The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
but you otherwise i think really talked about prk as the gold standard you know i think it's the only reason i might have said gold standard was that it came first it was the first procedure and if you look at prk and lasik which we'll get to in a bit if you look at those procedures say 30 days later they're indistinguishable in terms of results but the lasik patients get there way quicker
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
and that's why lasik was developed post prk presumably as a way to get around the healing process of prk yeah that was sort of a technological race and the way it developed was interesting and some of it was uh in pursuit of more rapid visual recovery