Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Eye Drops Could Dissolve Cataracts

Posted by timothy on from the use-a-strong-enough-acid dept.

An anonymous reader writes: As Slashdot readers age, more and more will be facing surgery for cataracts. The lack of cataract surgery in much of the world is a major cause of blindness. Researchers at University of California San Diego have identified lanosterol as a key molecule in the prevention of cataract formation that points to a novel strategy for cataract prevention and non-surgical treatment. The abstract is freely available from Nature. If you have cataracts, you might want to purchase a full reprint while you can still read it.

48 of 70 comments (clear)

  1. No way, man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    As Slashdot readers age

    I'm not old! I'm just not as young as I used to be, you insensitive clod!

    1. Re:No way, man by TheReaperD · · Score: 1

      Oh, so judging by your sensitivity, we would put you on display with the rest of the mummies in Cairo? ;-p

      --
      "Be particularly skeptical when presented with evidence confirming what you already believe." -
  2. Nivea by vanDrunen · · Score: 1

    Interesting, it's a main ingredient of Nivea creme.

    1. Re:Nivea by bazorg · · Score: 1

      Urgh. That's the worst yoghurt I've ever had.

    2. Re:Nivea by Demonoid-Penguin · · Score: 1

      Interesting, it's a main ingredient of Nivea creme.

      Interesting - do you have a source for that. It's not a listed ingredient in Australia.

      Here's what listed, with some additional information:-

      Parafinnum liquidum (fancy name for refined mineral oil - it'll grease you up good and proper, all the way through),
      PEG-150 (Pentaerythrityl Tetrastearate, emulsifier and thickener, High molecular weight Polyethylene Glycol Diester of Stearic Acid - like methylparaben, shouldn't be used on broken skin, in this case because it can carry other ingredients),
      methylparaben (a "paraben paradox" - don't apply to broken, eczematous or ulcerated skin, used as a preservative),
      butylparaben (another paraben - this one has powerful anti-microbial properties, kills all sorts of things, used as a masking agent),
      ethylparaben (another paraben preservative, used to make dry skin appear, um, not dry),
      isobutylparaben (another paraben preservative, used to stabilise suspensions),
      propylparaben (anti-fungal, anti-microbial preservative E126),
      simethicone (anti-foaming agent),
      BHT (dibutylhydroxytoluene, a preservative, also found in potato chips),
      parfum (fancy name for perfume, and a way to avoid listing other ingredients),
      limonene (citrus smelling cyclic terpine - a cleaning solvent),
      geraniol (scent, mozzie repellant, monoterpenoid alcohol, increases histamine release),
      linalool (scent - terpene alcohol, inhibitor of acetylcholinesterase, can be a potent skin irritant),
      hydroxycitronellal (scent - see citronellol),
      hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexane carboxaldehyde (long lasting Lily-like fragrance, a combination of myrcenol and acrolein),
      citronellol (acyclic monoterpenoid, keeps the mozzies away).

      Note, that's a lot of parabens - which the preservative industry makes use of because in low levels they are considered free of the cancer risks that larger levels pose. Breast cancer in particular. Parabens mimic estrogens and are endocrine destructors.
      tl;dr Not something I'd smear on my skin unless I the mozzies were really bad and I couldn't find any catnip (best mozzie repellent ever - especially since Kokoda was banned). I certainly wouldn't rub it in my eyes.

    3. Re:Nivea by Demonoid-Penguin · · Score: 1

      Urgh. That's the worst yoghurt I've ever had.

      Pro-tip. That other bad yoghurt you tried - the one your flatmate left in the fridge but didn't seem to eat. The one that left you with a sore throat.

      Maybe she didn't buy it to eat.

    4. Re:Nivea by Demonoid-Penguin · · Score: 1

      "PEG-150 (Pentaerythrityl Tetrastearate"

      Bloody hell.

      Anyone know how to replace a stearate functional group for a nitrate?

      Pentaerythrityl Tetranitrate is mother's milk!!!!

      Hmm, cook it with powdered magnesium and aluminium soap maybe? Just not on my stove - I doubt the insurance would cover it.

      You'll find that mother's milk in the pockets of some pensioners in handy little capsules.

