USAEYES - Dr. Jay Bansal and Dr. Swati Singh -- Two Black Eyes for Refractive Surgery
Brent Hanson - USAEyes.info
A Black Eye for Refractive Surgery
By Gregory Sandler
"I personally observed that LaserVue physicians Jay Bansal, MD, and his
wife, Swati Singh, MD, did not sterilize the microkeratome between patients
and did not change the blade between patients." Leah Holtan
The standards of care regarding the use of microkeratomes and microkeratome
blades is the central issue in a pending class-action lawsuit that has been
filed against LaserVue Eyecenter, its founder, Jay Bansal, MD, and his wife
and partner, Swati Singh, MD. The case, which has received national media
attention, came to light after a former employee alerted California public
health officials that LaserVue physicians were using the same microkeratome
blade on consecutive patients and reusing microkeratome heads, including
suction rings, without autoclaving them between procedures.
The impending lawsuit against LaserVue has given refractive surgery a black
eye, while shining a spotlight on a practice that some physicians say is
commonplace around the world. In the lawsuit, filed last summer against
LaserVue, attorneys for the plaintiffs assert "fraud, battery, and unfair
competition in connection with the center's failure to properly sterilize
equipment used to perform LASIK [laser in-situ keratomileusis]."
The suit alleges that Bansal and his associates "willfully and recklessly
failed to sterilize the equipment used in the LASIK procedure, and willfully
and recklessly reused unclean blades and other surgical products during the
surgical procedures in an attempt to maximize their profits by saving
expenses and by increasing the number of patients [they] are able to treat
in an hour."
The primary concern expressed in the court documents is that the alleged
actions may have exposed some of an estimated 2,700 patients and the public
to the transmission of blood-borne and other infectious diseases, including
HIV and hepatitis B and C. According to informed sources, two former
LaserVue patients have tested positive for hepatitis, but it is not known
whether they contracted the disease from the LASIK procedure. The attorney
for the defense says that experts, including the California Department of
Public Health, agree that the risk of any disease being transmitted through
these practices was extremely low, and that patients need not be tested.
In September of last year, a preliminary injunction was issued prohibiting
Bansal, Singh, and LaserVue Eye Center from conducting any LASIK procedures
"without changing the microkeratome blade between procedures and sterilizing
the microkeratome between procedures." However, LaserVue claims it
voluntarily discontinued the challenged practices in May last year.
On advice of his counsel and because the matter is in litigation, Bansal has
not responded to repeated requests for comment from EyeWorld. But, in court
documents, he has admitted to reusing blades and microkeratome heads on two
patients - after simply rinsing them with sterile water. In fact, the
defendants in the LaserVue case do not dispute the fact that they used a
single blade for two patients, provided that the first patient had no
history of any infectious diseases, there was no bleeding, and the blade
performed well. "When a blade was reused on a second patient, it was always
cleaned with sterile water and allowed to dry," Bansal's attorneys said in a
court filing.
"The standards of care for LASIK are still being worked out and no patients
at LaserVue were harmed by this practice," said Fletcher C. Alford, Bansal's
attorney. "We believe the evidence will clearly demonstrate that none of the
patients experienced any injury whatsoever from the surgical techniques in
question. ... From our perspective, this case was brought by several
disgruntled employees."
The case against LaserVue became known when a former employee became aware
that the center was reusing blades on more than one patient. Leah Holtan,
who worked for LaserVue from October 1998 to June 1999, said in court
documents, "I personally observed that LaserVue physicians Jay Bansal, MD,
and his wife, Swati Singh, MD, did not sterilize the microkeratome between
patients and did not change the blade between patients. The microkeratome
and blade were reused for surgeries on later patients without
sterilization." Holtan said she resigned from LaserVue because of the
practice.
This March, the California Department of Health Services ordered LaserVue to
notify all its LASIK patients treated between March 1996 and May 1999 that
they may have been exposed to infectious diseases. "The procedures used at
LaserVue Eye Centers were clearly not in compliance with established
infection control recommendations for the disinfection and sterilization of
patient-care items," said Jon Rosenberg, MD, a state epidemiologist. "The
seriousness of the breaches in infection control practices were sufficient
to warrant the notification of patients who had undergone these procedures
and might have been exposed by contaminated equipment." Alford pointed out
that the Department decided that the patients need not be tested for any
infectious disease.
