Several contributors to this NG seem to have a problem with
any suggestion that Laserscope has an ethical or potentially legal
culpability in regard to their marketing of the PVP procedure.

First of all, Patrick, one of Laserscope's relentless cheerleaders,
should divulge to us whatever connection he has to the people who work
for this corporation. I believe he has referred to this in the past.

Second, emphasizing only "positive" information about a surgical procedure
is simply misleading. Patients, (the "significant minority") who don't
experience
the timely, wondrous results that Laserscope so blithely promotes would be
better served by a more forthcoming, comprehensive and genuinely honest
discussion of what to expect. In other words, if you are going through an
extended
period of urgency, pain, etc. one would understand it as normal, instead of
thinking
you were in some anomalous medical crisis with no resolution.

Third, Internet marketing, particularly medical marketing, needs to be
strictly
regulated. Some may not agree, and are, of course, free to express their
point of view.
But selling surgery as if it were just another consumer good or service is
the epitome
of cynicism and greed. It is clear that some of the posts on this NG and
communications
with Laserscope have influenced their decision to make their site more
accommodating
to the reality of the "significant minority" of patients who suffer with
extended recovery issues.
More of these kinds of  adjustments are still necessary.

Fourth..... hey, if you're tired of reading dissenting points of view, go
try and
change the U.S. constitution. There's no quota here on how many times
you can bring up any particular grievance. Maybe you'd be happy with an
amendment
to the bill of rights limiting the expression of  "unpopular" opinions!

Marcus