Anyman wrote:Your theory makes some sense, but what I cannot follow is why I have it. Aren't these wonderful lasers supposed to NOT do that?
Different people react differently to the same surgery. Although the majority of Lasik patients may be satisified with their results, that is of little consolation to the minority with problems.
Anyman wrote:Also, if pupil size isn't as much of a factor then why do pupil reducing drops like alphagan make a difference?
Likely for two reasons. One is that the total amount of light entering the eye is reduced with a smaller pupil, and the other is that the center of the cornea may be smoother and thereby less affected.
Anyman wrote:Other than contact lenses, which lasik was supposed to make unnecessary, what else is there? I've heard of topographical lasers in Europe, but what the reviews I've read are mixed. I'd like a fix, but don't trust them anymore.
The best fix depends totally upon what needs to be fixed. If your problem is a rough surface, then laser is not likely to help but contacts may work very well. If the problem is dry eye, then neither laser nor contacts would be helpful, but supplements, artificial tears, and other
dry eye treatment may be helpful.
Anyman wrote:I remain upset with my doctor and need for redress, as I cannot and will not let this go. It would be most unjust for me to go through the rest of my wife with nasty starbursts and he with my money and night vision. These starbursts were not part of the deal.
You would need to seek legal advice in this regard.