In a May 4 letter to patients, LaserVue admited reusing blades and
microkeratomes after rinsing them with water. "The practice was to reuse a
blade on a second patient if that blade proved satisfactory on the first
patient. ... This reduced the risk that an unproven new blade might have an
imperfection that could cause a corneal flap disorder," said the letter from
LaserVue. "It was also the procedure to reuse the microkeratome assembly on
up to four patients without heat sterilizing it."
EyeWorld has learned that the Medical Board of California is investigating
Bansal, Kay, and Singh in connection with the lawsuit's allegations.
Still, there are varying opinions regarding just what the standard of care
is in the United States when it comes to microkeratomes and blades.
Bausch & Lomb's Hansatome user's manual, which is being updated as a matter
of regular policy, recommends for the disposal of microkeratome blades after
each use. The maker of the world's mostly widely used microkeratome
recommends a three-step process for cleaning and sterilizing heads between
each LASIK procedure. After each use of a Hansatome microkeratome, the
manufacturer's specifications call for the head to be soaked for 2 minutes
in sterile distilled water containing a Food and Drug
Administration-approved medical cleanser; scrubbed on all six sides with a
soft-bristle toothbrush, thoroughly cleaning all open cavities (blade
holder, flap slot); rinsed in a second bowl for 1 minute; and then soaked
for 5 minutes in sterile distilled water; and rinsed for 1 minute in third
bowl of sterile distilled water. Once the rinsing and cleaning are
completed, Bausch & Lomb recommends autoclaving for between 3 and 30
minutes, depending upon the type of autoclave being used.
In a declaration on behalf of the defense, Ralph G. Berkeley, MD, clinical
assistant professor, University of Texas, Houston, who helped train Bansal,
said, "The rationale for reuse of blades has nothing to do with saving time
or money."
Berkeley said that because the quality of the incision is so critical in
LASIK, blade quality is of paramount concern. "Ophthalmologists who learned
LASIK in the early years of the procedure were taught to reuse blades on
multiple patients as a way of reducing flap complications," he said.
Because of concerns about blade quality, Berkeley said, many surgeons
learned to reuse blades as a precaution. "It is my opinion that the
procedures used by Dr. Bansal ... were not below the standard of care and
were consistent with what many other reputable and experienced surgeons were
doing," he said.
Another refractive surgeon, Alan B. Aker, MD, said in a declaration for the
court, "I do believe that using a new blade and sterilizing the assembly for
each patient is certainly a good change, but it is not currently in practice
throughout the United States or Canada or the rest of the world."
Other physicians argue that the standard of care in the United States is to
use a fresh blade on each patient and to autoclave the microkeratome head
after each use. Gary M. Kawesch, MD, a refractive surgeon who also practices
in the Bay area, said LaserVue's microkeratome sterilization process and
reuse of blades are not in keeping with the accepted standard of care in the
United States. "The standard of care is a new blade and a fresh, sterilized
keratome for each patient," he said. "Blades get dull with use, and every
doctor knows there is 'invisible' blood, tissue, and fluid that can
contaminate a blade or microkeratome."
LaserVue's practice, he said, "goes against everything doctors know about
fundamental, basic elements of sterilization techniques." He called Bansal's
defense for reusing blades to avoid defective ones "ludicrous."
Kawesch estimated that maybe one in 1,000 blades is defective and that those
defects can be seen during routine preoperative inspection. Moreover, he
said, microkeratome assemblies should be autoclaved for 5 minutes after each
use. In his practice, Kawesh rotates three microkeratomes in and out of
service to reduce operating room downtime.
By reusing blades, Kawesch said, LaserVue may simply have been trying to
save money. Assuming a patient flow of 300 patients a month and a blade cost
of $50 each, total blade costs should have been about $15,000 a month. By
reusing the same blade on two patients, the center would have saved $7,500 a
month. Moreover, by not investing in additional microkeratome units or
heads, the center would have realized additional savings. However, Bansal's
counsel has indicated in court documents that LaserVue always had at least
two microkeratomes available on surgery day, so that there would have been
no money-saving motivation for his practices.
