Since I have been accused by some people, to speak "without verifying", of "to infest" European Forum, and, of "to frighten" some users that due to my word, are forced to go away from the FORUM, I feel to make clarity my position.
I want specify that the discussion that I have opened is tightly personal and not tied up to the opinion of the other site member, or association, or of WORK Group.
The discussion will be open only to Hari, a patient that promotes the technique of MiniARK, opening of a new site http://www.miniarkdatabase.com.
Until now discussions on this matter are always ended on other roads, or have turned on useless fires. This time, I would want to try to avoid this end, and try to obtain something.

PLEASE: excuse me for the translation. please tell me If some point are not clare,

Dear Hari,
I believe that we have in common a thing: both we seek the truth on the MiniARK. However, there is a great difference: you assume your responsibility to promote a technique on a site. instead I don't want to assume any responsibility for the patients of my site . I want only them to know the two sides of medal.
Nevertheless i have some doubt about choice to open a new site that traces in everything and that of the Dr. Lombardi.
Opening of the site you define the mediacl class "arrogant". This affirmation, besides being an offense toward thousand of serious and professional physician that have worked a life to reach a position, puts on the same plan incompetent, and doctors that have built with their hands, that are devoted to their job with the soul and the heart.
How many doctors have you known for shooting these sentences on "medical class?"

The site web that you have opened constitutes a serious danger for the sick poor man that a beautiful day finds again in the world of the keratoconus. it's full of old info, others not shown, and some straight false.

But we proceed with order, and let's see on every matter point for point.

1) In homepage you say that "information are not understood to sell the technique."

How can be otherwise if the site is the same of whom sells the technique?

2) "... technique is falsely associated to the notion that the incisional surgery on keratoconus is harmful..."

How do you do to say that is "false?" Can you demonstrate the contrary ?
Here I have many email of famous doctors and teachers that sustain that the MiniARK is dangerous because the tissue is weak and above all because the results are unpredictable. (this means that it doesn't need only illude looking who is now happy but also who is not it).
I don't publish the many email because they are all equal and the opinion it is the same. Nevertheless of someone I have the authorization, and above all doesn't speak "for felt to say" or for "voice" but of real facts !

(Prof. Umberto Merlin): ".. I not perform since many years anymore the radial cheratotomies in the cheratocono because they cause a further weakening to an already weak cornea...".

(Prof. Severino Fruscella President Sitrac): "... it's a technique that don't have some scientific support. The aforesaid doctors practise a technique that not only lead to unpredictable results but, well more serious thing, can favor evolution of cheratocono because practiced cuts on cornea already weaken the structural plot of the cornea of for itself altered by the illness. Unfortunately I have visited different patients submitted to MiniARK that introduced, after having operation, a worsening of the clinical situation and a great difficulty to correct the defect of sight with the contact lenses...".

(Prof. Caesar Bisantis): "... respect miniRK (that I don't also practise , even if having been in the last years a supporter of this methodic for the correction of the myopia) not the practical also because it is really in the astigmatisms of that the reliability and predictable are reduced quite a lot and not only, but that after 5 - 6 years, since the processes of consolidation of cuts and level of the cornea, continue also after so long periods, you can obtain astigmatisms of opposite sign to that correct. I suppose that in irregular astigmatisms like keratoconus, problem must be emphasizes...".

3) The site is an exaltation of Dr. Lombardi Clinic(straight to also insert secretary curriculum...). You have forgotten that in their publication Dr.Lombardi writes"... on the base of the gotten results using the mini A.R.K., From Us invented." ???
This means that if you want to give a minimum of seriousness to that site you should remove every reference to Doctor that practises that technique. Or, for parity, should insert also the curriculum of the Dr. Abundance and his staff, as also in the LINK you add http://www.abbondanza.org
Apart fable that have divided their roads, the 1997 publications are signed by both, both actively practise the miniark in Italy from when it has been invented and the patients of my site indiscriminately belong to both the studies.

4) It's normal that the doctors Abbondanza and Lombardi insert in their site the testimonies of ONLY happy patients.
Do you intend to do the same? Or will you also open a section for Patient Dissatisfied in which will insert some topographies that we will send you?

Which serious professional does it have need to publish the testimonies of his patients? Only who has need to exhibit qualities it makes promotion.

5) CHARTS are an authentic brainwashing, with the objective to attach other techniques emphasizing all their defects, and promote miniark .

"Duration of the transplantation 10-12 years according to SITRAC ( 5-6 according to Jörg Krumeich)"

I have asked this many experts:

(Prof. Umberto Merlin): "... 21 years on over 500 cases. In the lamellar, if infections don't intervene illimitate!..."

(Prof. Cesare Bisantis): ".. personally I still follow patient operated from me more than twenty years and I find them perfect..."

(Prof. Vito De Molfetta)":... 20-25 years, even if with the advent of the EYE Banks hope can extend for a longer time also the life of the transplanted cornea

(Prof. Severino Fruscella President Sitrac): ".. happened me to visit many patients operated of cheratoplastica piercing 20-25 years before, they perfectly have a good vision and a transparent cornea

(Prof. G. Tassinari)":... I Follow patient 40 year-old distance from transplantation they still have a satisfactory visual function

(Bank of the Eyes Melvin Jones)"... we See transplanted corneas in good state 30 years ago. With the actual criterions of quality adopted from all the Banks of the Eyes a 30-40 year-old least duration he esteems..."

and to end. the doctor you quoted has also answered me:

(Dr. Jörg H. Krumeich): "... between the 12 and the 15 years ..."

Besides I am waiting "Australian Corneal Graft Registry Report" from Joyce Moore (Department of Ophthalmology-Australia) that it picks up over 14.000 transplantations. I will hold you adjourned.

The Dr. Then Lombardi speaks of Recidive to the 30% of the patients (few weeks ago have declared straight 40-45% on this same site).
Let's see what it is also said speaking of this:

(Dr. Jörg H. Krumeich): "... In about 4000 penetrating transplantations in my experience The have seen recurrence of the cone in 2 caseses within the graft. I know it is possible but rare very..."

For the mathematics, we are speaking of 0.05% anything else other than 45% !!!

Where Do you take from these statistics?

(Prof. Cesare Bisantis) it is possible if the transplanted button is small in comparison to the extension of cheratoconus so it's a complicance of not correct choice and surgical execution

6)
Dr. Lombardi has declared that the experiments with the riboflavina did them in 84 in Moscow with Fiodorov, and they showed that the cornea grows old.
How come he has purchased the C3R machine?
a motive to widen the bill?

7) Another important point, is the concept to have for MiniARK.
I'm perfectly according with you to think that MiniARK is an "option" to consider. However, publicize the MiniARK like "heaven" it is not correct, and I refer to sentences that can be found in site:
"..A great conquest to eliminate the Cheratocono without traumas and without risks."
"...In the 95% of the cases, "Asymmetrical Cheratotomia Radiale" (if correctly performed) it is decisive for Cheratocono..."
"...the surgical application of such technique has suffered such an evolution (nearly sees the extreme simplicity and the nonexistent risk of such surgical technique)..."
"...he succeeds so to stop the evolution of the illness with the maximum refractive result ..."
"...in 2 minutes and in local anesthesia, it returns a perfect sight to the patient, without having thinned cornea, without having grafted him a tissue of another person and without complications of some type..."

Without risks? decisive? maximum refractive result ? without complications? it is not advertising deceptive this?
We have asked explanations on a patient from him operated , that has shown topographical maps in which there is an evident worsening .
As always. SILENCE! NO ONE WORD!!!
And of the discontents Forum keralens users ? The percentages of "it happened they seem me rather distant from 95%.

Do we want to speak of terrorism toward the other techniques:
"...what the corneal lenses worsen the cheratocono it is by now a consolidated concept."
"...it is not only able to go out of the tunnel: "contact lenses- further corneal staving in - transplantation of cornea..."
"...It is not possible, in fact, to guarantee its taking root in the 100% of the cases and, in the unlucky case of a rejection vascolarizzazione another transplantation would be impossible and the eye would be therefore irremediably lost..."

Lost eye? according to impossible transplantation?
What is it? an horror film?

8 ) Do we want to speak about Lombardi curriculum ? We have more times (3 time here!) asked where has gotten the title "Prof".
Always getting the silence. Since we don't see any motive for not to answer this authorizes us to think badly.
In the Italian university environment he would not have called Teacher, because' it doesn't have the qualification to the free docenza (abolished however in the '68) and' never state entrusted of an university course. It is able' to call him "prof" his neighbor, that doesn't probably distinguish the trust of the title of a course from other activities' of university docenza as the exercises or the seminars in progress of which the responsibility' is for others.

Besides he use "prof." but it doesn't say of what (he can wrote "prof. of eye surgery", but he doesn't write it). from us it is considered few serious and the real prof hold him to distance.

The State Council said that they limitedly had right to title of prof to the period in which they had the contract of teaching, and reporting subject they were teachers, thing that the dott. Lombardi never says.
In Japan when a teacher retires loses the title of prof....

