"Letting the Child Decide"

[jillio]

I went and looke at Cloggy's link. THe link provides the summaries of various studies done to see if improvment is made after implanting a second CI. In the cases the control is the persons test results with only one Ci. If you read down you'll even see that one of the studies actually included post lingally bi lateral subjects and age matched normal hearing subjects.

So some are controlled and some are case studies. All are peer reviewed, and all state what each particular study is looking at. Being perr reviewd I'm sure if you are a member of med line or whatever you could probably pull them up and get a more indepth view of the process and such.

Ok now your peer reviewed list showing the oposite of Cloggy's?

Once again, this is not the irrefutable evidewnce I requested. I requested statistics and experimental data. This is simply an interpretation. I want to know how the results were arrived at. And is this peer reviewed? I don't think so.

 

[jillio]

The $500 goes to Jag!

Hardly. You have offered me nothing. This is not evidence. Show me an entire paper from a peer reviewed journal that includes methodology and statistical anaysis that I can review. Show me something substantial. If this is the crap you base your opinions on, I can certainly see why you tend to be so illogical.

 

[jag]

Perhaps you don't, but as I said before, there are complete communities of those that do. And, they have a valid right to that identity, no matter how you choose to ID.

No one said they didn't. If you 'listen' closely you'll hear that not all of us feel the need to be lumped into those who do need that ID.

One example given also placed all blacks in one cultural lump. To me that says because of their skin color they some people think they all think the same. Sorry I know many who really don't feel Jesse or Al lead or speak for them.

Those here talking about the deaf culture keep stating that because one is deaf/hoh one is autormatically part of the deaf culture. I'll keep saying that that is NOT the case. Cloggy's daughter may never feel the need to indentify with deaf culture because she does communicate verbally with ease compared to other deaf individuals trained in the verbal approach with either the inferior amplyfication of HA's or no amplyfication at all. As Cloggy has stated they will follow her lead, at this time she chooses to rarely use sign, if she decides later to really pick up using it again then they will follow her and use it. Being deaf is not her identity, it's just a part of who she is.

 

[jag]

Once again, this is not the irrefutable evidewnce I requested. I requested statistics and experimental data. This is simply an interpretation. I want to know how the results were arrived at. And is this peer reviewed? I don't think so.

Well at the top of the list it does say I quote

Bilateral Cochlear Implantation
Selected Biliography of Peer reviewed Publications

It is a complilation of the studies and reports. If you really truely are interested in the nitty gritty of what each article/study was about and how they went about it you really should check out med line or whatever that place is that publishes study results on line.

You still haven't shown anything published in peer review, even summaries showing what you are stating. If things are really that bad then I'm sure that some deaf educator has managed to finangal some funds for a study proving your point of view that has been published in a peer reviewed publication. again. Your turn.

 

[jag]

Hardly. You have offered me nothing. This is not evidence. Show me an entire paper from a peer reviewed journal that includes methodology and statistical anaysis that I can review. Show me something substantial. If this is the crap you base your opinions on, I can certainly see why you tend to be so illogical.

one does take a bibliography and go to a place like medscape. sign up is free and you can browse to your hearts delight.

here's one of the peer reviewed abstracts listed in the biliography from the advanced bionics site. You should really go and explore the site, it's kinda fun.