Stephen D. McLeod, MD, a refractive surgeon and assistant clinical professor
at the University of California, San Francisco, agreed that LaserVue's
practice is not consistent with the standard of care. "I personally advocate
changing the blade between each patient," McLeod said. "My own practice is
to change the blade between eyes of each patient; I demand a pristine cut
each time, and there is evidence that the blade dulls after even one use."
While different manufacturers have varying recommendations for microkeratome
sterilization, McLeod said that it is critical to sterilize the
microkeratome head into which the blade fits. "As a general rule, all
nondisposable microkeratome heads can be autoclaved and should be between
all patients," he said. "We have three nondisposable microkeratome bodies
and five heads, so I use a freshly autoclaved head for each eye of each
patient."
In his supporting declaration filed on behalf of the plaintiffs, August L.
Reader III, MD, associate clinical professor, University of Southern
California, San Francisco, said, "In LASIK procedures, it is beneath the
standard of care to fail to change the blades in the microkeratomes between
patients. It is also beneath the standard of care to not sterilize the
microkeratome between patients. The standard of care requires that the
microkeratome be sterilized in an autoclave between each patient. ... The
failure to properly sterilize the equipment between patients can result in
the transfer of diseases between patients."
In another filing on behalf of the plaintiffs, Joseph B. Marzouk, MD, chief
of the infectious disease service at Summit Medical Center in Oakland,
Calif., said, "Because of the lack of sterilization of surgical instruments,
there has potentially been the transmission of bodily fluids, which includes
blood, from one LaserVue patient to another."
"Of particular concern," McLeod said, "is virus in tear film, including
hepatitis. Also, bleeding might occur in patients with pannus - not uncommon
in longtime contact lens wearers - and so direct blood-to-blood transmission
can theoretically occur. Based on corneal transplant data, corneas have
transmitted rabies, Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, hepatitis B, cytomegalovirus,
herpes simplex virus, bacteria, and fungi. While this may well be due to the
higher risk posed by cell-to-cell transmission made possible by whole-tissue
transplantation, cellular fragments adherent to the blade or tear film
contamination pose an unknown risk."
Certification of the class-action status of the lawsuit against LaserVue was
pending when EyeWorld went to press. Among the grounds for challenging
certification of the class identified by the lawsuit is the fact that Barry
S. Kay, MD, a former partner at LaserVue, is not named as a defendant in the
action - although he treated more than 1,000 of the potential plaintiffs.
Approximately five former LaserVue patients currently are part of the case
out of an estimated 2,700 patients who were treated during the time LaserVue
was reusing its blades and microkeratome assemblies. According to informed
sources, the parties involved in the case, including Bansal's malpractice
insurance company, are involved in settlement discussions.
spammer
<glenn.hageleSTOPS...@USAEyes.org> wrote:
> From 1999. Investigated, resolved, and no patient had any surgery
> induced problems that related to the microkeratome.
>
>
Maybe not. I heard one of those patients got pregnant shortly
afterwards.
DAK
Three words that best describe Glenn Hagele: DEEPLY DISTURBED
INDIVIDUAL
MAYBE THE REASONS AND THE TRUTHS CAME OUT AND YOU FIND YOURSELF UNDER
ATTACK IS BECAUSE YOU DREW FIRST AND SECOND AND THIRD BLOOD...YOUR
BUDDY, CODE NAME, "RAGNAR" SAID IT BEST ON AN EMAIL HE SENT ME:
"I'll tell you one thing... the attacks on Glenn have hurt him
incredibly. He would be best to not post any messages and let the
money roll in. Too late for that now. That forum is not an
appropriate forum for him to even be participating in..."
Again, someone close that knows Glenn!!
It was Glenn Hagele that is lying and lying some more. Glenn has
brought these challenges on himself, for HIS ATTACK, AND HATRED TO
THOSE HURT LASIK PATIENTS LIKE MYSELF, who were under attack by Glenn
Hagele probably because we have the guts to stand up to the lasik
doctors and tell them we are not afraid to sue them or expose their
lies and a rat for what they truly are...A LYING RAT!!
