This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.
—Dr Goodside's letter initially bothered me as much as my article must have annoyed him. My first reaction was that his emphasis on patient-physician relationship and professional ethics was a holier-than-thou subterfuge to fight an alternative provision system for health care, which is different from his own practice habits. Then I remembered that when I wrote the article I decided to assume that "sympathy," "kindness," and all professionalisms were givens in any acceptable equation that will provide a solution for optimal and affordable eye care in future decades.The reader had no way to look into my head to understand better why I attempted through a corporate venture to seek a system for high-volume eye care that under present systems of reimbursement could bring riches to the participating ophthalmologists. Furthermore, as he read my article, Dr Goodside interpreted my suggestion that there should be fewer ophthalmologists in the
Paton D. Ophthalmology in the 21st Century-Reply. Arch Ophthalmol. 1987;105(2):167–168. doi:10.1001/archopht.1987.01060020021007
Monkeypox Resource Center
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.