LASIK? - Page 12 - Cycling Mob: Road Cycling, Mountain Biking and More

08-04-2004, 10:32 AM

In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>, Mike wrote:
> I have no problems wearing glasses, though I don't like contacts,
> but I'd like to wear the rudy/oakley style sunglasses when cycling.
> Has anyone had the LASIK thing? How did it go?
>
> Mike

Thanks for everyone's thoughts and replies. I guess I'm
unwilling to roll the dice for LASIK. So my next alternatives
are contacts, sunglasses with optical inserts, or sunglasses
with the perscription ground into the lens.

Does anyone have any thoughts on these alternatives? Which
manufacturers offer the custom grinding of lenses?

Mike

08-04-2004, 10:54 AM

"GaryG" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> "Peter Cole" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> news:FD7Qc.203800$a24.18359@attbi_s03...
> > "DRS" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].ihug.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:ceqsr0$cdv$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].co.nz...
> > > "Peter Cole" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> > > news:Ui4Qc.208483$IQ4.32045@attbi_s02
> > > > "Zoot Katz" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > >> A friend of mine had it done following the good advice you posted.
> > > >> She can't drive at night now because lights cause her to see halos
> > > >> around everything.
> > > >
> > > > A good friend of mine has had a similar experience and has a large
> > > > lawsuit pending.
> > >
> > > On what grounds? This is a known side effect (although it usually eases
> or
> > > even disappears after some time). It's not like any of this is new or
> > > anything.
> >
> > The "halo-ing" problem. It was not so well known a few years ago that
> people
> > with larger-than-normal pupils, or otherwise different eyeball geometries
> > wouldn't fare so well given the maximum size of the area that was (could
> be)
> > reshaped. My friend's visual artifacts are quite severe and apparently
> further
> > corrections are not possible. He has to use drops to drive at night to
> > constrict his pupils, which is like wearing sunglasses. The suit is based
> on
> > the claim that the doc should have known better, even at that time.
> >
>
> The halo-ing effect has been known for a long time, and was probably
> mentioned to your friend prior to the surgery. I have it myself, but not
> enough to require any special treatment. There are several treatments to
> reduce it, and several new surgical options that are being explored.

My friend has quite severe artifacts, much more than nuisance level. He has
explored options for correction, both in the US and abroad. He has consulted
experts on both coasts (with exams). So far, he's screwed.

> FWIW, it sounds like your friend is just trying to gouge the doctor to make
> some money (Lawyer Lotto, American Style). That's one reason the surgery is
> expensive as it is...the doc's yearly liability insurance is probably in 6
> figures thanks to sue-happy patients and their lawyers.

Thanks for the random slam, I'm sure your friends are money-grubbing,
scum-suckers, too. FWIW, the guy is independently wealthy (founded & sold a
major computer supply company). His goal is to keep this bad doc from blinding
any other people.

08-04-2004, 10:54 AM

"GaryG" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> "Peter Cole" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> news:FD7Qc.203800$a24.18359@attbi_s03...
> > "DRS" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].ihug.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:ceqsr0$cdv$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].co.nz...
> > > "Peter Cole" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> > > news:Ui4Qc.208483$IQ4.32045@attbi_s02
> > > > "Zoot Katz" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > >> A friend of mine had it done following the good advice you posted.
> > > >> She can't drive at night now because lights cause her to see halos
> > > >> around everything.
> > > >
> > > > A good friend of mine has had a similar experience and has a large
> > > > lawsuit pending.
> > >
> > > On what grounds? This is a known side effect (although it usually eases
> or
> > > even disappears after some time). It's not like any of this is new or
> > > anything.
> >
> > The "halo-ing" problem. It was not so well known a few years ago that
> people
> > with larger-than-normal pupils, or otherwise different eyeball geometries
> > wouldn't fare so well given the maximum size of the area that was (could
> be)
> > reshaped. My friend's visual artifacts are quite severe and apparently
> further
> > corrections are not possible. He has to use drops to drive at night to
> > constrict his pupils, which is like wearing sunglasses. The suit is based
> on
> > the claim that the doc should have known better, even at that time.
> >
>
> The halo-ing effect has been known for a long time, and was probably
> mentioned to your friend prior to the surgery. I have it myself, but not
> enough to require any special treatment. There are several treatments to
> reduce it, and several new surgical options that are being explored.

My friend has quite severe artifacts, much more than nuisance level. He has
explored options for correction, both in the US and abroad. He has consulted
experts on both coasts (with exams). So far, he's screwed.

> FWIW, it sounds like your friend is just trying to gouge the doctor to make
> some money (Lawyer Lotto, American Style). That's one reason the surgery is
> expensive as it is...the doc's yearly liability insurance is probably in 6
> figures thanks to sue-happy patients and their lawyers.

Thanks for the random slam, I'm sure your friends are money-grubbing,
scum-suckers, too. FWIW, the guy is independently wealthy (founded & sold a
major computer supply company). His goal is to keep this bad doc from blinding
any other people.

08-04-2004, 10:54 AM

"GaryG" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> "Peter Cole" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> news:FD7Qc.203800$a24.18359@attbi_s03...
> > "DRS" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].ihug.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:ceqsr0$cdv$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].co.nz...
> > > "Peter Cole" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> > > news:Ui4Qc.208483$IQ4.32045@attbi_s02
> > > > "Zoot Katz" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > >> A friend of mine had it done following the good advice you posted.
> > > >> She can't drive at night now because lights cause her to see halos
> > > >> around everything.
> > > >
> > > > A good friend of mine has had a similar experience and has a large
> > > > lawsuit pending.
> > >
> > > On what grounds? This is a known side effect (although it usually eases
> or
> > > even disappears after some time). It's not like any of this is new or
> > > anything.
> >
> > The "halo-ing" problem. It was not so well known a few years ago that
> people
> > with larger-than-normal pupils, or otherwise different eyeball geometries
> > wouldn't fare so well given the maximum size of the area that was (could
> be)
> > reshaped. My friend's visual artifacts are quite severe and apparently
> further
> > corrections are not possible. He has to use drops to drive at night to
> > constrict his pupils, which is like wearing sunglasses. The suit is based
> on
> > the claim that the doc should have known better, even at that time.
> >
>
> The halo-ing effect has been known for a long time, and was probably
> mentioned to your friend prior to the surgery. I have it myself, but not
> enough to require any special treatment. There are several treatments to
> reduce it, and several new surgical options that are being explored.

My friend has quite severe artifacts, much more than nuisance level. He has
explored options for correction, both in the US and abroad. He has consulted
experts on both coasts (with exams). So far, he's screwed.

> FWIW, it sounds like your friend is just trying to gouge the doctor to make
> some money (Lawyer Lotto, American Style). That's one reason the surgery is
> expensive as it is...the doc's yearly liability insurance is probably in 6
> figures thanks to sue-happy patients and their lawyers.

Thanks for the random slam, I'm sure your friends are money-grubbing,
scum-suckers, too. FWIW, the guy is independently wealthy (founded & sold a
major computer supply company). His goal is to keep this bad doc from blinding
any other people.

08-04-2004, 10:54 AM

"GaryG" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> "Peter Cole" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> news:FD7Qc.203800$a24.18359@attbi_s03...
> > "DRS" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].ihug.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:ceqsr0$cdv$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].co.nz...
> > > "Peter Cole" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> > > news:Ui4Qc.208483$IQ4.32045@attbi_s02
> > > > "Zoot Katz" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > >> A friend of mine had it done following the good advice you posted.
> > > >> She can't drive at night now because lights cause her to see halos
> > > >> around everything.
> > > >
> > > > A good friend of mine has had a similar experience and has a large
> > > > lawsuit pending.
> > >
> > > On what grounds? This is a known side effect (although it usually eases
> or
> > > even disappears after some time). It's not like any of this is new or
> > > anything.
> >
> > The "halo-ing" problem. It was not so well known a few years ago that
> people
> > with larger-than-normal pupils, or otherwise different eyeball geometries
> > wouldn't fare so well given the maximum size of the area that was (could
> be)
> > reshaped. My friend's visual artifacts are quite severe and apparently
> further
> > corrections are not possible. He has to use drops to drive at night to
> > constrict his pupils, which is like wearing sunglasses. The suit is based
> on
> > the claim that the doc should have known better, even at that time.
> >
>
> The halo-ing effect has been known for a long time, and was probably
> mentioned to your friend prior to the surgery. I have it myself, but not
> enough to require any special treatment. There are several treatments to
> reduce it, and several new surgical options that are being explored.

My friend has quite severe artifacts, much more than nuisance level. He has
explored options for correction, both in the US and abroad. He has consulted
experts on both coasts (with exams). So far, he's screwed.

> FWIW, it sounds like your friend is just trying to gouge the doctor to make
> some money (Lawyer Lotto, American Style). That's one reason the surgery is
> expensive as it is...the doc's yearly liability insurance is probably in 6
> figures thanks to sue-happy patients and their lawyers.

Thanks for the random slam, I'm sure your friends are money-grubbing,
scum-suckers, too. FWIW, the guy is independently wealthy (founded & sold a
major computer supply company). His goal is to keep this bad doc from blinding
any other people.

08-04-2004, 10:54 AM

"GaryG" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> "Peter Cole" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> news:FD7Qc.203800$a24.18359@attbi_s03...
> > "DRS" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].ihug.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:ceqsr0$cdv$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].co.nz...
> > > "Peter Cole" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> > > news:Ui4Qc.208483$IQ4.32045@attbi_s02
> > > > "Zoot Katz" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > >> A friend of mine had it done following the good advice you posted.
> > > >> She can't drive at night now because lights cause her to see halos
> > > >> around everything.
> > > >
> > > > A good friend of mine has had a similar experience and has a large
> > > > lawsuit pending.
> > >
> > > On what grounds? This is a known side effect (although it usually eases
> or
> > > even disappears after some time). It's not like any of this is new or
> > > anything.
> >
> > The "halo-ing" problem. It was not so well known a few years ago that
> people
> > with larger-than-normal pupils, or otherwise different eyeball geometries
> > wouldn't fare so well given the maximum size of the area that was (could
> be)
> > reshaped. My friend's visual artifacts are quite severe and apparently
> further
> > corrections are not possible. He has to use drops to drive at night to
> > constrict his pupils, which is like wearing sunglasses. The suit is based
> on
> > the claim that the doc should have known better, even at that time.
> >
>
> The halo-ing effect has been known for a long time, and was probably
> mentioned to your friend prior to the surgery. I have it myself, but not
> enough to require any special treatment. There are several treatments to
> reduce it, and several new surgical options that are being explored.

My friend has quite severe artifacts, much more than nuisance level. He has
explored options for correction, both in the US and abroad. He has consulted
experts on both coasts (with exams). So far, he's screwed.

> FWIW, it sounds like your friend is just trying to gouge the doctor to make
> some money (Lawyer Lotto, American Style). That's one reason the surgery is
> expensive as it is...the doc's yearly liability insurance is probably in 6
> figures thanks to sue-happy patients and their lawyers.

Thanks for the random slam, I'm sure your friends are money-grubbing,
scum-suckers, too. FWIW, the guy is independently wealthy (founded & sold a
major computer supply company). His goal is to keep this bad doc from blinding
any other people.