This is what America was founded on. Our Constitution questioned
anything and everything. The problem today is that many people are
led like sheep, and you know what happens to sheep. Not us. It is
American to question our leaders and if we sense something is not
right, we ASK QUESTIONS...
Mr. Hagele has seemed to have forgotten about what it means to be an
American or live in America. I would suggest he re-reads the US
Constitution and I would suggest he questions authority, questions the
lasik community, questions the US Government, after all, that is what
keeps us all honest and in "check."
MR. HAGELE: When was the day and time your soul was "BOUGHT?" When
was the last time you were able to look yourself in the mirror and
know that your parents would have been truly proud of your honest
accomplishments and for doing the "RIGHT THING," not the "MOST
PROFITABLE THING...?"
Mine can not be bought...Here are a couple of questions that Mr.
Hagele should answer to all of us:
1. I QUESTION THE ACTIONS, COMMENTS, EXPRESSIONS AND CHARACTER of Mr.
Glenn Hagele and so should you!! This man is saying just the
opposite. If the hurt lasik patients are in deed "hurt," then why has
Mr. Hagele drawn "FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD BLOOD" if he is such a hurt
lasik patient advocate?
2. Who pays Mr. Hagele's salaries? The hurt lasik patient and/or the
greedy/corrupt lasik doctor(s)? Which one would be biased? Are you
going to get an honest answer from someone who is paid to "take care
of the lasik doctor's unhappy patients that want to tell their story,
and for FREE, while the corrupt lasik doctor makes millions of dollars
a year at the hurt lasik patient's expense?" So, in essence, Mr.
Glenn Hagele seems to work for the "lasik doctors" and appears to be
the ONE PERSON taking care of their "DIRTY BUSINESS," in this case it
is trying to further ruin and defame already hurt lasik patients?
3. HAS GLENN HAGELE EVEN GONE FURTHER INTO CORRUPTION BY MAKING UP
LIES TO EVEN CONTACT A HURT LASIK PATIENT'S EMPLOYER AND GETTING "HER"
FIRED? Is this sick...An already hurt lasik patient just trying to
pay her bills, spread the word on her story and experiences of lasik
which the TV's, newspapers, magazines are NOT talking about, and she
gets fired because Glenn Hagele couldn't strong arm and "black mail"
her???
4. Has Glenn Hagele tried to black mail hurt lasik patients? The
answer is "YES." There is overwhelming, FACTUAL EVIDENCE OF THIS, and
all Glenn will do is LIE, LIE, LIE...Black mail is a crime!! If I
really wanted to put Glenn Hagele in jail, I would focus a lot of
money on this ONE CRIME that has been committed by Glenn Hagele, who
let me repeat, tried to BLACKMAIL MYSELF AND MANY OTHER HURT LASIK
PATIENTS, before he started his defamatory website: www.glennhagele.com
which is no more than one lie after another, further making him look
more and more like the ass that he is...
5. Has Glenn Hagele taken any form of payment from a Dr. Nick Caro
and/or has Mr. Hagele been in touch with the Caro family to defame
myself and my family? Again, HAS ANY PAYMENT OR CORRESPONDENCE
BETWEEN THE CARO FAMILY AND GLENN HAGELE TAKEN PLACE?? IF so when and
what was discussed?
6. Glenn Hagele has filed for bancruptcy? True or False?
7. Glenn Hagele has tried to defame hurt lasik patients, yet he
advertises that he is a "patient advocacy service and advocate," that
is like saying you are Christian and then putting on a "Skull and
Bones" black gown and wearing skulls and attending a sacreligous event
later on that evenining...Glenn which is it?
More on "foe, fake patient advocate, and hurt lasik patient
hater"...Glenn Hagele:
http://www.lasikflap.com/crsqa/
http://www.lasikfraud.com/news/archives/000148.html
Wow, from reading the above and Goolge Searching: Glenn Hagele CRSQA,
it appears that Mr. Hagele finds himself being the ONLY "PATIENT
ADVOCACY SERVICE" that is truly defamed and "not liked" on the
internet...If he has done so much good for so many of us hurt lasik
patients, "HOW COME SO MANY HURT LASIK PATIENTS ARE WARNING EVERYONE
TO BE VERY CAREFUL OF GLENN HAGELE, AND HAVE MENTIONED THIS ONLINE?"
