Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ariel.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!we13!ihnp4!houxm!hogpc!houti!ariel!norm
From: norm@ariel.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.med
Subject: Re: Surgery to Correct Vision
Message-ID: <616@ariel.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 27-Apr-84 16:43:20 EST
Article-I.D.: ariel.616
Posted: Fri Apr 27 16:43:20 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 28-Apr-84 10:25:28 EST
References: <107@loral.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T-ISL, Holmdel, NJ
Lines: 35

Two years ago I went to a doctor in Austin, Texas who had already performed
over 500 such operations (keratotomies, if my spelling/memory is correct).  He
claimed that only one person had a problem, an infection that he was able to
cure without damage.  I called two people that he had operated on, and they
were ecstatic about the results.  A third person, operated on by another 
doctor was also happy.  None of these endorsements came, however, from people
who made the endorsement years after the operation.  More years are needed 
before anyone can say with any confidence what the long term prospects are
for continued good eyesight.

I very badly wanted the operation for myself, but I finally decided against
it.  Here's why:  An optometrist explained to me that when people have lense
(terminology?) transplants, that many, if not most, of the transplanted lenses
eventually deteriorate and fog up.  The person then has to go back for another
transplant, and the line of surgery has to be moved back further on the eye.
After enough such transplants, the line of surgery cannot be moved back any
further, and more transplants become impossible.  Now, the mechanism behind
the deterioration of the lense is not known, but it is supposed that the lense
gets inadequate nutrition through the line of surgery, and then deteriorates.
There is laboratory evidence (see Roger Williams) about cataracts being
related to improper nutrition.  The line of surgery for a lense transplant
entirely surrounds the new lense, whereas the surgery to correct near-sighted-
ness is done by radial cuts only, and then not all the way through.  However,
I still worry enough about the effects of those cuts on my eyes' nutrition
that I would like to postpone the surgery a few more years untill the results
are in.

Two years ago the cost of the first operation was $600.00 per eye.  Some
insurance companies paid for it, but I heard that they were about to change 
the policy since enough people were getting the operation that the insurance
companies were getting worried.  The Austin doctor is Leslie Doyle, and is
probably one of the most experienced in the country for this operation.  His 
Austin phone number is (512) 454-0333.  But I wouldn't do it just yet.  Most
people don't research these things very well.  They think doctors are gods
I guess... -Norm Andrews, (201) 251-9326 after 6.