
In 5 Minutes, He Lets the Blind See - laex
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/08/opinion/sunday/in-5-minutes-he-lets-the-blind-see.html?_r=0
======
Elte
My mom used to tell me about a similar procedure she would perform to help
people with cateracts in Africa 30 years ago, so I'm a bit confused. I'm not
saying this isn't awesome or special, just a bit curious what has changed to
make it particularly special _now_.

EDIT: So I asked her, it seems the main difference is the new lens they're
putting in. With a cateract the lens is clouded and the essence of this
procedure is cutting out that lens so that light reaches the retina once more.
30 years back they did not have new lenses to put in though, so (quote) "we
would send everyone home with +10 glasses". She also recalls the expeditions
into Nepal going into the mountains to operate cateracts 14 consecutive days
full time even back then (takes a while to get up to 100.000 I suppose :]).

So it used to be they were getting people who saw nothing to see something.
Now they get people who see nothing to see really well, which is of course
huge.

~~~
eps
Lower cost, probably. But if your mom is around, perhaps just ask her instead
of HN?

~~~
Elte
That e-mail went out before I posted here, and I fully intend on providing the
answer myself ;). Should've probably made that more obvious. EDIT: Updated
with the answer!

------
stevetrewick
Quite a few things bug me about this piece.

>I’m on my annual win-a-trip journey, in which I take a university student
with me on a trip to the developing world to cover underreported issues.

Firstly, I don't think this is 'under reported', I've seen at least two full
length documentaries about this procedure in Nepal, the project has its own
Facebook page [0] and a Google search for 'Nepal cataract' turns up lots of
trad media results.

Secondly, if the author has taken a student to cover things, why aren't e
reading the student's piece ?

Lastly, the author - like most people who haven't undergone this type of
surgery - falls into the trap of breathlessly hailing this as a miraculous
cure for blindness. It's not. While the restored sight is absolutely better
than having cataracts and will indeed cheer you up in the immediate term, the
vision provided by the replacement lenses is a far cry from a person's natural
vision, for one thing these lenses have a fixed focus. Another issue is the
limited life span - eventually they fur up, but don't go hard like UV induced
cataracts - which necessitates replacement or laser surgery.

Humans - particularly the kind that live up mountains in Nepal - are adaptable
and can cope, but as someone who has had this surgery (and the follow up laser
surgery) it annoys me that reportage routinely fails to mention these kinds of
things.

In this particular case, it is also quite peculiar that the author fails to
point out that handing out a $5 pair of sunglasses would prevent the cataracts
in the first place (these are pretty much all UV induced). Education and
prevention in this respect _are_ very much under reported.

[0]
[https://www.facebook.com/cureblindness/](https://www.facebook.com/cureblindness/)

~~~
IkmoIkmo
> handing out a $5 pair of sunglasses would prevent the cataracts in the first
> place (these are pretty much all UV induced).

I've also heard that vitamin sufficiency prevents UV induced cataracts, is
this true and on what scale would vitamins be sufficient? Introducing a
particular crop with the particular vitamin to the local farmers, potentially
a GMO crop, or selling supplements or adding vitamins to food (e.g. in the
Netherlands I know virtually all bread has government-encouraged iodine to
prevent iodine deficiency illnesses and effects, not sure if it's a worldwide
standard, but iodising table salt is common practice for the majority of the
world, too) might be a practical alternative.

------
curiousAl
Modern (science-based) medicine is a miracle of biblical proportions.

~~~
fasteo
Cataract surgery is not exactly modern medicine. There are records [1] of
cataract surgery as far as 2500 BC, that is, more than 4000 years ago.

[1] [http://cdn.intechopen.com/pdfs/42710/InTech-
The_history_of_c...](http://cdn.intechopen.com/pdfs/42710/InTech-
The_history_of_cataract_surgery.pdf)

~~~
afsina
Removing the infected lens is something, replacing it with an artificial
intraocular lens implant is something else.

------
pmontra
Bypass of the NY login: original text from
[https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=es&sl=en&tl=es&u=h...](https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=es&sl=en&tl=es&u=http:%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2015%2F11%2F08%2Fopinion%2Fsunday%2Fin-5-minutes-
he-lets-the-blind-see.html%3F_r%3D0&anno=2&sandbox=1)

------
rokhayakebe
This guy needs a kickstarter, or GoFundMe, or some other easy way to give him
$25. Imagine a "LET'S FREAKING END CATARACT BLINDNESS" movement.

~~~
_mgr
[http://www.hollows.org.nz](http://www.hollows.org.nz)

The Fred Hollows Foundation has been doing this since at least 1992 around the
world including Nepal where Dr. Hollows and Dr. Ruit worked closely together.

Unfortunately Dr. Hollows passed away years ago but the foundation continues
his work.

------
Kiro
I can recommend "Inside North Korea" (National Geographic) where he's treating
cataracts in NK.

------
ck2
I'm curious what $25 per eye translates into American healthcare prices?
$1000? $2500?

~~~
psykovsky
$25,000 probably.

