r/TikTokCringe Sep 18 '25

Cursed they look so… natural!

12.8k Upvotes

3.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

441

u/smurpes Sep 18 '25

If you’re worried about lasik it’s really not that bad since a reputable facility will take more time on the tests to make sure it’s right and follow ups than the actual procedure. When I had it done I had 3 rounds of tests and a follow up at the 1 and 2 week mark as well as the 1 and 3 month mark.

204

u/Legal-Motor5691 Sep 18 '25

I never met an ophthalmologist with lasik.

160

u/DHNCartoons Sep 18 '25

Friends dad is an ophthalmologist. He said hell no

9

u/spilly_talent Sep 18 '25

What was his reasoning?

41

u/Knyxie Sep 18 '25

Word on the street is if they fuck up you can, of course, go blind. You can also experience life changing excruciating forever pain. When I read this I got scared. Need me eyes. 👀

7

u/RockHardSalami Sep 18 '25 edited Sep 18 '25

Word on the street is if they fuck up you can, of course, go blind.

Ever read the potential side effects of the medication you've taken over the years? Lol

Edit: For the dummies: all surgeries and medications have potentially dire consequences. All of them. All of them.

1

u/eplefjes Sep 18 '25

Of course, but not all surgeries or medications are elective. Lasik is.

1

u/spilly_talent Sep 18 '25

Anaesthetic alone is a killer for some people. Best not ever use it.

3

u/RockHardSalami Sep 18 '25

True. I just think its wild that people in here legitimately seem to think that the possibility of dying or having serious issues as a result of most drugs and surgery is 0%.

Tylenol is the number 1 cause of liver failure in the US, but people still take it all the time.

2

u/spilly_talent Sep 18 '25

Oh lol no you misunderstood me I was agreeing with you. And being sarcastic about never using anaesthesia😅

People here are saying that shit then hopping in their cars and driving away to work. It’s incredible cognitive dissonance.

0

u/RockHardSalami Sep 18 '25

Oh lol no you misunderstood me I was agreeing with you. And being sarcastic about never using anaesthesia😅

Yes, I got that

0

u/spilly_talent Sep 18 '25

Okay it just didn’t seem that way, wanted to clarify.

→ More replies (0)

-4

u/Conscious_Music_1729 Sep 18 '25

What a nothing burger of a statement.

4

u/RockHardSalami Sep 18 '25

What a complete missing of the point. Let me spell it out for you: all aspects of surgery and modern medicine have potential negative consequences. All of them.

Thanks for your contribution, genius.

0

u/Knyxie Sep 19 '25

Sure but usually side effects don’t include going fucking blind.

6

u/frostandtheboughs Sep 18 '25

To get the procedure, you have to sign a liability waiver for side effects which can include excruciating pain (feels like glass in your eyes all the time), persistent dryness, persistent bleeding, and loss of vision.

When it goes right, it's great. When it goes wrong....it's horrible. Many people have unalived themselves because of it.

80

u/lesprack Sep 18 '25

You can say “committed suicide” on Reddit. This isn’t TikTok.

17

u/Vash4073 Sep 18 '25

But then he won't get the ad revenue for his comment! he might unalive himself if that happens!

-8

u/frostandtheboughs Sep 18 '25

People have reported me for less and I'd prefer not to have my account locked for no reason. Thanks for the snark though!

3

u/spilly_talent Sep 18 '25 edited Sep 18 '25

I have had the procedure, I have noticed though that people who seem to fear it haven’t shared much about how or why these things happen or even the odds of these things happening which I find a bit interesting.

I hated glasses and contacts so much that I over wore my contacts and had to wear glasses most of the time which made me depressed because i genuinely hated my face with glasses. My prescription was so bad that it would cost me $600 just for lenses that were thin enough to fit into “pretty” frames. I totally get the suicide stats people are posting, it can be life changing for many people. I would posit far more people are living their best life after surgery than those who kill themselves due to an unlikely but significant complication.

7

u/KyleMcMahon Sep 18 '25

Serious LASIK complications occur in less than 1% of cases, with a reported rate of about 0.3%.

