View Single Post
Old 10-12-2016, 01:35 PM
Vivisectus's Avatar
Vivisectus Vivisectus is offline
Astroid the Foine Loine between a Poirate and a Farrrmer
Join Date: Feb 2011
Gender: Male
Blog Entries: 1
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
Originally Posted by Vivisectus View Post
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
Originally Posted by Vivisectus View Post
Can you share the information on which you base your assertion that the FDA is hiding information about potential complications from prospective patients on?

I am not exactly au courant on American goverment institutions, but is it even their job to inform patients? Is it not their job to make sure treatments meet certain standards, and is it not up to the referring MD to go into the risks?

According to their own website:

Your doctor should perform a thorough eye exam and discuss:

whether you are a good candidate
what the risks, benefits, and alternatives of the surgery are
what you should expect before, during, and after surgery
what your responsibilities will be before, during, and after surgery

You should have the opportunity to ask your doctor questions during this discussion. Give yourself plenty of time to think about the risk/benefit discussion, to review any informational literature provided by your doctor, and to have any additional questions answered by your doctor before deciding to go through with surgery and before signing the informed consent form.
Seems they are taking the trouble to get people to properly inform themselves quite thoroughly.
Most of the information given by doctors tells the patient lies. They say the dry eyes and halos are temporary, which they are not in most cases. They also give false statistics saying the success rate is 95% which is another lie based on the satisfaction rate on questionnaires. The lifelong pain and dissatisfaction over this elective surgery speaks for itself. It is more like 20 to 30%, not 5% of dissatisfied patients who only wished they were given the true risks involved. Scary considering these are our only set of eyes. The results cannot be undone.
That is so much opinion - I was asking for the facts that underpin that opinion.
Where is this opinion? Are you referring to the number of eyes damaged, or the actual complications that are occurring?
I am asking what facts you base your opinion on. It is not a very complicated question. You are bandying percentages about - where do they come from?
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
aarp (10-12-2016), Angakuk (10-12-2016), The Man (10-12-2016)
Page generated in 0.41451 seconds with 11 queries