>> 1997 initialed Protocol of search and experimentation of personal projects among the Dr. Massimo Lombardi and the Cuban Society of Retinosi Pigmentosa.

When he quotes the contract he wrote "dott." and not as Prof.

>>> 1978-1980 Researcher university in the Oculistic Clinic of the university of Chieti.

I'm perplexed to the fact that says to have been "researcher" university from 1978 to the 80, since such figure was introduced only in August 1980 , and nobody was able to become it before November 1980 (law n° 382 of 1980)

The honors for "exceptional worths" they tell me few, because are not specified

Other perplexities I have her on the technique and on his execution.

10) "... he intervenes with a varying number from 3 to 12 incisions than no more than 2 mms of length." (Journal of Refractive Surgery (04-05/1997)
"...Such incisions can vary in the number from 1 up to 7 .." (same year!!! Experiences Year XII n.1, 1997 )
In your site you write".. from 1 to 10 .."

Are we speaking of science? or about Bingo?
Even more amusing then it is to know, that there are some patients that have a number of incisions great than declared officially .
How many cuts does Norbert have your friend?
and besides I have seen the photos with the incisions.
do they seem you long photo maximum 2 mms?

11) "... In the Asymmetrical Cheratotomia Radiale, used for correcting the Cheratocono, the microincisionis are performed only in the secto from 30° to 270°..."

there people that also have cuts in the superior part? what is difference with the normal radial cheratotomia for myopia?

12) "... In case of bilateral pathology we normally operate the eye under worse conditions for first, postponing to once following that best."

FALSE. We have the majority of cases in which have been operated both the eyes. Straight someone has been "forced" to operate both the eyes for "to avoid a de-stabilization"

13) ".. indications to mini A.R.K. are: .. KC type I and KC type II (only selected cases) " (max 60 diottries)

FALSE. We have patients that had MiniARK has also done more than 70 diottries and therefore well over the KC type II

14) "... with the final result of a progressive corneal increasing, up to that an average of 40 microns ...".

Is not demonstrated in any publication the increase thickness due to MiniARK.
Above all, if the incisions throw the cornea, from my studies (what they include science of constructions, theory of structures, statics of the constructions, elastic and inelastic deformation) I don't succeed in understanding in base to what physical reaction the thickness middly increases of 40 microns (and more..??!?).

15) it is not me clear, finally, in base to what reaction a central leucoma it would disappear after 2-3 years from the incisions.

Please, note that I don't have any competence to technically judge the MiniARK. We waiting the declarations of the University of Siena (or of anybody else center) before being able to express objective evaluations.

Some word finally on the PATOGEN AGENT (if you want to speak about this)
I have already made some declaration and I don't retire my words.
We could be to laugh for a week with all the tales that I know speaking of current underground water , amalgame, magnetic flows, insulating mattress.
Nevertheless, have laugh enough and I prefer instead of reaching something more serious.

16) when we have the great discovery public??
The Dr. Lombardi declares"... After 5 years of intense job of search and experimentation, in January of 2004 we have finally succeeded in defining the "biological factor" of cheratocono..."

It means that GEN '04 - 5 years = GEN '99
and he writes: "We have begun therefore to examine with particular equipments the patients affections from cheratocono and, to the confirmation of the tests (what you/he/she is revealed of 100% till now) of what we suspected, we have been able to begin supplemental income from the State causal therapy...".

We are almost to GEN 2006. From 7 years from the discovery, I don't see any motive to keep on hiding or to do the mysterious ones.

17) The Dr. Lombardi says that the PA can be infected.
Well, my girlfriend is ready to sacrifice in name of the truth.
Make me know how I can infect her my PA (over the things that we already do: -)) and we see if also she will have cheratocono.

18 ) The Dr. Lombardi declares to succeed in finding the agent patogeno with particularly machines and to kill it with low voltage.
This time I sacrifice my face.
I am ready to go to Rome with 2 bus and 100 people.
If Doctor will find those that are really affections from cheratocono (without use topographies), I am ready to publish in homepage a photo of me that kiss his feet and to publish all of my excuses.

Dear Scaistar,
This is exactly the type of repetitive, angry discussion I was attempting to avoid by setting up the Mini Ark database in the first place. Those who know anything of Mini Arks past will know that all of these topics have already been argued to death on a number of different forums.

But if we must address them again here is my standpoint:

I guess you are referring to me when you make your opening statement… it would be easier if you just refer to me by name.
The events which you speak of concern the publication on the German forum of a letter you sent to one of its administrators (It is now clear that your words were never intended to be made public but they have become common knowledge none the less).
You spoke of finding a ‘hook’ in the German forum and then proceeded to denigrate Mini Ark and prof. Lombardi… of course this is entirely your right as the letter was never supposed to be seen. But you spoke of very definitive negative conclusions and as we have seen these have now found their way into our mainstream forums.
This event was closely followed by the publication of parody Mini Ark images on the French forum… I know that you have no responsibility for what is posted on foreign forums but your support for this move was overtly obvious. I wonder how quick you would find the humor if I posted the same sort of images on your forum but used contact lenses as a base for the joke?
You see it is not Mini Ark or Prof. Lombardi that are solely effected by this sort of action but more so his patients. We have worked long and hard to find a way out of the KC jungle and whether you support the concept or not we still deserve respect and support.
I do not, as you have suggested, accept responsibility for the patients on my site… I have gone to great lengths to try and offer only information… I do not presume to think for anyone.
My choice to open my site was done for purely personal reasons… I just thought it would be a positive move to collect all the information together in one place so as it could be debated over and then ultimately accepted or rejected. I have said this time and time again… but obviously not loud enough!!!
Again, I agree that at this moment in time much of the sites contents mirror that of prof. Lombardi’s… this is a natural progression as the majority of information I have was authored my him.
As has been continually stated this operation has only two main supporters… the data will obviously been infused with the opinions of these doctors.
Again this is the purpose of the database so that in the future it might grow to encompass a much broader spectrum of views.
You have obviously visited my site… but unfortunately it seems this was some time ago as the details that you point out where removed some time ago.
I agreed with you that my personal views were not appropriate for the homepage as this is the first thing people see and my words may have influenced the way they viewed the site as a whole.
I still stand by every word I wrote… my contention is again a personal one. I was lied to and mislead from the beginning of my keratoconus journey… both intentionally and also through ignorance of the facts.
I have the utmost respect for those doctors and researchers who roll up there sleeves and address the problems we have head on. I have met and corresponded with many that I would place in this category. But I have also had to contend with the opposite and I see no reason why I should extend my blind faith to someone just because he wears a white coat and has spent a great amount of time at medical school.
In my opinion respect is earned, it is not a free gift that comes with a medical license.
My family has been involved with medicine all of my life… so my perspective is one that stretches outside of the world of keratoconus.
You say that my site represents a ‘… serious danger’ to the average KC sufferer that is unlucky enough to stumble onto it (Thanks again for your supportive words).
This comment has me scratching my head… the information contained in the site is NOT mine it is freely available to anyone who cares to take the time to track it down. All I have down is eliminate the need to search for hours on the internet.
I have made numerous statements that the information is not to be considered medical advice and I have advised viewers to contact their own medical professionals to discuss the data.
Some of the data is indeed old, the fact that you believe some of it to be ‘… straight false.’ is totally your opinion and as stated you are more than entitled to it.
In exactly the same way you are entitled to voice your opinions regarding corneal graft and the use of rigid hard lenses... many of these contentions I find ' straight False'.
The database is a BEGINNING of the translated information that I have collected… it is intended to be added to and revised. Already I have made a number of changes to the information I originally posted as new details have come to light.
For example I posted information regarding a new incisional treatment for glaucoma in England. At first I posted it because it mentioned that Keratoconus was also treated with this procedure… upon further inquiry I have been informed that the attending surgeons now believe it to be detrimental to an already weak keratoconic cornea… a fact that I have ALSO posted. I have just translated and posted a negative review from the Swiss medical establishement (Yes it is a few years old but I included it non the less).
I’m afraid that you have not read any of my previous posts for if you had you would know that I am not a doctor and yet here I see question after question that I am more than under qualified to answer.
Of course I had to rationalize these topics before I made my decision to have Mini Ark but my methods of reasoning and yours I’m sure will be very different. Mine where based on speaking to ex patients and questioning doctors… it wasn’t so much the replies that I got but rather the attitude and lack of substantial data to back their passionate rejection of this technique that eventually drew me to consider it.
So I will answer your questions as best I can:

1) I made the statement that ….’the information is not intended to sell the technique’ because that is truthfully my intention.
Now that it is online I have some people telling me that it is ‘stupid’ and ‘derivative’…. I’m not sure exactly what it is that people wanted me to include in a database of mini ark articles and information. Did you want ME to write these articles? Did you want me to leave a space wherever the name Lombardi or Abbondanza was supposed to appear? At no point do I suppose to tell anyone to undergo Mini Ark… I just present the same information that I had at my disposal when I was looking for and alternative option.
Prof. Lombardi has never at anytime contacted me to change or post anything on the site. Although I will surely ask him to provide updated data in the future.
I built the site without his knowledge and out of respect for his work I contacted him the day before it went online… he said it was entirely my project and I could continue as I see fit.
I also contacted Dr. Abbondanza at this time to explain why it was that the site had such a definite Lombardi influence. But as I say, as it grows and more data is collected it can expand to encompass all that have been operated with the technique.
I paid for the domain name and built the site myself... it has been a long hard task as I am not a website designer (As is obvious) But it is one that I felt I needed to complete. It is far from perfect but with the support I have recieved from a few of my KC friends (Some of which totally disagree with the concept of ARK) I hope that it will evolve into something worthwhile.