Either hurt lasik patients have nothing to do and get paid ZERO for
exposing you to this information, or Glenn Hagele has caught himself
in another one of HIS LIES, LIES, LIES, LIES, LIES!! Oh, but when
Glenn Hagele says something it's correct and is true. But when anyone
else says anything it is "false and defamatory." I think everyone
knows that anyone preaching to be a "hurt lasik patient/patient
advocate" would not be under fire, nor be spreading defamatory lies
online...
Three words that best describe Glenn Hagele: DEEPLY DISTURBED
INDIVIDUAL
IS THIS THE SAME GLENN HAGELE THAT "PLAYS GOD" AND SAYS THIS PERSON IS
LYING WHEN IT IS INDEED GLENN HAGELE AND ALL OF HIS ONGOING LYING
BLOGS??
IS THIS THE SAME GLENN HAGELE THAT HAS BEEN KNOWN TO HARASS HURT LASIK
PATIENTS?
IS THIS GLENN HAGELE WHO GOT A HURT LASIK PATIENT FIRED?
IS THIS GLENN HAGELE WHO HIDES BEHIND HIS COMPUTER KEYBOARD AND WORKS
OUT OF HIS HOUSE?
IS THIS GLENN HAGELE WHO IS "PRO LASIK DOCTOR" AND "ANTI HURT LASIK
PATIENT?"
IS THIS GLENN HAGELE, HIGH SCHOOL DEGREE GLENN HAGELE WHO LEADS
"DOCTORATE LEVEL DOCTORS" AT $5,000 A YEAR FOR A MEMBERSHIP CALLED
CRSQA, THAT ISN'T EVEN RECOGNIZED BY ANY MEDICAL ASSOCIATION AND
THANKS TO US IS UNDER INVESTIGATION AS A "NON PROFIT?"
IS THIS THE SAME GLENN HAGELE THAT HAD TO "IMPORT" A RUSSIAN WIFE
BECAUSE NO ONE HERE IN THE STATES WOULD PUT UP WITH HIS BULLSHIT?
THAT GLENN HAGELE...OH...MAY GOD HAVE MERCY ON HIS SOUL FOR WHAT HE
HAS DONE TO HURT SO MANY PEOPLE!!
THAT GLENN HAGELE??? USAEYES AND COMPLICATED EYES HEADED BY THIS
MAN????
HELLO EVERYONE:
FIRST IT IS GLENN HAGELE THAT IS CONSIDERED BY HUNDREDS TO BE A
"DEEPLY DISTURBED" AND "UNSTABLE INDIVIDUAL." MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT
IT, HE DOES NOT CARE ABOUT HURT LASIK PATIENTS AND IS RATHER PAID TO
MAKE ALL OF THEM AND THEIR WEBSITES GO AWAY...RATHER, IF THE TRUTH BE
TOLD, GLENN HAGELE IS IN "BED" WITH THE DOCTORS THAT PAY FOR HIS
OFFICE/HOUSE PAYMENT...EVERYONE KNOWS THIS, AND NOW SO DO YOU.
HE HAS TRIED TO HURT MY FAMILY AS WELL THROUGH ONLINE HARASSMENT AND
EVEN CONTACTED THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS THAT I SERVE AS 2ND VICE
PRESIDENT ON TO TRY TO GET ME TERMINATED FROM THE BOARD, AND BECAUSE
OF HIS ACTIONS, I AM COMMITTED TO SPREAD THE TRUTH UNTIL THE TRUTH
HELPS HIM TO GO BANCRUPT AGAIN...HE DID THIS TO HIMSELF, BECAUSE GLENN
HAGELE DOESN'T KNOW WHEN TO SHUT HIS MOUTH AND NOT "BUD IN." OH, BUT
MAYBE HE IS "PAID" TO DO SOMEONE ELSES DIRTY WORK AND BUD IN...BUT
THAT IS GLENN HAGELE, AND THUS THE REASON HE IS IN TROUBLE WITH THE
FLORIDA LAW...(COMING SOON)...
