Go Back   Freethought Forum > The Public Baths > Lifestyle

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #126  
Old 10-16-2016, 10:05 PM
thedoc's Avatar
thedoc thedoc is offline
I'm Deplorable.
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: XMMCCCXCIII
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
Peacegirl doesn't know what is in the article she is linking to, from the article,
"No legal form can bar a patient from bringing a legal claim if negligent treatment did, in deed, lead to harm (although some healthcare providers, like Kaiser Permanente, may force patients into arbitration rather than a lawsuit). If a doctor or hospital made errors that amounted to negligence, it can't hide from a medical malpractice claim behind a legal form".
:yup:
__________________
The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you donít know anything about. Wayne Dyer
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (10-17-2016)
  #127  
Old 10-16-2016, 10:06 PM
specious_reasons's Avatar
specious_reasons specious_reasons is online now
here to bore you with pictures
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: MMCDXCVII
Images: 8
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Every time I see this thread title, I think peacegirl is dissing Iftikhar.
__________________
ta-
DAVE!!!
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (10-17-2016), JoeP (10-17-2016)
  #128  
Old 10-16-2016, 10:14 PM
thedoc's Avatar
thedoc thedoc is offline
I'm Deplorable.
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: XMMCCCXCIII
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
I have to put you on ignore.
Promise?
__________________
The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you donít know anything about. Wayne Dyer
Reply With Quote
  #129  
Old 10-16-2016, 11:02 PM
peacegirl's Avatar
peacegirl peacegirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

How LASIK F%#@'s Up Your Eyes - YouTube
__________________
"We will not solve the problems of the world from the level of thinking we were at when we created them" -- Einstein

"The fatal tendency of mankind to leave off thinking about a thing
which is no longer doubtful is the cause of half their errors" -- John Stuart Mill
Reply With Quote
  #130  
Old 10-16-2016, 11:05 PM
But's Avatar
But But is offline
This is the title that appears beneath your name on your posts.
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: MVDXCIII
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

peacegirl, what's going on with the moons of Jupiter?
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
thedoc (10-17-2016)
  #131  
Old 10-16-2016, 11:13 PM
thedoc's Avatar
thedoc thedoc is offline
I'm Deplorable.
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: XMMCCCXCIII
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
We're talking myopic surgery, which does not have to do with someone losing their vision.
Peacegirl is backpedaling again.
__________________
The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you donít know anything about. Wayne Dyer
Reply With Quote
  #132  
Old 10-16-2016, 11:21 PM
peacegirl's Avatar
peacegirl peacegirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by But View Post
peacegirl, what's going on with the moons of Jupiter?
Why do you keep harping on this? We are no longer in that thread. If you believe he was wrong, then let it go.
__________________
"We will not solve the problems of the world from the level of thinking we were at when we created them" -- Einstein

"The fatal tendency of mankind to leave off thinking about a thing
which is no longer doubtful is the cause of half their errors" -- John Stuart Mill
Reply With Quote
  #133  
Old 10-16-2016, 11:22 PM
peacegirl's Avatar
peacegirl peacegirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

16x9 - 20/20 Hindsight: Laser eye surgery investigation - YouTube
__________________
"We will not solve the problems of the world from the level of thinking we were at when we created them" -- Einstein

"The fatal tendency of mankind to leave off thinking about a thing
which is no longer doubtful is the cause of half their errors" -- John Stuart Mill
Reply With Quote
  #134  
Old 10-16-2016, 11:36 PM
ChuckF's Avatar
ChuckF ChuckF is offline
liar in wolf's clothing
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Frequently about
Images: 2
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Countdown to a new edition of the Corrupted Text with a bunch of weird anti-LASIK corruptions added :nod:
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (10-17-2016), But (10-16-2016), Stephen Maturin (10-17-2016), The Man (10-17-2016), thedoc (10-17-2016)
  #135  
Old 10-16-2016, 11:43 PM
But's Avatar
But But is offline
This is the title that appears beneath your name on your posts.
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: MVDXCIII
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

peacegirl, don't you think that the question whether the eye is a sense organ is relevant to this topic? Maybe there are complications because those eye surgeons don't know that eyes aren't sense organs. It's possible that they get better results by just cleaning the brain windows the right way.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Adam (10-25-2016), Angakuk (10-17-2016), ChuckF (10-16-2016), The Lone Ranger (10-17-2016), The Man (10-17-2016)
  #136  
Old 10-17-2016, 12:21 AM
peacegirl's Avatar
peacegirl peacegirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by But View Post
peacegirl, don't you think that the question whether the eye is a sense organ is relevant to this topic? Maybe there are complications because those eye surgeons don't know that eyes aren't sense organs. It's possible that they get better results by just cleaning the brain windows the right way.
You can make fun all you want, but it doesn't take away the seriousness of this issue.
__________________
"We will not solve the problems of the world from the level of thinking we were at when we created them" -- Einstein

