LasikDecision.com is a reiteration of my previously owned website Lasiksucks4u.com. The content has been duplicated (and in most cases updated) here because I feel it important to get as much information to the public as possible, regardless of how many websites which contain the same information.
Bala Cynwyd & Philadelphia, PA and Marlton, New Jersey
"I will not remove the website in its entirety, and will be
updating this site or others with facts of my care, treatment, history, all of
the legal issues pertaining to my case and all necessary documentation
substantiating those facts within the legal guidelines as allowed by law and the
First Amendment which grants me freedom of speech."
- As stated in my letter
of intent upon receiving a Cease & Desist letter from Nevyases attorney.
I've accomplished part of and have much more to follow through on what I
promised in my letter of intent. I believe I've proven most of the allegations
brought against the Nevyases in my med-mal lawsuit and previously posted on my
websites, and will continue to do so until ALL has been proven (whether
dismissed in courts or not). There is
much to be learned from the current Nevyas v. Morgan lawsuit as well,
which I will be updating here shortly.
This section provides information based on my experiences with Drs. Herbert Nevyas and Anita Nevyas-Wallace (Nevyas
Eye Associates), the doctors who damaged my eyes:
Regarding their investigational study (before, during, and after) and what I believe to include improper use of an unapproved 'black box' laser;
As noted by several renowned LASIK doctors about the Nevyases Deviation from Standard of Care;
On the threats and intimidation to shut down my websites, the legal battle to retain my free speech rights,
and the continuous misrepresentations made to the courts (as noted by all
previous legal counsel).
The psychological impact of a bad refractive surgery can be devastating.
This updated version of the 2003 presentation, prepared by Roger Davis, PhD. Mr. Davis is a Psychologist; Damaged LASIK patient; Co-author of over 20 articles, chapters, and books in clinical psychology; and Founder of VisionSimulations.com. He tells of The Psychological Effects of LASIK Complications.
Submitted to the FDA's Ophthalmic Panel on April 25, 2008, the presentation I believe is more believable and accurate than what the FDA and refractive industry claims.
(May take a few minutes to load in new window)
Read more...
Coping
Although the marketing of LASIK focuses on quality of life, informed consent does not. Instead, the real risks are hidden in medical jargon that never mentions their true effects, particularly severe depression and suicidal ideation.
Right now, there are many Lasik casualties worldwide struggling to...
Cope with depression and suicidal ideation, medical disease syndromes not explicitly mentioned on their informed consent.
Cope with the symptoms of post-traumatic stress (PTSD) and other anxiety disorders.
Cope with their surgeons telling them that nothing is wrong with their eyes.
Cope with "second opinions" designed to protect their surgeon from legal problems.
Find a hard contact lens to fit their irregular corneas, often spending thousands and thousands of dollars hunting for a suboptimal solution.
Cope with the possibility of losing their jobs, homes, or spouses because of sudden, permanent visual loss.
Cope with three, four, or five complications at the same time.
One of the key factors I've tried to overcome is how best to accommodate my quality of life since LASIK. Visual aberrations differ from person to person, but I found in my situation the best way to adapt is to simulate daylight, as daylight offers the least complications. There is still a major loss of contrast but in my situation, it's the best I can do. LIGHTING
There are many ways to light your home, from the conventional light bulb to fluorescent and halogen. I found halogen to be the most costly and fluorescent to be somewhat effective. Still not the same as natural daylight. I did purchase a light from a local hydroponics store which proved quite effective, however, it is a 1,000 watt light bulb (ballast required) which did increase my electric bill.
There is a growing number of companies offering lighting simular to natural daylight. One such company, DaylightCompany offers all types of lighting, and in fact states many uses for their lighting especially for those with low vision. I've seen these lights, and I believe they would be beneficial to anyone with visual aberrations. TELEVISION
HD! What a difference! The glare and ghosting are not as prominent with this type TV compared to analog!
SPECIALTY LENSES
There ARE alternatives for those who may not want surgery and those with post refractive complications.
As an alternative to not risking your eyes to surgery, Paragon CRT® lenses reshapes your corneas while you sleep!
For those with Post-refractive complications, SynergEyes offers lenses that have been praised by both patients and practitioners.
For more information on these lenses and more, please...
Read more...
