5 ms·

You got lucky if you didn't need follow up surgeries. The most common cause of myopia is eyeball length, which laser eye surgery doesn't address. So folks end u

You got lucky if you didn't need follow up surgeries. The most common cause of myopia is eyeball length, which laser eye surgery doesn't address. So folks end up getting their cornea shaved and sculpted up, in a barbaric way (lasers wow!?) and then their eyeball length accommodates and they need the surgery yet again. There's only so much cornea that can be cut away.. in fact, often folks end up with chronic dry eye from the surgeries. The cornea is really not meant to be cut up, it's extremely delicate, and scars and ulcerates easily. Here's my full comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31834633#31860661 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31834633#31860661

feintruled 4y ago
Well, it's my eyeball and I can do what I like with it. Calling something barbaric is a nonsense to me when it doesn't hurt and is done with informed consent (and it works!) I'm sure there are risks, and you might have some haloing at night or whatever, but I went from -4.75, -5.75 to 20/20 vision! And if I end up slightly long sighted.. small price to pay for 20+ years free of glasses. Lasers wow indeed! Of course people should make informed decisions. I'm sure enough of the operations have been done to get a very informative risk breakdown. And if you are happy with glasses more power to you.
- goldenkey 4y ago
  -5.75 is pretty awful vision, so I can understand the desire. We likely could have fixed that naturally through changing your habits, getting you more accurate scripts, and 3+ activity-specific scripts. I discuss in my comment, how most folks don't really have genetically bad vision but rather persistent biological compensations that can be ameliorated. But sure, if you were looking for a quick fix that doesn't last, I suppose it's effective and I don't demean you for your choices.
  - feintruled 4y ago
    I'd love to believe it could have been fixed naturally, at the time that branch of treatment all seemed woo-woo, be fascinated to hear if there is any hard evidence for it working now. But anyway, sorry for the previous sharp reply. It wasn't warranted.

feintruled 4y ago

Well, it's my eyeball and I can do what I like with it. Calling something barbaric is a nonsense to me when it doesn't hurt and is done with informed consent (and it works!) I'm sure there are risks, and you might have some haloing at night or whatever, but I went from -4.75, -5.75 to 20/20 vision! And if I end up slightly long sighted.. small price to pay for 20+ years free of glasses. Lasers wow indeed! Of course people should make informed decisions. I'm sure enough of the operations have been done to get a very informative risk breakdown. And if you are happy with glasses more power to you.

goldenkey 4y ago
-5.75 is pretty awful vision, so I can understand the desire. We likely could have fixed that naturally through changing your habits, getting you more accurate scripts, and 3+ activity-specific scripts. I discuss in my comment, how most folks don't really have genetically bad vision but rather persistent biological compensations that can be ameliorated. But sure, if you were looking for a quick fix that doesn't last, I suppose it's effective and I don't demean you for your choices.
- feintruled 4y ago
  I'd love to believe it could have been fixed naturally, at the time that branch of treatment all seemed woo-woo, be fascinated to hear if there is any hard evidence for it working now. But anyway, sorry for the previous sharp reply. It wasn't warranted.