Oh great, somebody at the NY Times wants to ruin Lasik for us all too.
Lasik’s Risks Are Coming into Sharper Focus
171–180 of 239 posts
Re: Lasik’s Risks Are Coming into Sharper Focus
#172So, this poorly written article at least sparkled a good discussion here on HN. I have an "Ask HN" for you here: it's the year 2018, I am 41, live in Bay Area, have myopia (~2 sx and ~3 dx), and have pondered doing surgery. What's the absolute best option I have? Is it LASIK? Are there different types of LASIK? I spoke with two eye doctors in the past 5 years, and none of them managed to either convince me, or to cla…
The best option available when I started looking into this a year ago was ReLEx SMILE(Trans PRK being second, LASIK third). I have since had the procedure done (see my other comment in this thread for my experience but TL;DR is I highly recommend it). From what I remember LASIK is the oldest method with the highest chance of complications and side-effects and longest recovery period. Trans PRK is the least-intrusive…
Thanks to both for the info! Will do some more research now.
Re: Lasik’s Risks Are Coming into Sharper Focus
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
It helps to understand the benefits of the procedure to understand why folks would undertake the risk... I had correction at -6 diopters, which is equivalent to about 20/500 vision. My near vision uncorrected was bad enough that the focal distance was closer than the distance needed to resolve 3D vision. This means that to read my phone without correction, I had to close one eye and hold it in front of my face. Furth…
Hows your night vision?
I got LASIK in February for my -6.75 vision, and my night vision now seems the same as before the surgery. I've had no complications at all.
Re: Lasik’s Risks Are Coming into Sharper Focus
#174I think this is a unique view, but I've come to appreciate nearsightedness. Partially because I like having the ability to soften the external world by removing my glasses (like wrapping myself in a warm fuzzy blanket), but even more so because it grants me the ability to see things near me in sharper focus than someone with 20/20 vision. I can put on contacts or glasses to see something at a distance just as clearly…
As a person who recently wore contacts every day until dry eyes and an injury forced me to switch back to glasses, I have almost entirely the opposite experience. It bothers me to wear glasses again. My prescription is quite strong, so it creates a pretty significant distortion, stronger towards the edges of the lenses. It's hard to do sports, as I now have a background fear about losing/breaking them, and the distor…
If you don't mind can you share how your contacts damaged your eyes? I wear daily disposables almost everyday and sometimes forget to remove them at night... is that how you damaged your eyes?
Re: Lasik’s Risks Are Coming into Sharper Focus
#175> None of the surgeons he consulted ever warned him he could sustain permanent damage following Lasik, he added. I had LASIK ~18 years ago, and was warned many times by everyone I discussed the procedure with that there were possible side effects, including the ones in the article. I also signed a bunch of stuff saying the same. About 12 years ago I had a ‘touch up’ and same deal - warnings everywhere from everyone..…
Yea, I got a ton of warnings and had to straight up sign a paper saying I knew it could cause permanent damage. This makes me wonder if he just didn't pay any attention, or if he went to really dodgy surgeons.
Re: Lasik’s Risks Are Coming into Sharper Focus
#176"LASIK has a remarkable success rate, with 96%" This implies that 4% of LASIK surgeries are failures. Odds of dying in a skydiving accident: 0.0007% Odds of dying in a car accident: 0.0167% You probably aren't going to die from a bad lasik surgery but for someone who's livelihood depends on their eyes, developing bad eye problems and actually dying should be adjusted for the same level of risk. In which case, 4% is a…
Failure doesn't mean "bad eye problems", it means any result other than 20/20 vision. So you could have better sight than before, but still be a failed case.
Re: Lasik’s Risks Are Coming into Sharper Focus
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
My father had it done due to cataracts, and was satisfied with the artificial lenses and resulting vision. I had PRK done instead of LASIK (the top layer of the cornea is discarded [it regenerates] instead of being cut and lifted prior to abalation; recovery time is longer, but corneal integrity is preserved) 8 years ago. The recovery time was a few weeks, but I had no LASIK side effects. I highly recommend it versus…
Did the same. I really think it’s a pay now or pay later affair. PRK was a more painful recovery for sure, but I’ve had no issues and no restrictions. I healed very quickly. I did a review of medical research and did a few things to make PRK better for me: 1. Vitamin C supplements leading up to and after treatment. Reduces risk of corneal haze (though risk is very low with modern PRK which uses Mitomycin off-label fo…
All great points!
Re: Lasik’s Risks Are Coming into Sharper Focus
#178FWIW, I got PRK laser eye surgery and had 20/15 vision for maybe 6 months. Dry eyes took a few years to go away. Back to wearing glasses again in ~8 years. Stars and lights are now permanently fuzzy at night because my pupils dilation is larger than the surface area of the PRK. YMMV but for me, it wasn't worth it.
Interesting. One of the disqualifying factors for my LASIK surgery would have been if my pupils dialated too much. Luckily, mine did not.
PRK is a different procedure. The main advantage is that there is no incision and less chances of error which is why pilots opt for it. The main disadvantage of PRK over lasik is the much longer recovery time which is a decent trade off for less risk. That said, I still suffer from dry eye years after the procedure though it’s improved compared to before
Re: Lasik’s Risks Are Coming into Sharper Focus
#179I had LASIK a little over a year ago and it turned out very well for me, due in part to having a great doctor and due in large part to all of the research that I did before having the surgery. However, one thing I emphasize to everyone considering it is that (despite the marketing) it should be considered a major elective surgery with a possibility of serious complications, and that anyone considering it should weigh…
I had LASIK almost 20 years ago, from one of the leading practitioners in the then-fairly-young field, and I scrupulously followed the post-op regimen, yet I still experience noticeable halos and starbursts with lights at night, and my eyes are considerably more sensitive to the sun (I basically can't tolerate being outside in the daytime for any length of time without sunglasses, whereas I never even owned a pair of sunglasses before the surgery).
These are fairly minor issues for me, and I've never regretted getting LASIK, but a reputable surgeon doesn't guarantee lack of side effects.
Re: Lasik’s Risks Are Coming into Sharper Focus
#180I didn't read all the comments - but it should be pointed out that Lasik and PRK are 2 different things.
With PRK, the laser burns off the whole top of your eye. In Lasik, they just slice the top layer of your eye, peel it back, then laser underneath, then pull the flap back down.
I am wondering if this study only focused on lasik, or also looked at PRK.
Anecdotally, I had PRK and it was one of the best decisions of my life.