HE WILL TELL YOU THAT I AM IN TROUBLE WITH THE FBI, FOR AN ATTEMPT TO
EXTORT MONEY (GLENN CAN'T VALIDATE THIS, IT IS GLENN HAGELE THAT HAS
COME INTO TROUBLE WITH THE LAW, AND HE JUST KEEPS TALKING OUT OF HIS
ASS)...FROM THE PIECE OF SHIT LASIK DOCTOR NAMED NICK CARO, WHO DID
INDEED RUIN MY VISION, HAS 60+ LAWSUITS, AN ILLEGAL BLACK BOX LASER
THAT HAD TO BE SEIZED BY US MARSHALLS, PISTOLS DRAWN AT THE REQUEST OF
THE FDA BECAUSE NICK CARO WAS HARMING INNOCENT PEOPLE...
MORE ON GLENN HAGELE:
WWW.USAEYES.INFO
WWW.LASIKFLAP.COM
WWW.LIFEAFTERLASIK.COM
WWW.LASIKFRAUD.COM
WWW.LASIKSUCKS4U.COM
I WON'T REST UNTIL NICK CARO IS IN JAIL AND GLENN HAGELE IS IN THE
JAIL CELL NEXT TO HIM FOR WHAT THEY HAVE DONE TO MYSELF, TO MY FAMILY
AND TO MY DEAR FRIENDS WHO HAVEN'T DONE A DARN THING TO GLENN HAGELE
OR HIS FAMILY...(IN FACT, YOU WOULD HAVE TO KILL ME FOR ME TO STOP
CONTACTING THE LEGAL DEPARTMENTS WITH ONGOING COMPLAINTS...)
THE PERSON DESCRIBED ABOVE, GLENN HAGELE, IS ANYTHING BUT HONEST AND
SURELY ISN'T A PATIENT ADVOCATE. HE HAS ATTEMPTED TO "HARASS AND
INJURE" KNOWN HURT- LASIK -PATIENTS...
HE IS IN SERIOUS TROUBLE WITH THE LAW, AS I HEAR, AND THIS WILL ALL BE
MADE VERY PUBLIC SOON ENOUGH, AS I HEAR HE HAS GOTTEN IN TO SOME
SERIOUS CHARGES OUT OF FLORIDA...I THINK EVERY CRSQA SURGEON SHOULD
KNOW ABOUT THIS AS WELL, AND SOON ENOUGH, THEY WILL...
HAVE THE FOLLOWING CRSQA DOCTORS FIGURED OUT THAT THEY ARE PAYING
GLENN HAGELE $5,000 A YEAR TO RUIN THEIR REPUTATIONS? I WILL MAKE
SURE THEY KNOW...ANY DOCTOR BELOW DOING BUSINESS WITH GLENN HAGELE
SHOULD BE UNDER FULL EXAMINATION BY MULTIPLE LAW DEPARTMENTS FOR
HAVING "TIES" TO A CRIMINAL...
HERE IS THE LIST OF "POTENTIAL CRSQA DOCTORS" THAT ARE WORKING WITH A
"CRIMINAL:"
Lasik Doctor Kerry Assil
Lasik Doctor Jay Bansal
Lasik Doctor Daniel Beers
Lasik Doctor Scott Behler
Lasik Doctor Robert Brems
Lasik Doctor Stephen Brint
Lasik Doctor Ronald Brown
Lasik Doctor Randy Burks
Lasik Doctor Andrew Caster
Lasik Doctor Benjamin Chang
Lasik Doctor David Dulaney
Lasik Doctor Daniel Durrie
Lasik Doctor Ella Faktorovich
Lasik Doctor Raymond Gailitis
Lasik Doctor Robert Gladsden
Lasik Doctor Daniel Goldberg
Lasik Doctor Jack T Holladay
Lasik Doctor Thierry Hufhagel
Lasik Doctor Kent Kirk (isn't this guy the one on the video telling
how great the statistics were about Alcon, i think many people lost a
lot of credibility for this guy, as in our opinions...he seemed to be
lying through his eyes)
Lasik Doctor Robert Lin
Lasik Doctor Richard Lindstrom
Lasik Doctor Robert Maloney (isn't this the guy that just did lasik on
Kristen from Laguna Beach, who is like 20 years old...can you believe
a doctor would do that for publicity??? she's a kid, and who can say
if her eyes are stable and he just did lasik on her for probably
what...exposure??...very sick, two words: DEEPLY DISTURBING!!)