Ear Hear. 2002; 23(1 Suppl):80S-89S (ISSN: 0196-0202)
Tyler RS; Gantz BJ; Rubinstein JT; Wilson BS; Parkinson AJ; Wolaver A; Preece JP; Witt S; Lowder MW
Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, The University of Iowa, Iowa City 52242-1078, USA.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate possible binaural listening advantages for speech in quiet, speech in noise, and for localization in a group of postlingually deafened adults with two cochlear implants functioning independently after 3 mo experience. DESIGN: Nine postlingually deafened subjects who had received a Cochlear Corporation CI24M implant in each ear were evaluated on a number of tasks. The subjects all had audiometric or biographical (e.g., duration of deafness) differences between the ears. Word and sentence materials were presented to the subjects in quiet and in noise with the signal always in the front and the noise from the front or either side. Results are reported for each ear and for both ears with the noise on either side. This allowed evaluation of head shadow and squelch effects. Additionally, localization ability was assessed for broadband noise presented either to the right or left of center at 45 degrees azimuth. Localization was assessed for each ear and for both ears. RESULTS: Results of speech testing in quiet showed a significant advantage for the binaural condition over the better ear in four subjects. In noise, with both signal and noise in front of the subject, a significant advantage of two ears over the better ear was found for four subjects. For noise to one side of the head, when the ear opposite the noise source was added to the ear ipsilateral to the noise, a significant advantage was demonstrated for seven of seven tested subjects. When the ear ipsilateral to the noise was added to the ear contralateral to the noise, a significant advantage was shown for only one of seven (noise on right) and three of seven (noise on left) tested subjects. The localization task showed that all seven tested subjects could discriminate 45 degrees left from 45 degrees right above chance with bilateral stimulation. Three subjects could perform the discrimination above chance with only one ear. However, performance with both ears was significantly better than performance with one ear for two of these latter subjects. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that bilateral cochlear implants can provide real advantages, particularly when it is possible to utilize the ear that is away from a noise source, thus taking advantage of the head shadow effect. In addition, localization ability was generally better with two implants than with one.

 

[jillio]

No one said they didn't. If you 'listen' closely you'll hear that not all of us feel the need to be lumped into those who do need that ID.

One example given also placed all blacks in one cultural lump. To me that says because of their skin color they some people think they all think the same. Sorry I know many who really don't feel Jesse or Al lead or speak for them.

Those here talking about the deaf culture keep stating that because one is deaf/hoh one is autormatically part of the deaf culture. I'll keep saying that that is NOT the case. Cloggy's daughter may never feel the need to indentify with deaf culture because she does communicate verbally with ease compared to other deaf individuals trained in the verbal approach with either the inferior amplyfication of HA's or no amplyfication at all. As Cloggy has stated they will follow her lead, at this time she chooses to rarely use sign, if she decides later to really pick up using it again then they will follow her and use it. Being deaf is not her identity, it's just a part of who she is.

You need to go back and reread the posts because no one has implied that hearing loss automatically qualifies one for membership in the Deaf community. In fact, quite the opposite has been said, that membership is based on much, much more than level of hearing loss.

And what do you think identity is? It is the sum total of the parts that make up the whole--in other words, all the parts of who one is.

 

[jag]

[/B]

You need to go back and reread the posts because no one has implied that hearing loss automatically qualifies one for membership in the Deaf community. In fact, quite the opposite has been said, that membership is based on much, much more than level of hearing loss.

And what do you think identity is? It is the sum total of the parts that make up the whole--in other words, all the parts of who one is.

Hearing Parents part of deaf culture? No because they are not deaf/hoh. They are in Hearing Culture. Although they are WELCOME to join Deaf Culture to learn about their barriers and beautiful sign language, and any technology to help reduce communication barriers between hearing and deaf.

Are all CI implanted in deaf people part of Deaf culture? Yes: Regardless how much of exposure from hearing and/or deaf people they are part of Deaf culture.

Does your daughter change battery in her CI? Yes: Deaf Culture

>> as shown beetarehoh (hope that's spelt right if not appologies) Are all Ci implanted in deaf people part of deaf culture? Yes: regardless of how much of exposure from hearin and/or deaf people they are part of Deaf culture.

so you're saying that isn't saying that all deaf/hoh/ci people are part of deaf culture? sorry but it is.

 

[jillio]

Hearing Parents part of deaf culture? No because they are not deaf/hoh. They are in Hearing Culture. Although they are WELCOME to join Deaf Culture to learn about their barriers and beautiful sign language, and any technology to help reduce communication barriers between hearing and deaf.

Are all CI implanted in deaf people part of Deaf culture? Yes: Regardless how much of exposure from hearing and/or deaf people they are part of Deaf culture.

Does your daughter change battery in her CI? Yes: Deaf Culture

>> as shown beetarehoh (hope that's spelt right if not appologies) Are all Ci implanted in deaf people part of deaf culture? Yes: regardless of how much of exposure from hearin and/or deaf people they are part of Deaf culture.

so you're saying that isn't saying that all deaf/hoh/ci people are part of deaf culture? sorry but it is.

You are taking isolated statements out of context and trying to manipulate them to prove you point. Doesn't work.

 

[flip]

I went and looke at Cloggy's link. THe link provides the summaries of various studies done to see if improvment is made after implanting a second CI. In the cases the control is the persons test results with only one Ci. If you read down you'll even see that one of the studies actually included post lingally bi lateral subjects and age matched normal hearing subjects.

So some are controlled and some are case studies. All are peer reviewed, and all state what each particular study is looking at. Being perr reviewd I'm sure if you are a member of med line or whatever you could probably pull them up and get a more indepth view of the process and such.

Ok now your peer reviewed list showing the oposite of Cloggy's?

I am not going to do the work to prove if this is irrefutable evidence or not for you, and paying anyone 500 dollars in addition. You can't just say "I am sure...," and tell me to join med line.

Anyone can throw in any list of research, like Cloggy did right here. That is a silly reply to a challenge to come up with irrefutable evidence in a dicussion. I do not disagree much on the matters in those conclusions, and can't see what is so controversial with this research. The conlusions are careful and is mostly limited to focusing on intellible speech and localization of sound. It even states one place that the improvement of bilateral implants can be due to better coding programs... This list is also put togheter by a company who sells CI, thus loosing some creditibility by obvious reasons(not the research, but the collection itself).

What Cloggy not have been able to do so far, is to back up with facts when he is disagreeing with people here. He turns into trolling, sarcasm, rhetoric questions instead.

Why should I present some peer preview list showing the opposite of Cloggy's? This list is vague and makes different and careful conclusions. What should an opposite list consist of? Considerations on unilateral CI beeing better than bilatereal? What a strange topic you want to dicuss.

 

[shel90]

Hearing Parents part of deaf culture? No because they are not deaf/hoh. They are in Hearing Culture. Although they are WELCOME to join Deaf Culture to learn about their barriers and beautiful sign language, and any technology to help reduce communication barriers between hearing and deaf.

Are all CI implanted in deaf people part of Deaf culture? Yes: Regardless how much of exposure from hearing and/or deaf people they are part of Deaf culture.

Does your daughter change battery in her CI? Yes: Deaf Culture

>> as shown beetarehoh (hope that's spelt right if not appologies) Are all Ci implanted in deaf people part of deaf culture? Yes: regardless of how much of exposure from hearin and/or deaf people they are part of Deaf culture.

so you're saying that isn't saying that all deaf/hoh/ci people are part of deaf culture? sorry but it is.

Now, I am really lost..maybe I am tired or something but I dont understand this statement. Can u clarify it for me? Thanks!

 

[flip]

No one said they didn't. If you 'listen' closely you'll hear that not all of us feel the need to be lumped into those who do need that ID.

One example given also placed all blacks in one cultural lump. To me that says because of their skin color they some people think they all think the same. Sorry I know many who really don't feel Jesse or Al lead or speak for them.

Those here talking about the deaf culture keep stating that because one is deaf/hoh one is autormatically part of the deaf culture.

First you say that you don't want be lumped into one cultural lump, then you put all of us who talks about deaf culture here into one lump saying we all state that all deaf/hoh is part of the deaf culture...

 

[flip]

Hearing Parents part of deaf culture? No because they are not deaf/hoh. They are in Hearing Culture. Although they are WELCOME to join Deaf Culture to learn about their barriers and beautiful sign language, and any technology to help reduce communication barriers between hearing and deaf.

Are all CI implanted in deaf people part of Deaf culture? Yes: Regardless how much of exposure from hearing and/or deaf people they are part of Deaf culture.

Does your daughter change battery in her CI? Yes: Deaf Culture

>> as shown beetarehoh (hope that's spelt right if not appologies) Are all Ci implanted in deaf people part of deaf culture? Yes: regardless of how much of exposure from hearin and/or deaf people they are part of Deaf culture.

so you're saying that isn't saying that all deaf/hoh/ci people are part of deaf culture? sorry but it is.

