| Imported post
I have had laser eye treatment and I did an extremely large amount of research prior to having it done, in fact, spending two years researching it.
You cannot just rule something out on the basis that a SMALL percentage of people have problems. Especially given the massive increase in people having the treatment in recent years.
AM's (the banned one) comment is entirely accurate, anyone in the business of administering eyetests or procedures must not risk eye surgery - why you show derision is confusing because the perfect candidates for laser treatment are people who can accept a less than perfect result and do not rely on perfect vision for their jobs.
Unfortunately a lot of the newer laser clinics will accept and treat anyone. AM, stated on a forum a while back that she, like myself, did a year of research, before proceeding and attended counselling before the operation. I believe the driving force was losing contact lenses on a first holiday dive and wishing to pursue the sport in Britain. Scary choice to make just to see stuff!
AM has written extensively before on forums about laser treatment and is a good source of information on the criteria for the treatment, i.e. how many years a candidate's eye prescription should be stable for amongst others.
I have reduced night vision but I am told that can take a few years to subside. I would not consider that as a contra-indication to laser treatment.
Indeed, if I could go back, I would not. I am delighted with my treatment and a recent eye test is indicative that my eyesight is actually marginally BETTER than 20/20 whereas before I could not read even the top letter on the eye chart with both eyes together, uncorrected.
People who are considering this treatment must take responsibility for doing extensive research and they must be able to accept that there are no guarantees of success or improvement. A bad result is not always intractable and some clinics will re-treat free to attempt rectification of a less than perfect result.
If an eye prescription is worse than -1 dioptre, that indicates a better candidate than someone of better than - 1 dioptre.
There are also pros and cons between PhotoRefractive Keractectomy, or PRK and LASIK - again it is up to the individual to make an informed choice through research.
I personally recommend Optimax, who will allow potential candidates to meet other people who have already been treated and will even allow you to change your mind at ANY point and get a full refund. You could be lying on the table about to be treated and change your mind - no hassle. They provide pre treatment counselling and lifetime free aftercare.
Optimax were one of the founder clinics of laser treatment and their pioneering MD laser treated himself around 20ish years ago! They are very strict on who they will accept and who they won't (based on a defined set of criteria) - this maximises the chances of them always getting good results, unfortunately there are newer clinics who don't care about that and will take your money even when they can't guarantee a successful treatment.
Hope an opinion from someone who has actually HAD laser treatment makes things a bit clearer than the generic articles which are always floating around. Anyone who has NOT had laser treatment is not really in a valid position to advise people whether they should or should not have the treatment as they are generally not aware of the criteria which make someone a good candidate for a successful treatment.
They are also not aware what it feels like to wake up in the morning and be able to see perfectly! Good eyesight is something that a lot of people take for granted. You don't know what you've got until you lose it!
 |