All of us Vs Keratoconus


Members Login
Chatbox
Please log in to join the chat!
Post Info TOPIC: EPI ON OR OFF?


Phase Two

Status: Offline
Posts: 482
Date: Tue May 22 3:54 AM, 2007
RE: EPI ON OR OFF?
Permalink   
 


Those who received the attachment, from the most peer reviewed study, I sent to them will know that there is superficiality in this article, and also the results don't add up in consistency, plus there is a lot of down playing and up playing to justify the unjustifiable (there are no formal controls in the study, it's just serial results they have). If anyone tries, because they want a treatment to work so much, they will find suddenly more effort being payed to the results to get the results they want, if there are no formal controls. There are lots of words but nothing concreate said. This is all just to increace the life span of the epi-on method, when in fact it's a laughing stock the world over, people are too embrassed for them to say anything as its so shamful for them to add this to a sentance. Be very wary. That article has all the hallmarks of where all this comes from with the epi-on method (which is not a method at all when in fact the parameters of the orginal method has been increased even more, so that will "reign in" this non-animal tested/therefore can be seen as being un-safe/and is unapproved/ineffective change to suit the purposes other than what this whole thing was designed to do)


-- Edited by QuintriX at 04:11, 2007-05-22

__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 15
Date: Tue May 22 1:50 PM, 2007
Permalink   
 

are you serious?  you have to be kidding me.  has anyone convinced you that the earth is round, or do you still believe it is flat?

__________________


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 51
Date: Tue May 22 8:11 PM, 2007
Permalink   
 

I understand why people prefer the epi-on method (the pain associated with the epi-off method is awful from my own experience), but the problem with the epi-on method is that there seem to be no scientific articles at the National Library of Medicine (pubmed.com). I think one should consider this before doing the epi-on method. It might suggest the method is not really approved by the scientific establishment. At least with the epi-off method we have some solid ground and understanding (although long-term results are still missing and failures are not quite understood). With the epi-on method we have no solid ground yet.
 It is of course up to you to choose what treatment you want. However, be aware of self-appointed scientists who claim to hold the ultimate "truth". (1) Always be skeptical, (2) make sure to get second-opinions from experts or scientists whenever possible, and (3) make sure to find and understand all failures with the treatment you're considering. When you have reached some level of confidence after you have accepted all the risks involved, then toss the dice and have faith…
Best regards, Jan


__________________


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 38
Date: Wed May 23 12:45 PM, 2007
Permalink   
 

Dear friends,

I found this point of view from Dr Hafezi, a collaborator of Pr Seiler, the inventor of C3R It is on an italian forum.

"In contrast to certain Italian groups we clearly state that the epithelium has to be removed for riboflavin to penetrate the cornea properly. Recent animal studies have clearly shown that the macromolecule riboflavin can not penetrate the epithelium sufficiently to ensure riboflavin shielding and the effect of crosslinking, even when the corneal epithelium is losened by the use of tetracain an oxibuprocain eye drops.
However, for the patients comfort, we do not remove the epithelium completely anymore: we rather remove stripes of epithelium and leave other stripes of epithelium intact. The pattern on the cornea after removal of the epithelium is similar to a hand with five fingers, the palm of the hand representing the area of the biggest steepening in keratoconus (inferior cornea). Since the horizontal diffusion of riboflavin in the corneal stroma is twice as fast as the vertical diffusion, upon complete vertical saturation of the cornea over a denuded area we know that the non-denuded area is also saturated. Furthermore this can clearly be observed at the slit lamp.
By using this technique we markedly reduce the patients discomfort after the operation. "

-- Edited by Action444 at 12:53, 2007-05-23

__________________


Phase Two

Status: Offline
Posts: 482
Date: Thu May 24 4:49 PM, 2007
Permalink   
 

Those where two great posts Jan and Action you guys are asset to the Keratoconus community.

I wanted to add that the demarcation line has been drawn a long time ago, and it was posted here a very long time ago, for those who would like to know the facts.

Please Click Here

Conclusion: This newly observed demarcation line may result from differences in the refractive index and/or reflection properties of untreated versus X-linked corneal stroma and represents an effective tool to biomicroscopically easily monitor the depth of effective X-linking treatment in keratoconus.

-- Edited by QuintriX at 16:53, 2007-05-24

__________________
«First  <  1 2 3 | Page of 3  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us

www.kcfreedom.org

Knowledge Works