Finally, a great comparison of what hearing thru a CI is like..

Wpild like to ask a question....what about those who are late-deafened, say teens or early/late adults....And thinking about another member who had a CI, went deaf in her 40's...and still having problems....Feel sure the "sounds" you seem to hear with a CI are not the same sounds you heard before losing ur hearing...am I right?
 
rockin'robin said:
Wpild like to ask a question....what about those who are late-deafened, say teens or early/late adults....And thinking about another member who had a CI, went deaf in her 40's...and still having problems....Feel sure the "sounds" you seem to hear with a CI are not the same sounds you heard before losing ur hearing...am I right?
Click to expand...

Well, how long has she had it? Did she spend a long time deaf before she got it? Meaning did her brain go through a long period with little no auditory input? Was she born Hoh and just had more hearing loss? Are you thinking of Angel who is a horse of an entirely different color? No offense Angel if you read this I'm not comparing you to a horse but I think you know what I mean.
 
rockin'robin said:
Wpild like to ask a question....what about those who are late-deafened, say teens or early/late adults....And thinking about another member who had a CI, went deaf in her 40's...and still having problems....Feel sure the "sounds" you seem to hear with a CI are not the same sounds you heard before losing ur hearing...am I right?
Click to expand...

They are the same for the most part. Even if I don't fit your criteria for teens or early/late adults.. most of the ones that I know that do fit that criteria agree that it sounds very similar. In fact, in quiet they almost all say it sounds exactly like they remember. They become more aware of the difference when they are in noise and the difficulty becomes apparent.

The ones that don't experience it as they remember (in the long run since it takes time for the brain to figure it all out) have additional issues that prevent them from getting the full benefit of the CI.
 
same deal for ASL to learn in the early age with surgery free, so it would be benefit to have BOTH. :ugh3:
 
Who said anything about not learning ASL as well? Oh wait, nobody did. The kid will still be deaf, of course they should ASL.
 
ambrosia said:
It's useless Audiofuzzy. There's ignorance, then there's willfull ignorance. I'll let you decide what's the case here. ;) Although....there does seem to be some reading comprehension issues at work so maybe it's legit ignorance, and not leading a horse to water but being able make it drink.
Click to expand...

I've wanted to say this for a long time, but, you have more balls than I do.....:cool2:

Like I told a couple others, there are members here that only see what they want to see, and stick with their interpretation, even if it is wrong....so any attempt to clarify is futile at best.
 
rockin'robin said:
Wpild like to ask a question....what about those who are late-deafened, say teens or early/late adults....And thinking about another member who had a CI, went deaf in her 40's...and still having problems....Feel sure the "sounds" you seem to hear with a CI are not the same sounds you heard before losing ur hearing...am I right?
Click to expand...

That is a question everyone should be asking.

I know a few late-deafened adults in town that were in that situation, almost all of them say the same thing: The sounds are different, but very similar to normal hearing. After the brain adapts, all sounds pretty much sound normal.

With the CI's, you DON'T have normal hearing, you have assisted hearing. It is up to your brain to decipher what it is hearing.

Everyone's hearing loss is different, therefore everyone will respond differently. Those that are late-deafened usually benefit the most. Those that were implanted at early age (less than 2) usually do very well. Those that have had some hearing and used HA's most of their lives do better than HA's, but do not do as well as the others. And, lastly, most that have been deaf most of their lives do NOT do well.

Those that become deaf due to brain injuries are the most unpredictable.....those are the difficult ones, as the CI is meant to replace the damaged hair cells in the cochlea, NOT the auditory nerve.
 
ambrosia said:
Who said anything about not learning ASL as well? Oh wait, nobody did. The kid will still be deaf, of course they should ASL.
Click to expand...

If you say so then tell to the new parents of deaf babies with CI about what you say so. Thank you. :ugh3:
 
Audiofuzzy said:
Bebonang said:
No it's not, however the degree to which you can learn to hear, to understand thru a CI,
depends HOW OLD you were when implanted. The earlier the better. period.



First of all, I am sorry, I am confused - "the deaf go deaf"?? "complication in the surgery"???
WHAT complication? Also, I am not sure what you mean by 'deaf go deaf',
but guess you pertain to the remaining working nerves being damaged
during surgery?
y:shock: well, in place of those last, badly working nerves (what do you hear thru them, anyway, hmmm??)
you are getting 22 electrodes that will enable you to hear close to what a hearing person hear.
Ty well you learn to RECOGNIZE the sounds the hearing person can do easily, depends - again - how old you were when you were implanted.

If you get implanted as a baby -born deaf - it is highly guaranteed you will hear like a hearing person does,
if you -born deaf- will get implanted LATE in life - as late as past 3 years old,
the outcome is not as successful -meaning - you may have trouble recognizing what you hear.
you even may not be successful hearing thru CI at all - simply because of being implanted later in life.

I still remember one of the AD members who got his implant late in life and was severely disappointed. He was born deaf, implanted late.
I don't remember his username, except that he was an animal lover, a vegetarian and, I think, either Chinese or Japanese.



Fuzzy
Click to expand...

Bottesini said:
Audiofuzzy said:
. So that means you are against implanting deaf people unless you can do it before age three ?
Click to expand...

Audiofuzzy said:
Bottesini said:
Oh my gosh!
Where did you get that idea??????????

Fuzzy
Click to expand...
It is the third paragraph of your post above. Studies have shown that is not entirely true. Such extremely early implantation is not that critical.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Well, at the least, I still remember how you guys treated one certain member like shit when she said something so negative about her parents would choose to implant her at early ages.....

You don't care or concern about her well being if she gets her implants at young age, she would have not meet her current friends and people she personally know.

