Optical Express 'ruined my life' attack site wins Nominet takedown battle

Fails the smell test

If the woman was out of order, they wouldn't have bothered with Nominet, but would have immediately slapped a libel suit on her to silence her and 'send a message' (TM).

... that is of course unless there is something they really really don't want exposed to puiblic view.

"Am surprised - the libel laws being what they are in the UK - that this hasnt gone further."

For libel laws to apply a statement has to be false. If information is damaging to your business, but true, then no dice.

My question, (allegedly... I don't want anyone getting in libel trouble!), do these clinics have an unusual failure rate, or have they found the dozen failures out of numerous treatments (I assume quite numerous if they are at 15 minute intervals!)

I found the one post on there particuarly troubling where the LASIK (or LASEK? I didn't know they were different...) machine failed mid-treatment, and they ended up with a crease on their eye. I would hope A) These machines would not fail mid-treatment, period. B) Does the "crease" mean that the machine moved the laser to a "safe" position WITH the laser on, burning eyeball as it went? I would hope any fault it'd immediately turn off the laser.

At any rate... *shrug*. They are not violating the domain rules, so that's that.

Mental

Anyone who gets laser surgery for the usual reason (so they don't need to wear glasses or contact lenses) is an utter fuckwit imho.

You have one set of eyes.

I've wore contacts every day since I was 14. They take 10 seconds to put in in the morning.

Also of note, is that the 'success rate' of laser surgery is utter bollocks. they count success generally as 'an improvement in eyesight). note: not the CORRECTION of eye sight to at least the norm 20:20.

I have around 20:10 eyesight when wearing contacts. (i.e. better than 20:20).

My contacts are -2.75 diopters.

If the surgery reduced this to -1 diopter it would be deemed successful.

how they get away with that is beyond me.

Even if they corrected it to 20:20 they'd have made my eyesight worse than it was - but hey - they 'improved it from what it was, uncorrected, so it's a 'success'.

Don't believe me - walk into eye express or 'fuckyoureyesup.com' and ask them for their details success rate stats with breakdown by complications, what counts as success, etc, etc and see how far you get.

When I go into hospital for an operation these facts and stats are readily available.

In the laser eye burning field, they ain't.

utter fucking madness.

My Experience

Contrary to, I assume, most other posters, I have had eye surgery some years ago. Although I did not have a great amount of myopia, I required corrective lenses for day-to-day activity.

I researched the matter a long time ago and came to the conclusion that, as others have mentioned, the whole thing follows a bit of a factory line approach and anyone who could afford a machine (and many who couldn't) were offering the treatment regardless of experience or qualifications.

I assumed that if that was possible without them being shut down by administrative intervention or, more likely, bad publicity, it was because the risk (likelihood) was low and the machine does most of the work, requiring no more than a well-trained operator to push the button. Still, since I only have my own two eyes, I gave it a miss.

Fast-forward about a decade and because of a bid at a career change that required 20/20 vision in addition to being an active sportsman, I decided to take the risk, whatever the worst-case scenario consequences. I did my research again and went to the place where I felt most confident doing it in Europe, an eye clinic. In the meanwhile, the technology had advanced too so that was a bit of a bonus.

There are various types of corrective surgery and I had one called wavefront PRK, which was indicated by my sports physician on account of being a boxer.

A post-op in-depth examination by the UK Civil Aviation Authority (required for me to regain my Class I medical certificate) revealed that my vision is better than 20/20 on one eye, and both my night vision and lateral vision (can't recall what it's actually called) have improved and are better than average for a control group of non-treated individuals (the CAA, Qinetiq / MoD, and can't remember were doing a study at the time) . Apparently, this is a common outcome on pilots subject to PRK (over 50%).

All this to say:

* Yes, there are risks (remember: risk = probability * severity) and the consequences are potentially very serious even if the probability is low (and therefore the overall risk is low).

* Yes, there are lots of charlatans and people who probably should not be attempting to offer these services, even if technically the risk is low. There is definitely a production line feel to it in most places.

* For some people, the benefit may be marginal, purely aesthetic or a matter of convenience, while for others it is more life-changing (I couldn't have opted to the job I was after, and it offered a significant advantage in my sports activity). To each to evaluate their circumstances, which only they are in a position to do.

