But unfortunately I don't think 90 percent of parents include ASL in their CI children's toolbox. Just as they don't with HOH children either. They just don't consider it neccessary which is where the problems lie.
FDA-Shocking Results on CI Statically
- Thread starter Kalista
- Start date
- Status
But unfortunately I don't think 90 percent of parents include ASL in their CI children's toolbox. Just as they don't with HOH children either. They just don't consider it neccessary which is where the problems lie.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2008
- Messages
- 43,645
- Reaction score
- 504
I am.
R
rockdrummer
Guest
First of I can't follow what Kalistas link is saying so I can't comment on it. Is this just more hearsay without backing it up with facts? Where is the actual FDA study?
We have discussed in other threads about how "success" is measured. If the implant was put in correctly the surgeon considers it a success. If the implant can communicate with the external processor the manufacture considers it a success. Those numbers I am quite sure make it into the statistics. However, what about the soft failures where the patient gains no benefit from the CI in connecting with the world around them. Where are those stats?
One thing that I keep hearing from some deaf folks is that parents choose a CI because they are lazy or because they don't accept their deaf child for who they are. I wish those people that make those claims would stop generalizing. While that may be the case for some, I have yet to encounter a parent that has chosen the CI route because they think it's easier. In fact, there is nothing easy about it.
Tousi
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2003
- Messages
- 18,461
- Reaction score
- 182
Yeah, RD, I wanna know all that stuff, too. I am pretty sure now that the kind of results I am looking for just isn't out there and also not the FDA's job. It would be a complicated undertaking and would cost loads of money and would need to be from a completely unbiased commission. So we are not going to see anything like that soon, IMO. Not even via a FOIA search, I don't think.......
somedeafdudefromPNW
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2009
- Messages
- 9,499
- Reaction score
- 1
It has closed captioning. You just have to enable it on YouTube. Just click on the little triangle on the far right.
That isn't much use for Deafblind people like me who can't read captions. Could someone provide a transcription. I would have asked earlier but it's first I even knew people were responding to a vidio. I thought it was just a general discussion about CI safety.
This can be achieved by exposing a deaf child to sign language and Deaf culture. If parents choose the CI, chances are there's more to it than just opening doors because they could easily do that with sign language.
somedeafdudefromPNW
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2009
- Messages
- 9,499
- Reaction score
- 1
Aaaaaah.
Sorry about that dreama. Um, I will see what I can do. It's about nine minutes long. I will poke the original user to see if she is willing to send the .SRT or .SUB for copy and paste. Will also ask if she could paste the entire transcript from now on in her video-blogs.
Meanwhile... I will start typing.
Thanks.
That's true.
The biggest issues I have with CI in children is the fact doors are often closed when then this choice is made. I mean that a lot of doctors, Audiologist and speech trainers don't aprove of signing for CI users.
I think that there are laws in canada specifically saying that you either used signing OR you had your child implanted. You weren't alowed to do both. Souggy can correct me if I'm wrong there? It's just something I remember.
children (Wether HOH, profoundly deaf or CI users) suffer more isolation if not exposed to sign language. Before anyone tries to deny it, some oral deaf say their education was perfectly ok but then they seem the first on the list for wanting a cure for their deafness whereas I don't see so much need for a cure from the signing deaf community. That evidence seems to speak for itself.
somedeafdudefromPNW
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2009
- Messages
- 9,499
- Reaction score
- 1
Finished the transcript... First I am going to answer dreama's question.
Who told you this? Miss Buckets? While it is true the Canadian federal government is more powerful than the federal in the States, the provinces in Canada actually have more power over themselves than the individual states in the US have.
Far as I am aware, Alberta and B.C. has no such educational law regarding cochlear implants.
What you see is what you get with the closed captioning on the video-blog. Alright?
dreama said:
Who told you this? Miss Buckets? While it is true the Canadian federal government is more powerful than the federal in the States, the provinces in Canada actually have more power over themselves than the individual states in the US have.
Far as I am aware, Alberta and B.C. has no such educational law regarding cochlear implants.
What you see is what you get with the closed captioning on the video-blog. Alright?
Transcript of Aguabo's "FDA: Shocking Results on Cochlear Implants" on DeafTV said:
jillio
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2006
- Messages
- 60,232
- Reaction score
- 19
Sad, but true.
VamPyroX
bloody phreak from hell
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2003
- Messages
- 34,374
- Reaction score
- 21
Wow... that was the longest 9 minutes I have ever experienced in my life!
(Seriously, this could have save me a lot of time instead of wearing my brain out watching 9 minutes of what seems to be repetitive signing and information.)
Anyways, while Wikipedia is a good source of information... there will always be a small part of an article that's false or misleading due to what was put there by some random person out there.
For all we know, it was probably an anti-CI person who posted that article without backing it up. Then after Google updated their cache, someone else (or the same person) had that part removed for specific reasons (shame, false, no valid source, etc).
So, should we say that cochlear implants really has a low success rate? Who knows? Maybe it does. Maybe it doesn't.
But one thing I do think needs to be done is more research into this subject.
Doing research into this will be very difficult due to how many people get cochlear implants and how many actually follow up on it.
