Stem cells may be the next step in treating hearing loss, but one question comes to mind. Would there not be some relearining to hear involved in any stem cell treatment(just like with CI's) & would there also be a small number of people(just like with CI's) that have been deaf to long for their brain to make use of the auditory input? Just a question.
One Question about stem cells
- Thread starter C-NICE
- Start date
Ive noticed you have alot of CI threads. Your hearing is way too good for CI(by the time your hearing gets bad, stem cells will be widely used) and many of us aren't interested in CI. I however am very interested in stem cells(or some other method to improve my hearing) Yes there will be relearning but not as long as there is for CI since stem cells gives you more natural hearing, the kind my brain has been used to for life. I have no idea how well ill(or anyone will) do with CI since it's a totally different way to hear. People who were born deaf sometimes still do fine with CI so I expect much better results with stem cells. Hope this answer helps.
My Audiogram is a bit misleading
Deaf Dude my audiogram is a bit misleading to some degree(While it does look rather nice as audiograms for hearing loss go) My speech discrimination scores tell another story left ear 68% down fro 88% & Right 64% down from 84%. Also I have lost an average of 19 dbs in my left ear & 14 dbs in my right ear sine 1997. Also my hearing started declining at the age of 12. According to my ENT(I had a full work up at The Cleveland Clinic this February)my hearing is just going to get worse as I age(she said 10 to 15 years but really she has no idea how fast I will go deaf).
Deaf Dude my audiogram is a bit misleading to some degree(While it does look rather nice as audiograms for hearing loss go) My speech discrimination scores tell another story left ear 68% down fro 88% & Right 64% down from 84%. Also I have lost an average of 19 dbs in my left ear & 14 dbs in my right ear sine 1997. Also my hearing started declining at the age of 12. According to my ENT(I had a full work up at The Cleveland Clinic this February)my hearing is just going to get worse as I age(she said 10 to 15 years but really she has no idea how fast I will go deaf).
If your brain has never heard anything, or never heard "normal" hearing it doesn't matter what you are hearing your brain will still not have a clue. It has no reference to natural hearing.
This is your audiogram. You have 20db more hearing than he does in the mid frequencies, not to mention an even bigger 30db advantage in the lows. Do you have any audiogram scans, including aided audiograms? You may need more amplification or to try different HAs. Phi4sius is trying different HAs so he can hear better! If itll take 10+ years for you to become deaf, stem cells should be FDA approved by then and can restore at least part of your hearing!
This is Phi4sius audiogram. You should be hearing way, way, way better than he is! He was rejected for CI by insurance for having too much residual hearing. Yes they won't even implant his dead ear because it would not be better than what he hears with HA in the good ear and may just interfere with the good ear! He would really like to hear in the dead ear and improve his good ear, for this he will be a pioneer in the stem cell clinical trials.
I know this and I am prepared to spend months or even years to train my brain when my hearing is improved thanks to stem cells. You never mentioned how you are doing so well despite your degree of hearing loss. I would be interested in tips from you so I can train my brain now with what residual hearing I have in the meantime. I am also interested and was wondering if you had perfect ability to understand speech when your hearing loss used to be only 60-90db? You can still understand alot of speech with a 105-120+ db loss! I really wonder if my ability to understand speech should be way better than it's now?
cdmeggers
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 17, 2005
- Messages
- 3,117
- Reaction score
- 52
Exactly! Even with stem cells, one would need auditory rehab to make sense of the world around them. Bah!
And what about those who might have ossification with their inner ears? how would stem cells help? I just don't see it....
And what about those who might have ossification with their inner ears? how would stem cells help? I just don't see it....
I expect the adjustment for stem cells to be much shorter than adjusting to CI. After all, it's just more of the same aucousting hearing I already have. With CI, its a whole different ballpark since you don't get amplification but electrical beeps.
For those with ossification, I guess perhaps they can surgically remove as much of ossification as possible and try to regrow as many hair cells as possible. You might end up with a small amount of residual hearing which is better than none.
