My 2¢ on some DRY EYE ZONE issues...

[robster]

This thread seems to have taken on a life of it's own! I'm pretty sure I know which member you're referring to Marty as I've seen some of your interactions with them on another thread but I think that person in question was only trying to help. Alot of people simply don't think to preface their statements with a "could or "maybe" and I personally don't have any issue with that. 99% of the people who post on this site are doing so for the right reasons and the odd one or two who aren't soon feel Rebecca's wrath!

[spmcc]

I have a major issue with certain individuals on here who are doing deep scientific research on dry eye disease, drawing their own conclusions on certain matters, and then stating their conclusions as factual evidence to be used when considering certain dry eye treatments as a patient. I'm not going to name any names, but it upsets me to read these "investigations" done by wannabe scientists/doctors on here who have never worked in the field, but are attempting to speak as an authority on dry eye disease. Posting potentially incorrect or inaccurate information, in my opinion, is the worst offense you can do on this site. In my opinion, if you are not an eye care professional or are sharing direct information given to you by an eye care professional, you should not try to connect the proverbial scientific dots regarding dry eye disease based solely on your internet investigations and then present them as factual conclusions. Because most of the time, really, you're probably getting it wrong.

I'd just like to point out this post of yours, Marty, where your info is wrong, but you said Google says you're right: http://www.dryeyezone.com/talk/showt...3032#post83032. You should ask your doctor or pharmacist and they will tell you the truth about the tetracycline family.

Personally, I like the posts by the person you're complaining about. He/she is bringing up interesting points to think about. Obviously their first language isn't English so I read it with that knowledge. I also always read posts knowing they begin with "IMO...".

[MartyM1985]

I'd just like to point out this post of yours, Marty, where your info is wrong, but you said Google says you're right: http://www.dryeyezone.com/talk/showt...3032#post83032. You should ask your doctor or pharmacist and they will tell you the truth about the tetracycline family.

One eye doc I used to see told me doxy does increase photo-sensitivity.

Another eye doc I see told me doxy does not increase photo-sensitivity.

So I really don't know what to believe on that front.

[Guest]

I posted on this topic in your other thread if you're interested...

http://www.dryeyezone.com/talk/showt...ght=#post83304

Typically tetracyclines are known to cause photosensitivity (increased sensitivity of the SKIN to UV light) and not photophobia (increased sensitivity of the EYES to light). Not saying there will never be exceptions to the rule, but I'd never worry about trying a tetracycline over fears of photophobia since it is not likely at all. (and if it happened, then just stop the drug)

[Rebecca Petris]

One eye doc I used to see told me doxy does increase photo-sensitivity.

Another eye doc I see told me doxy does not increase photo-sensitivity.

So I really don't know what to believe on that front.

I wonder if the one doc you spoke with meant dermatological and the other meant ocular, in which case both would be right

Try drugs.com when in doubt:

Doxycycline

...

Adverse Reactions

...
Dermatologic

Maculopapular and erythematous rashes; exfoliative dermatitis; photosensitivity....