Slashdot Mirror
Laser Treatment Could Save the Sight of Millions
BotScout writes "British experts claim that a new laser treatment could save the sight of millions of people. The process is said to stop the onset of age-related macular degeneration, one of the most common forms of blindness, which leaves victims unable to read, drive or live independently. The technique rejuvenates the Bruch's membrane — a thin layer that lies behind the retina. The process takes just ten to 15 minutes and could be done by any ophthalmologist. While it does not cure sight loss, its inventor, Professor John Marshall, says it could prevent a generation from having to put up with declining vision in old age."
Now get off my lawn! I can hear you there!
I always thought shining a laser in my eyes would improve my vision.
In related news, perpetual motion machines have been proven by another professor to be the source of unlimited energy.
Hubert J. Farnsworth will be pleased by this news.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Over 40 years ago, my grandmother was the first successful retina reattachment patient. She wasn't the first to get the surgery (probably the Scleral Buckle surgery described in the Wikipedia article), but she was the first one for whom it actually worked.
Now, repair of a detatched retina is routine, laser eye surgery is advertised on TV and radio like something you'd have done at a kiosk in the mall, and formerly incurable degenerative diseases like macular degeneration are now being treated.
My grandmother is 90 now. If I'm lucky enough to make it to that age (I'm almost halfway there), I wonder if I'll even have my original ocular equipment? I'd love to be able to see me some UV and IR.
Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
Bit offtopic, but has anyone here had laser surgery? If so, which, when, what was your eyesight and how did it work out for you?
What I don't get -- if the laser isn't actually being used for thermal properties -- is how the light actually "fixes" the problem. If it's just the light that's "stimulating" the cells to "clean up their mess", why not dump 532nm light from an LED? They're just as monochromatic and oughta be bright enough to shine through the relevant tissues.
Obviously, that doesn't work if a high power density is required for some reason other than localized heating, but I'm failing to see why (since the article goes into repeated detail about how little thermal damage is done to photoreceptors) the laser's required.
The only thing that makes sense would be that the amount of waste heat/light dumped into the eyeball by a suitably-bright LED would damage cells in the rest of the retina (i.e. the 99% of the retina that has nothing to do with the macula), and that the laser's only used because it's the only thing that can deposit the required power in the region of the macula without dumping gazillions of green photons everywhere else? (that is, staring into a low-power green LED wouldn't do anything, and staring into a high-power one would be just as damaging as staring into the sun.)
Now I can go blind again..... if I don't stop doing "that"!
Hope is the currency of fools
Now all they need to do is train the sharks not to eat the old people during the procedure.
This has been disgracefully overhyped by all the news media that I've seen that have picked it up, often in very similar words, suggesting that the ultimate blame lies with the original press release.
The fact is that the technique hasn't even been *tried* yet on Macular Degeneration, much less been shown to actually work.
All that's been done is some studies on a quite different disease for which quite effective treatments already exist.
The history of efforts to treat Macular Degeneration is full of false hopes, and it is desperately cruel to grieving patients and relatives to put out seriously premature press releases like this. I am an eye surgeon specialising in these conditions and I had to deal with some very upset people because of this only today.
Prof Marshall is a very eminent figure in the development of laser treatments for eye disease, but if he had much to do with the way this has been presented to the media he should do some hard thinking about his responsibilities.
There's a brief press release about this on the website of the Royal College of Ophthalmologists (British eye surgeons' professional organisation)
http://www.rcophth.ac.uk/about/press/
Aberrations have appeared in my destiny prognostication engine!
Don't believe the fluff. Vision declines for several reasons. First, you'll have general focal point problems. Either myopia, hyperopia, or astigmatism (both at the same time - yes two focal points) those can happen at any age. But around 40, your crystalline lens in your eye begins to stiffen. This is presbyopia. The lens cannot bend and this is a lack of "accommodation". Then this lens as a result of UV exposure degrades and you get cataracts. Then you need lens replacement surgery. This is all before we even get to the back of the eye. Floaters in the various humors. Glaucoma (too much humor pressure distorts and damages the optic nerve) , Then, we can start worrying about the retina and things below...
Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
I never should have had that trendy laser surgery. It was great at first but, you know, at the ten-year mark your eyes fall out.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye!
1178161 is prime...
Where's mcgrew and his 3 eyes? I want to hear his comment.
how is babby formed?
I've RTFed the story couple of times, without finding any mention of 2 million dollars price tag.
Could it be that you have confused it with an overpriced toy?
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
but not one of them can kill me!
... if the equipment makers and ophthalmologists price those fifteen minutes out of reach of people on small fixed incomes with Medicare.
Anyone interested in learning more about John Marshall's retinal regeneration process can read my article about the technology, written in November 2007. The title of my online Journal entry was: Ellex 2RT Retina Regeneration Therapy: A First Report and the link is: http://irvaronsjournal.blogspot.com/2007/11/ellex-2rt-retina-regeneration-therapy.html Irv Arons
Now THIS is something that can threaten marriage. There's a natural harmony between declining sight and declining sights.
Do look at laser with remaining eyesight!
-- Braden's law of data: All data spends some of its lifetime in an excel spreadsheet.
Sorry mate, you're still a complete idiot, it's just your self awareness is laggy.
There are several types of lasers that are used on eyes.
Some reshape the cornea, to improve visual refraction/vision. (aka LASIK, or PRK)
Some clear "secondary cataracts", via breaking up "posterior lens capsule, secondary cataracts" (aka Yag laser)
Some stimulate the retina to react in ways that cause it to respond in a manner that mitigates damage "in progress" - this is most commonly effective in diabetic retinopathy treatment.
While it is possible, I have never seen any evidence of laser being effective against AMD.. ("Lucentis", and a couple of other drugs have demonstrated some efficacy.. )
Bob
P.S. I have attended a dozen ARVO meetings, and many of the scientific sessions, and this subject has not appeared, with evidence of efficacy.. (wife is a retina surgeon)
BILLIONS!!
Er, the Daily Mail is a bad choice of news outlet if you want accurate science reporting - it's well known for sensationalist stories of every kind, and has a bad track record in hyping medical research. Recently, they were uncritically quoting an 'expert' saying that autism is caused by (undefined) toxins, and they're a regular presence in Ben Goldacre's Bad Science, like in this article.
'... could be done by any ophthalmologist.'
We're now trusting bird watchers to cure our eyesight problems????
I wonder how http://www.gene.com/gene/products/education/vascular/amd.htmlGenentech feels about this one? Their Lucentis treatment for AMD is delivered by inter-ocular injection, to which I say "thanks, but no thanks!"
I can tell you that any hope is welcome. My Dad was using PDT treatments (which ruined the contrast in his vision) and Avantis injections (which were some help), but the real break through was when Lucentis came of trial and became available. He went from diminished vision and the prospect of not being able to drive to a vastly improved vision spectrum and only limiting his night driving (due to contrast issues). While the injections are costly ($1500 just for the drug - thank god for his insurance coverage!) it's been a night and day difference. I've been very involved in his treatments, taking him each month and going in the office and treatment rooms to gauge his progress and ask questions. We're lucky to have a great retina specialist who invites questions and participation, and thanks to this my Dad is able to do most of the things he used to enjoy - reading the newspaper, driving Mom around, working in the garden and workshop. But before Lucentis, it looked like I was going to need to move back in and care for him (not that I would have minded in the least - I have wonderful parents). If you or a loved one is suffering from this disease, please see a RETINA specialist asap - time is a factor. As far as the subject of the article, I am looking at it with great hope, because as a preventative it may be of use to me since I have some of the early signs myself.
No Text
...
...that most UK residents won't get the treatment for years while their sight degenerates as they sit on the waiting list. Unless they get it done in the United States...oh, that's right - they won't be able to once Obama is done with health care.
My dad had cataract surgery and recovered his ability to read about 15 years ago. If only this new surgery had been available back then, my dear mother (who unfortunately also suffers from advanced Alzheimer's) would not have lost her ability to read, do crossword puzzles, or even look at family photos -- things she enjoyed immensely.