08-04-2004, 11:08 AM

"Peter Cole" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:Cp9Qc.87803$eM2.31850@attbi_s51...
>
> "GaryG" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> > "Peter Cole" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> > news:FD7Qc.203800$a24.18359@attbi_s03...
> > > "DRS" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].ihug.com.au> wrote in message
> > > news:ceqsr0$cdv$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].co.nz...
> > > > "Peter Cole" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in
message
> > > > news:Ui4Qc.208483$IQ4.32045@attbi_s02
> > > > > "Zoot Katz" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> > > >
> > > > [...]
> > > >
> > > > >> A friend of mine had it done following the good advice you
posted.
> > > > >> She can't drive at night now because lights cause her to see
halos
> > > > >> around everything.
> > > > >
> > > > > A good friend of mine has had a similar experience and has a large
> > > > > lawsuit pending.
> > > >
> > > > On what grounds? This is a known side effect (although it usually
eases
> > or
> > > > even disappears after some time). It's not like any of this is new
or
> > > > anything.
> > >
> > > The "halo-ing" problem. It was not so well known a few years ago that
> > people
> > > with larger-than-normal pupils, or otherwise different eyeball
geometries
> > > wouldn't fare so well given the maximum size of the area that was
(could
> > be)
> > > reshaped. My friend's visual artifacts are quite severe and apparently
> > further
> > > corrections are not possible. He has to use drops to drive at night to
> > > constrict his pupils, which is like wearing sunglasses. The suit is
based
> > on
> > > the claim that the doc should have known better, even at that time.
> > >
> >
> > The halo-ing effect has been known for a long time, and was probably
> > mentioned to your friend prior to the surgery. I have it myself, but
not
> > enough to require any special treatment. There are several treatments
to
> > reduce it, and several new surgical options that are being explored.
>
> My friend has quite severe artifacts, much more than nuisance level. He
has
> explored options for correction, both in the US and abroad. He has
consulted
> experts on both coasts (with exams). So far, he's screwed.
>
> > FWIW, it sounds like your friend is just trying to gouge the doctor to
make
> > some money (Lawyer Lotto, American Style). That's one reason the
surgery is
> > expensive as it is...the doc's yearly liability insurance is probably in
6
> > figures thanks to sue-happy patients and their lawyers.
>
> Thanks for the random slam, I'm sure your friends are money-grubbing,
> scum-suckers, too. FWIW, the guy is independently wealthy (founded & sold
a
> major computer supply company). His goal is to keep this bad doc from
blinding
> any other people.
>

Unless the doc was negligent (e.g., ignored a thin cornea and operated
anyway, or mis-programmed the machine), I don't see what value can come from
the suit (besides the $$ to your friend and his lawyer).

If the doc followed standard protocol and exercised due diligence in the
procedure, how is he a "bad doc"? The protocols for this and other
procedures change all the time - if your friend had it done several years
ago, he might simply be unlucky...it's only recently that they have been
able to predict the severity of the halo effect prior to the surgery.

GG

08-04-2004, 11:08 AM

"Peter Cole" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:Cp9Qc.87803$eM2.31850@attbi_s51...
>
> "GaryG" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> > "Peter Cole" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> > news:FD7Qc.203800$a24.18359@attbi_s03...
> > > "DRS" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].ihug.com.au> wrote in message
> > > news:ceqsr0$cdv$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].co.nz...
> > > > "Peter Cole" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in
message
> > > > news:Ui4Qc.208483$IQ4.32045@attbi_s02
> > > > > "Zoot Katz" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> > > >
> > > > [...]
> > > >
> > > > >> A friend of mine had it done following the good advice you
posted.
> > > > >> She can't drive at night now because lights cause her to see
halos
> > > > >> around everything.
> > > > >
> > > > > A good friend of mine has had a similar experience and has a large
> > > > > lawsuit pending.
> > > >
> > > > On what grounds? This is a known side effect (although it usually
eases
> > or
> > > > even disappears after some time). It's not like any of this is new
or
> > > > anything.
> > >
> > > The "halo-ing" problem. It was not so well known a few years ago that
> > people
> > > with larger-than-normal pupils, or otherwise different eyeball
geometries
> > > wouldn't fare so well given the maximum size of the area that was
(could
> > be)
> > > reshaped. My friend's visual artifacts are quite severe and apparently
> > further
> > > corrections are not possible. He has to use drops to drive at night to
> > > constrict his pupils, which is like wearing sunglasses. The suit is
based
> > on
> > > the claim that the doc should have known better, even at that time.
> > >
> >
> > The halo-ing effect has been known for a long time, and was probably
> > mentioned to your friend prior to the surgery. I have it myself, but
not
> > enough to require any special treatment. There are several treatments
to
> > reduce it, and several new surgical options that are being explored.
>
> My friend has quite severe artifacts, much more than nuisance level. He
has
> explored options for correction, both in the US and abroad. He has
consulted
> experts on both coasts (with exams). So far, he's screwed.
>
> > FWIW, it sounds like your friend is just trying to gouge the doctor to
make
> > some money (Lawyer Lotto, American Style). That's one reason the
surgery is
> > expensive as it is...the doc's yearly liability insurance is probably in
6
> > figures thanks to sue-happy patients and their lawyers.
>
> Thanks for the random slam, I'm sure your friends are money-grubbing,
> scum-suckers, too. FWIW, the guy is independently wealthy (founded & sold
a
> major computer supply company). His goal is to keep this bad doc from
blinding
> any other people.
>

Unless the doc was negligent (e.g., ignored a thin cornea and operated
anyway, or mis-programmed the machine), I don't see what value can come from
the suit (besides the $$ to your friend and his lawyer).

If the doc followed standard protocol and exercised due diligence in the
procedure, how is he a "bad doc"? The protocols for this and other
procedures change all the time - if your friend had it done several years
ago, he might simply be unlucky...it's only recently that they have been
able to predict the severity of the halo effect prior to the surgery.

GG

08-04-2004, 11:08 AM

"Peter Cole" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:Cp9Qc.87803$eM2.31850@attbi_s51...
>
> "GaryG" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> > "Peter Cole" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> > news:FD7Qc.203800$a24.18359@attbi_s03...
> > > "DRS" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].ihug.com.au> wrote in message
> > > news:ceqsr0$cdv$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].co.nz...
> > > > "Peter Cole" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in
message
> > > > news:Ui4Qc.208483$IQ4.32045@attbi_s02
> > > > > "Zoot Katz" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> > > >
> > > > [...]
> > > >
> > > > >> A friend of mine had it done following the good advice you
posted.
> > > > >> She can't drive at night now because lights cause her to see
halos
> > > > >> around everything.
> > > > >
> > > > > A good friend of mine has had a similar experience and has a large
> > > > > lawsuit pending.
> > > >
> > > > On what grounds? This is a known side effect (although it usually
eases
> > or
> > > > even disappears after some time). It's not like any of this is new
or
> > > > anything.
> > >
> > > The "halo-ing" problem. It was not so well known a few years ago that
> > people
> > > with larger-than-normal pupils, or otherwise different eyeball
geometries
> > > wouldn't fare so well given the maximum size of the area that was
(could
> > be)
> > > reshaped. My friend's visual artifacts are quite severe and apparently
> > further
> > > corrections are not possible. He has to use drops to drive at night to
> > > constrict his pupils, which is like wearing sunglasses. The suit is
based
> > on
> > > the claim that the doc should have known better, even at that time.
> > >
> >
> > The halo-ing effect has been known for a long time, and was probably
> > mentioned to your friend prior to the surgery. I have it myself, but
not
> > enough to require any special treatment. There are several treatments
to
> > reduce it, and several new surgical options that are being explored.
>
> My friend has quite severe artifacts, much more than nuisance level. He
has
> explored options for correction, both in the US and abroad. He has
consulted
> experts on both coasts (with exams). So far, he's screwed.
>
> > FWIW, it sounds like your friend is just trying to gouge the doctor to
make
> > some money (Lawyer Lotto, American Style). That's one reason the
surgery is
> > expensive as it is...the doc's yearly liability insurance is probably in
6
> > figures thanks to sue-happy patients and their lawyers.
>
> Thanks for the random slam, I'm sure your friends are money-grubbing,
> scum-suckers, too. FWIW, the guy is independently wealthy (founded & sold
a
> major computer supply company). His goal is to keep this bad doc from
blinding
> any other people.
>