I do not see how adjustment for stem cells can be faster than CI. It's still the very same story, let the brain to adapt to the new hearing signal. Of course, hearing in the frequencies where you have a residual would be much different with a CI, but remember the brain is a wonderful machine and it deals with sound memory. Very shortly sounds you already know will sound exactly the way you remember them. It must be said that even for the sounds you are able to catch with your residual and amplification, you can notice major differences after stem cells. Nobody knows.
For all the rest of sounds you never heard, it is exactly the same: your brain has no reference at all, the signal will be new with stem cells and with CI, no difference.
Ear is only the instrument, the brain is hearing!
The quality at the end could be better or worse, nobody knows. In principle is should be better than CI, since you are re-growing hairy cells, but no clues about how efficient the tissue regeneration will be. Nobody can state that right now. Any discussion on this matter is pure speculation.
Finally, in case of born deaf with no hearing at all for years, stem cells, CI, or whatever do not make any difference. You make the ear able to send signal to the brain, but the brain plasticity won't be enough to give full access to speech and complex understanding of sounds.
As for the ossification, I do not see so much difference to the CI. If it is possible to dig into the cochlea for stem cells, it should be possible to do the same for CI. At the moment, it seems more that in case of ossification, CI is extremely difficult to be implanted (but some special kind of implants exist, for ossified cochlea). Nobody knows what for stem cells in these cases.
Stem cells probably will give better quality of hearing so there's less interpretition/filling-in-blanks for the brain to do. The signal will be new indeed but better with stem cells.
It may be speculation till we see "before" and "after" audiograms. But ill say that stem cells does offer a much better chance of giving better hearing than CI, not to mention numerous other advantages. This is why me, Phi4sius and others are waiting.
Prelingual deafs have gotten good results with CI decades after hearing little or nothing.
Stem cells should in theory repair any damage or even regrow you a new cochlea!
The signal will be IN THEORY better, right. When the procedure will be fine tuned it will be. Potential is far better than any electronic technology for sure!
It's true the expectations for stem cells are much higher and potentially they are a big step forward over the exixting CI/HA technologies.
Anyway I disagree on the concept of audiogram: getting a gain of some db does not necessarily translate into the ability to give a sense to what you are hearing. This is what I mean with the concept of having a better signal does not necessarily translate into having a better hearing. For sure having a good signal helps you a lot in the brain process of it, that's clear.
moreover, I whould not overestimate the nature of the signal. It is to be demonstrated that signal generated by hairy cells makes easier the brain elaboration, if compared to the signal from a CI. It seems reasonable for people born hearing, since the brain get the same (or very similar) it was used to, but for people born deaf it has to be demonstrated.
That is questionable. Some of them yes, but it strongly depends on what you mean with "good results". How many prelingual, not able to understand/developed speech with HAs, got this ability after being implanted adult? Not so many, if anyone...
Well, there are many things that can be done in theory. This sounds more like science fiction at the moment... It would be terrific to see a 30-40db gain in a normal shaped cochlea at the moment!
Then it's logical to save your ears for stem cells. I don't care if the first round of stem cells doesn't give me better hearing than some lucky guy who hears at 10db with CI. I am comparing stem cells vs. CI on myself and the odds are way better with stem cells, even the first round. I plan to get additional rounds a few years later when the technology matures. Have you seen my blog(link in sig) note all the advantages of stem cells vs. CI!
So it does make sense to wait a few years for stem cells as ive said.
So you are saying a 20, 30, 40db improvement in unaided hearing might not translate into me hearing way, way better? Ill be able to hear alot of sounds without HAs with this much improvement!
I had somewhat better hearing when I was young so my brain has the ability to rapidly make sense when I get an improvement in hearing.
I can understand some speech with HAs. Ive seen people who scored 0% speech with HAs easily get above 50% speech with CIs. Not perfect but still a huge improvement!