Lasik Doctor James McDonald
Lasik Doctor Michael Mockovak
Lasik Doctor Sanford Moretsky
Lasik Doctor Thomas Planchard
Lasik Doctor Philip Roholt
Lasik Doctor James Rynerson
Lasik Doctor Cary M Silverman
Lasik Doctor Swati Singh
Lasik Doctor Barrie Soloway
Lasik Doctor Gregory Stainer
Lasik Doctor Harmon Stein
Lasik Doctor Steven Stetson
Lasik Doctor Dan Tran
Lasik Doctor Mark Volpicelli
Lasik Doctor David A Wallace
Lasik Doctor Robert Weisenthal
Lasik Doctor Marc Werner
Lasik Doctor Norman Zaffater
Is Glenn Hagele, CRSQA Doctors, USAEyes in trouble with the FBI?
WARNING LASIK / REFRACTIVE SURGEONS OF THE WORLD:
(IS THE $5,000 A YEAR MEMBERSHIP A SCAM and DOCTORS WILL YOUR
REPUTATION BE HARMED BY PAYING THIS FEE TO GLENN HAGELE TO BE A PART
OF CRSQA? YOU DECIDE...
POTENTIAL CRSQA DOCTORS:
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO READ THE BELOW...YOU SHOULD BE INFORMED OF
WHAT YOUR LEADER, GLENN HAGELE, IS SAYING AND DOING TO HURT LASIK
PATIENTS, BECAUSE YOU ARE PAYING HIM...AND HE SEEMS TO APPEAR TO BE
CREATING AND ANSWERING HUNDREDS IF NOT THOUSANDS OF NEGATIVE BLOGS
REGARDING LASIK, AND HE HAS BEEN FOUND TO CONTINUALLY HARASS HURT
LASIK PATIENTS...
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN TO YOU? IT IS MAKING YOU LOOK BAD AND HE COULD BE
RUINING EACH OF YOUR REPUTATIONS...IF YOU ARE ONE OF THE BELOW, YOU
MAY WANT TO HAVE A 'HEART TO HEART' TALK WITH GLENN HAGELE: ARE THESE
THE 'INFAMOUS CRSQA DOCTORS'????
IF SO, HAVE THESE LASIK DOCTORS EVEN FIGURED OUT YET, THAT THEY ARE
PAYING A YEARLY MEMBERSHIP OF $5,000+++ TO MR. GLENN HAGELE AND
USAEYES TO HAVE A "CRSQA" CERTIFICATE THAT COULD POSSIBLY RUIN THEIR
REPUTATIONS? WHAT IS HAPPENING TO THEIR REPUTATION THANKS TO GLENN
HAGELE AND USAYES? THE BELOW COULD BE A LIST OF CRSQA DOCTORS AND THEY
COULD HAVE TIES TO GLENN HAGELE AND USAEYES:
Lasik Doctor Kerry Assil
Lasik Doctor Jay Bansal
Lasik Doctor Daniel Beers
Lasik Doctor Scott Behler
Lasik Doctor Robert Brems
Lasik Doctor Stephen Brint
Lasik Doctor Ronald Brown
Lasik Doctor Randy Burks
Lasik Doctor Andrew Caster
Lasik Doctor Benjamin Chang
Lasik Doctor David Dulaney
Lasik Doctor Daniel Durrie
Lasik Doctor Ella Faktorovich
Lasik Doctor Raymond Gailitis
Lasik Doctor Robert Gladsden
Lasik Doctor Daniel Goldberg
Lasik Doctor Jack T Holladay
Lasik Doctor Thierry Hufhagel
Lasik Doctor Kent Kirk (isn't this guy the one on the video telling
how great the statistics were about Alcon, i think many people lost a
lot of credibility for this guy, as in our opinions...he seemed to be
lying through his eyes)
Lasik Doctor Robert Lin
Lasik Doctor Richard Lindstrom
Lasik Doctor Robert Maloney (isn't this the guy that just did lasik on
Kristen from Laguna Beach, who is like 20 years old...can you believe
a doctor would do that for publicity??? she's a kid, and who can say
if her eyes are stable and he just did lasik on her for probably
what...exposure??...very sick, two words: DEEPLY DISTURBING!!)