  3. Interesting by spineboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    While cataract surgery isn't a big deal, it still is surgery, requiring cutting of the eye, replacing the lens, etc.

    Part of the aging process of the eye also makes it stiffer, producing presbyopia (Far sightedness). I wonder if these drops will also affect that as well. Now that I'm on the high side of 40, I've noticed this in my own eyes, and it is quite irritating.

    --
    ..........FULL STOP.
    1. Re:Interesting by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 2

      Part of the aging process of the eye also makes it stiffer, producing presbyopia (Far sightedness). I wonder if these drops will also affect that as well. Now that I'm on the high side of 40, I've noticed this in my own eyes, and it is quite irritating.

      If you haven't already, get progressive lenses. You'll hate them for several weeks, and then you will likely love them.

    2. Re:Interesting by cellocgw · · Score: 2

      There are a few "progressive" contact lenses as well. I use Air-Optix with great success. They are NOT weighted for orientation but (I believe) have a radial variation in power, and somehow your optics processing center learns, very quickly, to use the reduced power info for short-range work and the full-power info for distance viewing.

      That said, the day either medication unstiffens my natural lens or a focussable artificial implant is approved, I'm going to jump at the chance. In fact, I'd prefer the latter so I can dump my -8 diopter contacts!

      --
      https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
    3. Re:Interesting by Demonoid-Penguin · · Score: 1

      Part of the aging process of the eye also makes it stiffer, producing presbyopia (Far sightedness). I wonder if these drops will also affect that as well. Now that I'm on the high side of 40, I've noticed this in my own eyes, and it is quite irritating.

      If you haven't already, get progressive lenses. You'll hate them for several weeks, and then you will likely love them.

      Sounds interesting (thanks for the tip), mine are deteriorating rapidly. I've only worn glasses since I was thirty. Two years ago I had to get a second pair for distance. And this year I had to get a third pair for close up.

      I've had a partially detached retina in one eye - will that affect progressive lens? (I was told it stops me from wearing contacts)

    4. Re:Interesting by wwphx · · Score: 1

      I'm 53, I've been wearing glasses since I was 13 or so and had cataract surgery May '14. BIG mistake. My vision wasn't that bad, and now I have to put on reading glasses to read anything: computers, books, my phone, differentiating between Euro coins, whatever. Total PITA. Yes, I can drive at night without glasses. Big whoop. But it's totally f'd up my photography: I can't see the controls accurately without changing to my reading glasses, and I can't see through the viewfinder while wearing them. I've been a photographer for almost 40 years and it's a major part of my life, I hate the fact that it's now screwed up.

      I'd strongly suggest trying progressive bifocals, I used them for a couple of decades and loved them. I can't say anything about a partially detached retina, I've never had that problem, talk to an ophthalmologist. By default the lens they install corrects to clear distance vision and you'll need reading glasses at all other times. It's the easiest default: if they installed lenses that corrected for close vision, you wouldn't be able to get corrective glasses for over a month until your eyes stabilize.

      Given what I know now, I should have waited at least another five years, my eyes just weren't that bad. Now every day is a pain in the butt: rather than wearing glasses all the time, which I was used to and perfectly happy to do, I wear them for working at the computer, then take them off to talk to people or walk around campus. The weirdest thing is that it was perhaps the single most painful thing that I've ever had done to me. I had 11 operations prior to my cataract surgery, and in an atypical fashion, it was crazy painful, and the doctor did nothing when I complained of the pain. I personally think the doctor is running, for want of a better term, a cataract surgery mill, and we won't be going back to him even though it means driving 100 miles to see someone else. Lots of older people in my area who probably need it, I think it was too soon for me.

      --
      When you sympathize with stupidity, you start thinking like an idiot.
    5. Re:Interesting by Demonoid-Penguin · · Score: 1

      I'm 53, I've been wearing glasses since I was 13 or so and had cataract surgery May '14.

      Crap - I'm older than that - I'd never even considered the possibility of cataracts until now. Presbyopia really took me by surprise - I was certain that there was something wrong with my prespriptions when I suddenly needed two pair of glasses. I'd been having to use a screen reader for most of the day for the three or four years prior.