That will be a reality in a few years. I am just hoping to get a gain of 20db but Phi4sius says I should easily see more like 40db!
faire_jour
New Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2008
- Messages
- 7,188
- Reaction score
- 3
Then it's logical to save your ears for stem cells. I don't care if the first round of stem cells doesn't give me better hearing than some lucky guy who hears at 10db with CI. I am comparing stem cells vs. CI on myself and the odds are way better with stem cells, even the first round. I plan to get additional rounds a few years later when the technology matures. Have you seen my blog(link in sig) note all the advantages of stem cells vs. CI!
So it does make sense to wait a few years for stem cells as ive said.
So you are saying a 20, 30, 40db improvement in unaided hearing might not translate into me hearing way, way better? Ill be able to hear alot of sounds without HAs with this much improvement!
I had somewhat better hearing when I was young so my brain has the ability to rapidly make sense when I get an improvement in hearing.
I can understand some speech with HAs. Ive seen people who scored 0% speech with HAs easily get above 50% speech with CIs. Not perfect but still a huge improvement!
That will be a reality in a few years. I am just hoping to get a gain of 20db but Phi4sius says I should easily see more like 40db!
Miss Kat went from 0% to 86% word recognition in just 9 months of having a CI. Why would you NOT want that? If you want to hear and understand spoken language, why would you wait and hope when clearly there is a tool that works RIGHT NOW!
If you recall, I got 85% speech recognition with a broken Hearing Aid on an earlier aided audiogram from early this year. I get 76% speech recognition without a hearing aid according to my latest audiogram back in June. That's all using my remaining good ear! This just goes to show that It's all in how well you've been trained and how well the tools you use are utilized. I'm not debating Miss Kat's results - just proving that alternate methods actually can and DO achieve similar or better results than CI.
THAT is another reason why I won't go with a Cochlear Implant.
My speech understanding wasn't great even before. I don't understand a lot of speech now, there is one person who I am able to understand well enough with a ton of practice listening to her voice and with a program on my aids for her voice. Most people talk and I have no clue what they are saying but I can speech read with amazing accuracy, more so than most.
overthepond
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2008
- Messages
- 2,078
- Reaction score
- 0
You already had hearing for the first 4 years of your life which is vital for speech development. Brains is like sponge it absorbs very well and stores well. With HA for many years to stimulate the hearing had helped you to keep your speech recongition.
however all my life it doesn't matter how much AVT I had my hearing aids weren't doing the job.... it was like an instant relief when i got the CI so it's not every one with HA can do better than CI.
You are hypocrital git, You threw toys out of pram when we told you that you shouldn't have CI with good speech recogition! and to attack us people for our opinions. we merely were trying to help you all to sense that YOU, Deafdude and other people KNOW nothing about how to hear out of CI whilst having NO idea what will happen when stem cell comes out for heaing loss, all the papers/links are just piece of writing there is no LIVING proof that it works on HUMAN.
Well said! I don't have a CI but I have seen the results in the kids I work with. I have seen kids who had some speech discrim before and some residual hearing who after the CI can speak and hear way better than they could before. When that is actually happening with stem cells I'd say go for it, but until then CI is what we have and it works.
Wow...this whole quote is laughable. I'm searching for a way to hear again out of my left ear that will provide me with the absolute best hearing possible. So, I did the research, and took all opinions on this board into account when making my decision not to go for CI. Now that we've discovered evidence that stem cells for hearing loss having been experimented on in humans, AND proven to work in both humans and animals, all of you start attacking the very existence of it saying things like "Oh, I have no belief in stem cells until you provide scientific evidence". HELLO! There would be NO TRIALS whatsoever on human children unless they have a plethora of evidence available in OTHER COUNTRIES supporting the existence and functioning treatments available for the hearing loss cure! AND I can guarantee they already have some idea of what to expect when it comes to results!
There IS scientific evidence. I've provided the links - I've provided everything. Even on the link to safestemcells.org in my sig there are scientific papers talking about stem cells! NOT just press releases. Even the link I've posted before about researchers curing Blindness with the first stem cell therapy FOR age-related macular degeneration in the UK provides the scientific proof!
