Aren't we wasting time with HAs...

Audiofuzzy

Audiofuzzy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2005
Messages
4,697
Reaction score
152
The many happy and excited posts made by many CI users here made me think - aren't we wasting time settling for HAs when better and better CI is available.
Sure it requires surgery but the quality of hearing is without hesistation so much better.
So why still settle for HAs?

Fuzzy
 
Because CIs require surgery and is a little overkill if someone does not have a large degree of hearing loss. :)
 
I'd say the reason is CI's won't work for everybody. It's not a "one-size-fits-all" scenario.
 
I dont feel the same as you and I know many deaf people who feel the same as me about their HAs...they are happy with them. If u want to desire to hear better that is your own personal choice. Not everyone has the same desires as u.
 
I'm going to be my own example. I settled for a hearing aid because I was happy with what I was hearing. Once an integral part of my lifestyle disappeared and I was not going to let it go without a fight. That is when I really considered it, because there was no other choice for me with the way I lived my life.

If your happy and you know it, then stick with your aids.

If you wonder about it, there is no harm is going through the evaluation. They don't exactly pressure you into getting one like a car salesman if you are a candidate. It is a long PROCESS!
 
Audiofuzzy said:
The many happy and excited posts made by many CI users here made me think - aren't we wasting time settling for HAs when better and better CI is available.
Sure it requires surgery but the quality of hearing is without hesistation so much better.
So why still settle for HAs?
Click to expand...

:confused:

All should have CIs? Mild hearing loss? More hearing loss with good HA hearing? Elderly people who are HoH very late? Are all people alike or just your opinion about all CI and HA issues?

Do you want arguement? Earlier I thought you didn't, but now I wonder. Not everyone "still settle for HAs". Please try thinking about others perspective. Who is "we"?
 
I am thinking more in terms of how these devices are effective - HAs and CIs. Both are just devices to assist with hearing, just assist.

If you compare the two, CI wins, hands down.
Of course when I am saying CI and HAs I mean only in regards to those pople who are candidates for both.

Reading so many interesting posts about successes with CI, like "hearing this for the first time or hearing that for the first time", I couldn't help but wonder - I am sure a lot of people could have that much much earlier, and who knows- maybe with even better results.. so why is the CI still considered a "last resort"? what's the point of it?

I am sure having such a better hearing with CI than with Has would came handy in many instances, for example academically, in family gatherings, just being out there doing such simple things as shopping...

Is it only surgery itself that stops people from getting CI more readily, or there is something more behind this...? because, since it is out there, why not take advantage of this technology right away?


Fuzzy
 
Having hearing isn't everything, to me it isn't, maybe for some. Working so hard to hear and understand all the time can be exhausting.

Each person is unique and has a variety of needs and they're not wasting their time on hearing aids.


Interesting listing for hearing aids vs cochlear implant, link showing below.


Advantages & Disadvantages: Hearing Aids vs. Cochlear Implants
 
Advantages & Disadvantages: Hearing Aids vs. Cochlear Implants for Those with Severe Hearing Loss


Personal Thoughts of Ellen A. Rhoades, ©2000-2001

The article is nice, but its 7 years old. The technology has changed greatly.
Just like HA have changed greatly.

Sure I love my CIs, but not everyone can benefit from it. I did not qualify 5 years ago. That is why there are such strict guildlines. My advise, if you feel a CI will benefit you, talk to your doctor. Or at least rule it out with your doctor.
 
Audiofuzzy said:
I am thinking more in terms of how these devices are effective - HAs and CIs. Both are just devices to assist with hearing, just assist.

If you compare the two, CI wins, hands down.
Of course when I am saying CI and HAs I mean only in regards to those pople who are candidates for both.

Reading so many interesting posts about successes with CI, like "hearing this for the first time or hearing that for the first time", I couldn't help but wonder - I am sure a lot of people could have that much much earlier, and who knows- maybe with even better results.. so why is the CI still considered a "last resort"? what's the point of it?

I am sure having such a better hearing with CI than with Has would came handy in many instances, for example academically, in family gatherings, just being out there doing such simple things as shopping...

Is it only surgery itself that stops people from getting CI more readily, or there is something more behind this...? because, since it is out there, why not take advantage of this technology right away?


Fuzzy
Click to expand...

I see what your saying. I don't feel that it is a argumentative topic at all. I feel that Fuzzy is asking that those who are in the profoundly deaf category what prevents most from getting a CI. There could be several factors, like culture, language, length of loss and motivation.

It takes work to make the CI work for you. Some people aren't up to the amount of work it takes to have one, the mapping sessions, the traveling (some qualified clinic are a long haul away from home) the rehab, the listening, the learning. I've heard stories where some people went through the surgery and became activated and threw it in the drawer the next day. They went through all that for nothing and never bothered to keep at it. Its not like a hearing aid where a quick visit to the local audiologist will rectify whatever issues there are.
 
Having hearing isn't everything, to me it isn't, maybe for some. Working so hard to hear and understand all the time can be exhausting.
Click to expand...

I understand what you are saying Cheri but I am discussing why stick to old technology when the new, better one is available?

Fuzzy
 
contradica said:
I see what your saying. I don't feel that it is a argumentative topic at all. I feel that Fuzzy is asking that those who are in the profoundly deaf category what prevents most from getting a CI.
Click to expand...