Dr. Edward Boshnick maintains a cutting edge practice devoted to the restoration of vision and comfort lost as a result of refractive eye surgery (including LASIK and Radial Keratotomy), keratoconus, corneal transplant surgery, pellucid marginal degeneration, extreme dry eye, corneal dystrophies, corneal trauma and Stevens-Johnson Syndrome.
Specializing in contact lens care, children's vision, orthokeratology and vision care for the partially sighted (low vision). Dr. Boshnick has been a clinical investigator for both the FDA and several major contact lens manufacturers for over 20 years. Dr. Boshnick has also lectured extensively and authored a number of professional articles dealing with contact and scleral lenses and
orthokeratology.
How best to treat a patient who has suffered vision loss due to LASIK, RK or some other surgical procedure depends on a number of factors. Some of the symptoms and issues facing the doctor and patient included but are not limited to the following:
Reduced best corrected visual acuity
Irregular or distorted corneas
Open wounds and/or weakened corneal flap
Higher order aberrations
Decentered optic zones
Corneal ectasia
Extremely dry eye
Ocular pain and headaches
Vitreous floaters
Reduced contrast sensitivity
Dramatically reduced night vision
Visual phenomena such as glare, flare, halos around lights, starbursts
Overcorrection of the pre-surgical refractive error
Emotional issues due to many of the above factors
At the present time there is no cure for many of the above. However, there are a number of specialized lenses now available that will allow post-surgical patients to function on a much higher level with a much greater level of comfort. While there are a number of soft lens and gas permeable lens designs included in the "specialized lens" category, I have come to rely on two major lens designs to address the vision and comfort issues that most post-refractive surgical patients are facing. These lens designs are the new Synergeyes Post-Surgical Lens and Post-Surgical Scleral Lenses.
Many LASIK casualties lose more than 'Just Their Eyesight'...
LASIK Safety
This section emphasizes the safety aspect of Refractive Surgery. Doctors reusing Microkeratome blades on multiple patients, 'The LASIK Report', from casualties' perspective, and more...
THE LASIK REPORT
A Call for the Discontinuation of a Harmful Procedure
August, 2006
LASIK is one of the most commonly performed elective surgeries in the United States today. The public perception of LASIK is based largely on advertising, which is intended to entice patients to have surgery without disclosing risks, side effects and contraindications.
The perceived benefits of LASIK surgery are obvious, whereas risks and adverse effects are not. It is unwise to assume that a surgeon who has a financial interest in a patient’s decision to have LASIK will provide adequate informed consent.
LASIK is irreversible and may result in long-term, debilitating complications. There are permanent adverse effects of LASIK in 100% of cases, even in the absence of clinically significant complications. This is unacceptable in the context of an elective surgery when safer alternatives such as glasses or contact lenses exist.
On April 25th, 2008, the FDA help an open public meeting with their Ophthalmic Panel to address 'Quality of Life' issues after Refractive Surgery. Among the presenters were Gerry Dorrian, whose son
commited suicide in 2007 as a result of his complications. Joseph Schnell help up charts depicting his distorted vision.
The 'positive side' was shown as well. The military spoke stating this was one of the best procedures available for those in the field. Doctors brought in patients portraying lasik as a miracle.
The panel was made aware that refractive surgery had a complication rate of about 5%. Think about it: If 1 million people had the procedure done, then that means roughly 50,000 (5%) were damaged! Majority rules though, so 50,000 damaged lasik-induced people doesn't mean anything to the FDA. What about 5 million? That would make 250,000 people with complications! When I hear that the FDA is influenced by financial interest, you get no argument, especially since I've seen how they work!!!
As the FDA wants information on quality of life, I say give it to them. Anyone who's had a complication from refractive surgery please send them your story. Let them know what your life is like now.
I would like a copy also because
I simply don't trust them!
Throughout all of this, maybe the FDA can answer a simple question:
At what point does 'Quality of Life' matter more than the almighty dollar?
Many of you who have contacted me through my website have asked for help because of your complications. PLEASE, this is very important to set the facts somewhat straight by letting them know the EXACT figures. Please file an 'Adverse Event Report' (Medwatch) on the FDA's website. PLEASE NOTE: Based on my experience and that of others, their Contact Form or
Email WILL NOT guarantee that the information is properly filed or acknowledged.
Former FDA Chief of Medical Devices, Morris Waxler, PHD, Warns Public About Dangers of
LASIK - Aired February 25th, 2010 on Good Morning America
Leave it to the FDA to deny that they ‘MESSED UP’. Mr. Waxler admitted 10 years after his retirement what most LASIK casualties have been trying to say since the late 1990s. The FDA continues to downplay the risks further allowing more people to get damaged from this procedure - when is enough enough? At least Mr. Waxler has taken his time to actually talk to damaged patients on a personal level (myself included), which is more than I can say for the FDA. I commend Mr. Waxler for his honesty.
If you surf the web, you'll notice that most Lasik websites are advertisements for having Lasik eye surgery. These sites will list complications but severely downplay the risks associated with LASIK just to sell you the procedure. The same can be said of MANY doctors who perform this procedure when you go in for consultation. Don't be rushed, and try to research as much as possible.
This website is to educate you to the dangers of having Lasik when you are not a proper candidate. Before you consider Lasik, you must be sure it can be done safely, and that you are a proper candidate. Many will view this site as anti-lasik, but the intent is to show what can (and HAS happened). The information is here, but it is still YOUR decision!
My name is Dom Morgan, and I tell my story because it may be useful to anyone considering Lasik. I went to a doctor who advertised that anyone who was nearsighted, farsighted, or had astigmatism could be done safely...that's almost everybody! I trusted these doctors, and now I'm legally blind.
My websites contain material which some people do not want you to see. I know that Drs. Herbert Nevyas and Anita Nevyas-Wallace, the doctors who damaged my eyes do not, because they sued to shut down my website. The documents on this site are vast and (I believe) irrefutable however, I ask that you come to your own conclusions regarding LASIK.
Please be safe - your eyes are too important to risk to just anybody.
The Right To Free Speech
When I first started warning others of the potential risks of LASIK surgery, I could not name Drs. Herbert Nevyas and Anita Nevyas-Wallace (the doctors who damaged my eyes) due to litigation
(medical malpractice).
After my med mal lawsuit, I added the doctors’ names because I believed then (and still do) that as a matter of public safety, they should be named. Their investigational study, as proven by the information (documents) posted resulted in numerous lawsuits. I posted all of the information I could get.
The doctors did not like this, and filed a defamation lawsuit against me. In the course of the 2 years it took for this case to appear before a judge at trial, my website was shut down 3 times, through intimidation and threats of lawsuits against my web hosting companies. On the second attempt, even after a temporary restraining order was denied twice by the courts, my site was shut down due to phone calls and a letter from the doctors’ attorney.
In July 2005, I was ordered by the court to remove the doctors’ names from my website. I appealed the court's decision.
Were My Rights Being Violated?
In the Nevyas Eye Associates section of this site, I believe the documents posted support all my claims against Drs. Herbert Nevyas and Anita Nevyas-Wallace (Nevyas Eye Associates). The Nevyases have fought hard to keep these documents from the public eye.
Public Citizen felt so strongly about my
rights being violated, that they appealed on my behalf, pro bono (without
charge to me). The ACLU also took interest (they helped me obtain local
counsel for my appeal).
Because Public Citizen does not accept funds from corporations,
professional associations or government agencies, we can remain
independent and follow the truth wherever it may lead. But that means we
depend on the generosity of concerned citizens like you for the resources
to fight on behalf of the public interest.
Public Citizen has done an exceptional job in providing representation
for not only my rights, but those of many others. Please consider
donating to help them continue protecting the rights of Americans. The
donations ARE tax deductible.
LasikDecision.com publishes letters from people who
write in.
Are you a patient who has something you want the public to know, but
aren't tech saavy, or otherwise can't afford to hire a web designer to
create an attractive site for you?
Are you currently involved in litigation and want to say something
without your identity becoming publically known?
Are you so visually damaged you feel you have to warn the public
because your conscience compels you to do so?
Are you a doctor who can't speak out because of fear of professional
retaliation?
If you have something you would like published, please
email me, or use my
contact form.
LASIK: Another Insider’s
Experience…
Name Witheld By Request
Dear Dom,
I'm sorry to hear about your experience. I am a laser tech. I have been
for a number of years, and have assisted in over 30,000 procedures with
over 20 different surgeons. I have seen it all...