2) Again the comment you refer to has been gone from my site for some time now… but again I stand by it. I agree, It was not appropriate for the homepage.
The notion that incisional surgery is not counterproductive is of course a personal opinion… you are right I am not a doctor and I apologize for stating my personal belief (Although if I am to be asked to not quote prof. Lombardi then it may be my only option… I could of course quote other doctors, as you have, but then who is it that judges them..?)
I am happy that you have at your disposal the ‘Real facts’ …. And your list of doctors is indeed impressive. But it is a little short… I have many more doctors whom I have contacted that say the exact same thing. Everywhere you look on the internet you will find example after example of doctors telling us a big NO to refractive surgery regards keratoconus. I’m not sure why you published these as this is a point that has never been in contention.
But it is of interest to see you mention Prof. Merlin and his statement:
(Prof. Umberto Merlin): ".. I do not perform since many years anymore the radial cheratotomies in the cheratocono because they cause a further weakening to an already weak cornea...".

I believe that prof. Merlin is one of the few doctors to have actually tried mini ark… perhaps you should ask him where it was he studied this technique before he thought it safe to use on his own patients? Surely no matter how great the surgeon a detailed course of training would have been undertaken?

(Prof. Umberto Merlin):
‘It’s not true that after mini ark it’s not possible to have a transplant…’

If the above statement is true then WHY is not mini ark at least considered pre graft… why are those on graft waiting lists not even informed of its existence? What is there to lose? Even a 50% success rate would mean that half of chronic Kcer's could retain their original cornea.

(Prof. Severino Fruscella President Sitrac): ‘Unfortunately I have visited different patients submitted to MiniARK that introduced, after having operation, a worsening of the clinical situation and a great difficulty to correct the defect of sight with the contact lenses...".

Perhaps you could ask the professor to get these ARK patients to contribute to my database so that we can all compare the results… would it not be interesting to see both sides of the problem?

(Prof. Caesar Bisantis): I too have contaced this doctor in the past and he told me very much the same thing. At least he’s consistant!!

3) Again with the same question!!!… My site was NOT intended as a shrine to prof . Lombardi!!! It reflects a lot of what he has said because that is the bulk of the information I have. Had I been operated on by Dr. Abbondanza then I’m sure the site would look quite different. Also one of the main intentions of the site is to provide access to this information for English speaking kc sufferers… you as an Italian may be used to seeing this information but it far more difficult if you are English speaking.
You are also totally wrong in saying that I have also added prof. Lombardi’s secretary’s curriculum… I guess you refer to Silvia Micarelli, if you had bothered to read her profile you would see that she is Prof. Lomabrdi’s surgical assistant.
She has a vast knowledge of all things concerned with mini ark and keratoconus and was present during my personal operation. She is far more that someone that passes the instruments and mops the doctors brow and as such I felt she more than warranted inclusion.
Again this profile section was included more for the benefit of English viewers that have directly asked who are the people behind this treatment.
Also to repeat… I have contacted dr. Abbondanza and informed him of my situation. I have always had an open line of communication with him and although we differ on some points he has stated that he is more concerned with his work than politics. We agree to disagree.

4) As I stated above I intend to insert ALL verifiable testimonials that I am sent. I welcome the balance of those who are not happy with their results. I have been in contact with a patient that is in this category and has decided to try other methods after his ark to treat his KC. If he contacts me I will surely post his story… the same goes for anybody else out there that is interested in sharing there experiences.
You say you will send me topographies of your dissatisfied mini ark patients… this is a noble gesture but one fill of negativity.
If it makes the patient happy I will post it as I will any additional updates from his doctor (You must agree that whoever operated has to be able to defend these results… so again we can all see ALL the information and decide for ourselves).
Why are you not as quick to send me the results of members who have had great results? Each and every one of the questions you have set out here are negative… you never once speak of the prospect that there may in fact be those of us that are HAPPY with our results.
That is unless we are being accused of being paid to heap praise on the Lombardi eye clinic or that we are being tricked into having good results. The Prof. is a good surgeon but I doubt that he is good enough to cure keratoconus merely through the power of suggestion.
You say that no serious health professional would publish testimonials from his patients, and that if they did then the only reason is self promotion. I must remember this statement the next time I surf the net…

5) As regards the charts… they are a direct translation of those that appear in Italian. I do not seek to promote them as rock solid certainties but rather they are the OPINION of one doctor.
His name appears on the charts and if you disagree with his statements then you are welcome to disregard them.
If you feel you are being brainwashed by them and feel that you are incapable of discerning what you believe and what you don’t then maybe I should have added that you owe me 1000 euro at the bottom of the chart… (you can send me a cheque whenever you like.
Also this is again but one chart… it is the only one I have at the moment but if any doctor wishes to debunk these results then please have them send me the relevant information.
Your next comment is great news… that the corneal graft lasts for, on average, 25-40 years!!!… the statistic that we see everywhere, the 96% success rate for keratoconus, has been confirmed by all these doctors you have mentioned.
That means keratoconus needs only disrupt the lives of 4% of the KC population!!! But of course the result is not so… The question has always been how do we define success. Ask someone who has had PK and then ask a doctor who performs it… I’m sure their answers will be very different.

6) You speak about Prof Lombardi’s comments regarding cross-linking at the Fyodorov Institute, that he stated concern that the process in effect ages the cornea.
I did not know that he has purchased a C3R machine and have no idea as to his motives. I must speak to him about this when we next meet? You on the other hand have again only seen dark motives and declare that his actions are fueled solely by greed. I assume you have spoken to him in great length about this topic to reach such a conclusion.

7) I publicize nothing… I have merely reprinted in an accessible format information that has been readily available for years.
I have never said that mini ark is a ‘heaven’ sent cure. I know both the doctors have repeatedly said that it is not a cure… the extracts that you use are not my words.
It’s a shame you didn’t read my site because the only words that are mine appear in the history page.
The closing statements are the only personal written input I have in the site. And I state that my view can appear too ‘rosy’ I apologize if the majority of you feel that I should remain totally unbiased but my results have been great and I felt that somewhere I needed to say this.
Of course the balance will come when the legions of unhappy patients you believe exist come forward.
You speak of terrorism toward other forms of treatment… and false advertising. I believe to question and argue a contentious issue is far from terrorism. The posting of images specifically created to draw ridicule to a treatment… now that to me is premeditated manipulation of authority. Any first time viewer to this would automatically associate mini ark with nonsense. I know that you did not post these particular images on the French forum but I was just making the point in the broader sense.

I’m sorry but of all the arguments put forward concerning Ark this has to be my favorite. I remember arguing for weeks over this exact same issue on another forum. A fact that I am now ashamed of. Why did I waste so much valuable time?
It has to be a very lonely argument that has to resort to debating what the doctor calls himself!!!
Who cares? He can call himself whatever he likes as far as I’m concerned as long as he fix’s my eyes. This is petty politics… search the phone book in Rome and then get back to me when you have convinced all that unlawfully use the title Prof. to rescind it.
The only valid point that did arise from my previous argument was that people may be deceived to think that ‘prof’ Lombardi is somehow more able than he actually is merely due to his title.
In my case I could care less but there you go… others may feel differently, But if this is the only thing that sways your decision you really haven’t researched enough.
I have seen prof. Lombardi’s qualifications and unless he has a secret secretary that is great with Photoshop, I see no reason to disbelieve their authenticity.
I take it you have also seen these same documents?
Interesting fact about professors in Japan though… I didn’t know that. You never know when information like that will come in handy.

9) Looks like you missed this one… time for a coffee.

10) No, I did not write ‘1 to 10’ incisions on my site. These are not my words I simply reproduce them for you to use against me.
I truly do not know why there is a discrepancy in numbers… this is not my field of expertise. Maybe as time went on it was thought that more incisions where necessary… I really have no clue as to the reason.
Why do you mention Norbert here? Does the fact that he has had mini ark and is in contact with me a threat to you? I can see of no possible reason why it would be? Unless of course you want me to say that he had a high number and then that would afford you some satisfaction? I have meet Norbert and his wife and they are very good people… I cannot remember if I asked him how many incisions he had but if I had of done I certainly wouldn’t make an issue of it… if you find this amusing then you have a very strange sense of humor. We have the amount of incisions needed to do the job… no more no less.
I’m glad you have seen the Mini Ark photos… as you have been very vocal in the past that they do not exist. And furthermore you have stated that no one would post them as they are too ashamed of the result. Here we finally has the beginning of a gallery and you are still not happy… you have found fault with the incision length merely by viewing a photograph. Rather than thanking the patients involved for sharing their data.
Of course at a later date when you have had the images checked by the FBI you would be more than entitled to dismiss them.

11) 12)13)14)15) I’m sorry but these questions are intended for someone with vastly more scientific knowledge than me… and I expect you.
Of course I considered each of these before undergoing Ark but I did so in my own way. I did not limit myself to numbers… instead I asked questions of ex patients, I asked questions of doctors and finally I weighed up the results. Many have said I was crazy to risk my sight when so much opposition to the procedure is evident. But it was the lack of conviction and ignorance to keratoconus in general that finally lead me to my decision.
I did not meet or speak to prof. Lombardi until well over a year of personal study into the procedure. When I did finally meet him I was pleasantly surprised to find him as direct and politically incorrect as he appeared online. He had a passion for all that he said… I have sat in his waiting room for hours as he affords each of his patients the same consideration. That is not to say that some that have visited him are of a differing opinion… I can only speak of personal experience.

Again you speak of ridiculing the PATOGEN AGENT treatment… with total disregard for those that are experimenting with its effectiveness.
It was a totally new concept to me… I have had to open my mind to all sorts of different possibilities if I am to believe in its worth.
But I am trying it and have had varying results… Just a note, that the issue of amalgam lead poisoning is not restricted to this treatment. It is a source of continued international concern and debate from both points of view.
Again I find the things you find humorous very strange...
As I said it is a treatment that, although far from based on new principles, is very new to our culture. Some years ago acupuncture was also deemed a practice only for witch doctors and yet today we have acupuncture clinics in major hospitals. People always fear and ridicule what they do not understand.

16) You ask ME when this treatment is to be made public!? How should I know? From what I understand the process in Italy for legitimizing these types of homeopathic treatments are non existent or at the very least impossible to achieve with any haste.
But you will have to contact the clinic if you want more information… oh but you did and didn’t get any, sorry I forgot.

17) I find your comments here beyond taste. I personally have not made a firm decision regards the effectiveness of the pathogen treatment. I hope to set up a section on my database so that we can all compare results.
I hope your girlfriend never has to endure the kind of emotional and physical torture that goes along with KC… I know this was again just another of your jokes, just bad taste in my opinion.

18) I hope you enjoy your trip to Rome… Hopefully you get the results you require and can again dance on the decision of we foolish few that made the decision to have ARK.
You are a man that it seems sees the world in absolutes… but nothing ever is.
Am I happy with my decision to have ark… yes, it has exceeded all my expectations… is there room for improvement... yes, its an ongoing process... are there those that are not happy with ARK… yes, there are… and their reasons are various.
If you want the reason to be that Prof. Lombardi is an evil man that manipulates the innocent then so be it. But I find it much more productive to discuss WHY they are unhappy and then seek too remedy the situation.

I hate this kind of discussion…it make me feel like a humorless old man that has nothing better to do with his time than rant on the internet.
So to close I say this… miniarkdatabase.com is nothing more than a collection of articles, images and reports regarding mini ark. You are all welcome to contribute, to inform me of any errors and to provide your testimonies …
I cannot alter the text of reports that were not written by me but I can provide alternative views by publishing opposing doctors views.
You can tell me that my site is 'a stupid joke' (as some already have ) or you can offer your support... at the end of the day I'm nobody of importance, I'm just a guy who had keratoconus that now dosen't.
I have no influence on the way that popular opinion swings... the KC world turns by itself.

I'm sorry this text is not in italian but I accidentally erased the original Italian version my wife typed… and now shes not speaking to me

Scaistar I really don’t think people are so interested that it warrants setting up this little playground for us both to throw sand in each others faces.
My advice is to leave ALL sections of your forum open and let people have their say.

Best Regards,
Hari Navarro

The sound of silence tells me that we have at last reached a point where we can disagree with respect (or you are waiting for that vital piece of information to unleash on me ).
New data is being presented that brings great hope to our Keratoconic community... Reports that Pk is becoming a less sort after option are welcome and a whole new world of treatment options are gaining credibility daily.
Finally we are being treated to the information we deserve... Our options MUST be vast as we as patients are so diffrent from each other.
Mini Ark may be my choice of treatment but whos to say that cross-linking is not yours or any other of the various treatments?
A little over a year ago I didn't have the treatment options I have today... Its not as if they appeared from nowhere... they have always been an option.
Its just that it has taken some very loud voices to get them to who needs them most.... us.
You can says that trials needed to be had... that tests where required and results confirmed and triple confirmed... But I for one dont need a monkey to tell me whats best for me.
I totally agree and see your point that to progress we do not have to sacrifice ourselves... but you must see that the decision to step into these brave new treatments are not taken lightly... that we all see and hear the distrust some have in our decision (The pictures of RK gone wrong posted here keep me up at night)... but I have faith in the result.
In MY case the outcome has been fantastic...
I would assume that even Prof Lombardi would disagree with me (His attention to detail and passion for perfection is not just my hollow words of praise) ... He is not a magician and he cannot alter nature. But he can, to a degree try and work with it...
I have to be honest with you Scaistar... I have had many of the same doubts as you, but I have spoken to some very fine people regarding aspects of Prof. Lombardis work and have been opened to an entire world that I did not know existed. I could speak for hours about the things that I have been shown... but it is of little use if you are on another path.
You have faith in the doctors that you entrust to sponsor this site... That they can direct you to the answer to your Keratoconus.
I have chosen Prof Lombardi's approuch and have already seen the result... you can argue to how long it will last. But I would find it much more interesting to argue how it has lasted at all.
Dont limit yourself to any one option... (Some of them may be a million miles from what you have been taught to accept).
I truelly believe we are on the eve of killing Keratoconus... but it will take a concerted attack from all sides.
It not a case of saying Mini Ark is the cure all of KC... in my opinion its more a situation of using the BEST tools at our disposal to attack the problem.
Its not a black and white problem,
Regards,
Hari

Hari excuse me for delay, But answer, and quote, and then translate, asked me for most time, and this week was not the best. And after who is in a hurry?
Besides... I still waited for some answer and the Australian register, that however they not have changed anything.



Only one of accusations were yours and from Sajeev, the other ones came from other directions. And however we have clarified that my words were not for "to infest" the German Forum (for your information I cannot even enter that Forum).



Besides not having responsibility for the parody created by the webmaster French joker, believe me, not even it is not connected to me. Since I have been having Adsl from a week I could not see clip and audio from his sie, the only thing I saw it was a beautiful young girl in top: lol: Because of the language then I have also had difficulty to understand that it dealt with a parody:?
And however I don't support (despite I like a lot to joke and I do here also often it, and know well Photoshop). I have quoted here French only for the fact that on 300 affiliate nobody has made the MiniARK (probably, contrarily what you think, influence is important). I don't believe that on 300 there is not a only one subject able to think with his Head and to decide to make few hours of trip.



I perfectly arrange with you when says that we have the two different think. You has built a site with the idea of a "Container". Without worrying about the true news, false, old or not verified. You put together only in a showcase. Clearly, being of part (by circumstance) curtains to bring only who is for the technique and not the about ten mail of the contrary (what you says to have) doctors, but I wish me that the site grows in both the directions.
Instead my idea of site is that of moral support, to the patient that from one day to the other one it is found to be "sick rare", and it finds again him in the jungle of the medical health. What to do? If you go to Rome-MI = MiniARK fast and ready, if you go from the rest of other oculists = nothing to be done... LAC and, after, transplantation, if you go to Bologna = INTACS, if you go to Siena "perhaps" X-linking, if you go to Germany circular keratotomy, etc..
For this motive, the site must bring all the information (Pro and not) but at the same time must give material for reflect (until demonstrate contrary I have never told anybody "don't Do mini-ark". I say only "inform as well you can on this techniques and on the alternatives!".



perhaps misunderstands me. I am an Architect, and the most famous architects of the earth are not University Teachers. The famous Frank Lloyd Wright (that of "house on the fall") was a donkey to school straight. And, since I have had ago a contract with the University in Naples up to a few months I'm convinced even more about what I affirm. Despite this I have met exceptional (of international level) teachers, with which job now out of the university. And the same I think about medical field. For this I condemned you to generalize on "medical class" (note: I have already changed 3 oculists => dogs, but i don't stop my research).



ohh. I don't understand then because you have not also published the other half. Instead of defining the class medical "arrogant" you could simply open a section with the mails of whom is Against, and to leave the possibility to appraise the 2 position to the visitor (but justly, he is born for learning and there is the whole time to modify. After all, a site is always "under construction").



I have done the same and I have not had Any refusal. Simply the explanation of the REASON he doesn't consider the technique.



I don't hold "Stupid" the initiative to open a site on the miniark. But when I have opened him the first time I have found him "ridiculous" (consideration My personnel). However, I see that some things you have understood her and you confirm, others you have corrected, and the good intentions to change road are there.
Then if you allow me, I would want to add me to the list of "friends of KC" that can help to make evolve the site.