This thread is nothing but disgusting.
 
green427 said:
That is a question everyone should be asking.

I know a few late-deafened adults in town that were in that situation, almost all of them say the same thing: The sounds are different, but very similar to normal hearing. After the brain adapts, all sounds pretty much sound normal.

With the CI's, you DON'T have normal hearing, you have assisted hearing. It is up to your brain to decipher what it is hearing.

Everyone's hearing loss is different, therefore everyone will respond differently. Those that are late-deafened usually benefit the most. Those that were implanted at early age (less than 2) usually do very well. Those that have had some hearing and used HA's most of their lives do better than HA's, but do not do as well as the others. And, lastly, most that have been deaf most of their lives do NOT do well.

Those that become deaf due to brain injuries are the most unpredictable.....those are the difficult ones, as the CI is meant to replace the damaged hair cells in the cochlea, NOT the auditory nerve.
Click to expand...

Thank you!...That's almost like clarity...and thanks for ur input.
 
wow. Pretty intense thread. :eek3:

but it was great insight into both views of the CI.:hmm:
so... thanks everyone!:wave:

Also, I was honestly curious when I opened this thread about what the CI sounds like.
I have gathered that it changes over time to become clearer (also dependent on the age of implantation)? and that these changes are because the brain begins to recognize the sounds?

so this would be like.. a person that can read Norwegian but never heard it spoken moved to Norway and immersed themselves in the language. Over time they would be able to understand the cadences of the language and pick out the words. Eventually becoming comfortable with this language but it might never be like their native language. (unless the person was very young when beginning to learn the language) ?
 
MsSaraB said:
wow. Pretty intense thread. :eek3:

but it was great insight into both views of the CI.:hmm:
so... thanks everyone!:wave:

Also, I was honestly curious when I opened this thread about what the CI sounds like.
I have gathered that it changes over time to become clearer (also dependent on the age of implantation)? and that these changes are because the brain begins to recognize the sounds?

so this would be like.. a person that can read Norwegian but never heard it spoken moved to Norway and immersed themselves in the language. Over time they would be able to understand the cadences of the language and pick out the words. Eventually becoming comfortable with this language but it might never be like their native language. (unless the person was very young when beginning to learn the language) ?
Click to expand...

Don't forget that listening to music will never be the same for those that have a memory of particular songs/artists.
 
i went to shop few weeks back,i saw this pakistani chap with CI i was surprised to see him i thought he visitor but turn out he lived there for years but his life only had value when he got his CI This boy could not do bsl he only had his near relatives for company,i started bsl with him but member of his family stopped me said no allow him to do this..to me it seemed he was treated like a dog until he got his CI ..kept saying to me get one i said no ,he genuinly could not see how revulsed i was by his family actions.
 
I suppose CI or no CI it's between him and his family (depending on whether he is underage or not) but I can't see how refusing to allow him access to a language that would connect him with others who could understand would do anyone any good. :/ I hope he learns to stand up for himself.
 
rockin'robin said:
Pls. correc me, Travis if I read this wrong, I'm trying to learn more pure ASL..

I think you said: ....."Also, I have hearing loss...but became pro deaf as the reason...I already knew of my hearing loss... Already, I'm oral and lipread and speech, mixing them up...I have 2 hearing aids, both ears....I doubt, I accept to willing to be deaf (?)...I am straight deaf, I do well...to view point my point...I have hearing loss because my HL is broken...On sound reason, I have a problem hearing sound.....
Click to expand...
I agree you point, that is exactly! you are correct,, I doubt you are right I wise viewpoint, I am very accept, hearing loss, I have hearing loss, I am very wonder on my hearing aid, I am HL is very odd!

I wonder!! I am very accept it pro deaf! I knew!!! , I believe it
 
Bottesini said:
Audiofuzzy said:
It is the third paragraph of your post above. Studies have shown that is not entirely true. Such extremely early implantation is not that critical.
Click to expand...

Please show me these studies.


here's mine:
An exploratory look at pediatric cochlear implantat... [Ear Hear. 2008] - PubMed - NCBI

2008
DESIGN:

Ninety-six children with congenital profound sensorineural hearing loss bilaterally and no additional identified disabilities who were implanted before the age of 4 yrs were stratified into four groups based on age at implantation. Children's spoken language development was followed for at least 2 yrs after device activation. Spoken language scores and rate of development were evaluated along with four covariates (unaided pure-tone average, communication mode, gender, and estimated family income) as a function of age at implantation.

RESULTS:
In general, the developmental trajectories of children implanted earlier were significantly better than those of children implanted later. However, the advantage of implanting children before 1-yr old versus waiting until the child was between 1 and 2 yrs was small and only was evident in receptive language development, not expressive language or word recognition development. Age at implantation did not significantly influence the rate of the word recognition development, but did influence the rate of both receptive and expressive language acquisition: children implanted earlier in life had faster rates of spoken language acquisition than children implanted later in life.
CONCLUSIONS:

Further, oral language development progressed faster in children implanted earlier rather than later in of life (up to age 4 yrs),

this, in pdf, you'll need to open but it's well worth it
http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j...v4rWiuSRQWO50i0TQ&sig2=l99f18wlJUMCnrMXrXgq-w

No, I am not against implanting late, but I do believe the earlier the better - no contest.

As for the paragraphs and whatever,
I was merely trying to explain to Bebonag how she misunderstood the words "successful" and the context it was used in.

What is Context
discourse that surrounds a language unit and helps to determine its interpretation

also, I tried to explain why earlier is better.

Hope that clarify things for you, Bottesini.

Fuzzy
Click to expand...
 
Wirelessly posted

These Scientific studies - visualizing 'guinea pigs' in an experiment - history repeats itself once again.
 
Back
Top