"Cutting on your eyes for the sake of our profits - do you really find that so objectionable?"

As my cataracts continue to worsen, I felt the desire to once again call the local ophthalmology association and make my dissatisfaction known. I wanted to once more let them know that in the past, there were alternatives to cataract surgery which had successful clinical trials or were used successfully on large numbers of patients, such as certain eyedrops.
I regret that I cannot discuss these methods in this forum at this time for fear that the eye profession will attempt to block them. The fact that they are willing to block them, and to ensure that cataract surgery outlasts the human race, is clear from the details of our telephone conversation which went like this. My questions and comments are labeled "A", and their response is "B":
A: "According to statistics, most persons who undergo cataract surgery die within 5 years after the operation. Since there were successful alternatives to surgery in the past, why do you force people to have the operation today?"
B: "Most people with cataracts are elderly, and don't have long to live anyway. So if they do die soon after a cataract operation, it doesn't matter".
A: "I see.
Of course eyedrops for example take several months to work, whereas cataract surgery is very fast and therefore very profitable. But since there are alternatives which would enable me to keep my own eye lens, and avoid an incision as well as secondary complications, I strongly object to letting your surgeons cut on me just for the sake of your big profits".
B: "Do you really find that so objectionable?"
A: "Damn right I do".
I was so taken aback by this frank admission, that I decided there was no point in continuing the discussion. But, I felt that CureZone readers should know the other side's responses, so I have posted them here.