Plus, you guys are never, ever going to listen to me, but after doing this for several decades, I'm here to tell you that it's not going to work properly. You can have an autorefractor, but you can't have an autodoctor.
Plus, you guys are never, ever going to listen to me, but after doing this for several decades, I'm here to tell you that it's not going to work properly. You can have an autorefractor, but you can't have an autodoctor.
The question we should all be asking, is who is doing the eye health evaluation. If your state allows the LDO to fit contacts with a current EG RX, you should be damn clear that an eye health evaluation was performed.
I didn't attend the funeral, but I sent a nice letter saying I approved of it. Mark Twain
My favorite one:Originally Posted by drk
Phil is an opportunity hunter and award winning professional actor in The Greater Boston Area who enjoys home brewing, bacon, and tending to the insurmountable will of his Maine Coon cat, Winnie.
http://www.goblink.co/our-visioneers
If I am prohibited from purchasing the things I need to cure what ails me (eyeglasses and contact lenses), then I have, in reality, been prohibited from practicing medicine upon myself.
There's an old saying: You don't want to be the first, and you don't want to be the last.
I'd rather deal with the trials and tribulations of permanent vision loss, than make and remake eyeglasses for a technogeek lacking life experience. And because I can't turn iron into gold, I won't service eyeglasses that were not designed and dispensed by an ophthalmic optician.
Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. - Richard P. Feynman
Experience is the hardest teacher. She gives the test before the lesson.
I would also submit that when we stifle new ideas and methods, we stifle progress. I agree with Dr. K that a hand-held self-refractor will probably not do as well as a trained professional. But for many people, it may be adequate, and in their situation, it may be the best option.
People's definition of what's "proper" is always going to be inversely proportional to the price paid.
The deal will always be the deal...at least in the USA.
B
Yes, all that's good until something goes wrong and we will cry for oversight, financial penalties, and "someone we can trust".
You can't have it both ways.
Well said Barry. From a patient's perspective (seeking CL after expiration), the OD is extorting them for exorbitant exam fees, especially for those who have had the exact same Rx for the past 5 years, and who are seeing just fine. From the patient's view, the OD is using the force of law to keep them from taking care of themselves.
And we must admit that this is true. We charge our fees based on supply and demand. The requirement that only LDOs, MDs, and ODs can prescribe is a barrier to supply (thus increasing the cost). The requirement that patients possess a current Rx in order to take care of their eyes is an artificial boost to demand (thus increasing the cost). Patients pay more than what the service is worth because the law requires it. Anybody who seeks to get around the law can be fined or even jailed. This is coercion.
Now don't read me wrong. I am not saying that ODs are worthless. I am saying that the system artificially boosts their marketability through well-intentioned, but poorly reasoned, laws.
Like the pols say to us...
They'll have to deliver the bodies....
B
That's why we have ferocious trial lawyers. If you have truly been harmed they will insure that you are made whole or obscenely recompensed for all the pain and suffering that the bogus Rx or glasses caused you.
Well I can see I'm not convincing anyone.
I don't think you guys would feel as groovy about deregulating medicine.
I don't think some of you guys really appreciate the importance of eye care.
Oh well.
Oh, I do drk.
but I'm afraid everyone else doesn't. And they are the deciderers.
B
Dr. K, I actually am in favor of deregulating medicine for consenting adults. Nothing stultifies an industry like government regulation.
But this does not mean that I devalue eye care or eye doctors. I think I value it more. If you want to see an industry advance, get government out of the way.
Stop listening to your Econ proffessors.
Look at other countries with better healthcare systems than the U.S.
They all have way more government regulation.
Maybe not in eyecare, but healthcare in general is highly regulated.
There could also be some laws eliminated...................
There could also be some laws eliminated. If you would follow what is happening elsewhere on other continents, like modern India where soon millions of eyes will be tested by unemployed
young people. They will be using all automatic equipment.
The delivery system for glasses is already in place and has been, and is tested in Canada and the USA.
I hope the U.S. can catch up to modern India, with their millions of untested eyes and unemployed people.
Ml43, I simply disagree with your premise. True, the US is overpriced. But that is due to failed government regulation. Thus, healthcare tourism. As far as quality and advanced procedures, the US is top notch (if you can pay for it).
Dr. K, you are confusing status with progress. True, India is third world. But that is not the point. India is using new technology to make progress. The US has been top dog for a long time, but we should not rest in our status. We must continue to make progress. That means embracing new technologies without the stultification (love that word!) of overbearing government.
Your libertarian slip is showing. Don't get too deep, you won't like the water.
my favorite is Gisela cuz she's cute.
True, I am into the whole freedom thing (is that bad?). But you still conflated status with progress. I think I made a cogent argument for liberty. I think you made an erroneous argument against it.
I value progress in eyecare, and I think that http://www.goblink.co/ is progress in that it is a highly-mobile solution for patients who do not require a comprehensive eye exam. It may succeed, or it may fail. But that should be dependent on patient satisfaction, not government interference.
I love you, man, and thanks for serving.
Don't conflate change as progress, either. Just sayin'.
What's more is that you should not confuse "government interference" with "law and order".
Well put! Thank you for serving patients, and I know you do it for more than the money.
You mean I could be making money doing this?????!!!!!!!
We live in a society that can sue over the person being stupid and win.
I see opticians getting sued for using these "rx's" because they should know better.
It's not about freedom or "well informed adults". If you're not in this industry you can't be well informed, hell I'm sure we all know of a few "opticians" and "od's" who know jack and squat. We are the experts, we have the training and experience to do this.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks