Harold Ridley permanently implanted the first intraocular lens (IOL) in 1950. The widely accepted narrative is that Ridley and his invention received a hostile reception from Stewart Duke-Elder and other ophthalmic thought leaders. Ridley suffered greatly but was eventually vindicated as later IOL designs were widely accepted. This narrative casts Ridley as a prophetic innovator who suffered and eventually triumphed against the forces of animosity, jealousy and close-mindedness arrayed against him. We argue that this narrative is biased because it was told by Ridley himself and amplified by his biographer and close friend, David Apple. There were good reasons to be skeptical of Ridley's invention. Ridley had not done pre-clinical studies, so his first patients suffered avoidable complications. He worked in secret at a time when openness was the norm. Ridley's IOL had a high percentage of poor outcomes. The cautious approach that Duke-Elder and others had towards IOLs is understandable. The accurate history is a story of a clash of worldviews between an inventor who was focused on innovating quickly to solve a major clinical problem and established leaders who were concerned about the harm to patients from a flawed invention. The skepticism of established thought leaders remains a valuable check on aggressive innovation today.
Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of ASCRS and ESCRS.