Dr Kanackal Alex George
Thank you Sasha for taking the trouble in warning people like me because I cant imagine what it must be like living with eye problems for the rest of your life when you dint have to.
Probably a bit odd but I should thank Dr George as well because it was some of his quacks that told me more than I was told at my consultation at Optical Express!! If they told me some of what he says I would never have gone further than the consultation!! Doesn’t bear thinking about what might have happened If I’d let the operate on me!! :S
I will warn other people and wish you all the best with what you are doing.
Reply to Jennifer
- Offline Topic Author
- Posts: 1155
- Thanks: 153
Sasha Rodoy wrote: ...after reading with fascination some of the information you have posted concerning refractive eye surgery, before I respond to your repeated ‘demand’ that I publish copies of documents relating to Paul Holmes’ legal claim against you, and my own Optimax signed consent, it would be helpful for me to better understand your reply to Mr Starburst claiming, ‘Surgery is 50% of success. Neuroadaptation is the remaining 50%.’
A quick google search found the following article, and as a lay person with more knowledge about this industry than most, perhaps that’s why I found it simple to understand.
But maybe I am not as well informed as I thought, because its content implies that neuroadaptation is mostly relevant to intraocular lens implants?
I’m also curious to know how you define ‘essential research’? And in which document given to patients pre op is this instruction given? It was not mentioned in my consent form, and I cannot recall having seen it in any of the many copies I have of OE’s ever changing consent form...
You continue to post your comments and demands, and I have been more than generous in allowing you to do so - without censorship or moderation - yet you have failed to respond to any of MY questions, while ignoring sensitive/contentious comments from other contributors questioning and/or criticising your actions.
• Why are you reluctant to disclose how many of your damaged patients are in litigation against you? (I personally know of at least twelve to date.)
• One of these is Paul Snape*, whose intended career as a commercial pilot was destroyed in 2010, after you performed what was unarguably ‘life changing’ bilateral lasik surgery at Optical Express Wolverhampton clinic. And, similarly to Paul Holmes, Mr Snape’s lawyer also had issues concerning your apparent lack of medical indemnity at the time (more for your alleged libel claim against me!). Does it not disturb you in the least to know that you not only ruined a young man’ s eyes, but his future too?
*I have Paul Snape’s written authority to share details/documents related to his legal claim when I consider it appropriate to do so.
• You say that you are self employed, yet It is Optical Express who pay you, not the patient. And I believe that in 2010 you were paid £32.25 for each of Mr Snape’s eyes, but do correct me if I’m wrong.
• You have expressly [sic] criticised Optical Express in your letter to both Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell, so why do you continue to work for Optical Express?
• You are a member of the RCOphth, whose standards/guidelines are not followed by your ‘employers’ (who in fact produced contradictory standards via FODO to suit their own modus operandi), so I repeat my question, why do you continue to work for this company? Is it because you cannot find employment anywhere else?
• Your letter to the Labour leader and Shadow Chancellor praises my intelligence, knowledge of this industry, etc... (see Douglas’ post below), so why did you not voice this opinion to the RCOphth when they removed me from the RSSWG (indisputably at the welcomed behest of your ‘boss’ David Moulsdale)?
• You claim, ‘I am currently the Surgeon who does the most lens exchanges perhaps in the UK.’
Given your track record, I find this extremely worrying, although I was led to believe that your colleague David Teenan held that position, at least within Optical Express. Can you supply data to support your claim?
• Why should an apology/retraction from me (in your wildest dreams!) be a condition of you meeting with Hazel Jones’ family? (I will go further than Truth Fairy, and say that your total lack of remorse or conscience exhibits psychopathic traits - that I have previously only attributed to corrupt businessmen Russell Ambrose and David Moulsdale.)
* Why have none of your colleagues spoken out in support of you? Or your employers, Optical Express?
• And finally (for now) why do you wear glasses?
If you are [strike]stupid[/strike] brave enough, I look forward to you addressing all my points, and providing honest answers to everything asked of you by contributors to this thread .
Reply to admin
- Truth Fairy
Reply to Truth Fairy
"Sasha Rodoy is an intelligent woman .......... she could be an immense force for good .......... With her own experience as a patient she has the wherewithal to inform, explain and support .......... She could ease the anxiety and help postoperative patients .......... "
It begs the question then, why was Sasha removed as the Royal College of Ophthalmologists nominated lay advisor to the RSSWG in 2015? Patients and public worldwide would have benefitted if she had not been removed.
Sorry for any typos, eyes are crap today (nothing new there then since my RLE from 2013)
Reply to Douglas
Unless I'm very much mistaken, it is not stated on any refractive eye surgery consent form that IOL or LVC ops will certainly 'get rid' of the need for spectacles or contact lenses but that ops will reduce patients dependency on them, so why are you making this misleading statement?
2 - You posted - 'In my years doing this surgery I am well aware of the immense joy of successful patients, who are in the significant majority far outstripping unhappy ones.'
Successful patients are ONLY a significant majority? It is quite telling that you did not state that successful ones are in the vast majority & what exact figure/percentage does 'significant' refer to? Surely you must have this data!
3 - From OE's website - 'Refractive lens exchange gives excellent results, but in the months or years that follow treatment, approximately 20% of patients may notice that their vision is fading.'
I think that most people would expect 'approximately 20%' could easily be as much as 5% either way so that could mean that 25% or a QUARTER of all RLE patients will need to have YAG laser in the months or years after ops!
What if YAG is needed more than 12 months after ops, which is beyond OE's free 12month aftercare time limit? Are they told prior to ops that they have to pay if this is the case?
I note that on the YAG Laser Capsulotomy page on OE's website that there is no mention of the possibility of fees being charged for this treatment if subsequently needed!
Reply to S.Hodges
If I’d have had stats like he quoted I wouldn’t have gone ahead with RLE!!! Precisely why Sasha is campaigning! To regulate the industry and negate false stats.
P.S. Try telling Peter Constable, NHS surgeon who repaired my eye damaged by OE, that he’s not up to speed on latest techniques!!!
Reply to Claire
- Posts: 14
- Thanks: 2
This guy is not just deluded, he's demented if he seriously believes that his letter is going to serve any purpose of that sort!
I'd be interested to know how many patients are actually suing him??? Please do tell me Alex!
So 15-20% of patients are initially disappointed but over time they become 'relatively' happy. Even that doesn't sound great. I am 7 years post surgery and I am nowhere near 'relatively' happy with what I have been left with.
Referring to Sasha and OERML as TOXIC is just ironic, this website wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for the TOXIC industry that is laser eye surgery, Sasha is the only one there for damaged patients like myself who are constantly ignored and brushed aside, told to give it time just to delay us taking a case to court.
Look in the mirror, and you'll see TOXIC!
Reply to Shell84
- Alex George
Also request put your reference on Neuroadaptation article from April 2007. That’s important **
*I am not publishing same letter twice, I have edited the error.
**The link is there - try looking again with your specs on
Reply to Alex George
- Alex George
- Alex George
Disgruntlement for whatever reason, fostered by the rancour in this OERML web-site, will only drag you further down into a morass of despondency.
I cannot speak for Optical Express’ dealing with you because I am self-employed but I shall personally do my best for you clinically. If we determine that any of you are among the very small minority who cannot tolerate your lenses then I can exchange them for a different lens which can be tolerated by you. Paul Hogg is one person I recognise on this site who perhaps needs to have that done. I am currently the Surgeon who does the most lens exchanges perhaps in the UK. That may be for whatever reason, either an opacifying lenses or for patients who don’t get on with their lenses or whatever and I shall do my best for you but only in a partnership where you understand your role in the process of achieving a positive outcome.
Dr Kanackal Alex George
FRCOphth, FRCS, MS, DOMS, MNAMS
Self-employed Refractive Eye Surgeon
GMC Specialist Registration 3633782
Mr Jeremy Corbyn MP
Leader of the Labour Party
House of Commons
01st January 2018
Ms Sasha Rodoy, Web site- www.opticalexpressruinedmylife.co.uk (OERML)
Dear Mr Corbyn,
[admin: Carbon copy of letter sent to John McDonnell and previously posted by Dr Duck on 1 January ]