Unless the doc was negligent (e.g., ignored a thin cornea and operated
anyway, or mis-programmed the machine), I don't see what value can come from
the suit (besides the $$ to your friend and his lawyer).

If the doc followed standard protocol and exercised due diligence in the
procedure, how is he a "bad doc"? The protocols for this and other
procedures change all the time - if your friend had it done several years
ago, he might simply be unlucky...it's only recently that they have been
able to predict the severity of the halo effect prior to the surgery.

GG

08-04-2004, 11:08 AM

"Peter Cole" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:Cp9Qc.87803$eM2.31850@attbi_s51...
>
> "GaryG" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> > "Peter Cole" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> > news:FD7Qc.203800$a24.18359@attbi_s03...
> > > "DRS" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].ihug.com.au> wrote in message
> > > news:ceqsr0$cdv$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].co.nz...
> > > > "Peter Cole" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in
message
> > > > news:Ui4Qc.208483$IQ4.32045@attbi_s02
> > > > > "Zoot Katz" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> > > >
> > > > [...]
> > > >
> > > > >> A friend of mine had it done following the good advice you
posted.
> > > > >> She can't drive at night now because lights cause her to see
halos
> > > > >> around everything.
> > > > >
> > > > > A good friend of mine has had a similar experience and has a large
> > > > > lawsuit pending.
> > > >
> > > > On what grounds? This is a known side effect (although it usually
eases
> > or
> > > > even disappears after some time). It's not like any of this is new
or
> > > > anything.
> > >
> > > The "halo-ing" problem. It was not so well known a few years ago that
> > people
> > > with larger-than-normal pupils, or otherwise different eyeball
geometries
> > > wouldn't fare so well given the maximum size of the area that was
(could
> > be)
> > > reshaped. My friend's visual artifacts are quite severe and apparently
> > further
> > > corrections are not possible. He has to use drops to drive at night to
> > > constrict his pupils, which is like wearing sunglasses. The suit is
based
> > on
> > > the claim that the doc should have known better, even at that time.
> > >
> >
> > The halo-ing effect has been known for a long time, and was probably
> > mentioned to your friend prior to the surgery. I have it myself, but
not
> > enough to require any special treatment. There are several treatments
to
> > reduce it, and several new surgical options that are being explored.
>
> My friend has quite severe artifacts, much more than nuisance level. He
has
> explored options for correction, both in the US and abroad. He has
consulted
> experts on both coasts (with exams). So far, he's screwed.
>
> > FWIW, it sounds like your friend is just trying to gouge the doctor to
make
> > some money (Lawyer Lotto, American Style). That's one reason the
surgery is
> > expensive as it is...the doc's yearly liability insurance is probably in
6
> > figures thanks to sue-happy patients and their lawyers.
>
> Thanks for the random slam, I'm sure your friends are money-grubbing,
> scum-suckers, too. FWIW, the guy is independently wealthy (founded & sold
a
> major computer supply company). His goal is to keep this bad doc from
blinding
> any other people.
>

Unless the doc was negligent (e.g., ignored a thin cornea and operated
anyway, or mis-programmed the machine), I don't see what value can come from
the suit (besides the $$ to your friend and his lawyer).

If the doc followed standard protocol and exercised due diligence in the
procedure, how is he a "bad doc"? The protocols for this and other
procedures change all the time - if your friend had it done several years
ago, he might simply be unlucky...it's only recently that they have been
able to predict the severity of the halo effect prior to the surgery.

GG