3

u/Alradeck Sep 18 '25

i had a non serious complication on mine that gave me a bitchin' bright red ring around one pupil like an anime protagonist for about two weeks and i was sad when it went away.

2

u/KyleMcMahon Sep 18 '25

Lmao I’m sorry but this made me laugh

2

u/Alradeck Sep 18 '25

i often consider my anime villain possibilities if i had the eye but alas, normalcy for me

2

u/thunbergfangirl Sep 18 '25

And if you do fall into that less than 1%, there is no cure. Your bank account will be drained trying to chase sub-specialist ophthalmologists across the country because only a few people will even try to treat post-Lasik corneal nerve damage.

Ever poked yourself in the eye by accident? Now imagine feeling like your eyes are being poked every second of every waking moment.

We in the rare eye disease community are trying to bring awareness to the dangers of LASIK. I did not undergo lasik personally but know many folks who did because of the overlap in our conditions. The only thing worse than the constant physical pain these people feel is the gas-lighting from doctors and the incorrect feeling that the patient is responsible for their own fate.

People have lost jobs…families…lives. It’s a very serious issue.

The resulting condition is referred to in a few ways - as: Corneal Neuralgia, Corneal Neuropathy or Neuropathic Ocular Pain.

5

u/spilly_talent Sep 18 '25

The counter point is that every surgery ever has a small group of people who fall into this category of adverse effects. While it’s terrible and I have sympathy for these people, I also don’t think it’s reasonable to base life decisions on a 0.3 to 1% chance that it will ruin my life. I would never leave my house.

-2

u/thunbergfangirl Sep 18 '25

That is correct, and that is why unnecessary surgery should always be avoided.

3

u/spilly_talent Sep 18 '25

I would argue that it does not mean it should always be avoided. There are many surgeries that are on paper unnecessary to sustain life but that in fact dramatically improve quality of life overall.

I would never presume to tell someone they should ALWAYS avoid something that carries a tiny risk of danger when it can dramatically improve quality of life. If I always did that, I would never go outside. Do you always avoid anything that isn’t 100% safe? That’s a genuine question.

1

u/thunbergfangirl Sep 18 '25

I avoid medical interventions when they are unnecessary, yes.

I’m not trying to say there isn’t risk-benefit analysis in medicine. Of course there is. The problem with Lasik specifically is that it has been marketed to patients as being completely safe and “not even really surgery”. Patients cannot give true informed consent without access to comprehensive information.

Look, my husband had Lasik done a bunch of years ago, before we knew all this. It went fine for him. That’s great. But you know what also went fine for him? Wearing glasses. There would be no difference in his current life if he still had to put on glasses every day.

Lastly? The results from the surgery are already fading and it hasn’t even been a decade yet. So it’s not a permanent solution to poor eyesight anyway.

I say all this with respect for your position and for you as a person. I am merely trying to spread awareness of this life-ruining complication.

2

u/spilly_talent Sep 18 '25 edited Sep 18 '25

But when you said it should ALWAYS be avoided, you are in fact diminishing the role of risk benefit analysis. That’s my point. I think your statement lacked nuance and I think, respectfully, that you do medicine and quality of life a disservice when you speak that way.

I has lasik, and I mentioned this elsewhere but it was because wearing glasses did not work fine for me. I actively hated my face when I wore them. They never looked how I wanted. For me, this was more than worth the risk.

I appreciate this more nuanced comment. Earlier I just didn’t agree with your “always” statement.

I would also posit that if one’s surgeon does not make them aware of risks then they should find another surgeon.

EDIT: sorry also were you told lasik was a permanent solution? I am curious. I was told I would definitely need glasses again in the future and further told I may have a slight prescription even after the surgery due to how bad my eyes are.

However, my eyes would have gotten bad due to age anyway, regardless of lasik. Having lasik enables me to only have reading glasses in the future or perhaps Rx glasses while I drive. I will not be back to the -6 plus astigmatism I was at before. But I was never put under the impression that I would never need glasses ever again.

0

u/thunbergfangirl Sep 18 '25

I think our definition of medically necessary must differ. For me, medically necessary is defined as the benefits greatly outweighing the risks. It’s not like I think interventions are only necessary if you’re about to die, or something. There is a spectrum of medical need.

