CI candidacy....

[deafskeptic]

I've not had much tinnitus since I got implanted. The only time I had that since I got implanted was when the landline phone rang. It was so loud and jarring that I got rid of it. It's more than 30 years old and has no volume control. It'd make my ear ring and now I have peace and quiet thanks to my new landline phone.

 

[R2D2]

I would have horrendous bouts of tinnitus before my CI. Since then I have noticed that my tinnitus is barely audible with and without my CI on. I have heard of it making it worse but I thank my lucky stars that it has been relatively quiet.

Fantastic!

 

[deafdyke]

and I just gotta say that I think that severe tinintas and recruitment cases should be able to get implanted with NO hassle!
I kind of wish that audis here pushed the body worn/pocket aid.(it's still used in Europe and other countries) I really do think in SOME cases, some people just need a more powerful hearing aid. Size is still pretty much indictive of power. Just like the way hoh people can "hear" with the "dinky" aids (the ITE and smaller) but only get really good results from BTEs.

 

[LuciaDisturbed]

I've not had much tinnitus since I got implanted. The only time I had that since I got implanted was when the landline phone rang. It was so loud and jarring that I got rid of it. It's more than 30 years old and has no volume control. It'd make my ear ring and now I have peace and quiet thanks to my new landline phone.

My phone is like 20 to 30 years old and the ring is so fucking loud...to the point where I've had to unplug it from the wall. I don't need it unless my fiance is over here and he is expecting a call from his grandparents. It goes Riiiiiiinnnnnggg Riiiiinnnnngggg riiiiiinnnnnggg and it really bothers my poor brain!

 

[Audiofuzzy]

I heard to well to qualify when in a nice quiet sound booth. But that's not life.

That's exactly how I "failed", too. I did thought it's too perfect a condition to hear., though, not reflected in real life at all, and if I truly wanted to I could challenge that. But I am not in any hurry. yet.

My phone is like 20 to 30 years old and the ring is so fucking loud...

And I always looked for phones like that, what with my HAs
Why not consider buying one with milder ringer and with the volume control?
Unless you have another one, of course!

Fuzzy

 

[Tousi]

Or stuff a wad of Kleenexes into the area where the bell is since it's obvious this is not a digital phone......to muffle the sound.

 

[Sunshine1]

My friend in Chicago (IL, USA) still wearing body hearing aids!!!

and I just gotta say that I think that severe tinintas and recruitment cases should be able to get implanted with NO hassle!
I kind of wish that audis here pushed the body worn/pocket aid.(it's still used in Europe and other countries) I really do think in SOME cases, some people just need a more powerful hearing aid. Size is still pretty much indictive of power. Just like the way hoh people can "hear" with the "dinky" aids (the ITE and smaller) but only get really good results from BTEs.

 

[Audiofuzzy]

That reminds me of a most funny cartoon I saw a long time ago.

It depicted an elderly man with two huge stereo speakers taped to his sides, and a large microphone taped above his forehead, pointed forward.
and the caption under the picture said "How's that new hearing aid working, Grandpa?"

that sure could have been a powerful aid!


Fuzzy

 

[jag]

My phone is like 20 to 30 years old and the ring is so fucking loud...to the point where I've had to unplug it from the wall. I don't need it unless my fiance is over here and he is expecting a call from his grandparents. It goes Riiiiiiinnnnnggg Riiiiinnnnngggg riiiiiinnnnnggg and it really bothers my poor brain!

Is the ringer set at the lowest setting? I havn't had an older phone like that in the house for about 15 yrs but I always had the ringer set high way back then so just thought I'd ask.

 

[R2D2]

and I just gotta say that I think that severe tinintas and recruitment cases should be able to get implanted with NO hassle!
I kind of wish that audis here pushed the body worn/pocket aid.(it's still used in Europe and other countries) I really do think in SOME cases, some people just need a more powerful hearing aid. Size is still pretty much indictive of power. Just like the way hoh people can "hear" with the "dinky" aids (the ITE and smaller) but only get really good results from BTEs.

I can see how a bodyworn might be useful if the distortion is being caused by the close distance of the microphone to the ear on the BTE, however for other distortions it won't make any difference.

Remember, a lot of the stuff with deafness and devices is not about the power or volume but rather the clarity. I'm sure like me, you've probably rolled your eyes when hearing people turn up the volume on the TV for you, not realising that you can hear it but just cannot understand it. At profound levels of deafness, hearing aids sound more distorted because there is only so much it can do with lots of severely damaged hair nerves.

 

[Audiofuzzy]

At profound levels of deafness, hearing aids sound more distorted because there is only so much it can do with lots of severely damaged hair nerves.

Simply saying, a hearing aid is an amplifier. It can not amplify sounds our ear no longer receives. this is why HA will never help hear quite clearly, no matter how much it amplifies. it's like a guitar with missing strings - no matter how loud is the guitar, missing strings will not produce sound.

Ci works differently.

How does a cochlear implant work?
A cochlear implant is very different from a hearing aid. Hearing aids amplify sounds so they may be detected by damaged ears. Cochlear implants bypass damaged portions of the ear and directly stimulate the auditory nerve. Signals generated by the implant are sent by way of the auditory nerve to the brain, which recognizes the signals as sound. Hearing through a cochlear implant is different from normal hearing and takes time to learn or relearn. However, it allows many people to recognize warning signals, understand other sounds in the environment, and enjoy a conversation in person or by telephone.