Beh, should ask also me as a doctor learns to make the transplantation, as learns to put the Intacses, as learns to dose the UVA rays ... and thing has happened to those that have done these operations to the beginning.
The same I wonder me where the first ones are operated of the years 90 of MiniARK when the 2 doctors have started to experiment this new technique.
If then we now want to compare a new-graduate that (justly) it would ever start making cuts on the KC (for bad school and for inexperience) to a doctor that a (good or not) having been following ago now this type of operations for 20 years... it is clear that cannot be gotten the same results.
But do you believes that the 2 Dr. are they the only ones to know the correct recipe?
do you believes indeed that none of the other experts both able to read the publication of the Journal. of 97 and to repeat the same cuts?



Simple. because a patient that has put in attend list, has a cornea very thinned. And even if it was a Dr. PRO-MINIARK, could he ever recommend a technique that must be performed on eyes with at least 400micron and to the I-II phase???



could be a good addition to the road in Siena. I remember however that the "happy" dare speak and to publish maps (not even everybody). "unhappy" instead they don't speak. Apart Simone that has reached an extreme condition instead the others... it needs to force them (and I don't see for what motive I must to force them to collaborate).



do you think is more important publish curriculum of Lombardi assistant rather than opinions of the other Profs. and Doctors that you has contacted?
This will surely do you happy, but it is clear that in the optics of whom visits the site for the first time, you lose credibility.'



No. I have asked only to know if will publish only the happy patients. In our GALLERY we have published all maps, negativite or less. it's clear that if the patients will give the permission, you can publish that of your site, happy or less.
I concern to your Happy results I have expressed more times my opinion. But "my opinion" or "your" don't help anybody. It is not that the objective that interests me to reach. The opinions are personal.



We have in the site doctors that make PK and patients that are submitted to transplantation. I don't see where the problem is. They tell all the positive and negative sides without any censorship.
I would like to know however, in base to what parameters you has chosen to publish Only Those Charts instead of others. And if you has decided to publish her because it finds your full approval, or if instead doesn't agree with that data, but has wanted to publish her same (for Love for Information).



have simply reached that conclusion because I have felt with my ears from Dr. Lombardi " this "stupid" experiments with the riboflavina we did them in the '84 with Fiodorov..."
And then I find Dr. Lombardi that arrives on the FORUM to publicize after a long silence (who knows why?) that in January it will begin Xlinking treatment .
Now. it is for money, or instead the Dr. Should Lombardi admit (at least once so much) that he is been wrong on this technique, or that the experiments that it probably did with Fiodorov were not correct (or is the discourse of the skill level worth for the MiniARK only?)



Once more they come me doubts on the whether to decide to publish only certain aspects of the story, and in fact I am not the only one to have noticed the lack of impartiality.
I am not Me to Believe that there are patient "unhappy" persons!!!. however we will see to throw out for the equilibrium of which you speaks.



In fact I condemn both the positions. I would prefer to speak of certain data and not of nonsense or parodies (but even of false data)..



NO. Absolutely No. It is not true that whoever can call as he wants. The law regulates titles (and punishes usurpation of title).
Once more we have different positions. To you doesn't interest to know who has before, it is enough for you to know that it will resolve problem.
instead, I need to know to whom will put my Important eyes. And I need also know why you become PROF, and above all I need to know why write on my FORUM many chatters but doesn't answer when for well 3 times in 6 months I set Simple question "where you has become Prof."
I don't have need to see wall titles (for you information I have been A Whole Day to Dr. Lombardi clinic on February 15 th 2005 therefore I don't speak for "voices" and I can return there when i want).
Mine "analysis" part from the simple visit on a page web. And' obvious that if I feel necessary in the future, I will go on with more serious actions (in Spain the newscast never speaks of forgeries arrested doctors?).
I am not doing anybody accusation (at this moment). I am asking only an information without understanding because I cannot Have An Answer


no. simply I must sleep more



You sustain to have studied, and to be informed before. Evidently I have studied better if I go to notice certain "small discordances", also not belonging to the FBI.
I have simply thrown out Norbert because in one email he wrote me to have a number of incisions Abundantly Superior To How much Officially Declared , and this hurt me not little. Well, if you are able, you add to your site "here contained information would be able not to respect the real execution of the technique (as is written on ice cream box, or of chocolates to say that the image would be able not to mirror content).
I attend to also see photo and maps of Norbert (considering that it is your friend) to understand the actual state of the MiniARK (because now read documents has become useless. we are speaking of technic that have no documentation).



What a pity. I wish me that at least as promoter of the site, face so that to widen the information, and even to find answer to these questions.



Ohh.... we finally come to a beautiful point: "the ignorance." Also I have continually set questions, and I have very often seen lost faces, like if i'm speaking alien matters. I have seen patient to speak of perfect sight, and then I have found old messages in which still complained about defects; I have seen patient to speak and challenge me on the 10/10 visus, and then to talk in other places of problems in the use of LAC, has seen patient to declare to have increases thickness of many microns, and then I discover they have no topography in hand; I have discovered of patients that used 2 different usernames, and with one they spoke badly about Dr.Lombardi and with the other he thank it to have given back the sight (if you want I can show this post).
You have really right! is not guilt of the doctors, but above all of the patients.



Certain . it's your experience. And there are many others.
But does you have idea instead of how many people go out of that study thinking "it is crazy?"



I am not ridiculing at all. Rather, my proposal of the test to verify with the MORA Machine who has the KC and who no it is always valid. But I understand that it is useless to also speak of this matter, at least until when we won't have the opportunity speak on some concrete data.
It is not ridiculous because I don't understand it. And' ridiculous the way according to which the matter is faced. I am proposing only seriously to make some verification, and I don't see because cannot be done.



The homeopathy is in phase of observation in Italy. I don't see however why this fusion of homeopathic medicines with a presumed patogen agent .
Why to mix homeopathy, acupuncture and other alternative techniques, with discover of a presumed parasitic? There is not here anything to believe or not to Believe. there is a parasite. then a something that is here and we can see. Why cannot we see after so many years?



ok... impossible also verify this information.



You attacked me when I have said that "operated patients talk to the words of his own doctor". you can see it is continuous, and not little bothers me. [Color=red] The patient that operates him of MiniARK is convinced that doesn't have anymore keratoconus [/ color]. I can understand that this affirmation comes from a mason, that don't know who is KC, and decides to undergo an operation. But from one say to have studied for a long time first to have picked up information, and that believes to be able to furnish a "Container of data and news",.
... I don't accept him!
Perhaps you has not understood yet what is it keratoconus.
Perhaps you has not understood what is True Motive for which the doctors condamn miniark.
I want to ask you a question.



In this image superficial and basal epithelium of a healthy eye and stripes of initial Vogt are seen to the left. To the right those are seen instead of an eye with keratoconus.
If you had the keratoconus, your eyes had put to the right. If instead you don't now Have Anymore keratoconus means that cells of your eyes are returned to be as those of left.
If indeed you succeed in demonstrating me as incisions can make this, I booktoday the operation. In contrary case you should stop saying that you don't have keratoconus anymore because (unfortunately it is a bitter truth), no one cannot remove anymore it.
And probably. the doctors that study these things, know very well (more than you and me) what damages can cause some incisions on tissue like our, and simply close saying that they have "prejudices", or that their skill level has not been as tall as that "Russian", I repeat , it is not correct towards who studies this disease with heart.



sorry. we had some problem with the database

PS: It is right. The Spanish wine decidedly disgust. we have made here 2 months ago a test with teacher of university of Valladolid in Naples, on laser scanner 3D (practically we have made a topography of the Plebiscite plaza: twisted: ). The Prof. has given us 2 bottles of local wine. worse of the vinegar.
I live in province of Naples instead, very next to the Vesuvius, and when you will be in Italy I will make you try wine that my father produces. (and me with my feet. )
PS2: I have studied english for 2 years at surveyor school(one of the few institutes in which he doesn't study English 5 years: evil: ) by now well 16 years ago. But that I know come from continuous training of internet, and not certain to the teaching.
I have another site that forces me to have contacts with Russian, German, Polish, and a little while ago I have also subscribed Zackyfiles. (Spanish. ). That little that I have learned this summer to Barcellona has served me.

Hello Scaistar,
I have been getting a lot of response from both the database and our conversation here. Which I feel can only be a good thing...

There are many people in the world Scaistar, there are those that focus their time and energy on making a difference and there are those that sit back and criticize.
You have proven by your response that you are have a great passion for the things you have spoken of. You have taken the inititive to set up this forum and provide a place for people to interact... I know a little of the effort it takes to run a site such as yours, it is not an easy days work
But we still differ on many points...

The thing that maddens me the most is when people assume something without researching it first. It is sad that people assume that I am promoting Prof. Lombardi simply because I have created the database... All I wanted was to create an organized body of related information. Thats all!!... I truely do not hold myself responsible for its content (As I DID NOT write it)...
Also as I said it is intended that the site will grow to encompass ALL results (The good, the bad and the ugly),

I truelly wish that I could put the many negative letters I recieved from various doctors on my site... problem is that I have been refused permission to state the doctors names (I will attempt once again to gain permission as I feel if something is valid enough to be said privately then ALL should know).

I am sorry if my comments on the medical class were seen as a generalisation (As I said, I respect those who gain my respect).

In answer to your question...

Yes, I do believe that the 2 doctors are the only ones that know the mini ark (recipe), it has been perfected over many years of use. The same cannot be said of other doctors as they simply havent been using the technique.
I believe at its heart it is a simple procedure... but its complexity comes with being able to correctly place the incisions so as to promote the best possible healing matrix.
How many of the patients of the doctor you mentioned that had ark and went on to graft did he operate on himself? He used mini ark it failed, he used it again, it failed... these are patients not lab rats.
You are an architect but would you construct a building without first meeting with its designer? It is the subtle things that make the difference? Professional arrogance is dangerous in any field but most especially medicine.
Do you assume that mini ark can be learnt from reading a few papers? If only life were that easy.

Of course you must not 'force' anyone to contribute to my site. To be honest it is difficult to get people to commit there results both good or bad. But if you do have any patient data that I can post then please forward it... If the result is not satisfactory then it would be of interest to see why.

I can not for the life of me see what is wrong with publishing the bio's of the team of people that treated my keratoconus. Silvia Micarelli proformed all my tests and was an important part of my operation... She has informed me in depth regarding data I did not understand and she is very valid to the story.

The answer to what kind of parameters I use to publish data is simple... (I have none) except that they must be able to be open to cross examination (as you are doing here).
The site is still new and I have been very busy over Christmas, the information that is available at the moment is the START of what I hope is an evolving collection of related data. I have been attacked for 'show casing' mini ark, this was never the intention... again those comments are from those who 'assume' to know my motives.

Prof. Lombardi has a letter regarding his position on cross-linking at KC Global support... I believe he states there how he intends to incorparate this method, possibly at times (As you stated) when the corneal thickness is too thin for Ark.
But I am to visit Rome in the near future and will I'm to sure discover further interesting data.

I see the topic of whos a prof and who is not is one you find important. Yes you are right we all do not have the right to be called prof. but in prof. Lombardi's case I feel that he does.
But I also do not frankly care... I didnt have ark because he was a prof. I had it because I believed in the concept. If you believe that prof. Lombardi is not a doctor then that is a diffrent case all together... The rest to me is politics.

Yes I do consider Norbert to be a friend (although we have only met briefly) but I in no way intend to ask him to add his data to my site. He will when or if he decides to... all I can do is set the stage to present the information.

You again misunderstand the intention of my site, again you say I am a promotor (Where have I ever told anyone to have ARK... I have never once in any forum said any such thing) The intention is to provide a place where people can add related data and then access the results.

If you believe there is no professinal ignorance (At all??) to the day to day lives of those of us in the KC community then you must not have been reading the same forums as I.
The famous case of a little american girl misdiagnosed by a number of 'top'...'leading' eye specialists... she was told that she had advanced KC... by chance her mother had the courage to fly her half way across the country for another opinion and it was here that it was found KC wasnt present (or at least not in the form she had been informed).
Human error? Maybe, we all make mistakes... My specialist told me that I had nothing wrong with my eyes, my contact lens specialist told me that RGP's would 'CURE' my kc... My next specialist had to look kc up in the dictionary... my story is not unique.
But it is also NOT the case that there arent many good doctors out there that are making the effort to find us solutions. All I'm saying is that ignorance is ignorance ... putting a white coat on it changes nothing.

There may be a great number of people who come out of the Clinic thinking the prof. is crazy... I really dont know. Do you?

Its simplistic to say that I said that Ark was overshadowed by its Russian origin or that poor prof. Lombardi has been dismissed for political reasons.
I feel many factors contribute to its acceptance or lack of.
Here you have set up a private forum to do nothing but speak about it... It has substance and it has results.
But it also has the ability to passionatly infuriate those who cannot grasp its worth...
Your scientific questions are again intriguing, I wait as you do for those who know of such things to answer your questions (As you said, we are not doctors and our views are only opinion).

At the end of the day Scaistar I am not avoiding your medical questions... I simply feel that I am not in a position to answer with any substance. I feel now that I have a better idea of you as a person (translating from Italian can paint diffrent pictures)...
So again I tell you, I'm just a guy who has taken the time to accumulate all the information I can regarding mini ark from the internet and other sources.
I have BEGUN this collection with the site as it appears as of now... but as is the case with all databases it will grow as I find the time to add further information.
Dr. Abbondanza's patients are more than welcome to contribute data... I have stated many times that the site is there to be changed, added to and corrected.
I ignore those who attack it or me without substance... The way I see it people find it far too easy to comment when they have not themselves taken the time to build something (Like I say Scaistar, I appreciate your comments more now that I have learnt about the efforts you make).
Constructive comments are more than welcome and although I bitterly oppose some of your views, I believe that if people are talking then people are learning.
All I have ever intended is that we are informed.
Best Regards,
Hari

Ps.. You will have me run out of Spain for my comments on its wine!!
The volcanic soil must be great for your fathers wine... I look forward to trying it some day.

Hello Scaistar,
This is just a quick message to inform your members that the very first American patient has now been operated with the Mini ARK procedure at the Lombardi Clinic.
His name is Mike and his experiences can be read in the testimonial section of my site: http://www.miniarkdatabase.com
He seems like a straight forward guy and has a very balanced approuch to his Keratoconus.
If you or your members are interested then I'll get my wife to translate his testimonial.
Maybe you already know of this in which case I'll leave you to make your own conclusions.
Rightly or wrongly it is my personal feeling that this case will throw a new light on Mini ark - the mere fact that Mike is American speaks volumes on the international stage. This is of course not fair and totally bias -- but it seems that in the present global enviroment this is how the world turns.
Regards,
Hari

I have appreciated only this sentence from the whole document.



And I wish that it will be always in this way, for each that decides to undergo to any type of operation.

The rest, are things already felt, no novelty. Does this testimony add something?
I have here so many testimonies, and messages of other forum that is equal. But they serve any one? I believe nothing!

I think that it needs to change the things. The words don't help me, and they don't help anybody.
We need facts, and if you continue so your site will become a container of "tales", and to this point, you must also add the history of lady that visiting Madonna has cleared keratoconus.

I am programming a visit to Siena University in next month (I have not yet decided day).
To this point I openly and publicly send you an invite to come together with me to Siena. You and any other your friend you can bring.
We can spend a day together, to make all visits and the possible examinations, and to ask to the doctors "of establishment" what have to say about your eyes and miniark.
I hope that you won't find stupid excuses of more important appointments (I am not an unemployed) .

It is such a shame... because now Mr. Scaistar you really have let me down (Also we are all adults here, It would be nice to call you by your real name sometime)
I truelly believed that you were a man that saw Keratoconus as a disease that is handled in ways that are personal to the sufferer. We each get to the conclusion within the enviroment we are presented with.
You arrogantly state that Mike's testimony is meaningless as it does not conform to your preset views--
Yes his story is not a novelty, but is this not in itself testimony to the stability of Mini ARK? Many ARK storys are the same. It is an operation, variation exists... it has never been stated as anything else.
You believe that the simple testimonys of Keratoconus sufferers that have found personal peace do not in your words - 'Help anybody'.
You go further to denegrate Mini Ark by saying that my site is nothing more than a container of 'tales'.
You are very true my friend... these are tales, they are the tales of people with families, with wives, husbands and children that are seeking a better life... you dismiss their attempts as storys without substance.
I cannot understand your approuch... If you want scientific fact then please read the scientific contents of your next meal, it may surprize you.
Also I am disturbed by your arrogance at setting me a task that I cannot complete.
My 'stupid' excuse is that I, unlike yourself, are unemployed-- that my keratoconus has put me in a position of financial difficulty.
You know I live in Spain many miles from Italy and that it is a hardship for me to travel. I was supposed to have a checkup at the Lombardi Clinic in January but have had to postpone it due to finance. (If you think I enjoy speaking about how poor I have become you are very wrong)
The fact that you 'Appreciated' only one sentance within Mike's entire testimony is evidence of how truelly shallow your appreciation for your members is.
Is it true that you found NOTHING else about his statement that interested you? You found no interest in how he stated that ALL approuches should be sought, no interest in his offer to invite Prof. Lombardi to a globally seen forum where doctors from all sectors could review Mini Ark? No interest in the mere fact that he was happy?
I truelly do not see your standpoint--- Do you think I am not being truthfull about my sight, Is Norbert also lying? Is Mike? etc etc
My question is this-- Why the negativity? Why are you not supporting those of us that have found an answer? What are you afraid of?
You wrote:
'The words don't help me, and they don't help anybody'-- would you walk into a the cancer ward of a hospital and say these same words? Why are we so diffrent?
As I've always said-- Mini Ark is a choice, it is not forced on anyone-- You are bitter, you have made this personal-- All I wonder is -- why?
It does not have to be this way.

I truelly hope that you find what you are looking for at the University of Sienna, but if you dont? What then?

I wish you the best of luck,
Hari

Hey Hari, you are becoming predictable. I'm expecting for this answer.
By now it is not possible to get nothing. Neither from the doctors neither from the patients that follow the miniark. Only words!
Every attempt to throw out the facts, degenerates always in the same history.

