Tweet
And I am not ruling myself out as one of them (the conspiracy theorists that is.)
Dr Perry Rosenthal has a relatively new website and foundation he has created to combat eye pain and promote a new way of looking at dry eye. The website is http://www.bostoneyepain.org/.
On one of the pages of his site are his views on LASIK - http://www.bostoneyepain.org/my-personal-thoughts/.
I don't think what he says here will surprise many people on the DEZ but some of it (about his articles questioning LASIK being refused publication in medical journals) is certainly disturbing.
On another page of Dr Rosenthal's site there is a contribution from a researcher Roger Davis, PHD. - http://www.bostoneyepain.org/invited-contributions/. His conclusion is that in approving LASIK the FDA "ignored its own (negative) data". It also defined permanent dry eye like pain that was a consequence of a significant number of LASIKs as a "side effect" (and therefore temporary) rather than the much more serious definition of "complication". The latter definition may have meant LASIK would not have been approved.
But what I think is the most damning thing is this - Roger Davis states that EyeWorld magazine (a publication for eyecare practioners) made the following statement in an article about LASIK -
"We are only starting to ride the enormous growth curve of LASIK in this country.
There will be more than enough surgeries for everyone to benefit if we keep our heads by sharing information openly and honestly and by resisting the temptation to criticize the work of our colleagues when we are offering a second opinion to a patient with a suboptimal result. Who was it who said, “When the tide comes in, all the boats in the harbor go up?”
(Unfortunately, Roger Davis does not properly reference this quote.)
So the magazine is asking doctors to resist criticising suboptimal LASIK results. Does this translate as a cover-up?
Dr Perry Rosenthal has a relatively new website and foundation he has created to combat eye pain and promote a new way of looking at dry eye. The website is http://www.bostoneyepain.org/.
On one of the pages of his site are his views on LASIK - http://www.bostoneyepain.org/my-personal-thoughts/.
I don't think what he says here will surprise many people on the DEZ but some of it (about his articles questioning LASIK being refused publication in medical journals) is certainly disturbing.
On another page of Dr Rosenthal's site there is a contribution from a researcher Roger Davis, PHD. - http://www.bostoneyepain.org/invited-contributions/. His conclusion is that in approving LASIK the FDA "ignored its own (negative) data". It also defined permanent dry eye like pain that was a consequence of a significant number of LASIKs as a "side effect" (and therefore temporary) rather than the much more serious definition of "complication". The latter definition may have meant LASIK would not have been approved.
But what I think is the most damning thing is this - Roger Davis states that EyeWorld magazine (a publication for eyecare practioners) made the following statement in an article about LASIK -
"We are only starting to ride the enormous growth curve of LASIK in this country.
There will be more than enough surgeries for everyone to benefit if we keep our heads by sharing information openly and honestly and by resisting the temptation to criticize the work of our colleagues when we are offering a second opinion to a patient with a suboptimal result. Who was it who said, “When the tide comes in, all the boats in the harbor go up?”
(Unfortunately, Roger Davis does not properly reference this quote.)
So the magazine is asking doctors to resist criticising suboptimal LASIK results. Does this translate as a cover-up?
Comment