This article is within the scope of WikiProject Metalworking, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Metalworking on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
1. in favor. it is the same injury from the same radiation, with pretty much the same treatment. It's just a different source.--MartinezMD (talk) 01:23, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
2. I take me last phrase back - I'm in favour of photokeratitis vs ultraviolet keratitis: PubMed hits are "arc eye" 7, "snow blindness" 11, "ultraviolet keratitis" 5, "photokeratitis" 52. David RubenTalk 01:28, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
No to Flash blindness which is not a superficial burn but disruption (temporary or perminent) to the retina. Clearly a Nuclear blast will cause both, but these are not same disorder.David RubenTalk 02:02, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Support Merge to Ultraviolet photokeratis. Photokeratitis can be caused by high power IR/heat, though, so if you have other corneal IR burns in another article, you have to use UV as a qualifier here. These are also separate from flashblindness, which is an effect on the retina, not cornea, and thus is not a keratitis and doesn't cause pain. A visible high power laser will also damage retinas but not necessariy corneas.
Also, note the problem that an editor has deleted the treatment section in arc eye. SBHarris 18:26, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
I think we should go with the ICD 10 term of Photokeratitis. This is the term also used by Uptodate. Can we request someone to perform the move?Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:53, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Now what we need is an image. I see this condition on a fairly regular basis but unsure how to get a good image through the slit lamp without a special camera. Anyone have one?Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:43, 26 April 2010 (UTC)