Reply to comment
What's the point, really?
July 17, 2007
by The Seer (not verified),
2 years 19 weeks ago
Comment: 24255
Reply
About us
Science Blog was started in August 2002. It lives, breathes and eats press releases from research organizations around the globe. Most of what you read here are press releases from the outfits named in the stories themselves. Got a news story you think belongs here? Let's talk. The other half of the equation is blog posts from readers like you. So if you have an interest in science, please register and join others like you in an ongoing, vibrant dialog about what makes the world tick. Meantime, please take a minute to read our Privacy Policy and Site Disclaimer.Recommended
Andrew Sullivan Dan Sullivan Doug Arellanes Emmanuelle Richard Faith Sullivan Fred Bortz Heather Havrilesky Henry Copeland Kate Sullivan Ken Layne lagreenbean.com LAist.com Maggie Sullivan Matt Welch NewYorkology Opinion L.A. Ron Kaye Slashdot Steve Elzer & Family TheNewsroom.org Thor Garcia Tony Pierce Wonkette OlderThanks CNET for naming Science Blog one of your Blog 100!
I don't see the point of a new machine to correct fully for only one eye. Surely that could be accomplished with current machines? Just change the setting.
Also, what about stereoscopic vision and depth? These would be lost when one eye sees far and the other sees near.
Do check out the following for more details:
http://www.visionimprovementsite.com/2007/07/14/new-lasik-device-for-par...
The Seer