      I can't say anything about a partially detached retina, I've never had that problem, talk to an ophthalmologist.

      I do (he's a mate). He said "don't get in any more fights" - other than that he gives good advice. I'll ask him about progressive lens next chance I get. I can cope with three sets of glasses most of the time. It was the suddenness of the eyesight decline more than the inconvenience, or the effect on my ability to shoot rabbits and foxes that causes a problem. Until I got the close range set I had to give up reading paper books for almost four years as it was too tiring trying to read a book at a distance and continually move forward to turn pages.

      Thanks for the advice - I'll definitely bear it in mind if cataracts occur, though I've no family history of it AFAIK.

    6. Re:Interesting by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      I've only worn glasses since I was thirty. Two years ago I had to get a second pair for distance. And this year I had to get a third pair for close up.

      For me it was since 42 or so, though I needed them LONG before that (my wife finally convinced me). At first I got away with mild reading/computer glasses, which I could leave on for anything but driving. Since then I've needed more power, and the amount per eye diverged, so I got the progressives.

      I seriously almost handed them right back in the optical place. The effect was so crazy. My brain had to get used to them, but once it did, loved 'em. I can bring things into focus at any distance. Read a book, use a computer, walk around, and drive all with the same pair. (I did get a single vision computer pair later - more of a luxury; the progressives are fine for the computer but the single vision are just a bit nicer.)

      I've had a partially detached retina in one eye - will that affect progressive lens? (I was told it stops me from wearing contacts)

      That I do not know ... you'll have to ask your doctor.

    7. Re:Interesting by Solandri · · Score: 1

      While cataract surgery isn't a big deal, it still is surgery, requiring cutting of the eye, replacing the lens, etc.

      Part of the aging process of the eye also makes it stiffer, producing presbyopia (Far sightedness). I wonder if these drops will also affect that as well.

      Part of the problem with cataract surgery is that a fixed lens is inserted in place of your natural, flexible lens. This means your focus is fixed after the surgery, usually on far objects, and you are totally dependent on glasses for near vision.

      This isn't a big deal for elderly people who are already badly farsighted (who also get most cataracts). But drops which dissolve cataracts would be a substantial boon for younger people who still have flexible lenses but are afflicted with cataracts. (I've heard of newer replacement lenses which are affixed to the muscles in your iris and can focus just like your natural lenses can. But I've been unable to find any follow-up info on them.)

    8. Re:Interesting by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Actually, it doesn't cause far-sightedness OR near-sightedness. It causes inflexibility. If you tend to normally be far-sighted, this will make you unable to see closely. If you tend to be near-sighted (as I am) this will make you unable to focus at a distance.

      FWIW, I still don't wear glasses to read, but I do wear them to use a computer. If I were to drive, I'd need a second pair to drive with. Inflexible. I do not find progressive lenses tolerable, I find them essentially useless. My main use of glasses is while using a computer. Progressive lenses would render much of the screen unreadable. (I know that's technically not true, and that one only sees clearly out of the foeva, but moving the entire head is a lot different from moving just the eye.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    9. Re:Interesting by wwphx · · Score: 1

      I live at 9,000' and apparently high altitude accelerates cataract formation (it also can whack your thyroid and cause hypertension), that was probably part of my problem.

      While wearing progressives, I had no problem shooting handguns or long arms. Post surgery, handguns are tough to shoot (can see the target, can't see the sights well) and rifles with telescopic sights were no problem. I tried getting some prescription progressive reading glasses, but they didn't work worth anything. I'm considering half-moon reading glasses, but I can only get them through online sources, and I'd rather check them out before dropping money on them.

      We don't have much of a family history of cataracts. My mother's mother had cataracts some 40 years ago, but both my parents are in their 80s and haven't had the surgery, though my mom says she needs it. But they also live at comparatively low altitude.

      --
      When you sympathize with stupidity, you start thinking like an idiot.
    10. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I've only worn glasses since I was thirty. Two years ago I had to get a second pair for distance. And this year I had to get a third pair for close up.

      Posts like yours are a profoundly annoying form of narcissism. You convey no useful information by referencing relative time intervals without a baseline. For all we know you could be 33 or 116.

