Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 02:05:48 -0500
Message-ID: <redirect-998515@logan.com>
Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=148.78.247.125; envelope-from=hwasti@starband.net
From: "Hamid A. Wasti" <hwasti@starband.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Multi-focal Contacts
References: <list-995030@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> Posted for <miriani33@charter.net>:
>  
>  Lasik surgery has come a long way. If you are an acceptable candidate 
> for
> surgery  (is your cornea thick enough  etc), and you are treated by a 
> skilled
> surgeon your risk is less than one percent, risk measure being not 
> corrected
> to 20/20 without correction.  Research is now out greater than 10 years.
>  
>  Matt Miriani
>  AME

When I looked into Lasik in the late 90's, I could not help but notice 
that those advocating the procedure were themselves wearing glasses. 
 The "less than 1%" risk sounds almost acceptable, but I am reminded of 
the fateful words of my grandfather from almost 3 decades ago, as he lay 
dying of cancer: "When I chose to forego further chemotherapy, I knew 
that my chance of survival was 98%  I just did not appreciate that if I 
was in the 2%, I would be 100% dead not merely 2% dead."

For me at least, the inconvenience of glasses is far more acceptable 
than the risk of loosing or severely imparing my eyesight even in a 
single eye.  Every individual has a different tolerance for 
inconveniences and a different aversion to risk -- for what it is worth, 
that is where I draw my line.

Regards,

Hamid