Some Lasers Just Don't Cut It...The FDA has been very 'choosy' as to what actions they took against SOME in the LASIK industry regarding 'Black Box' Lasers.
Debris After LASIK
LASIK Blade Leaves Metal Under FlapSome patients have reported large chunks of metal in their corneas after lasik.
Flap disintegrates during lifting
Seemingly Harmless, And Yet...Others have reported the LASIK flap lost, missing (found on the floor), or stuck to the microkeratome blade.
LasikFDA LAUNCHED
You Know Big Tobacco, Now Meet Big LASIK.
What do the LASIK industry and the tobacco industry have in
common? A smokescreen to hide the truth!
For many years, the tobacco industry depended heavily on
advertising. Big Tobacco marketed smoking as hip and cool. The
LASIK industry also depends heavily on advertising. Big LASIK
marketing portrays glasses and contact lenses as uncool and
restrictive.
Big Tobacco relies on peer-pressure from young people to
entice their friends into the deadly habit of smoking. Big
LASIK relies on testimonials and word-of-mouth promotion. LASIK
patients are encouraged, and sometimes even paid, to refer
friends and family members to have a medically unnecessary and
risky surgery.
Big Tobacco sold a product which contains dangerous
chemicals and an addictive drug, nicotene, which gives instant
pleasure and satisfaction to users. Big LASIK sells a harmful
surgery which gives patients an immediate sense of joy and
excitement (wow factor) when they realize they can see without
glasses or contacts, leading to a high initial rate of
satisfaction.
Big Tobacco manipulated medical studies about the dangers of
smoking. Big LASIK manipulates medical studies and publishes
junk science to cover up the dangers of LASIK.
Big Tobacco said that drinking one to two glasses of whole
milk a day was riskier than second-hand smoke. Big LASIK says
that wearing contact lenses is riskier than having LASIK
surgery.
Big Tobacco advertised low-tar cigarettes as "the cigarette
that takes the FEAR out of smoking." Big LASIK currently
advertises blade-free LASIK as the technology that takes the
FEAR out of LASIK.
Big Tobacco said that "unhappiness causes cancer." Big LASIK
says that patient personality factors are to blame for LASIK
dissatisfaction.
Big Tobacco attempted to silence and discredit its critics.
Tobacco industry whistleblowers were threatened and harassed.
Big LASIK attempts to discredit outspoken critics of LASIK.
LASIK patients who speak out about problems with the procedure
are threatened and harassed.
Big Tobacco lied before Congress about the harmful health
effects of smoking. Big LASIK lied before the Food and Drug
Administration about the harmful effects of LASIK.
Smoking can lead to cataracts, the number one cause of
vision loss in the world. LASIK can lead to cataracts. Also,
steriods drops routinely prescibed after LASIK may hasten onset
of cataracts. Ironically, LASIK complicates cataract surgery.
The damaging health effects of smoking are slow and
insidious. Smokers may not realize or acknowledge harm from
cigarette use for years; nonetheless, the damage is there. LASIK
patients may suffer obvious and immediate complications, but
some universal adverse effects of LASIK are insidious. LASIK
patients may not realize or acknowledge the harm they suffered
from LASIK for years; nonetheless, the damage is there.
Tobacco use is the number one cause of preventable death in
America. LASIK is becoming a leading cause of preventable vision
loss in America.
Big LASIK is selling a harmful, unnecessary surgery, and
covering up the truth about LASIK risks and long-term adverse
effects. Don't let Big LASIK blow smoke in your eyes.
Simply stated, its mission is "to expose deceit, corruption, and collusion by
the FDA and the LASIK industry. You've read the hype about the 10-minute
miracle. Now get the truth."
The site contends that at that FDA panel meeting, "Insiders acquainted with the
FDA approval process for medical devices were horrified as one by one, the
presenters alleged deception by individual LASIK surgeons, cover ups perpetrated
by medical device manufacturers, and corruption at the level of the FDA itself.
Compelling cases were made for massive violations of federal law, the failure of
the FDA to monitor surgical facilities for LASIK, and deliberate
misclassification of severe complications as simple side-effects, as a means of
securing premature FDA approval of the excimer laser.
