Exposing the LASIK Scam
http://lasikscam.com/

Steve Post and pupil size
http://lasikscam.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=101
Page 1 of 1

Author:  ThereIsACoverUp [ Thu Dec 08, 2005 6:06 am ]
Post subject:  Steve Post and pupil size

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.

Author:  Bill [ Thu Dec 08, 2005 1:14 pm ]
Post subject: 

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.

Author:  Maverick [ Fri Mar 31, 2006 8:22 pm ]
Post subject: 

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.

Author:  LasikTragedy [ Fri Mar 31, 2006 10:12 pm ]
Post subject: 

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.

Author:  ThisIsNotMedicine [ Fri Mar 31, 2006 11:17 pm ]
Post subject: 

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!!

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/