    11. Re:Interesting by Demonoid-Penguin · · Score: 1

      I seriously almost handed them right back in the optical place. The effect was so crazy. My brain had to get used to them, but once it did, loved 'em. I can bring things into focus at any distance. Read a book, use a computer, walk around, and drive all with the same pair. (I did get a single vision computer pair later - more of a luxury; the progressives are fine for the computer but the single vision are just a bit nicer.)

      What little I know of progressive lens comes from reading this thread and the wikipedia page. The reaction to first wearing them sounds normal, particularly given your delay in getting glasses.

      Thanks for the information.

    12. Re:Interesting by Demonoid-Penguin · · Score: 1

      I live at 9,000' and apparently high altitude accelerates cataract formation.

      Interesting - not something I'd considered. Is that just due to UV levels, air pressure, or some other factor?

      I spend most of my time at 890 metres (2,920 ft) so altitude might not be much of a problem. UV levels are high, and I have never worn sunglasses very often. I'm reconsidering the sunglasses now.

      While wearing progressives, I had no problem shooting handguns or long arms. Post surgery, handguns are tough to shoot (can see the target, can't see the sights well) and rifles with telescopic sights were no problem.

      No handguns at my place. That would be illegal.
      From what little I've read progressive lenses may ruin my archery if they affect my ability to quickly judge distances. (I'm not certain that I do adjust for distance).

      Fox shooting is usually with a Savage 1919 NRA Target rifle (tack hammer). Aperture rear sight, not a problem as I can stop and put on the distance glasses. It's mostly used at the 20 to 90m (65 - 300'). For rabbits I usually walk fast and flush (paddocks) using a recurve bow (instinctive gap). Range is now reduced to 5 to 40 metres (16 - 120') . That's more difficult these days, as I need the midrange glasses so I can clearly watching the ground at near my feet in my peripheral vision (Eastern Browns are very common on my place, and they'll sometimes try and bite if stood on). The distance glasses hurt my eyes if I'm watching the ground all the time.

    13. Re:Interesting by Demonoid-Penguin · · Score: 1

      Dear coward

      I've only worn glasses since I was thirty. Two years ago I had to get a second pair for distance. And this year I had to get a third pair for close up.

      Posts like yours are a profoundly annoying form of narcissism. You convey no useful information by referencing relative time intervals without a baseline. For all we know you could be 33 or 116.

      Insightful.

      You read /. anecdotes authored by pseudonyms looking for facts to base your medical opinions on? Your ironic accusation of narcissism is the least of your failings.

    14. Re:Interesting by wwphx · · Score: 1

      Apparently the altitude thing is having less atmosphere to protect us from radiation. It's not as glaring and hot as, say, Phoenix, AZ, it's somewhat more insidious. We don't get skin cancer as much, they don't get their thyroids and cataracts. My wife is an astronomer and her father was a pathologist, so she has a lot of medical knowledge.

      I would recommend sunglasses, but that's a style choice. It's been 30+ years since I tried archery, though we have a range about 45 minutes away that I've been wanting to check out. I think progressives should allow you to shoot well with your bow, though you might want some range time before doing it in the field. I previously had no problem shooting pistols or rifles with iron sights when I wore progressives. For all my years in Arizona I never saw a snake outside of a zoo, and now that I'm in the mountains found out that snakes don't like snow, ticks don't survive up here either, we just have to remember to give our dog a tick treatment for extended travels.

      Best of luck to you!

      --
      When you sympathize with stupidity, you start thinking like an idiot.
    15. Re:Interesting by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      had cataract surgery May '14. BIG mistake. My vision wasn't that bad, and now I have to put on reading glasses to read anything: computers, books, my phone, differentiating between Euro coins, whatever. Total PITA.

      I've been wearing glasses for about as long (within a year). If my (opthalmic) optician told me that I had a cataract and that I needed surgery, I'd be starting from the expectation that I was going to lose the lens in one or both eyes, and that would drastically affect my vision, and my visual flexibility ("accommodation" is the technical term, IIRC), because, well, you lose the lens from the affected eye. Most of the focussing power of the eye comes from the air-cornea refraction, it is true, but even so you need the adjustment from the lens to accommodate changes of focus.

