To Cochlear Implant or to re-Hearing Aid; know thyself what you want, my Deaf ears?

[SBirn]

Oh noooooo Mr. Billl (that has to be too old for you)

It was only after the death of my analog hearing aid this year as well as the sudden loss of certain sound waves in my left ear that had prompted me to seriously ask myself such a question as this: will I be ok with a cochlear implant?

A little background:
I was born hearing but at 18 months old, scarlet fever came into my life (or rather my parent's life as I recall none of it) and turned me into the color of a tomato. It was only by the attention of nurses around me that saved my life by throwing me into an ice bath full of ice, literally, after the doctor said I was only having a typical fever. And so starts my lifelong deafness.

On my left ear, I have 99% severe profound hearing loss and on the right ear is 97% severe profound hearing loss. But here is where the story gets a little wee strange (and the reason for this thread). During all my audiology testing, my left ear can only hear all the deep tones while my right ear can hear a more higher tone while missing the deeper tones. But when I put on my hearing aid I was able to hear almost all of the sounds except the very high tones.

And so for the next 30+ years I've been wearing analog hearing aid in my left ear exclusively (wearing in both ears makes my head spin due to the differences in hearing losses). Until one day, in 2012, my memories suddenly told me that I was supposed to be hearing certain sounds that I no longer can hear anymore. That was when I realized that my hearing, whatever I had left, was much less than any time in the last 30 years. Not even my right ear can hear or process as much as my left ear did. And then my analog hearing aid broke...Great.

So for the last one year, I've been without sound. At first I thought my skill in lip reading and my near-photographic memories for things can hold me up indefinitely, I found that I was wrong. It's been in a steady decline as I got more used to being fully Deaf (I have full use of ASL as well as full ability to speak).

So here I am, seriously thinking about Cochlear implant(s) or even digital hearing aid(s).

I'm not sure if having digital hearing aid will do me any good with my recent new hearing loss (presumably from wearing hearing aid for 30 years constantly). So that leaves Cochlear implants as an option. But my doubt is this: Due to the nature of my hearing loss, I already had one doctor shake his head in a resounding "no" without even taking a test. He said that due to the death of my cochlear hair nerves, that the implants will not work.

So here I am, asking to see if such avenue is possible, realistic, do-able, and worth the effort...or not. I will be first to admit that I don't have a single clue on what I should do or what to research on based on my type of hearing loss. Any direction or kick in the pants or advices, etc would be appreciated.

I just miss listening to music...

"Sorry
Is all that you can't say
Years gone by and still
Words don't come easily
Like sorry like sorry..."
~Tracy Chapman
​

I am not knocking you at all. That used to be a very old saying out of Saturday Night Live. I understand your hearing pure tone loss but with a HA (I don't care which):
1. What are your speech recognition scores?
2. Do you have any bone conductive hearing left? If you do, we can explore that route but with caution.

You have to be very, very careful when considering a HA vs a CI. I still have Oticon 380s and 390s but don't use them. While digital sounds are better than analog, it's nuts. Many insurance companies will cover CIs that surgery + hardware can run you @$100k (not kidding). My total is warped due to the other surgeries I had to have (three others plus the implant). I don't know what that added.

IF you look at a CI, you cannot view it as regaining hearing. It is called "processing sound." While people say they can hear music, I do not know if it's normal music sound (like not having a CI but a HA) or a CI processed sound.

At my last audiology meeting early in December, my audiologist told me I have to stop comparing hearing sound vs processing CI sound. THEY ARE DIFFERENT. HAs don't require a process or tons of mapping to get it right but they do require programming .

HAs have their drawback as well but if I had ears that would accept earmolds, I'd go with a digital aid. You can get them discounted and god knows, I'm not starting a battle over this one either . Digital aids are expensive and you can absolutely get them cheaper over the internet.

