English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Department of Ophthalmology & Vision Science, University of California Davis Eye Center, Sacramento, CA, USA Dear editor I read, with interest, the article by Moshirfar et al examining the shift in eye banking models that is occurring in our country. While the authors maintain that their purpose is to provide a fact-based, non-biased exposition of the current issues, they fall regrettably short of this goal. Of the 11 paragraphs in this paper, 6 are dedicated to outlining the advantages and contributions of the SightLife/ CorneaGen, while the criticisms of this new paradigm are skimmed over with mere lip service to the critics. If the authors had truly desired to provide a balanced picture, they would have written a paper that more fully outlines the objections to and concerns over the mixing of non-profit and for-profit organizations. There is no mention of the World Health Organization Principles of Transplantation or the Barcelona Principles for Eye Banking, which have been endorsed by every major eye bank organization in the world including the EBAA, neither of which support a “for profit” model. In eye banking, change is both inevitable and critical. There is no doubt that the industry has the wherewithal to facilitate true progress. However, we need to be clear about the role of for-profit institutions and their role in providing the gift of sight. Moshirfar et al do not provide us with a balanced picture, a most unfortunate analysis, clearly not free of bias.

<p>A paradigm shift in eye banking: how new models are challenging the status quo by Moshirfar et al</p>