Do you want to see how I see it?
I see On side you and the others operated that speak of miracles.
From the other side I see the doctors that EVERYBODY TOGETHER speaks of the unpredictabilty and of the instability of the miniark.
My conscience brings me to believe that is very more probable than the seconds is right (the doctors are THEY not you ! You have not answer to technical questions that has give to you here).

But I want to put aside my conscience.
And then, what is more simpler than to put to comparison these different thoughts? It is not simple if finally we soothe there around a table and we speak of it?
It's too much comfort for Dr. Lombardi fight a struggle inside his study.
And' very easy for the Dr. to speak of technical concepts, without anybody that can oppose and to speak to you of the opposite things.

My invitation departed from the fact that I will be in Siena next month. If it won't be in March, it will be in June, and if it won't be in June it will be in September. And if it won't be in Siena it will be in some other hospital.
But to me it seems very strange that it's so difficult to get this simple comparison. i Have not asked you explanations on your life (and the fact that speaks to me of economic problems make me think that you are nervous rather), but do you want to see that with so many patients that had MiniARK, there is nobody to have economic conditions to "lose" one day for a complete visit of THEIR eyes?
Why YOU WANT demonstrate full effects of MiniARK without a serious approach?

Hello Scaistar,
I have just woken up on this fine Saturday morning-- your words of support are like coffee and hot croissont to me.
Let us see if we can see where your anger stems from:
You are frustrated that you can not get valid data from either Mini ARK patients or Mini ARK doctors (quote: '...only words!') -

This is not a new arguement, when I first started researching Mini Ark it was via the Center for Keratoconus web forum (R.I.P).
Both Prof. Lombardi and Dr Abbondanza where regular contributers- We all know they have their differences but at least here we could all hear them speak of what Mini Ark actually was.
Patients similar to you did not want however to hear this, they wanted facts-- they wanted pages of published work, they wanted corneal maps, they wanted independant testimony from mini ark patients (Not just the ones found on Prof. Lombardi's website).
They too were frustrated that none of these things were readily available.
The result was that Prof. Lombardi was banned from the site, subsequent questions regarding mini ARK were not aswered by the doctors connected to CFK.
I was banned for speaking about ARK - I was accussed of being part of a Mini Ark conspiracy - At this time I had never met or personally spoken to Prof. Lombardi, the paranoia of the Keratoconus forum administration was infectious. The same thing happened on the next forum that I found myself on.
I make no excuses for Prof. Lombardi's approuch to his practice-- I have seen and been satisfied by all the things that have been said not to exist. I have seen his qualifications, spoken to his ex patients and spoken to him about just these frustrations you are having now. He said he has an open door policy to his work as long as those who wish to review his work are qualified to do so and that they truelly have the desire to learn -

I created the miniark database in an attempt to provide people such as yourself with at least a little of the information you crave. As I have always said it is only the beginning of a growing collection of information. Much of it is indeed old (Prof. Lombardi restricted his attempts of presenting his work at congress some years ago, we say in english 'you can lead a horse to water but you cant make him drink').
You have met my site with bitterness, I have added the doctors letters you spoke of-- adjusted some of the text that I wrote to reflect a more balanced approuch, I have begun to post patient photographs (by the way it would be nice if you had asked the patient before cutting and posting her pic on your site)-- these are all minor things. Things that I do to help myself as much as anyone else- this is my album of Mini Ark that I hope others may find useful. It is nothing else.

You said: 'I see On side you and the others operated that speak of miracles'.
Now I want you to answer this next question truthfully-- Where have I ever said that Mini Ark is a miracle? I have gone to great trouble to say that it is an operation, one with inherint variation, one that takes time to reach its full potential. You have made this statement I want you to post here your proof.

You say that the doctors you have spoken to are right as they speak of the unpredictabilty and instability of the miniark...

What are they basing these statements on? Have they researched Mini ARK? Or is this merely uninformed opinion?
Recently one of those 'Friends' of mine that you speak of went through a difficult time with his Mini Ark.
He went to leading eye specialist in his country who told him that his cornea was a 'disaster!!!' - Prof. Lombardi urged him to allow the healing process to work and now at his last checkup his sight has made excelent improvement. I do not know what the future holds for him but I expect and wish him continued improvement.
My point is that you seem to put your faith in medicine above the words of your fellow KCer's - Doctors do deserve respect but it must be earned. To me nothing is more pure than speaking directly to someone who has actually stepped forward and had the operation. We thus hear everything, the good, the worries, the everyday workings of the treatment -- we are in a position to encourage and support.
A doctors viewpoint is more abstract, he may base his opinion on medical reports that do not speak directly to the problem.
(Please publish here the reports that your doctors refer to when denigrating Mini ARK (Note here that I said Mini ARK not RK or any other of its variations) I want to see exactly what data you yourself are using as a basis to your contentions. Remember your own words - 'unpredictabilty and instability'. How did you reach this conclusion?

You say that I have not answered your medical questions--
I am not a doctor, my answers would be mere opinion and in many instances I truelly do not know the answer. (If I was to have a coronary transplant would you ask me to lecture on the inner workings of the heart?).
I think it is as pointless for an amatuer such as myself to answer these technical questions as it is for an architect such as you to ask them.

What do you think is happening here? Why is that no one wants to take a trip with you to Sienna? Do you think we are scared of what we might find? Maybe I am making eye charts with extra large letters for Prof. Lombardi to trick his patients with!:roll: You surely cannot be so arrogant as to believe we are all robots controlled from Prof Lombardi's office? Why would this be so? What would we have to gain? Maybe the answer is more simple? Maybe you just do not inspire trust--
I personally would love to spend a day in Sienna -- but your approuch worrys me.
It is impossible for me to make the trip to Italy before I am able. But when I do I would gladly visit whichever hospital you choose.

Yes Mr. Scaistar this reply is just more predictable words-- but I am at a loss to understand exactly what it is you want from me.
I am hiding from nothing, of all the mini ark patients I am purhaps one of the ones that is attempting to give you what you want - Data.
Attempting - in my own predictable pointless way.
You will see what you want to see...

Hari

Dr. Lombardi must to be also banned from this site for the behavior that has assumed (please, if you hear it, ask it to find courage to explain us at least where has taken the title PROF, where he has taken the percentage of recidivist keratocono in the 45% of the transplant and if want to explain us the worsening of Simone after his incisions it is due?)
I don't have banned for a one motive. To avoid that it told lies to his disciples, that is "had unjustly excluded him from the FORUM because he spoke of annoying matters to the establishment."
There is no establishment here. I am a free spirit and I can still afford to choose.



I directly reported not to you but to the various felt histories. And however even if the term miracle is not used (not always)... the sense is the same.



Do you have short memory, or has been bad translation of mine?
I repeat to you (they are no voices! the emails that speak of shout I have to about ten of it! I publish alone the names of whom dares compromise, not of people that "they feel to say"..





Also for me is the same. And it is really for this that I have not considered MiniARK. Because you have spoken only with whom tells your happy tales...
Instead I have also felt other histories...
But don't worry you. The time will also come for this.
And however... I repeat for the hundredth time that To Me The Histories don't Interest. You will be happy with your tales. ME NOT!!!! Because for me the tales also include this:
http://www.mammadellamore.it/testimonianze.htm and search for MARIANNA (please, ask to your wife to make the sacrifice of translate it).
Note that the Madonna of Carbonara of Nola (Naples) is located to 20 minutes from my house.
I must believe in Marianna. or to HARI? (better Marianna... it is less expensive )

And please... made to translate this other.
http://www.tgcom.mediaset.it/cronaca/ar ... 8005.shtml
Not One, but A lot of People have seen the statue stir.
Do you believe in those that they have seen???
how i can believe to YOUR EYES?
I think the fastest way (and MORE SIMPLE WAY) it's to put you place side by side I, and to try to read a same poster from far..
and remember...
after surely and confirmed that REFRACTIVE GAIN it's good.. we'll speak about risks..



No. but I believe that there are various reasons to the fact that who is not happy doesn't write on the FORUM or in your site. I remind you that Simone has been the only one to Want to Write, not the only don't satisfy that I know.



I don't have hurry and I will wait with anxiety the day when it will be possible. (in the meantime I see if I succeed in convincing someone nearer).



I don't want anything from you.
But if you come here to convince me of something, you must do seriously.

And besides. 2 beautiful differences among us.
You have created a site to spread and defend the MiniARK.
I have created a site for the patients with cheratocono. There are a lot of differences (and not to offend you if I tell that have more responsibilities towards my subscriber).

