i asked this elsewhere..

Beach girl said:
How many deaths from meningitis have there ever been? How about more recently, now that the implant procedure and the hardware have been improved? Were the deaths in children who had been vaccinated against meningitis, or not?

It's a good idea to have a really clear picture of the statistical risks of choosing one option over another, because everyone has a point of saying "OK, this is an acceptable level of risk, considering the benefits" vs. "wouldn't do that on a bet!"
Click to expand...

does it matter? risk is still there.
 
Of course it matters

There are nearly 40,000 deaths from car accidents in the U.S. every year. Does that stop you from driving a car?

There is a small number of women who die in childbirth in the U.S. every year. Will that stop you from ever having kids?

Some kids drown in backyard pools. Will that stop someone from having a pool, if they don't have kids and only have visiting nieces and nephews from time to time?

There is a risk of investment loss (as we've seen last week!) if you put money in the stock market. Long-term, will that stop you from investing?

My point is: for nearly every human activity - even staying home! - there is some level of risk and some level of benefit. It's important to know the probability of a given risk and the probability of the corresponding benefit, and decide accordingly.
 
Beach girl said:
Of course it matters

There are nearly 40,000 deaths from car accidents in the U.S. every year. Does that stop you from driving a car?

There is a small number of women who die in childbirth in the U.S. every year. Will that stop you from ever having kids?

Some kids drown in backyard pools. Will that stop someone from having a pool, if they don't have kids and only have visiting nieces and nephews from time to time?

There is a risk of investment loss (as we've seen last week!) if you put money in the stock market. Long-term, will that stop you from investing?

My point is: for nearly every human activity - even staying home! - there is some level of risk and some level of benefit. It's important to know the probability of a given risk and the probability of the corresponding benefit, and decide accordingly.
Click to expand...

but.... we're not talking about car deaths, backyard pools, or having baby. Totally unrelated. This is not just a health risk that largely concerns us.... it's more of social & developmental risk that a deaf child will face because of false hope.
 
Well, it's a foreign object in the body is not quite a good idea. So you know, better focus on other things that need to work on.


I am with Jiro, in his last sentence.
 
Jiro said:
does it matter? risk is still there.
Click to expand...

Beach girl said:
Of course it matters

There are nearly 40,000 deaths from car accidents in the U.S. every year. Does that stop you from driving a car?

There is a small number of women who die in childbirth in the U.S. every year. Will that stop you from ever having kids?

Some kids drown in backyard pools. Will that stop someone from having a pool, if they don't have kids and only have visiting nieces and nephews from time to time?

There is a risk of investment loss (as we've seen last week!) if you put money in the stock market. Long-term, will that stop you from investing?

My point is: for nearly every human activity - even staying home! - there is some level of risk and some level of benefit. It's important to know the probability of a given risk and the probability of the corresponding benefit, and decide accordingly.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you are both in agreement. BeachGirl says that everyone has a different level of acceptable risk. Jiro says he would not accept any level of risk (I assume he would not even accept a Zero level of risk). Both have come to terms with their own level of acceptable risk.

I (since I have a CI) have obviously accepted a higher than zero risk. However, I am on the fence for a second CI. I have to once again gauge the level of risk I am comfortable with before proceeding with a second CI.
 
Cheetah said:
Children cannot make the determination. They just don't have the capacity.
Click to expand...

which is why it's better to wait and ask if they want it when they get older
 
Frisky Feline said:
Well, it's a foreign object in the body is not quite a good idea. So you know, better focus on other things that need to work on.


I am with Jiro, in his last sentence.
Click to expand...

Pacemakers are foreign objects. People with broken bones sometimes end up with screws and metal plates holding the bones together. My brother-in-law had brain surgery a while ago (about 3 years ago) and now has a small metal plate in his head.

Thousands of people have foreign objects in their bodies. The vast majority of them have no problem with these objects.

I'm not advocating for or against a CI for any given person, just saying that evaluating the particular risk is important. That would include knowing the details of how the risks might have changed with improved technology.

Cheetah, right. I get what you're saying about gauging the risk before you do the 2nd CI. Everyone has a different risk/benefit analysis.
 
Beach girl said:
Pacemakers are foreign objects. People with broken bones sometimes end up with screws and metal plates holding the bones together. My brother-in-law had brain surgery a while ago (about 3 years ago) and now has a small metal plate in his head.

Thousands of people have foreign objects in their bodies. The vast majority of them have no problem with these objects.

I'm not advocating for or against a CI for any given person, just saying that evaluating the particular risk is important. That would include knowing the details of how the risks might have changed with improved technology.