Lasik Doctor James McDonald
Lasik Doctor Michael Mockovak
Lasik Doctor Sanford Moretsky
Lasik Doctor Thomas Planchard
Lasik Doctor Philip Roholt
Lasik Doctor James Rynerson
Lasik Doctor Cary M Silverman
Lasik Doctor Swati Singh
Lasik Doctor Barrie Soloway
Lasik Doctor Gregory Stainer
Lasik Doctor Harmon Stein
Lasik Doctor Steven Stetson
Lasik Doctor Dan Tran
Lasik Doctor Mark Volpicelli
Lasik Doctor David A Wallace
Lasik Doctor Robert Weisenthal
Lasik Doctor Marc Werner
Lasik Doctor Norman Zaffater
In other words, a hurt lasik patient lead comes in via email or a
phone call to Glenn Hagele of USAEyes and CRSQA. Glenn Hagele answers
questions to the hurt lasik patient (and has been found on many
occassions to give the patient medical advice which is a "NO NO"
because Glenn Hagele is a high school graduate, and NOT A DOCTOR). The
hurt lasik patient on many occassions, is funneled to one of the
PAYING CRSQA LASIK DOCTORS WHO PAYS GLENN A $5,000+++ YEAR MEMBERSHIP
FEE, in order to get LEADS from the HURT LASIK PATIENTS...so the lasik
doctor can make money off of the HURT LASIK PATIENT...
The unethical problems here could be the following:
a. Glenn Hagele is operating a 501-c3, Non For Profit out of
Sacramento, CA as his business card/email signature states. This could
be a violation. We are investigating this further.
b. The poor hurt lasik patient, may have ONLY ONE SHOT to fix their
eyesight, and is taking a huge risk potentially by going to a CRSQA
lasik doctor possibly further risking the exponential chances of
making an already horrific situation even worse by risking ECTASIA.
c. Glenn Hagele has been known to harass injured lasik patients who
are in lawsuits with their doctors and it is apparent that he has
closer ties to the lasik doctors that PAY HIM $5,000++++ A YEAR, then
he does to the hurt lasik patients that have websites to inform,
educate, and update the "lied to and misinformed public..."
MORE ON THESE DOCTORS AND THEIR REPUTATIONS FROM HURT PATIENTS CAN BE
FOUND :
"BE VERY CAREFUL OF GLENN HAGELE AND IN GOING TO ANY CRSQA LASIK
DOCTOR..."
Scott
letter asking **** **** to call a "truce" back in Jan. 2007. This
letter was very carefully worded and asked **** to kindly pay for the
medical expenses incurred, that's it, and I would restructure my
website if he would show some integrity. Instead, this was taken out
of context, turned over to the Miami FBI where someone did **** **** a
favor, and the FBI showed up at my door asking questions. "
Looks like DAK has some legal trouble of his own...
http://tinyurl.com/2vg3vj
spammer
capnsp...@yahoo.com
spammer
capnsp...@yahoo.com
spammer
capnsp...@yahoo.com
Scott
capnsp...@yahoo.com
> <capnspaldi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1189828901.8...@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Sep 11, 7:19 pm, spammer <sereb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> s
>
> - Show quoted text -
/
spammer
capnsp...@yahoo.com
spammer
capnsp...@yahoo.com
spammer
> s
s
capnsp...@yahoo.com
/
spammer
capnsp...@yahoo.com
/
spammer
s
capnsp...@yahoo.com
RT
capnsp...@yahoo.com wrote:
really, what's the point of posting things like this?
Waste of space and time. Into the the killfile you go.
--
~RT
capnsp...@yahoo.com
with the truth".
spammer
> >
> "It's not enough to rage against the lie... you've got to replace it
> with the truth".
STOLEN QUOTE HERE !!