"The fatal tendency of mankind to leave off thinking about a thing
which is no longer doubtful is the cause of half their errors" -- John Stuart Mill
Reply With Quote
  #137  
Old 10-17-2016, 12:33 AM
But's Avatar
But But is offline
This is the title that appears beneath your name on your posts.
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: MVDXCIII
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by But View Post
peacegirl, don't you think that the question whether the eye is a sense organ is relevant to this topic? Maybe there are complications because those eye surgeons don't know that eyes aren't sense organs. It's possible that they get better results by just cleaning the brain windows the right way.
You can make fun all you want, but it doesn't take away the seriousness of this issue.
Which one? The one about eyes not being sense organs?
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (10-17-2016), The Man (10-17-2016), thedoc (10-17-2016)
  #138  
Old 10-17-2016, 12:34 AM
peacegirl's Avatar
peacegirl peacegirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by But View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by But View Post
peacegirl, don't you think that the question whether the eye is a sense organ is relevant to this topic? Maybe there are complications because those eye surgeons don't know that eyes aren't sense organs. It's possible that they get better results by just cleaning the brain windows the right way.
You can make fun all you want, but it doesn't take away the seriousness of this issue.
Which one? The one about eyes not being sense organs?
Yup, that one.
__________________
"We will not solve the problems of the world from the level of thinking we were at when we created them" -- Einstein

"The fatal tendency of mankind to leave off thinking about a thing
which is no longer doubtful is the cause of half their errors" -- John Stuart Mill
Reply With Quote
  #139  
Old 10-17-2016, 12:54 AM
But's Avatar
But But is offline
This is the title that appears beneath your name on your posts.
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: MVDXCIII
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

If it's that serious, maybe you should tell those eye surgeons.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Adam (10-25-2016), Angakuk (10-17-2016), ChuckF (10-17-2016), Stephen Maturin (10-17-2016), The Man (10-17-2016), thedoc (10-17-2016)
  #140  
Old 10-17-2016, 01:14 AM
peacegirl's Avatar
peacegirl peacegirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by But View Post
If it's that serious, maybe you should tell those eye surgeons.
:rolleyes:
__________________
"We will not solve the problems of the world from the level of thinking we were at when we created them" -- Einstein

"The fatal tendency of mankind to leave off thinking about a thing
which is no longer doubtful is the cause of half their errors" -- John Stuart Mill
Reply With Quote
  #141  
Old 10-17-2016, 03:18 AM
thedoc's Avatar
thedoc thedoc is offline
I'm Deplorable.
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: XMMCCCXCIII
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

__________________
The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you donít know anything about. Wayne Dyer
Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 10-17-2016, 02:49 PM
The Lone Ranger's Avatar
The Lone Ranger The Lone Ranger is offline
Jin, Gi, Rei, Ko, Chi, Shin, Tei
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: MXCDVI
Images: 523
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

I wonder how peacegirl explains the fact that optometry works at all, given that (according to her), it's flat-out wrong in every particular when it comes to the eyes and how they work.

Amazingly, I just got a new set of contacts and strangely enough, I can now see pretty well. Even though (according to peacegirl) the theory and practice behind how the contacts allow me to see is completely wrong.
__________________
ďThe greatest way to live with honor in this world is to be what we pretend to be.Ē
-- Socrates
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (10-17-2016), But (10-17-2016), The Man (10-17-2016), thedoc (10-17-2016)
  #143  
Old 10-17-2016, 06:49 PM
Angakuk's Avatar
Angakuk Angakuk is offline
NeoTillichian Hierophant & Partisan Hack
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Iowa
Gender: Male
Posts: MXCCCLXXXIII
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
If you are deemed competent and you sign a consent form that explains the known risks ---and there was no negligence --- you can sue but you probably won't win.
Unless I am completely mistaken peacegirl's original complaint was that the true risks associated with Lasik surgery were being hidden from the public. If that were true, then those risks would not be included in a consent form and an injured patient would have legal recourse.

Let's break this thing down.

Consent form fails to disclose risks - patient signs- patient is injured - patient sues successfully despite having signed the consent form.

Consent form discloses the risks - patient signs - the surgeon is negligent - patient is injured - patient sues successfully despite having signed the consent form.

Consent form discloses the risks - patient is incompentent to give informed consent - patient signs anyway - patient is injured - patient's legal guardian successfully sues on behalf of incompetent patient despite the fact that the patient signed the consent form.

Consent form discloses the risks - patient fails to read the consent form but signs it anyway - patient is injured - patient sues unsuccessfully.