* It should be fucking obvious to any responsible adult that, however small the risk, statistically a certain number of cases will not achieve the desired results, which is why it is up to each one of us to make a decision based on as much information as we are able to access and understand. I consider that it is the individual's responsibility to research for that information from reliable sources, and contrast it.

Now, this Ms Rodoy says that she would "fight on until this industry is regulated and the serious risks publicised." Well, there are two problems that make her alleged goals invalid:

1. The industry *is* already regulated--perhaps what she means is that the regulation can be improved?

2. As for the "serious risks", what evidence has she in respect of the risks being "serious"? Or perhaps she means the "potential consequences"? Risk is one of those terms that most laymen seem to to misinterpret, bit like mass and weight.

In any event, I trust that she has pursued her claims through the courts and the relevant medical authority? What was the result of that? What did consumer organisations say about her case? In what respect a hearsay website is meant to help, even assuming that her goals were restated in some valid form?

It is not so much the whiff of blackmail in this case as her own attempt at FUD that bothers me. In the same way that certain potential customers could be misinformed by providers, she could be scaring away people who, on the balance of probabilities, would significantly benefit from undergoing treatment.

Ive condisered this before:

I wear contacts. But the risk isnt worth it. For the benefit of not having to pop a small plastic disc in my eye each morning, i get to have a procedure that could leave me blind. No thank you. Good luck to all that have had it done, and plan too. But its not for me.

The procedure has been carried out hundreds of thousands of times (at least) in the UK. And how many people have been left blind because of it? And how many of them didn't take their eyedrops as prescribed?

Glasses here

I am pretty short sighted, but now getting a new issue due to age, not so easy to focus, I struggle to see close up things with my glasees on. But when I do take off glasses I can do a lot of closeup work, as a modeller it is actually not a problem to be short sighted.

If I had contacts or laser treatment I would now be in a more difficult place than I am in now.

However I do annoy the fashion police as they talk about brands they mean frames by fashion designer, whereas I mention brands like Nikon and Zeiss, so middle price metal frames here with bloody expensive plastic!

The ignorance of some commenting here explains why the eye surgery industry continues to get away with what they do.

One post suggests that the comments on the opticalexpressruinedmylife.co.uk site are not true, whilst another explians more sensibly that Optical Express would have sued Sasha Rodoy instead of complaining to Nominet if they were libelous. And, according to a letter posted on the site yesterday, Optical Express is apparently appealing the (second) Nominet decision.

A few suggest here that her site is simply Ms Rodoy's attempt to blackmail OE into paying her off, claiming that's why she set up Optimax Ruined My Life.co.uk

I can only assume these people haven't bothered with any research otherwise they would be aware that Ms Rodoy was paid compensation for the damage done to her own eyes by Optimax, which included a 'gagging order' - as most out of court settlements expect, which meant she had to take down the Optimax Ruined My Life.co.uk site.

These details are available on the Optimax Ruined My Life.com site as they are on numerous You Tube videos.

The OERML site also details that she has been offered bribes by owner of Optical Express David Moulsdale which she has refused and publicised. Ms rodoy also alleges that she has rcvd threats against her life.

Doesn't sound like someone who wants money to me!

Perhaps we are too used to people who will sell their souls for a fat bank account and don't understand that there are still some for whom money is not as important as fighting for a cause they believe in.

And yes, I support the campaign for regulation - another ignorant comment earlier claimed it IS regulated.

I suggest someone tells that to John MCDOnnell, tthe MP who introduced a bill in Parliament on the 20th November calling for legislation.

I am yet another victim of OE's sharp practices

I underwent laser Eye Surgery with OE in June 2010

The surgery failed and I continue to wear varifocal spectacles. My eyesight has deteriorated in the last three years.

Also, OE failed to identify a pre-existing eye problem that I was unaware of and that should have excluded me from surgery.

Yes I have tried to sue them but after three years of legal costs and deliberate delays by their solicitors Harper McCleod, was advised that the OE branch in the Trafford Centre Manchester, where the surgery was performed, had gone into administration.

I am a regular contributor to the OERML website where anyone is free to read my TRUE story.

I feel a responsibility to warn everyone of the potential poor outcomes that are far more common than OE divulges. I now have to face my life in constant discomfort and regular severe pain. There is no likelihood of improvement or cure. Anyone contemplating surgery should avoid the High Street charlatans hard sell tactics and seek a reputable, experienced, honest and ethical surgery for advise before making a decision.