Hearing loss Drugs and Treament.

I have this kind of hearing lost , sensor neural and my balance is getting worst as I get older , I sure would love to have a cure for this.
 
I would worry about what other cells it might start growing. The potential for encouraging cancers with this type of treatment seems strong.
 
Ausrider said:
Lets just wait and see what the side effects are
Click to expand...

LOL! How right you're ! I was going to take some meds for dizziness and I read the list of side effects and guess what one was ? Yup , is affected your balance . :roll:
 
This drug is new. I've just learned about it this past weekend.

From what I have read about this approach, only about 50% of hearing can be restored. Still, if that got me from profound to mild/moderate I'd be able to hear on the phone again.

I agree about side effects. It would be better to wait until the drug has been well used.

I wasn't really expecting something like this for about seven more years, but it appears to have a lot of money behind it.

Keep it on your bookmark, but don't throw the hearing aids out just yet.
 
Thanks, but I'd rather take my hearing at 20db with my CI rather than get something like this that would only give me moderate HL at best. And my CI doesn't sound unnatural or weird or artificial for that matter. Also if this is gene therapy only, it may or may not give anything meaninful to people who have non-genetic HL causes.
 
everlastingstorm said:
Thanks, but I'd rather take my hearing at 20db with my CI rather than get something like this that would only give me moderate HL at best. And my CI doesn't sound unnatural or weird or artificial for that matter. Also if this is gene therapy only, it may or may not give anything meaninful to people who have non-genetic HL causes.
Click to expand...

Interesting. Do you think a profound person with a CI hears better than a moderately deaf person? I don't think you would get the same range, but I don't know.
 
VacationGuy234 said:
Interesting. Do you think a profound person with a CI hears better than a moderately deaf person? I don't think you would get the same range, but I don't know.
Click to expand...

http://www.asha.org/public/hearing/Degree-of-Hearing-Loss/

These are the degrees of hearing loss according to the American Speech-Language Hearing Association.

"Moderate Hearing Loss" falls between 41db and 55db. With a moderate hearing loss, one will start to have a lot of trouble understanding speech. There are some speech sounds that fall outside the "speech banana" with that level of hearing loss, like the "k", "f", "th".

If a CI gives me 20db across all frequencies, that is certainly leaps better than a moderate hearing loss. My SRT is at 15db. So technically that means I'm getting some sounds at 15db, at least in speech. 20db is fairly normal for adults, but children with normal hearing should hear a little above 20db.

With unaided profound hearing loss, my hearing aids got me up to 45db, in the mid frequencies, which is in the moderate hearing loss category. My CI gives me 20db. Either you have a thing or two to learn about CIs or you are denying their potential outright. No CI audiologist would be satisfied with their patients hearing between 41-55db.
 
everlastingstorm said:
http://www.asha.org/public/hearing/Degree-of-Hearing-Loss/

These are the degrees of hearing loss according to the American Speech-Language Hearing Association.

"Moderate Hearing Loss" falls between 41db and 55db. With a moderate hearing loss, one will start to have a lot of trouble understanding speech. There are some speech sounds that fall outside the "speech banana" with that level of hearing loss, like the "k", "f", "th".

If a CI gives me 20db across all frequencies, that is certainly leaps better than a moderate hearing loss. My SRT is at 15db. So technically that means I'm getting some sounds at 15db, at least in speech. 20db is fairly normal for adults, but children with normal hearing should hear a little above 20db.

With unaided profound hearing loss, my hearing aids got me up to 45db, in the mid frequencies, which is in the moderate hearing loss category. My CI gives me 20db. Either you have a thing or two to learn about CIs or you are denying their potential outright. No CI audiologist would be satisfied with their patients hearing between 41-55db.
Click to expand...

I don't pretend to know about CIs because I don't wear one and I have no interest in getting one. I do know that there is a limit to the depth of the electrode which limits access to certain frequencies. At what point are you stating a gain of 20db? At the electrode point?

The hearing aids do work with damaged hair and that is the drawback. But, decreasing the amount of damaged hair will increase the ability to hear. Which may or may not be perfect, but it will be an improvement. And, it would be real hearing. I have delt with loss of hearing my whole life. For me, I would rather have real hearing.