Cheetah, right. I get what you're saying about gauging the risk before you do the 2nd CI. Everyone has a different risk/benefit analysis.
Click to expand...

but... you're talking about implants in adults... not little kids

and you're seeing it purely from medical perspective. You're forgetting about social perspective. CI implies false hope for many especially hearing parents with deaf children. That's why so many deafies felt left out at later age.
 
Beach girl said:
Pacemakers are foreign objects. People with broken bones sometimes end up with screws and metal plates holding the bones together. My brother-in-law had brain surgery a while ago (about 3 years ago) and now has a small metal plate in his head.

Thousands of people have foreign objects in their bodies. The vast majority of them have no problem with these objects.

I'm not advocating for or against a CI for any given person, just saying that evaluating the particular risk is important. That would include knowing the details of how the risks might have changed with improved technology.

Cheetah, right. I get what you're saying about gauging the risk before you do the 2nd CI. Everyone has a different risk/benefit analysis.
Click to expand...

some are lucky some are not lucky according to the foreign objects that are in their body.

But small kids. *scratching my head*
 
Jiro said:
but... you're talking about implants in adults... not little kids

and you're seeing it purely from medical perspective. You're forgetting about social perspective. CI implies false hope for many especially hearing parents with deaf children. That's why so many deafies felt left out at later age.
Click to expand...

So it sounds like for you, there is no acceptable amount of benefit that makes the risk (social or medical) worthwhile, is that what you're saying?
 
Frisky Feline said:
some are lucky some are not lucky according to the foreign objects that are in their body.

But small kids. *scratching my head*
Click to expand...


True, but the amount of "some" in each category is really important. The vast majority do not have problems with devices or implants of various sorts (I'm not just talking about CIs) in their bodies. It's not like it's 50/50. For a given individual, it's either 100% fine or it's absolutely not fine and has to come out.

But taking into consideration the whole universe of people who have had surgeries requiring some sort of plastic or metal or other product in their bodies, if you know that better than 99%, say, have no problems, while less than 1% do, wouldn't that make a difference in your thinking versus, say,
20% are successful, versus 80% unsuccesful?

I'm just saying it's important to know what those numbers are, success vs. failure, before saying "anything foreign in the body is bad news."
 
Beach girl said:
How many deaths from meningitis have there ever been? How about more recently, now that the implant procedure and the hardware have been improved? Were the deaths in children who had been vaccinated against meningitis, or not?

It's a good idea to have a really clear picture of the statistical risks of choosing one option over another, because everyone has a point of saying "OK, this is an acceptable level of risk, considering the benefits" vs. "wouldn't do that on a bet!"
Click to expand...

With what Netrox talked about with the biofilm and potential for staph, I say "wouldn't do that on a bet!"
 
Jiro said:
but... you're talking about implants in adults... not little kids

and you're seeing it purely from medical perspective. You're forgetting about social perspective. CI implies false hope for many especially hearing parents with deaf children. That's why so many deafies felt left out at later age.
Click to expand...

Doesn't that kind of imply that CI is the SOLE reason for deaf people feeling left out at later age? Doesn't it already apply for kids with hearing aids? A lot of people (if not most) here on AD who have experienced that "feeling left out" do not have a CI.

Fix the reality that surrounds CI (or HAs), not the product itself.
 
Beach girl said:
So it sounds like for you, there is no acceptable amount of benefit that makes the risk (social or medical) worthwhile, is that what you're saying?
Click to expand...

My stance is clear - I do not support CI implantation for infants. When kids get older, they can decide whether or not if they want it. My stance should not be questioned regardless of any reason.

Now you're making it sounds like you're a CI advocate :hmm:

and plus this is NOTHING like parents being against any vaccinations for their infant because they believe it's some government or medical conspiracy theory. Far from it.
 
Beach girl said:
True, but the amount of "some" in each category is really important. The vast majority do not have problems with devices or implants of various sorts (I'm not just talking about CIs) in their bodies. It's not like it's 50/50. For a given individual, it's either 100% fine or it's absolutely not fine and has to come out.

But taking into consideration the whole universe of people who have had surgeries requiring some sort of plastic or metal or other product in their bodies, if you know that better than 99%, say, have no problems, while less than 1% do, wouldn't that make a difference in your thinking versus, say,
20% are successful, versus 80% unsuccesful?

I'm just saying it's important to know what those numbers are, success vs. failure, before saying "anything foreign in the body is bad news."
Click to expand...

It's still risk for small kids when the big foreign objects inplants into the small body. *shudder*
 
Daredevel7 said:
Doesn't that kind of imply that CI is the SOLE reason for deaf people feeling left out at later age? Doesn't it already apply for kids with hearing aids? A lot of people (if not most) here on AD who have experienced that "feeling left out" do not have a CI.

Fix the reality that surrounds CI (or HAs), not the product itself.
Click to expand...

CI carries more risk than HA. it's a permanent option.
 
Back
Top