Thanks - you are very close to what I am trying to say. I went even further than that, and am asking why even WAIT so long -or wait at all- why start with HAs ever instead of going to the source - a CI- right away...?

And no of course I am not being argumentative- I just find it as very interesting topic..

Fuzzy
 
Audiofuzzy said:
Thanks - you are very close to what I am trying to say. I went even further than that, and am asking why even WAIT so long -or wait at all- why start with HAs ever instead of going to the source - a CI- right away...? And no of course I am not being argumentative- I just find it as very interesting topic..

Fuzzy
Click to expand...

I think that's a valid arguement. Well.....(thinking)......even if lets say you have a mild loss and you wear hearing aids, but you have a normal cochlear. The hearing loss may not be progressive. Or if so the hearing loss might not decrease quickly and ha are still a benefit. Also my opinion is surgery should be the last option not the first.

CIs are a lot of work, the mapping, training, listening. Its not for everyone and its only a device a tool. But if it is on your mind - discuss it with your doctor. Not all doctors are out to just do the surgery, most want what is best for the patient.
 
Audiofuzzy said:
I understand what you are saying Cheri but I am discussing why stick to old technology when the new, better one is available?

Fuzzy
Click to expand...

Hearing aids does not involves any surgery as cochlear implants does, there's a differences.

Supposedly someone gets a cochlear implant goes under the knife then the surgeon first drills a 3to 4 millimeter bed in the temporal bone then set everything up, then the patient goes home, After 4 to 6 weeks of healing, goes back to the office and get the cochlear implanted programmed.

What if the signals to the hearing nerve, doesn't work how is the user allow to hear? Is it worth to go though all that for nothing? Is it worth for a re-implanted?

No one can predict if the cochlear implant is gonna work for this person and not for the other person. We don't want to give people high expectations or high hopes that it's a guarantee device for everyone.

That's why I believe that cochlear implant is a personal choice should be made upon the person that wants it.
 
Audiofuzzy said:
Thanks - you are very close to what I am trying to say. I went even further than that, and am asking why even WAIT so long -or wait at all- why start with HAs ever instead of going to the source - a CI- right away...?

And no of course I am not being argumentative- I just find it as very interesting topic..

Fuzzy
Click to expand...

Politically, the red tape set by strict FDA guidelines. That is what prevents some from skipping over HA's and going right for the CI. As a part of the evaluation, they need to conduct speech discrimination test in the best aided conditions of both ears, not just one. If you are over the percentage that FDA requires, then clearly HA's are giving you benefit. CI surgery comes with risks and some of them are not so nice and some of them are corrected with a simple vaccine. For some the risks of the surgery do not outweigh the benefit.

I am thankful that it is difficult to get a CI because since we live in a capitalist country, the surgeon, hospital or audiologist cannot turn it into a get rich quick scheme because of the guidelines. There are audiologist out there that push hearing aids on a patient even if they know there will be no beneft. It is all money in their pocket.
 
Cheri said:
What if the signals to the hearing nerve, doesn't work how is the user allow to hear? Is it worth to go though all that for nothing? Is it worth for a re-implanted?

No one can predict if the cochlear implant is gonna work for this person and not for the other person. We don't want to give people high expectations or high hopes that it's a guarantee device for everyone.

That's why I believe that cochlear implant is a personal choice should be made upon the person that wants it.
Click to expand...

There are tests done to make sure that there is a working auditory nerve prior to the surgery. At the time of surgery, the implant is turned on and tests are conducted to make sure it is inserted properly and functioning before they even close you up.

They do tell you to keep your expectations and hopes low but your motivation and determination high.
 
contradica said:
There are tests done to make sure that there is a working auditory nerve prior to the surgery.
Click to expand...

Ok then tell me how come some experienced nothing or not getting as much out of their cochlear implant--can you please explain if you know? :)
 
The difference between a hearing aid and a cochlear implant is that a hearing aid amplifies the sounds. A cochlear implant sends the information through the cochlea to your brain.

The problem with a cochlear implant is that it will destroy the remaining hair cells inside your ear. So if a person with a hearing aid is able to carry on a conversation, talk on the phone and do anything they want to. Then they don't need a cochlear implant. Why destroy the remaining hair cells for something that isn't guaranteed to work when you're already doing well with the hearing aid?

Once you get implanted, you won't understand everything instantly. It takes time and you will have to go for re-mappings and all sorts of adjustments once in a while. It's not logical to make a risk when your hearing aid is fulfilling the purposes it was designed for.

Not everybody is a good candidate.
 
Cheri said:
Ok then tell me how come some experienced nothing or not getting as much out of their cochlear implant--can you please explain if you know? :)
Click to expand...

wow,, I know some people have differnet type of brands on what type of CI or ha they are using. I am using Med-el CI. So I went through several test before they could approve me to have it. So far my CI is working great for 3 years. So I don't have any problems with mine. I don't know how other people feelings are with CI and how they react to it if it works for them or not. I guess everybody different. I used to wear hearing aid almost my whole life and hear pretty well with it. But when I got older,, my hearing loss was getting more servre and worst. So I had other options to take CI. It took me like a year to think about it for long long time. But I went through with it and glad I did. I hope no one gonna judge me on that for getting CI. ahh. Smile.
 
Back
Top