Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Yes, this is why I was never willing to get the procedure done. The risk/reward ratio is too unfavorable. Even if the percentage of people who have problems is very low, those problems are permanent. To take the risk of permanent injury just to avoid the inconvenience of wearing glasses never made sense to me.



I can see it making sense if you're nearly blind without your glasses. I'd feel very vulnerable if I'm so reliant on glasses.

If it's just a slight convenience then yeah... keep that stuff away from me.


True, I can imagine circumstances where it would be preferable. I was just commenting about my own situation.

(BTW, I am nearly blind without my glasses, but that's never really bothered me. I just wear the glasses.)


Glasses are the least risky. If you're using contacts however, you're taking more of a risk with your eyes than surgery.


citation?


https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaophthalmology/fullartic...

They calculated in 1/2000 lifetime chance of vision loss from contacts vs a 1/10000 chance for refractive surgery.


I can't read the full article, so this might be incorrect. The summary seems to indicate that they're only considering vision loss, but most of the reports that I've heard of about lasik problems aren't vision loss as such, but the introduction of artifacts.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: