I thank Drs Tso, Abbott, and Spivey for their interest in my recenteditorial1 and greatly appreciate theircomments and clarifications regarding the international guidelines being developedby the International Council of Ophthalmology (ICO). Perhaps my editorialand the comments by Dr Tso and colleagues serve to highlight the confusionin the direction or purpose of such guidelines as perceived by the generalophthalmological community and by someone such as myself who is (albeit remotely)involved in the ICO guidelines. In my editorial, I sought to portray the realityof ophthalmology in a non–English-speaking, non–English-readingcountry with a different genetic and cultural population of patients fromthe still mainly English-speaking audience of the ARCHIVES who may not beaware of the magnitude of such differences.
Okada AA. International Guidelines: All for One and One for All?—Reply. Arch Ophthalmol. 2004;122(7):1091-1092. doi:10.1001/archopht.122.7.1091