I don't have any interest to defend the miniark, as also even to demolish it.
For me we could make avoid than speak of it. But if we want to speak of it (since there are some affiliate that however consider the technique), let's do then it in serious and concrete way, because..
NEVER NEVER NEVER... i want read message of patients that write "i had it because i've read it on http://www.associa... no.it

ciao signor scaistar,
it is true that prof. Lombardi was not only banned from the internet forums because he solely spoke about mini ark. It was also because of his directness, he spoke of his beliefs and he did not tollerate stupidity. This in my culture is not acceptable from a doctor. In my culture doctors generally tell you what you want to hear. They generally give you the medicine that you require. In prof. Lombardi's case he tells it as it is. You can believe his point of view or you can dismiss it, this is the beauty of democracy.
You mention again the fact that prof. Lombardi uses the title of professor, again I say to you he can call himself Angelina Jolie if he wants to, so long as he gives me back my sight. This is a political point, it is one as a patient that I give very little thought to. As I said in the past, the only credibility that this line of argument has is that perhaps patients new to mini ark may think that using the title of professor gives him more stature than he deserves. This point is easily resolved upon meeting the man, you will either like him or you won't.
The 45% recurrent keratoconus after graft is something that you will have to examine for yourself. I personally do not know the percentage. If prof. Lombardi states this then you must ask him.
You speak again of Simone. I don't know who Simone is. I assume that he is a patient of prof. Lombardi that he's far from happy with the outcome of his surgery. I do not know what his situation is. But I would hope that he would publish them so that we could all understand where his problems lie and perhaps we can help him towards a solution.
You are avoiding your own words by saying that I did not say that mini ark was a miracle cure. These are exactly your words. You implied nothing. You should stand by them.
The examples that you posted are replied to as this:
prof. Merlin - it is to be confirmed but as I understand it this man operated with mini ark without appropriate training. He may be an excellent surgeon but he has never once stepped into the surgery of prof. Lombardi to learn the exact method of this operation. He used his own skill and perceived knowledge to operate on his patients. The results were negative and as such he finds it necessary to denigrate mini ark as a whole.
Prof. Fruscella - this doctor speaks of mini ark patients that have had very bad experiences. I ask myself why I have not heard of this on the many web forums that are available. It is true that there are some that are not happy with their results. We live in a real world and there will always be variation when it comes to medical treatment. He says that there's no scientific basis to this treatment but we have international medical opinion that clearly states that controlled corneal incisions can indeed aid myopia. The issue here is skill. And the skill to perform these operations is rare.
Prof. Bisantis - states that after 5-6 years mini ark incisions can cause astigmatism. Again I ask you what data is he using to state this?
Again, you wrongly state that I only speak of positive results. You know this is not true. Why do you keep saying it?
I've had fellow mini ark patients contact me saying that they were very unhappy with their results. The vast majority of these have found that it has only been time that was needed for them to achieve acceptable results. Another patient was still not happy and went on to have yet another alternative treatment. I grow tired of you continually painting me as someone who only potrays the sunny side of mini ark. Everything has two sides.
You say that you are not interested in my "tales". I find this very sad because they are not my tales, they are the stories of simple keratoconus sufferers. They do not pretend to be anything else.
Here you speak of bleeding statues and holy Madonnas, this is not the first time you have made this analogy. I have to ask myself what is this man talking about? Why are you being so dramatic?
I respect your culture and your local saint but why do you so easily use her to make your diluted point? I ask nobody to have faith in me, I ask nobody to follow me, I'm not building a church nor a cult.
I'm just a guy from New Zealand who was unfortunate enough to get keratoconus but was fortunate enough to find a way out of it. This is the only reason that I have made my website. I expected nobody to visit it. I tell you this truthfully from my heart. I never consulted prof. Lombardi whilst constructing it but since it's been online the response has been amazing. I've had contacts with people from many parts of the world, in fact many are from this forum. People want to learn, what is contained within my site may be worthless, it may be propaganda to convince people of something they do not want to have. Of course I know this is not the case but I also have great faith in the ability of people to discern what is valid and what is not.
Now let us speak of the "beautiful differences" - you have again elevated yourself above me. This does not worry me. I have a simple website and you have a national associated organisation, there is no comparison.
You say that I have created my site to spread and defend mini ark, this is not entirely true. The intention of my site was solely to offer an alternative to the treatments that we are routinely offered. To educate people to other possibilities. I defend mini ark against uneducated attacks but I do so from a position that is medically uneducated. I do so from the sole position of having had mini ark and being able to see better now than the rest of my family.
The final point we totally agree on. I would not want to hear that anyone had decided to have mini ark solely by reading my website. My hope would be that they would take whatever information they could and then investigate further for themselves. That they would contact their own doctors and debate the issues.
If you want my humble advice, which I'm sure you don't, then I'd say that you should focus on the positive side of mini ark, you should use your website to support those who have chosen this path. At the same time, if certain negative aspects arise you should work with these same patients to investigate and resolve these problems. It's not good enough to not stand by these people. We are all from the same keratoconus community. Our choices may be different but our goal is always the same.
Arrivederci,
Hari

Buona Pasqua (Happy Easter) to you and all your members,
Things have been quite in the Mini ARK boxing ring for a while (Purhaps this is a good thing?:) )
Anyway, our fellow Keratoconus sufferer Mike... for those that dont know Mike is an American KCer that has recently undergone the mini ark procedure... Has just reported his latest (yes anecdotal) experience post operation.
He has reported 20/20 vision in both eyes after consultation with his American eye specialist.
I'm sorry Scaistar if I am repeating myself to your members as I know you are a member of the same American forum as I and must have already read of Mikes progress and reported it to your members.
His testimony and corneal maps + photographs can be seen on my site:

http://www.miniarkdatabase.com
http://www.miniark.eu
http://www.cheratocono.eu

Which reminds me... If I were you I'd register associazionecheratocono.eu
before someone else does. There are a lot of people who just wait for those sorts of opportunities to cause trouble.

I'm sorry once again that my wife is not available to translate my words. But plans are a foot so that this need not be a problem in the future.
How was your bus trip to Siena University? Wouldn't it be great if we could get them and the American specialists and the British corneal experts that have all seen but have as yet not commented on Mini ARK to put their names forward and make a statement? It is an exciting time at the moment isn't it? We are now seeing a true interest in Mini Ark where as before it was merely dismissed.
Actually my last statement was not entirely true as these U.S and U.K doctors have commented privately... and between you and me I like what I'm hearing.
This can only be good for the Keratoconus community as a whole. Its not about pushing people into having Mini ARK... its about having our doctors care enough to dig as deep as we have. To strive to find the answer to our disease with as much passion as we do.
Please tell me about Simone? How is he? You should encourage him and any others you find that are not happy to contribute to my site.
I want to have all sides of the story. I want the patients and the doctors to be able to put their stories across so that we can all be informed.

Hari

Happy Easter you too Hari,
it's a little break with you..because i'm playing in other ring....

I'm happy for Mike. I hope to see same result after 10 years.

About Siena, i was ver busy in March because have to close two works.
After Prof. Caporossi was at San Francisco symposyum, and after is holyday... so i have appointment in next 2 week.

I'm busy in other tasks. Do you see in homepage? Do you know Vincenzo Salemme ?

About MiniARK, i hope that Doctors have same interest about you're talking.
I'll make all possible for obtain more results, analysys,.. for KC communities.

About Simone, he is not much present on the forum, but yesterday he wroted this message and say that eye condition have RETURNED TO PREVIOUS CONDITION before Miniark.
viewtopic.php?t=362

There are some Simon's messages on other forum, writed after MiniARK operation, where he wrote lovely words about Dr. Lombardi, so... this MUST to reflect all us.
I've invited Simone to come at Siena with me... but he say "now no".
I've invited another patient from Rome that will have GRAFT AT JUNE, after 27 MINIARK cuts.
I have proposed to bring MY CAR, drive until ROME, go to Siena, meet with BIG doctor, after bring back to home and after I return to Naples. He say "i speak with my mothers..." and now ...i can't contact it (probably he have blocked me in MSN).

I don't know what can do anymore. i'm creating ONLY ENEMIES with miniark, without reason.
.. so.. i think... "why this???". "what is my gain in this story?".

I hope to change something after Siena trip.

but now.... BUONA PASQUA A TE E ALLA TUA FAMIGLIA...

I have to say that I did not know who Vincenzo Salemme was. But my wife has now corrected my ignorance and I see that he has done some fine work in Italian cinema.
For those English readers here is the link:
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0758033/

Scaistar your frustration at not being able to connect with patients regarding Mini ARK may stem from the approuch you have taken thus far.
I have seen this same thing playing out on other forums in the past and the result is always the same.
Divisions are made and sides are taken. Discussion threads talk in circles and very little is gained.
We do not need to concentrate on proving Mini ARK to be false... and to hold up those few whom have had negative results as proof.
We can in fact do the opposite and follow those whom have had positive results and work to support and encourage them. Of course we also need the balance that comes from discussing the negative, but why does it take presidence?
As in any surgery there will always be variation... but in this case does the degree of negative variation deserve to condeem the procedure before it has a chance to prove itself?
Do you drive to Siena with the intention to hopefully give credibilty to ARK or do you do so in the hope that science will again condem it?
I for one, as an ex-Keratoconus sufferer, would hope that most people would strive for the first choice.
And that is how we all 'Gain' from this story. Whatever the outcome... if we respect each others choice and push ourselves to learn more then at the end of the day we can all find a way out from underneath this disease.

Regards,
Hari