      Fortunately, I've no indications of cataracts forming yet. I'm slowly getting used to needing to carry a pair of single-vision glasses and a pair of bi-focals for use in the office. But most days I don't bother.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    16. Re:Interesting by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      I've only worn glasses since I was thirty. Two years ago I had to get a second pair for distanc

      I hate to tell you this, but you're well within the normal range of variation. Sorry to break the news to you.

      You will die ; maybe not because of this medical issue, but you will die.

      Incidentally, I'm following the same progress of eye disease, within about 25%. I'm going to die too.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    17. Re:Interesting by Demonoid-Penguin · · Score: 1

      I've only worn glasses since I was thirty. Two years ago I had to get a second pair for distanc

      I hate to tell you this, but you're well within the normal range of variation. Sorry to break the news to you.

      You will die ; maybe not because of this medical issue, but you will die.

      No-oooo. Tell me that you're just trolling. Please.

      I'm a special snowflake that will last throughout the year. If you don't take that back I'll hold my breath. Oh wait....

      I'll pay that. Thanks for the laugh. If there are any moderators left that don' t just mod down that should be modded Funny.

      Incidentally, I'm following the same progress of eye disease, within about 25%. I'm going to die too.

      [shrug] I guess I've read over 20K books, so I'm not complaining - I just felt a little stupid after thinking that the prescription for two pairs of glasses was wrong. And that was after "thunking" it was an issue with displays. You'd think all the wrinkles would've been a clue. Just goes to show that it's not just the eyes that getting past their peak.

      I sort of like all my wrinkles. Which is just, um, weird. My girlfriend freaks out about hers. I catch sight of mine in a mirror and it just makes me laugh, which causes her to lecture me about not making the laugh lines worse (which just makes it harder not to laugh).

      We all get our time in the sun. I can't say I've missed out on much of the good, have any real regrets - or look forward to senility and a loss of physical ability. But that's another subject. (one I also find hilarious)

    18. Re:Interesting by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      I sort of like all my wrinkles. Which is just, um, weird. My girlfriend freaks out about hers. I catch sight of mine in a mirror and it just makes me laugh, which causes her to lecture me about not making the laugh lines worse (which just makes it harder not to laugh).

      "One man's wrinkles are another man's laughter lines."

      It's probably not worth the effort of trying the line on your girlfriend. She's going to kill you for mentioning them anyway, though you might get a slightly quicker and less agonising death. Which might be a small gain.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  4. Re:Secondary Cataracts by Demonoid-Penguin · · Score: 1, Troll

    It makes me glad that I can call my president an asshole if I feel he is being an asshole. Of course, I will be labled a racist if I do so but that is another matter entirely.

    Labelled by idiots. A label to wear with pride. Of course I could be wrong - but I suspect it's unlikely that you would call Obama an arsehole because of the colour of his skin. Even calling him a black arsehole doesn't make you a racist bigot. It's just an accurate description.

    I am sure I will be a sexist for not voting for Hillary as well but, again, that is another matter entirely.

    Labelled a sexist bigot by idiots - maybe. But not voting for someone - whatever your reasons is just exercising your right to vote.

    Just saying.

    Of course I'll be labelled rude by idiots. Maybe I am, but it won't make them less idiotic.

  5. What a shitty summary by rebelwarlock · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you have cataracts, you might want to purchase a full reprint while you can still read it.

    The summary is only five sentences long, and you had to use one to be an asshole?

    1. Re:What a shitty summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Well your Comment Subject is only one line and you used it to be an asshole.

      It was just a joke bro .. who would be insulted by it? Maybe we should stop getting offended by every little thing?

    2. Re:What a shitty summary by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      It was just a joke bro .. who would be insulted by it?

      Someone who is worried about their slowly deteriorating sight and has their worst fears raised by this deliberately crude joke.

      OP might wish to spend a few hours trying to navigate the world without vision - or with severely degraded vision. In fact, it's an experiment that almost anyone who isn't already severely visually impaired would benefit from. It's the old "walking a mile in another man's shoes" thing.