If you feel the CI works better for you, there no reason to change it.
 
This also brings up another issue which I had not given any thought. If we could cure some hearing, how many people would take that option.

Obviously, there are some who would not. But, what is surprising is that perhaps assisted users, not just hard core Deaf, might also forgo treatment.

This is a curious view since assisted devices are not, at this point, better than human hearing. I have no doubt that they may be in the future and that could be an advantage.
 
VacationGuy234 said:
I don't pretend to know about CIs because I don't wear one and I have no interest in getting one. I do know that there is a limit to the depth of the electrode which limits access to certain frequencies. At what point are you stating a gain of 20db? At the electrode point?

The hearing aids do work with damaged hair and that is the drawback. But, decreasing the amount of damaged hair will increase the ability to hear. Which may or may not be perfect, but it will be an improvement. And, it would be real hearing. I have delt with loss of hearing my whole life. For me, I would rather have real hearing.

If you feel the CI works better for you, there no reason to change it.
Click to expand...

A CI bypasses the damaged hair cells and directly stimulates the auditory nerve. The electrode of my CI does not go all the way in so you don't hear below a certain hertz, but you pretty much hear all the frequencies that are tested on a standard audiogram, from 250 hertz to 8,000 hertz, the only exception being 125 hz which they don't test. That is different from decibels which refers to the volume in loudness/softness of any given sound across the frequencies. Thus, a 20db sound is quieter than a 40db sound and so on. When I say that I am hearing at 20db, I am referring to what my test results showed on my audiogram 3 weeks after I was implanted.

Although there is a limit with the lower frequencies, those lower sounds can be perceived by the brain via harmonics.

I think many people worry about the sound quality when they speak of hearing that is not "real". This "artificial hearing" with a CI really doesn't sound "artificial" when someone is implanted very young or has had hearing experience during their lives. Personally I would rather hear speech and sounds as clear as possible and be able to function in noise, even if those sounds are delivered digitally, than struggle with a moderate hearing loss.

No one is pushing anyone to get a CI, but saying that moderate hearing loss exceeds the kind of hearing potential that CI's can deliver is false.
 
Asked My Audi. This is her response. They are making head way on the genetic stuff. I knew that Vanderbilt University was working on regrowing hair cells a decade ago, but they were only able to keep the hair cells alive for 3-4 days in rats. It will be interesting to see how this develops in a human.



The other concern is that most people like yourself have sensori-neural hearing loss. This means that the hair cells could "fix" the sensory part of your hearing, but the neural issue would still remain. I have always said that once they could figure out how to make a parapalegic walk, then they could "cure" hearing loss and blindness.




Thank you for the article!! It looks like they have certainly figured out the "code" for sensory damage!!




Kristie .
 
Nobody answer my post. Its this closest thing to restore hearing? I lost 90% of my hearing due to a virus. The virus destroyed the hair cells in my Cochlea. Will this regrow the hair cells in my Cochlea?
 
The Joker said:
Nobody answer my post. Its this closest thing to restore hearing? I lost 90% of my hearing due to a virus. The virus destroyed the hair cells in my Cochlea. Will this regrow the hair cells in my Cochlea?
Click to expand...

Sure if you want to lose the SSDI benefit and make you looking for a job.
 
If the hair cells are restored and you have that type of loss, yes, it would cure it. At this point, they are not saying everything will be restored. I'm sure that is a goal, but it has not been confirmed yet. We have to wait until after the trials.

Fox, good point about SSDI. I wonder if that would be replaced with rehabilitation benefits.
 
VacationGuy234 said:
If the hair cells are restored and you have that type of loss, yes, it would cure it. At this point, they are not saying everything will be restored. I'm sure that is a goal, but it has not been confirmed yet. We have to wait until after the trials.

Fox, good point about SSDI. I wonder if that would be replaced with rehabilitation benefits.
Click to expand...

I doubt it since you can hear so you can be a secretary .
 
I predict any cures for loss will benefit late deafened people. They're the only ones who were ever able to process sound the way hearing people do.I think even in a thousand years we'll still have loads of dhh kids
 
Back
Top