Am I the only one who is worried about the fact that "...a New York Yankees catcher who needed to be able to see the ball coming out of the light" was allowed to get this kind of surgery? How is getting elective eye surgery to help you see a ball better any different from taking steroids or any other drug?
I can see it all now... "Do you have a child getting ready to play baseball for the local youth league? Tune in at 10 for all information you'll need about getting the right bat, the perfect glove, and the best clinics to have your child's eyes improved!"
@Bhockzer:
A lot of us have been saying that for years. Certain things are allowable in sports, like kids in high school losing between 50 and 80 pounds in between football and wrestling seasons, and that is considered okay, even though the health consequences are far more dire for a young body than HGH. Elective eye surgery is ridiculously common in baseball and it isn't even hidden. Some people see these things in black and white terms, but it is really all shades of gray, and if everyone else is doing it, is it really wrong to want to keep up, especially when juicing was not even against the rules and was encouraged by owners and managers? It is easy for baseball's upper management to throw the players under the bus, but even they implicitly encouraged it, just as they still encourage a form of cheating with elective eye surgery.
But wait - I thought British Socialized Medicine was only capable of giving us leeches and gurneys to cart off Death-Paneled oldsters.
Isn't the only place in the globe that has medical innovation the US of A?!!
(ahem)
Anyone with any personal experience (either in the medical/academic fields, or as a patient) want to chime in?
It'd be some kind of awesome to see better in the dark or have hawk vision. How much fine-tuning (and operational retries) is required? Is it very much more expensive than simply getting vision to 20/20? Most importantly, can I puhleease have cat's eyes?
With all the scandal around steroids and growth hormone in sports, does nobody see a problem with athletes having non-necessary laser eye surgery to improve their game? This seems like at least as much of a cheat as "juicing" only it's permanent.
@Jeriba: Nope. I see no problem at all. In kids, absolutely, but full-grown consenting adults? nope.
I also don't really care what professional sports players do, outside the Olympics, cause in reality they are not playing to compete nobly, they are playing to entertain us. Seriously, how much better would baseball be if the batters could actually break the sound barrier with a homer?
@Smeagol92055: Great, you just invoked the Internet Heisenburg Uncertainty Principle... it doesn't exist until you ask about it. Go ahead, go google it.
I had laser iridotomy in both eyes (laser a hole in the iris to let off pressure from the back of the eye.) After recovering we found my right eye didn't need correction any longer and my left, with the contact lens, had epic distance vision. Good vision and not going blind - SWEET! My health plan vision co-pay now only have to cover one eye - BONUS.
@Julius Seizure. (the CANUCK one): Congratulations. I'll tell you, all I really want is a set of eyes that don't have the eye strain problems of looking at detail on a computer monitor for 10 hours.
I doubt they'll be able to do that with the current technology.
"Should the Space Program Join Forces with Reality TV?"
No.
For one thing, it would encourage the space program to be filled with internal strife to improve ratings.
More importantly, this is the mistake that jackass JFK made in the first place, that got us into the situation we're in with NASA today. Making the space program into a public media circus = fail, because the general public thinks it's boring.
-Kle.
When I was in Johannesburg a few years back, they had a channel that broadcast Big Brother South Africa 24 hours a day. In real time. And wouldn't you know it, but I had people constantly come over to watch. I was actually experiencing insomnia at the time, so I would sometimes pass the late-night hours watching night-vision footage of a bunch of people sleeping. It was strangely comforting.
All of which is to say, don't underestimate people's penchant for watching absolutely nothing happen on a screen. Though I suppose they could spice things up with an astronaut confessional booth or a boxful of space puppies...
10/05/09
10/05/09
I can see it all now... "Do you have a child getting ready to play baseball for the local youth league? Tune in at 10 for all information you'll need about getting the right bat, the perfect glove, and the best clinics to have your child's eyes improved!"
10/05/09
A lot of us have been saying that for years. Certain things are allowable in sports, like kids in high school losing between 50 and 80 pounds in between football and wrestling seasons, and that is considered okay, even though the health consequences are far more dire for a young body than HGH. Elective eye surgery is ridiculously common in baseball and it isn't even hidden. Some people see these things in black and white terms, but it is really all shades of gray, and if everyone else is doing it, is it really wrong to want to keep up, especially when juicing was not even against the rules and was encouraged by owners and managers? It is easy for baseball's upper management to throw the players under the bus, but even they implicitly encouraged it, just as they still encourage a form of cheating with elective eye surgery.
10/05/09
Isn't the only place in the globe that has medical innovation the US of A?!!
(ahem)
Anyone with any personal experience (either in the medical/academic fields, or as a patient) want to chime in?
It'd be some kind of awesome to see better in the dark or have hawk vision. How much fine-tuning (and operational retries) is required? Is it very much more expensive than simply getting vision to 20/20?
Most importantly, can I puhleease have cat's eyes?
10/05/09
10/05/09
I also don't really care what professional sports players do, outside the Olympics, cause in reality they are not playing to compete nobly, they are playing to entertain us. Seriously, how much better would baseball be if the batters could actually break the sound barrier with a homer?
10/05/09
10/15/09
10/05/09
I still get to kill a few people, right?
10/05/09
10/05/09
Done and done.
10/05/09
Touché. They have taught you well.
10/05/09
Me, too.
10/05/09
The rest, of course, is porn.
10/05/09
10/05/09
10/05/09
10/05/09
10/05/09
10/05/09
10/05/09
10/05/09
10/05/09
10/05/09
Yes, please.
10/05/09
10/05/09
10/05/09
I doubt they'll be able to do that with the current technology.
10/05/09
10/05/09
08/05/09
No.
For one thing, it would encourage the space program to be filled with internal strife to improve ratings.
More importantly, this is the mistake that jackass JFK made in the first place, that got us into the situation we're in with NASA today. Making the space program into a public media circus = fail, because the general public thinks it's boring.
-Kle.
08/04/09
All of which is to say, don't underestimate people's penchant for watching absolutely nothing happen on a screen. Though I suppose they could spice things up with an astronaut confessional booth or a boxful of space puppies...