      Try it one day. If you don't hate and fear the experience, then you're very unusual.

      BTW, did you know that there's an STD that has a 35 year symptom-free incubation period. You could have caught it from the person (or farm animal) that you lost your virginity to.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  6. Effective cataract eye drops are already available by Eukariote · · Score: 5, Informative

    N-acetyl carnosine drops have been used with good success for a while. Bought them for my grandmother in law. Over the course of a couple of years it halted and mostly reversed her developing cataracts. Can get them from multiple sources.

    Here is a link to a paper describing some of the early research.

  7. Next step by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

    Figure out if there's something that can bring back the flexibility of the lens as well.

    --
    If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    1. Re:Next step by kencurry · · Score: 1

      yep, reading glasses are annoying as hell especially when your distance vision is perfect.

      --
      sigs are for losers (except to point out that sigs are for losers)
  8. Re:Effective cataract eye drops are already availa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Please read all of this.

    http://www.berkeleywellness.com/self-care/over-counter-products/article/cataract-drops

  9. Re:Effective cataract eye drops are already availa by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 4, Informative

    N-acetyl carnosine drops have been used with good success for a while. Bought them for my grandmother in law. Over the course of a couple of years it halted and mostly reversed her developing cataracts. Can get them from multiple sources.

    Good information - especially while we're waiting for this stuff to become available.

    I note, though, that:
      - This newly-identified material substantially clears cataracts in six days while N-acetyl carnosine takes four months for significant improvement to show.
      - This newly-identintified material appears to be what the eye normally uses in a specific mechanism to prevent/repair cataracts, while N-acetyl carnosine appears to have more generic antioxidant and chelation properties. (It's a modification of carnosine to a form which can penetrate the tissues of the eye and is converted back to carnosine within them. Carnosine is great for retarding several ageing mechanisms but it looks more like a generic helper than a specific repair-mechanism component or trigger for cataracts.)
      - The discovery of this new stuff occurred by identifying what was missing in people with a genetic early-cataract problem. If this is necessary for cataract prevention/repair and its production declines (but doesn't fully stop) with age, N-acetyl carnosine might not work for people who don't make it at all.

    So though N-acetyl carnosine looks good, this looks great and specific. (And I don't see any reason to stop the former even if taking the latter. Unless some specific interaction issue shows up I'd expect them to work well together.)

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  10. Re:Cataracts are for cows. by itsenrique · · Score: 1

    Copycow

  11. Re:Secondary Cataracts by KGIII · · Score: 1

    The best part is that we have been modded down. Quite likely because they think I am a Rightwinger, a racist and a sexist. I can not vouch for you but I suspect you are not that bad of I'd have noticed and I have seen plenty of your posts in the past.

    The beautiful part is that I am neither of those things and am much (much) further to the left than any elected Democrat. What will really make them confused is that I am a Libertarian. I support things like Single-Payer health care because it is cheaper for me to pay the taxes for preventative care than it is to pay for ER visits for a head cold. A non-employed acquaintance called an ambulance and went to the ER because they put a staple in their hand. I only wish I were kidding... An ambulance! A staple! I do not care about the cost as much as I care about the lack of some hydrogen peroxide in the home, maybe a bandage, and maybe an ibuprofen.

    I care about highways, environment, libraries, court systems, welfare, and all those social things because they make me able to be more productive in a safe environment. I pay too little in taxes. I make up for it by donating to worthy causes. Those causes are not oak desk businessmen in darkened rooms filled with smoke from fine cigars. They are charities like Heifer International or the EFF. Let's raise them up and get them productive. It's not altruism - it is greed.

    Most of all... I care about individual freedoms (and the responsibilities that go with that). Ayn Rand was a blooming idiot though they did have some valid insights but they were often overlooked in favor of extremist views. More importantly, they were an idiot. They do not define Libertarianism and the vast majority are not anarcho-capitalists. *sighs*

    Anyhow, I could rant for hours. I will spare you. I am an asshole. I accept that. Now let's move on to something pertinent. ;-)

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  12. Would be a great solution, but not for me... by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 1

    I'm sort of holding out for the inevitable cataract surgery as an upgrade.