I have friends who got CI, but stopped using them a few months later. Their reason was that they got tired of it.
Well, it takes patience and practice to improve on listening, understanding, and speaking. At first, you won't immediately recognize sounds that you hear. After time and patience, you will. At first, you will speak differently. After time and patience, you will learn to pronounce things properly. So, if you don't have the time or patience to do it... who is to say whether it was successful or not? Being able to understand sounds and speak like a hearing person doesn't happen overnight.
I have one friend who spent 3 years in order to learn to say things 90% proper pronunciation. If you weren't listening too hard, you could probably say that she spoke like a hearing person.
That's part of what would make it difficult. If people (who got CI) don't follow up with their doctor or audiologists, then how can we get reliable information on how well cochlear implants work?
Oh, babies getting CIs? That's another issue. They get CIs and parents don't use sign language (as rumored to be not recommended by doctors) with their kids. When those babies grow older and still show lack of hearing and understanding, could it be the CI or their brain development. Who knows? We can't give a very good accurate reading on whether CI is good on kids. It's also an issue of nature versus nurture. A deaf kid (without CI) raised with very communicative parents (who use ASL/SEE) could be better than a deaf kid (with CI) raised by not-so-communicative parents (who treat their kid like a hearing person with the assumption that he/she can learn everything on his/her own). That would be the case of nurture, not nature.
But then there's nature. Perhaps, the CI didn't work. The kid doesn't hear anything or does hear something, but not understand it... with CI. So, is the CI really working or is it because the kid's brain is not processing the sound properly.
There are a lot of things to be considered with researching on the success rate of cochlear implants.
That's why people shouldn't immediately treat cochlear implants as a "cure" or a "fix" for deafness. There are still other things to consider... plus patience.
(Seriously, this could have save me a lot of time instead of wearing my brain out watching 9 minutes of what seems to be repetitive signing and information.)
Anyways, while Wikipedia is a good source of information... there will always be a small part of an article that's false or misleading due to what was put there by some random person out there.
For all we know, it was probably an anti-CI person who posted that article without backing it up. Then after Google updated their cache, someone else (or the same person) had that part removed for specific reasons (shame, false, no valid source, etc).
So, should we say that cochlear implants really has a low success rate? Who knows? Maybe it does. Maybe it doesn't.
But one thing I do think needs to be done is more research into this subject.
Doing research into this will be very difficult due to how many people get cochlear implants and how many actually follow up on it.
I have friends who got CI, but stopped using them a few months later. Their reason was that they got tired of it.
Well, it takes patience and practice to improve on listening, understanding, and speaking. At first, you won't immediately recognize sounds that you hear. After time and patience, you will. At first, you will speak differently. After time and patience, you will learn to pronounce things properly. So, if you don't have the time or patience to do it... who is to say whether it was successful or not? Being able to understand sounds and speak like a hearing person doesn't happen overnight.
I have one friend who spent 3 years in order to learn to say things 90% proper pronunciation. If you weren't listening too hard, you could probably say that she spoke like a hearing person.
That's part of what would make it difficult. If people (who got CI) don't follow up with their doctor or audiologists, then how can we get reliable information on how well cochlear implants work?
Oh, babies getting CIs? That's another issue. They get CIs and parents don't use sign language (as rumored to be not recommended by doctors) with their kids. When those babies grow older and still show lack of hearing and understanding, could it be the CI or their brain development. Who knows? We can't give a very good accurate reading on whether CI is good on kids. It's also an issue of nature versus nurture. A deaf kid (without CI) raised with very communicative parents (who use ASL/SEE) could be better than a deaf kid (with CI) raised by not-so-communicative parents (who treat their kid like a hearing person with the assumption that he/she can learn everything on his/her own). That would be the case of nurture, not nature.
But then there's nature. Perhaps, the CI didn't work. The kid doesn't hear anything or does hear something, but not understand it... with CI. So, is the CI really working or is it because the kid's brain is not processing the sound properly.
There are a lot of things to be considered with researching on the success rate of cochlear implants.
That's why people shouldn't immediately treat cochlear implants as a "cure" or a "fix" for deafness. There are still other things to consider... plus patience.
I've also been looking for statistics on success rates but I couldn't find any either.
It would be interesting to have stastistics on:
How many implantee wear their CI?
How many can hear on the phone.
The life expectancy of someone who is implanted with a CI in comparision to the general life expectancy of all Deaf and HOH people.
These are stastistics I'd be very curious to read about.
I also looked at Wilko and but couldn't find the part that was stated in this vidio. It's not particularly factual. It says that deaf that were born deaf don't benifit from CI when it seems some do. Certainly HOH and some congenitally born deaf do. In fact I've been noticing them as being among the most successful.
It would be interesting to have stastistics on:
How many implantee wear their CI?
How many can hear on the phone.
The life expectancy of someone who is implanted with a CI in comparision to the general life expectancy of all Deaf and HOH people.
These are stastistics I'd be very curious to read about.
I also looked at Wilko and but couldn't find the part that was stated in this vidio. It's not particularly factual. It says that deaf that were born deaf don't benifit from CI when it seems some do. Certainly HOH and some congenitally born deaf do. In fact I've been noticing them as being among the most successful.
- Status