Good to hear from you again.

Yes, all the anticoagulants have the same effect.

After all,
1) they basically turn users into hemophiliacs
(surely you've noticed how you bleed from minor wounds?)

2) About my blinding eye disease: it's caused by tiny abnormal capillaries which grow into the retina, in some older people. They are very fragile. When they leak, the blood (and toxic fluids from inadequate eye metabolism) permanently kill retinal cells right in the macula - i.e., destroying central vision.

Right now, they can only forestall the (groan) inevitable by fairly recently discovered chemicals which act to prevent the growth of these capillaries (and to a degree, dry them out). They reach the affected area by eye injections (no, it's no fun but not as bad as it sounds).

Within days of getting the eye diagnosis, I put 2 and 2 together - the anticoagulant effect (which is so useful against stroke risk from AFIB) and the nasty fact that it's uncontrolled bleeding which blinds people with my eye disease.

What to do? My retinologist is a dead loss in terms of honest advice concerning exploring such options ("what am I? A cardiologist?" "Do you want to have a stroke"? etc.) undoubtedly affected by liability concerns. (If he steers me even by hinting, away from anticoagulants, he might be sued by me/my family if I have a stroke.)

Anyhow, I found on my own the options to avoid anticoagulants (eg. the Watchman which seems the best), and thus have been exploring how and whether I might qualify for this surgery. (For example, people with internal bleeding can NOT take these anticoagulants , Afib or not).

Your (approx) annual hospital visit for your heart issues sound terrifying, especially (I imagine) because they just happen - i.e., no set date. (I identify with that aspect of it especially as recurrences of my retinal bleeding happen unpredictably.)
Not to mention the ambulance drama and how you must feel during this annual emergency. Sympathies!

"Funny" how people with the same condition can have such radically different manifestations and experiences!
And yet we can still help each other. At least, there's that.

Suddenly realizing that "if aspirin won't help with clots", there's no really good reason to force patients to take aspirin forever after the Watchman!

I guess they're just erring on the side of caution in both cases: IN CASE they might help with clots (which do occasionally form after the Watchman) have them take aspirin - even though, they had the procedure to get off anticoagulants!

Likewise, don't encourage clot-vulnerable patients to count on aspirin for significant protection when it only helps REDUCE the risk.

They don't want to be stuck guaranteeing anything, least of all, as a matter of policy (for which they might be held liable).