Originally Posted by lurker2010

Analogies miss the full picture. Artie's explanations was probably as good as any analogy on this thread.

The lens companies were accused of wrong doings. The lens manufacturers didn't deny the facts. They claimed there was nothing wrong in marketing the same, or substantially equivalent, lens, for both daily disposable and planned replacement, use. They paid $$$$, agreed to stop the practice and agreed to stop going after eye professionals who prescribed a wear schedule (wearing a daily lens for more then one day) other then suggested by the lens mfg.


Golda missed the essence of the settlement and should read the entire settlement before continuing to post rubbish.

[b]The fact is lens manufacturers continue to market daily disposable lenses which are also marketed in the US (and/or other markets) for planned replacement./B]

.