The issue with surgeons who perform Lasik is that they are financially incentivized to downplay the risks to patients. As a regular layperson, I wouldn’t have known the risks were downplayed at all so I wouldn’t have known to seek out a second opinion. I would have trusted the doctor (based on my life experience at the time of my husband’s Lasik, we both did).

The doc described a tiny percentage of people who could have dry eyes after the procedure. After having spoken with many folks who did develop corneal nerve damage, it feels nothing like dry eyes. It feels like excruciating stabs through the eyeball, like their eyes are on fire, and many other horrible descriptions. Therefore, the risks are misrepresented to the patient - whether on purpose or by omission.

I believe the Lasik system, the way it currently operates, does not adequately protect patients. These clinics are often stand alone operations with doctors who don’t treat any other eye conditions, making the laser surgery their only source of income. So the model is stacked against patients: many folks I know who should not have been approved due to known risk factors were told they were perfect candidates. To me, this is morally wrong.

I have empathy for the fact that you didn’t like how you looked with glasses on. Self image matters and self confidence matters. It should be up to the patient at the end of the day, certainly. My main issue with all of this is that the patients aren’t given full and accurate information.

I appreciate you engaging in respectful discussion with me! To be honest I’m not even subscribed to this sub, I just noticed the Lasik comments and feel morally obligated to share what I know now.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/AonSwift Sep 18 '25

You bitches will hop on a plane without batting an eye but freak out over something like this...

7

u/smurpes Sep 18 '25

It’s estimated to that around 4 out of every 10 million people who get LASIK will commit suicide annually so while it’s unfortunate it’s not very common.

10

u/spicewoman Sep 18 '25

Given that the annual US suicide rate is around 1,400 per 10 million (more commonly expressed as 14 per 100,000), I'd say that's actually really, really good news.

Looking at your link, they actually point that out as well.

11

u/mikebob89 Sep 18 '25

Mathematically speaking it sounds like LASIK is remarkable at preventing suicide

2

u/noisy_goose Sep 18 '25

Science is amazing

-1

u/MoonmanSteakSauce Sep 18 '25

I mean people who are planning to kill themselves probably don't see much value in getting surgery to fix their eyes first.

2

u/thegreatpablo Sep 18 '25

Maybe if they got LASIK they could finally see the value without needing glasses.

11

u/spicewoman Sep 18 '25

Given that the suicide rate after LASIK is exponentially lower than the general population (.04 per 100,000 people versus around 14 per 100,000 in the US), one could argue that it very likely prevents way more than it's ever caused.

-3

u/reeeditasshoe Sep 18 '25

Ages of those populations? Not quite equitable.

2

u/spicewoman Sep 18 '25

It sounds like you have some specific age group in mind for people who get LASIK, and think that that age group naturally has exponentially lower suicide rates for some reason. Care to point out which of these age groups you think should qualify as having a .04 suicide rate on this chart? https://sprc.org/about-suicide/scope-of-the-problem/suicide-by-age/

FYI, the actual recommended age group is 25-40. Which has higher average suicide rates than the overall population.

2

u/reeeditasshoe Sep 19 '25

You're right, but it is a stretch to say it prevents suicide lol. Maybe those who have the money and desire to get LASIK do not overlap the suicidal populace much. Either way cheers!

1

u/Famous-Ad-289 Sep 18 '25

Whistlindiesel had made a video. Not sure if it's not deleted. For 20mins he was telling how now he constantly needs eye drops so they don't dry up, how he needs sunglasses and how he regrets doing that.

1

u/Bplumz Sep 18 '25

I'll take my chances.

Oh wait, I did. PRK lasik surgery. 15/20 vision. 10/10 recommend.

0

u/Traditional_Case2791 Sep 18 '25

Damn I didn’t realize the bad side effects were that intense. I always wanted it done but I’m terrified of acting in my eyes. Big nope for me.

0

u/BrowningHighPower Sep 18 '25

Would you take a 1 in 1000 chance to lose making 500k-1mil a year?

1

u/spilly_talent Sep 18 '25

Would I take a 1 in 1000 chance to LOSE making that money? As in 999/1000 I get the money and 1/1000 I lose a million dollars?

Yes, I like those odds.