Consent form discloses the risks - competent patient reads and signs the consent form - there is no negligence on the part of the surgeon - patient is injured - patient sues unsuccessfully.

As I see it, so long as the consent form discloses the risks, the patient is competent and the surgeon is not negligent there are only two scenarios in which a patient harmed by the procedure fails to sue successfully.

1. Negligence on the part of the patient: Though the patient was able to do so the patient didn't bother to read the consent form. Patient is guilty of failure to exercise due diligence and of lying about having read the consent form before signing it.

2. Accidental injury: Patient sustains an injury that could not have been reasonably foreseen by the surgeon.

Am I missing anything here?
__________________
Old Pain In The Ass says: I am on a mission from God to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable; to bring faith to the doubtful and doubt to the faithful. :shakebible:
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
The Man (10-17-2016), thedoc (10-17-2016)
  #144  
Old 10-17-2016, 07:31 PM
peacegirl's Avatar
peacegirl peacegirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger View Post
I wonder how peacegirl explains the fact that optometry works at all, given that (according to her), it's flat-out wrong in every particular when it comes to the eyes and how they work.

Amazingly, I just got a new set of contacts and strangely enough, I can now see pretty well. Even though (according to peacegirl) the theory and practice behind how the contacts allow me to see is completely wrong.
What are you talking about Lone Ranger? The shape of the eye and the corrective nature of a lens has everything to do with clear vision. Light has to strike the eye for any kind of vision to occur. Lessans never said otherwise.
__________________
"We will not solve the problems of the world from the level of thinking we were at when we created them" -- Einstein

"The fatal tendency of mankind to leave off thinking about a thing
which is no longer doubtful is the cause of half their errors" -- John Stuart Mill
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 10-17-2016, 07:40 PM
peacegirl's Avatar
peacegirl peacegirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Misleading LASIK Eye Surgery Ads Draw FDA Warning - AboutLawsuits.com
__________________
"We will not solve the problems of the world from the level of thinking we were at when we created them" -- Einstein

"The fatal tendency of mankind to leave off thinking about a thing
which is no longer doubtful is the cause of half their errors" -- John Stuart Mill
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 10-17-2016, 07:48 PM
peacegirl's Avatar
peacegirl peacegirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Angakuk View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
If you are deemed competent and you sign a consent form that explains the known risks ---and there was no negligence --- you can sue but you probably won't win.
Unless I am completely mistaken peacegirl's original complaint was that the true risks associated with Lasik surgery were being hidden from the public. If that were true, then those risks would not be included in a consent form and an injured patient would have legal recourse.

Let's break this thing down.

Consent form fails to disclose risks - patient signs- patient is injured - patient sues successfully despite having signed the consent form.

Consent form discloses the risks - patient signs - the surgeon is negligent - patient is injured - patient sues successfully despite having signed the consent form.

Consent form discloses the risks - patient is incompentent to give informed consent - patient signs anyway - patient is injured - patient's legal guardian successfully sues on behalf of incompetent patient despite the fact that the patient signed the consent form.

Consent form discloses the risks - patient fails to read the consent form but signs it anyway - patient is injured - patient sues unsuccessfully.

Consent form discloses the risks - competent patient reads and signs the consent form - there is no negligence on the part of the surgeon - patient is injured - patient sues unsuccessfully.

As I see it, so long as the consent form discloses the risks, the patient is competent and the surgeon is not negligent there are only two scenarios in which a patient harmed by the procedure fails to sue successfully.

1. Negligence on the part of the patient: Though the patient was able to do so the patient didn't bother to read the consent form. Patient is guilty of failure to exercise due diligence and of lying about having read the consent form before signing it.

2. Accidental injury: Patient sustains an injury that could not have been reasonably foreseen by the surgeon.

Am I missing anything here?
A big problem is false advertising and the way people are misled regarding the true complication rate. I started this thread is to make people aware That this surgery is extremely risky and if something goes wrong, the damage has already been done whether a lawsuit is won or not.
__________________
"We will not solve the problems of the world from the level of thinking we were at when we created them" -- Einstein

"The fatal tendency of mankind to leave off thinking about a thing
which is no longer doubtful is the cause of half their errors" -- John Stuart Mill
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 10-17-2016, 07:51 PM
peacegirl's Avatar
peacegirl peacegirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Gender: Female
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Angakuk View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
If you are deemed competent and you sign a consent form that explains the known risks ---and there was no negligence --- you can sue but you probably won't win.
Unless I am completely mistaken peacegirl's original complaint was that the true risks associated with Lasik surgery were being hidden from the public. If that were true, then those risks would not be included in a consent form and an injured patient would have legal recourse.

