Hacker News Reader

Note here that "complete success" doesn't seem to necessarily mean recovery of vision, just some kinds of testing of corneal health. The article vaguely says that "most" patients had some improvement of vision. I couldn't quickly find discussion of this in the actual study, but the study claims success in proving safety and suggests further investigation is necessary to show therapeutic efficacy.

View on HN

This is an important point. It looks like they didn’t directly make any measurements of vision, just biological markers of corneal health.

That doesn’t mean that vision didn’t improve. It’s just a bit odd that if it did, they wouldn’t have quantified it and added that to this paper.

If you read the article, they clearly test vision in the patients.

>the majority of patients regained some sight, with some advancing from legally blind to low vision.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com