005 1:14 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 9:06 pm
Posts: 297
If pupil size didn't matter, why did laser manufacturers gradually and incrementally increase the size of the optical zone from the original 4 mm to 6.5 with a blend? There is a down-side to increasing the optical zone (deeper ablations, corneas more prone to bulging), so why did they increase it?

The peer-reviewed medical literature is over-flowing with articles going back to the early days of RK that discuss the importance of matching the clear zone/RK or optical zone/PRK & LASIK to the scotopic pupil. There are a couple of poorly conducted studies that say pupil size doesn't matter. Yet refractive surgeons ignore the hundreds of articles that support the importance of pupil size.

Interestingly the couple of studies that say that pupil size doesn't matter didn't include objective tests, such as contrast sensitivity or wavefront.

What needs to happen is a large class-action lawsuit.


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 8:22 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 8:28 am
Posts: 52
I really don't understand how this debate continues when pupil size is recognized as a precaution by the FDA and the laser manufacturers themselves. It is clearly listed as a precaution in the customvue patient guide that I was not given before my surgery.


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 10:12 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 12:17 am
Posts: 113
If the debate were to resolve, a significant amount of marketplace would disappear with it. lots of patients have large pupils. so, its easier to just continue to treat patients who are noncandidates and then claim that the standard of care isnt firm in this regard in order to avoid lawsuits.


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 11:17 pm 
Offline
 E-mail  Profile

Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 5:46 am
Posts: 60
LasikTragedy wrote:
If the debate were to resolve, a significant amount of marketplace would disappear with it. lots of patients have large pupils. so, its easier to just continue to treat patients who are noncandidates and then claim that the standard of care isnt firm in this regard in order to avoid lawsuits.



You are absolutely correct!!

_________________
I swore a Hippocratic Oath to "Do No Harm." I don't know what refractive surgeons did!


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group  
Design By Poker Bandits