I'm not attacking anyone - merely defending my position and providing proof in light of misinformation and providing a balanced perspective from someone that almost went down the wrong path for my own hearing. All of you started attacking ANYONE that took the position of stem cells. When I was going for CI, everyone never attacked me at all. When I finally got educated and saw the real price of CI and what it would entail, and then finally decided against it, EVERYONE started attacking me for the mere reason that I decided upon some other method to regain my hearing. What if I had decided on some other mode of implantation that was experimental and not FDA approved? I'm sure that you would be supporting me there too. How's THAT for hypocritical? I've even said in previous posts how I understand that in situations of severe-profound hearing loss where NO ONE can benefit from hearing aids, how I would fully support them going for Cochlear Implantation.
I realize there are other reasons as to why people would need CI - I'm certainly not discounting this fact. I just do not want anyone with enough residual hearing to buy into the marketing hype that is constantly perpetuated on this discussion forum about CIs when natural cures for hearing loss are on the horizon. Sure, the results are there. But at what cost? For me, I can't justify a surgery that has so many mixed results from implantation until there is a study with scientific proof that PROVES that I will be obtaining near normal hearing with CI in my other ear. For that, I can wait until stem cells arrive.
Again, no one, especially me, is discounting the results of CI. I know it works to some VARYING degree in most people - but I'd like to see you provide scientific proof that it will work on ME without 1. Pulsating sounds, 2. Paralyzed face, and providing 3. My left ear will sound exactly like my right ear currently does providing a seamless hearing experience without a robotic sound, and 4. Won't even work AT ALL, which has happened in quite a few cases.
I know perfectly well that ALL of you anti stem cell folks will be the first in line to get your hearing restored using stem cells once it has been proven to work on many different people. We'll see who's the hypocrite then. Of course, I will be glad to bow down to the politics of this board, publically apologize, and then go for a CI in five years if the stem cell cure for sensorineural hearing loss has not moved any closer to final fruition by then. I'm certainly not going anywhere.
cdmeggers
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 17, 2005
- Messages
- 3,117
- Reaction score
- 52
it seemed to me that one of the reasons you gave up on the CI was from some online "example" of what a CI sounds like.... dude, it makes sense if the CI sounded robotic at FIRST... but gradually over time, after enough MAPping sessions, the world sounds more natural, according to MANY CI users... not robotic but natural/normal. It just takes time for the brain to process all the information and make sense of it all!
And seriously, do you think once you get the stem cell treatment, you'll hear like MAGIC and be able to cope with it all perfectly? I'd think those who have been deaf long enough will still have to struggle to make sense of all the new information coming into their brain... same thing with hearing aids, and any other technology out there that might help one to gain a sense of some sort. So don't just assume stem cell will be 100% perfect and you'll be 100% perfectly satisfied afterwards. It's still going to take TIME to get used to whatever treatment you've chosen.
And seriously, do you think once you get the stem cell treatment, you'll hear like MAGIC and be able to cope with it all perfectly? I'd think those who have been deaf long enough will still have to struggle to make sense of all the new information coming into their brain... same thing with hearing aids, and any other technology out there that might help one to gain a sense of some sort. So don't just assume stem cell will be 100% perfect and you'll be 100% perfectly satisfied afterwards. It's still going to take TIME to get used to whatever treatment you've chosen.
I sure as hell won't be in that line. Seriously. I wouldn't want to be hearing 24/7, oh no.
overthepond
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2008
- Messages
- 2,078
- Reaction score
- 0
I am NOT against people who wants to have Stem cells, and i am not anti stem cell freak, it's their life/choice which is great but Your and others posts seems very obessive and there is not a bloody proof of a human who had one.... There is nothing on British news, There is not a person with a name on the news who had one and is living proof on tv talking about it!!!
I have no wish to have stem cell, if i had the choice of being deaf or hearing i rather be deaf, I was born deaf, brought up in hearing world with few deaf friends and is happy this way. I have no desire to become hearing.
I have no wish to have stem cell, if i had the choice of being deaf or hearing i rather be deaf, I was born deaf, brought up in hearing world with few deaf friends and is happy this way. I have no desire to become hearing.