Cynically, I'd like to counter that the procedure was not experimental but well-proven. As the quacks informed us, they've successfully performed thousands such

Cynically, I'd like to counter that the procedure was not experimental but well-proven. As the quacks informed us, they've successfully performed thousands such interventions. To make my above statement true, you need only consider what defines "success" from the point of view of the quack clinics. In each case, the treatment achieved its primary goal, which was to part desperate people from their money. The treatment's effect on their vision was a side effect. For the same reason, I wouldn't dignify the procedure with the "experimental" label. When you say an approach is experimental you're implying that it's being performed under carefully controlled and monitored conditions to improve the state of medical knowledge. It sounds to me like this isn't at all what those treatments are about.