I think you are trying grasp one single definition of deaf culture? It's possible to dicuss term culture on different levels, depedening on the context it is dicussed in.

How hearing people look at deaf people, how deaf people look at deaf people, how hoh look at hearing and deaf people, how one looks at oneself and so on, can be put into definition of deaf culture.

And if we mix culture with community, we could say you are a part of the deaf culture by coming here joining this thread.

So it's different prespectives. Sorry if you feel offended by some of them.

 

[jag]

I am not going to do the work to prove if this is irrefutable evidence or not for you, and paying anyone 500 dollars in addition. You can't just say "I am sure...," and tell me to join med line.

Anyone can throw in any list of research, like Cloggy did right here. That is a silly reply to a challenge to come up with irrefutable evidence in a dicussion. I do not disagree much on the matters in those conclusions, and can't see what is so controversial with this research. The conlusions are careful and is mostly limited to focusing on intellible speech and localization of sound. It even states one place that the improvement of bilateral implants can be due to better coding programs... This list is also put togheter by a company who sells CI, thus loosing some creditibility by obvious reasons(not the research, but the collection itself).

What Cloggy not have been able to do so far, is to back up with facts when he is disagreeing with people here. He turns into trolling, sarcasm, rhetoric questions instead.

Why should I present some peer preview list showing the opposite of Cloggy's? This list is vague and makes different and careful conclusions. What should an opposite list consist of? Considerations on unilateral CI beeing better than bilatereal? What a strange topic you want to dicuss.

You know, I don't want your money, Cloggy was asked to give supporting data and he gave a list supporting what he's saying. By going to actually I believe is was medscape where I found the abstact that I posted you can sign up free and explore any type of peer reviewed articles you want. the short analysis provided by AB seems to haave been accurate for the abstrat I posted.

So far I have not seen the proof ...peer reviewed articles/abstracts nor any links or titles/publications from jillio, if she comes up with a list like the one from AB with enough information to track an on line copy at a place that lists peer related publications I would take a look, the fact that jillio and yourself are not willing to take the list and check that the information is accurate and not misleading to prove your point or even to provide the information she says she has seems to mean that she and possibly you are the ones who aren't really interested in peer review.

 

[shel90]

You know, I don't want your money, Cloggy was asked to give supporting data and he gave a list supporting what he's saying. By going to actually I believe is was medscape where I found the abstact that I posted you can sign up free and explore any type of peer reviewed articles you want. the short analysis provided by AB seems to haave been accurate for the abstrat I posted.

So far I have not seen the proof ...peer reviewed articles/abstracts nor any links or titles/publications from jillio, if she comes up with a list like the one from AB with enough information to track an on line copy at a place that lists peer related publications I would take a look, the fact that jillio and yourself are not willing to take the list and check that the information is accurate and not misleading to prove your point or even to provide the information she says she has seems to mean that she and possibly you are the ones who aren't really interested in peer review.

Jillo started a thread about deaf ed for this purpose..It is called Bilingualism in Deaf Ed or something like that.

 

[jag]

First you say that you don't want be lumped into one cultural lump, then you put all of us who talks about deaf culture here into one lump saying we all state that all deaf/hoh is part of the deaf culture...

Sorry even I need to be careful how I state it. let me restate it more clearly.

there are 'some' here who lump all deaf people in the deaf culture. Or whatever.

alot of this discussion comes from the fact tht cloggy is saying is daughter is not defined by her deafness. Maybe I understand him with no problem because I'm not defined by mine. I'm deaf but it's just a small part of me, an anoying part I lived with for years and now with a CI it's becoem an even more irrelevant part. Now that I've confused everyone even more it's time to go to work.

Everyone have a wonderful Memorial weekend. Hope it's warm and dry and you can enjoy time with friends and family.

 

[jillio]

one does take a bibliography and go to a place like medscape. sign up is free and you can browse to your hearts delight.

here's one of the peer reviewed abstracts listed in the biliography from the advanced bionics site. You should really go and explore the site, it's kinda fun.

Ear Hear. 2002; 23(1 Suppl):80S-89S (ISSN: 0196-0202)
Tyler RS; Gantz BJ; Rubinstein JT; Wilson BS; Parkinson AJ; Wolaver A; Preece JP; Witt S; Lowder MW
Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, The University of Iowa, Iowa City 52242-1078, USA.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate possible binaural listening advantages for speech in quiet, speech in noise, and for localization in a group of postlingually deafened adults with two cochlear implants functioning independently after 3 mo experience. DESIGN: Nine postlingually deafened subjects who had received a Cochlear Corporation CI24M implant in each ear were evaluated on a number of tasks. The subjects all had audiometric or biographical (e.g., duration of deafness) differences between the ears. Word and sentence materials were presented to the subjects in quiet and in noise with the signal always in the front and the noise from the front or either side. Results are reported for each ear and for both ears with the noise on either side. This allowed evaluation of head shadow and squelch effects. Additionally, localization ability was assessed for broadband noise presented either to the right or left of center at 45 degrees azimuth. Localization was assessed for each ear and for both ears. RESULTS: Results of speech testing in quiet showed a significant advantage for the binaural condition over the better ear in four subjects. In noise, with both signal and noise in front of the subject, a significant advantage of two ears over the better ear was found for four subjects. For noise to one side of the head, when the ear opposite the noise source was added to the ear ipsilateral to the noise, a significant advantage was demonstrated for seven of seven tested subjects. When the ear ipsilateral to the noise was added to the ear contralateral to the noise, a significant advantage was shown for only one of seven (noise on right) and three of seven (noise on left) tested subjects. The localization task showed that all seven tested subjects could discriminate 45 degrees left from 45 degrees right above chance with bilateral stimulation. Three subjects could perform the discrimination above chance with only one ear. However, performance with both ears was significantly better than performance with one ear for two of these latter subjects. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that bilateral cochlear implants can provide real advantages, particularly when it is possible to utilize the ear that is away from a noise source, thus taking advantage of the head shadow effect. In addition, localization ability was generally better with two implants than with one.

This is about localization, not oral education of deaf students. We've known for years that 2 HA produce better localization than 1 Ha

 

[jag]

Jillo started a thread about deaf ed for this purpose..It is called Bilingualism in Deaf Ed or something like that.

So why doesn't she post the link here when asked? or did she and I missed it?

 

[Cloggy]

Hardly. You have offered me nothing. This is not evidence. Show me an entire paper from a peer reviewed journal that includes methodology and statistical anaysis that I can review. Show me something substantial. If this is the crap you base your opinions on, I can certainly see why you tend to be so illogical.

You mean like the one you have provided ....

You're a lot of mouth, but I haven't seen anything from you....

 

[jillio]

You know, I don't want your money, Cloggy was asked to give supporting data and he gave a list supporting what he's saying. By going to actually I believe is was medscape where I found the abstact that I posted you can sign up free and explore any type of peer reviewed articles you want. the short analysis provided by AB seems to haave been accurate for the abstrat I posted.

So far I have not seen the proof ...peer reviewed articles/abstracts nor any links or titles/publications from jillio, if she comes up with a list like the one from AB with enough information to track an on line copy at a place that lists peer related publications I would take a look, the fact that jillio and yourself are not willing to take the list and check that the information is accurate and not misleading to prove your point or even to provide the information she says she has seems to mean that she and possibly you are the ones who aren't really interested in peer review.

You produced an absract of an article on sound localization. What does that have to do with oral education vs. ASL education for deaf children? STick to the topic. Just because you found one article in some peer reviewed journal doesn't mean that it supports your or cloggy's claims. You are really grasping at straws now.

 

[jillio]

Sorry even I need to be careful how I state it. let me restate it more clearly.

there are 'some' here who lump all deaf people in the deaf culture. Or whatever.

alot of this discussion comes from the fact tht cloggy is saying is daughter is not defined by her deafness. Maybe I understand him with no problem because I'm not defined by mine. I'm deaf but it's just a small part of me, an anoying part I lived with for years and now with a CI it's becoem an even more irrelevant part. Now that I've confused everyone even more it's time to go to work.

Everyone have a wonderful Memorial weekend. Hope it's warm and dry and you can enjoy time with friends and family.

The fact that you find your deafness annoying speaks volumes.