Does this mean you could replicate the effect with brighter lighting? I was hoping for something that would actually make the lens more flexible.
... maybe you should be using it then? (Sorry... but not sorry.)
"Gentle" or not, is this actually safe for long-term use? Your pupil dilates in indoor light for a reason, I'm not sure if it's a good idea to fight that. You'd be better off just increasing ambient light levels to match sunlight.
There's obviously bound to be 'medical' and comfort reasons over disposable ones beyond the disposable society, but the cynic in me can't help but feel that research into longer-lasting more-comfortable reusable contacts would be taken through to market in preference to a more profitable cheaper-made daily product.
- don't accumulate gunk over days/weeks/months that can cause injury and/or infection
- are cheap to replace if torn or lost (which happens with tiny transparent things)
- are made from softer, thinner material (because it doesn't need to last) which is way more comfortable
Does anyone know the reason that data is published after approval rather than before? Seems illogical at face value, but I'm obviously missing something.
Correct. When liabilities grow too big, the company will spin off the liabilities to a shell company without means to pay for damages caused. (this is called a "Texas two-step" bankruptcy)
But instead of doing that you’ve decided to just write this comment instead and post something that looks quite silly for those that have taken the first approach.
The numerous “not approved” decisions makes that plainly obvious. Not to mention all the times FDA has said “you have to do X to get approved” and the company happily complies despite it delaying sales by several quarters.
To the question at hand “why do publications come after FDA approval”, the FDA has access to all the data (actually more) before publication, so the publication is irrelevant to approval.
Once the pivotal trial reads out, companies usually submit within a month or two to the FDA. Much of the submission dossier (trial design, product description) can be written ahead of time, so it’s really the results that need to be drafted.
The FDA can approve in as little as 3-4 months for an accelerated approval, but it can take up to 12 months.
Compare that with a paper being written and reviewed across multiple authors (3-6 months if you’re lucky), then submitting to multiple journals for review and feedback (6 months), then final submission and peer review (1-2 months), then any additional edits (1 month), then final slating for publication after article is type set, all figures are sized, article laid out and final version (1-2 months).
So all in the FDA takes less time (3-12 months) than publishing (12-17 months).
I don't really understand eyes or optics though, I'm just guessing based on my layman's understanding of focussing a camera, so take this with a pinch of salt!
Anyone got experience/comments on that? (Presumably one could replicate it with contact lenses, in particular.)
Mistletoe•2h ago
Edit:
"During the investor call, Lenz executives outlined the cost of VIZZ. A monthly, 25-pack will cost $79. A 3-month pack from the e-pharmacy will cost $198 ($66 per month). Samples are anticipated in the United States as early as October 2025, with commercial product to be broadly available by mid-Q4 2025."
tguvot•2h ago
krupan•1h ago