Let's break this thing down.

Consent form fails to disclose risks - patient signs- patient is injured - patient sues successfully despite having signed the consent form.

Consent form discloses the risks - patient signs - the surgeon is negligent - patient is injured - patient sues successfully despite having signed the consent form.

Consent form discloses the risks - patient is incompentent to give informed consent - patient signs anyway - patient is injured - patient's legal guardian successfully sues on behalf of incompetent patient despite the fact that the patient signed the consent form.

Consent form discloses the risks - patient fails to read the consent form but signs it anyway - patient is injured - patient sues unsuccessfully.

Consent form discloses the risks - competent patient reads and signs the consent form - there is no negligence on the part of the surgeon - patient is injured - patient sues unsuccessfully.

As I see it, so long as the consent form discloses the risks, the patient is competent and the surgeon is not negligent there are only two scenarios in which a patient harmed by the procedure fails to sue successfully.

1. Negligence on the part of the patient: Though the patient was able to do so the patient didn't bother to read the consent form. Patient is guilty of failure to exercise due diligence and of lying about having read the consent form before signing it.

2. Accidental injury: Patient sustains an injury that could not have been reasonably foreseen by the surgeon.

Am I missing anything here?
A big problem is false advertising and the way people are misled regarding the true complication rate. I started this thread because the more I looked into this "miracle" procedure, for many it has been a total nightmare. I wanted to make people aware that this surgery is extremely risky and if something goes wrong, the damage has already been done whether a lawsuit is won or not.
__________________
"We will not solve the problems of the world from the level of thinking we were at when we created them" -- Einstein

"The fatal tendency of mankind to leave off thinking about a thing
which is no longer doubtful is the cause of half their errors" -- John Stuart Mill
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 10-17-2016, 09:24 PM
ChuckF's Avatar
ChuckF ChuckF is offline
liar in wolf's clothing
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Frequently about
Images: 2
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

So the FDA warned some LASIK providers over advertising that "failed to adequately warn consumers about the risks of laser eye surgery."

peacegirl, didn't you start this thread complaining that consumers were not sufficiently warned of risks and about the FDA and "their advertising"? peacegirl, should the FDA not have issued warnings?
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
How can we trust the FDA when there is a conflict of interest in many cases?
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (10-17-2016), Stephen Maturin (10-17-2016), The Man (10-17-2016), thedoc (10-17-2016)
  #149  
Old 10-17-2016, 09:51 PM
thedoc's Avatar
thedoc thedoc is offline
I'm Deplorable.
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: XMMCCCXCIII
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger View Post
I wonder how peacegirl explains the fact that optometry works at all, given that (according to her), it's flat-out wrong in every particular when it comes to the eyes and how they work.

Amazingly, I just got a new set of contacts and strangely enough, I can now see pretty well. Even though (according to peacegirl) the theory and practice behind how the contacts allow me to see is completely wrong.
What are you talking about Lone Ranger? The shape of the eye and the corrective nature of a lens has everything to do with clear vision. Light has to strike the eye for any kind of vision to occur. Lessans never said otherwise.
You're lying again, Lessans wrote in his book that molecules of light only had to surround an object for the brain to look out through the eyes and see the object. He never wrote that light had to enter the eyes, in fact he claimed that nothing, even light, did not enter the eye and impinge on the retina. Seeing clearly would depend on the brain's ability to look out through the eyes clearly, so you'd better clean those windows with Windex.
__________________
The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you donít know anything about. Wayne Dyer
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (10-17-2016), The Lone Ranger (10-17-2016)
  #150  
Old 10-17-2016, 10:17 PM
But's Avatar
But But is offline
This is the title that appears beneath your name on your posts.
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: MVDXCIII
Default Re: Iffy therapies given thumbs up by the FDA. SCARY! I'm

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger View Post
I wonder how peacegirl explains the fact that optometry works at all, given that (according to her), it's flat-out wrong in every particular when it comes to the eyes and how they work.

Amazingly, I just got a new set of contacts and strangely enough, I can now see pretty well. Even though (according to peacegirl) the theory and practice behind how the contacts allow me to see is completely wrong.
What are you talking about Lone Ranger? The shape of the eye and the corrective nature of a lens has everything to do with clear vision. Light has to strike the eye for any kind of vision to occur. Lessans never said otherwise.
If you see an object blurred, there is the same amount of light at the retina and nothing has changed about the object. You can't even explain how a lens works.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (10-17-2016), ChuckF (10-18-2016), The Lone Ranger (10-17-2016), The Man (10-17-2016), thedoc (10-17-2016)
Reply

  Freethought Forum > The Public Baths > Lifestyle


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Page generated in 0.50455 seconds with 14 queries