Cochlear Implants


Fuzzy

 

[deafdyke]

I know the difference between CI and HA. But the thing is, that "profound" loss encompasses a HUGE range, from people who can only hear 10% of words/sentances unaided to only being able to hear enviromental sounds to nothing at all. I really do think that some of the people on the upper end of the profound scale might be able to benifit more from more powerful aids.......that's all I'm saying.

 

[deafskeptic]

I know the difference between CI and HA. But the thing is, that "profound" loss encompasses a HUGE range, from people who can only hear 10% of words/sentances unaidedto only being able to hear enviromental sounds to nothing at all. I really do think that some of the people on the upper end of the profound scale might be able to benifit more from more powerful aids.......that's all I'm saying.

Actually I would say it'd be more accurate to say that profound deafnesses ranges from being able to understand 10% of words aided to only being able to understand environmental sounds aided to nothing at all. I find it hard to believe that those with severe loss - let alone profound deafness- to understand sentences 10% of the time unaided. They might be able to hear very loud environmental sounds unaided but I'm certain that they won't be able to hear the hinges of the door squeaking when it's opened unaided.

I always could hear speech but it was rarely clear to me with my HA. Now I can understand speech a lot better with CI but it's still subpar compared to the hearing. I don't understand all speakers and some speakers are hard for me to understand.

 

[deafdyke]

*shrugs* I was just basing that on something the mom of a deaf kid over at DumbNotes, said. Her son could hear 60%ish with HAs, but was classified as profoundly deaf (and got implanted) b/c without aids he only could hear 10%.

 

[Audiofuzzy]

I know the difference between CI and HA. But the thing is, that "profound" loss encompasses a HUGE range, from people who can only hear 10% of words/sentances unaided to only being able to hear enviromental sounds to nothing at all. I really do think that some of the people on the upper end of the profound scale might be able to benifit more from more powerful aids.......that's all I'm saying.

Okay, but have you ever considered taking a step back, and view it from perspective- what's the point of this whole hullabaloo about CI, after all it's just a device. Granted, it requires small surgery, but still. to tell you the truth, sometimes I wonder why it have to be the "last resort"..?
If anybody is interested in it it's because he/she is interested in hearing better, right?
So if one is interested in hearing best as possible - what's the problem? why not go for "the real thing"?

Let's also not forget that CI can be removed in most cases, it's just not covered ,and not popular, but it can be done. So if someone is unhappy very much- removal is possible.
Btw, I think this is one more reason to consider if CI really wanted - because of certain "permanency" of it.
(apart from losing residual hearing, of course)


Fuzzy

 

[Cloggy]

I know the difference between CI and HA. But the thing is, that "profound" loss encompasses a HUGE range, from people who can only hear 10% of words/sentances unaided to only being able to hear enviromental sounds to nothing at all. I really do think that some of the people on the upper end of the profound scale might be able to benifit more from more powerful aids.......that's all I'm saying.

Not really..

 

[R2D2]

*shrugs* I was just basing that on something the mom of a deaf kid over at DumbNotes, said. Her son could hear 60%ish with HAs, but was classified as profoundly deaf (and got implanted) b/c without aids he only could hear 10%.

I'm wondering maybe the testing was with visual cues (i.e. lipreading). I can't see how it's possible to be profoundly deaf and hear even as much as 10% without visual cues and being unaided. There's something wrong with that scenario. Now if lipreading was involved, the 60% with aids and 10% without would make sense to me.

I was made to do hearing aid speech tests both with lipreading and without. My scores were much better with lipreading but lipreading is exhausting when used for long periods.

 

[jillio]

I know the difference between CI and HA. But the thing is, that "profound" loss encompasses a HUGE range, from people who can only hear 10% of words/sentances unaided to only being able to hear enviromental sounds to nothing at all. I really do think that some of the people on the upper end of the profound scale might be able to benifit more from more powerful aids.......that's all I'm saying.

Not to mention different etiologies, which respond to amplification differently. All profound deafness is not the same.

 

[jag]

I can see how a bodyworn might be useful if the distortion is being caused by the close distance of the microphone to the ear on the BTE, however for other distortions it won't make any difference.

Remember, a lot of the stuff with deafness and devices is not about the power or volume but rather the clarity. I'm sure like me, you've probably rolled your eyes when hearing people turn up the volume on the TV for you, not realising that you can hear it but just cannot understand it. At profound levels of deafness, hearing aids sound more distorted because there is only so much it can do with lots of severely damaged hair nerves.

I didn't get the distortion from the BTE because of being to close to the mic. I got the dreaded sqeals because of the mic being to close. So had to turn the nice powerful aide down so it wouldn't sqeal. Course when it was turned up and actually not squealing alot of sounds hurt my ear, but I still could'nt understand. Ahh weren't those the days. UGH.

 

[LTHFAdvocate]

You don't need to be categorized as profoundly deaf any more to be a CI candidate under the FDA system. 60 % word recognition under best aided conditions combined with the right audiogram is generally sufficient. What constitutes the right audiogram depends on age. For adults, you can have residual low frequency hearing as high as 50 dB, and as long as your word recognition is 60 % or less, you qualify. This happens sometimes because 50 dB hearing at 250 dB does very little to help you with understanding speech.

The FDA criteria includes nothing about unaided word recognition, FYI. It just isn't a consideration. Most clinics abide by FDA criteria because insurers don't pay when they perform a service that is outside of the FDA criteria.

Sheri

*shrugs* I was just basing that on something the mom of a deaf kid over at DumbNotes, said. Her son could hear 60%ish with HAs, but was classified as profoundly deaf (and got implanted) b/c without aids he only could hear 10%.