    I don't have significant cataracts yet, but I have no reason to expect that I won't. And when I do, and get replacement lenses, I expect better visual acuity than I have now, and hopefully better focal accommodation. There are already various replacement-lens products that offer accommodation; ten or twenty years down the road, I hope much better products will be available.

    I briefly considered laser surgery to correct my vision when I was in my late 30s, but I was satisfied with contact lenses. Eventually, as I lost accommodation, I gave them up in favor of bifocal glasses (which serve as trifocals for me -- top for distance, bottom for reading, peer under the lenses or take them off for close-up examination). If I had laser surgery, I'd need to carry reading glasses all the time, probably in more than one strength. What would be the point?

    Ah, but if I can regain accommodation -- that changes everything. And, yes, I'd consider invasive surgery to gain that benefit.

  13. Re:Secondary Cataracts by Demonoid-Penguin · · Score: 1

    The best part is that we have been modded down.

    Oh - that makes me reassess my opinions. Too late I must kill my self and make more room for the stupid and those intolerant of other view. Or.. bully for them.

    Quite likely because they think I am a Rightwinger, a racist and a sexist.

    Anyhow, I could rant for hours. I will spare you. I am an asshole. I accept that. Now let's move on to something pertinent. ;-)

    Apparently I'm rude. That's what you call some who slaps the dick that's shoved in their face instead of stroking it.
    That and I use too many words - (coz things should be simple). And sarcastic [shrug]

  14. Would completely change eye industry ... by xmas2003 · · Score: 2

    Currently, cataract surgery is the most commonly performed operation - millions every year in the United States alone. This sounds a bit too good to be true ... but if it actually worked, it would have a HUGE impact on the eye industry.

    The real holy grail would be if it also restored the flexibility of the lens so you would get your accommodation back.

    --
    Hulk SMASH Celiac Disease
  15. Re:Secondary Cataracts by KGIII · · Score: 1

    If what you have to say does not fit on a bumper sticker than it doesn't count.

    Maybe that should be on a bumper sticker?

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  16. Re:Secondary Cataracts by Demonoid-Penguin · · Score: 1

    If what you have to say does not fit on a bumper sticker than it doesn't count.

    Maybe that should be on a bumper sticker?

    In small print, on the rear bumper, of a solid heavy truck with a high, protruding tow bar - at mid-radiator height.

    In smaller print below it "tail gating is dangerous"

    Just a thought.

  17. Re:Cataract surgery is trivial, improves eyesight by Graysccale · · Score: 1

    I have to agree with this. I've needed glasses since I was 6 (I'm 59 now). After having cataract surgery, I swear I have never had better vision in my life. No more glasses! I chose distance corrected vision, and can still get away with some computer work without glasses. About a +1.25 reading glass makes it more comfortable though.

  18. Re:Secondary Cataracts by Mr.+Somey · · Score: 1

    FYI, the documentary is called Inside North Korea, and the behavior in question begins at around the 40:00 mark.

  19. Re:Secondary Cataracts by KGIII · · Score: 1

    Nice, thanks. I am going to watch it again.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  20. Re:Secondary Cataracts by KGIII · · Score: 1

    It is to get one made up but I no longer own even a single vehicle that I would allow a bumper sticker on. I have a barn and a garage full of vehicles but I do not hate them enough to put bumper stickers on them. There is something to be said about the days when you owned cheap cars and did not care about them.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  21. Re:Secondary Cataracts by TempestRose · · Score: 1

    Why the fuck do I never have points when it would actually do some good?!?!?

    Is there some fucking Slashdot Project Insight that keeps me from having them, when I really want them?

    Someone who ACTUALLY HAS POINTS fucking mod this up...

  22. Re:Effective cataract eye drops are already availa by cwsumner · · Score: 1

    Um ... the phama companies can't make money on it?

    There are a lot of traditional remedies, that actually work, that are not "pushed" because there is no way to make money on them. And no way to cover the cost of medical testing required, before you can say they work.

    So those that know, use them. And those that don't, loose out.

    Of course, there are many traditional remedies that don't work, or not enough to be better than new stuff. But not as many as the "establishment" claims.