Things and I mean do not knock me for the internet stuff because I have been through just about everything in the book by now.
1. ahearingaid.com was one of the first internet and legal sites. In 1997ish, I tried a digital through them. But due to my ill-fitting earmolds, it just didn't work. The owner was in a motorcycle accident and the webite is out of commission. They also outpriced themselves in later years and I stopped using them.
2. There are other sites. I bought two analog aids for $525 or $550 instead of $1100 (with a telecoil) and the higher price is what I paid locally.
3. There's a Dr. who warns of buying over the internet but she actually posted my comments. They are no worse than buying them locally. She understood me, thank goodness.
-- She said "face-to-face" was better than not. I said that wasn't true. I had seen too many people get burned face-to-face. You just don't do anything stupid like use eBay (I know you wouldn't do that).
4. Do you have earmolds that fit well?

Anyway, let me know where your brain takes you with this. I will say this one more time a little differently. I understand some of your loss that you shared but you don't give enough info. IF YOU CAN GET A DIGITAL AID, go that route. CIs are irreversible and I personally don't know if I can tolerate the sound produced but I likely have the rock of ages over you and may be less flexible (and if we go there and it's another very bad story BAHAs and they are cheaper and irreversible).

I'm not talking you into anything. I'm pushing aids because they are cheaper and even with a profound loss, you may be able to get a power blaster that will be okay for you.

Be careful.

 

[SBirn]

HOH HOH? Be careful of what thou writes

There is simply no comparison, a CI is so much better then any HA's. If you are really that low on the hearing charts, a HA isn't going to provide much benefit, even the "strong" ones. I would go get evaluated and see what they say. If they say no, you have the HA as a fall back.

Careful. A HA (if you can hear it) allows sounds to go through the normal channels. Your hearing is closer to pure. Yes, there is drop out depending on where your losses are. A CI PROCESSES SOUND through one's brain. It bypasses the tymphanic (eardrum) membrane and the middle ear. YOUR BRAIN and auditory canal is used to process sound and it isn't the same as how a HA hears.

You will never see me writing, "... a CI is so much better than any HA..." It is not true and is dependent on the user, the doctor, and the brain. It is not a true statement. With any HA, there are variables, too. BUT hearing sounds goes the normal route at least. Don't like the HA, return it. Don't like the CI, you cannot reverse it.

I am no expert. I am also not crying wolf.

 

[NaidaUP]

There is simply no comparison, a CI is so much better then any HA's. If you are really that low on the hearing charts, a HA isn't going to provide much benefit, even the "strong" ones. I would go get evaluated and see what they say. If they say no, you have the HA as a fall back.

Not 100% true. I have two friends who are a lot deafer then you, very deep profound / off the charts, who actually still get more benefit from their HA then they do with their CI. They've had their CI for about 12 years now and still benefit more from a HA but they still gain very little from their HA as well.

 

[HOH-ME]

Careful. A HA (if you can hear it) allows sounds to go through the normal channels. Your hearing is closer to pure. Yes, there is drop out depending on where your losses are. A CI PROCESSES SOUND through one's brain. It bypasses the tymphanic (eardrum) membrane and the middle ear. YOUR BRAIN and auditory canal is used to process sound and it isn't the same as how a HA hears.

You will never see me writing, "... a CI is so much better than any HA..." It is not true and is dependent on the user, the doctor, and the brain. It is not a true statement. With any HA, there are variables, too. BUT hearing sounds goes the normal route at least. Don't like the HA, return it. Don't like the CI, you cannot reverse it.

I am no expert. I am also not crying wolf.

Not 100% true. I have two friends who are a lot deafer then you, very deep profound / off the charts, who actually still get more benefit from their HA then they do with their CI. They've had their CI for about 12 years now and still benefit more from a HA but they still gain very little from their HA as well.

Sorry but having both I stand by what I said... I'm not an expert, just a user of both and I never got the sound clarity and ability to hear well with a HA like I have with my CI. Technology has changed in the CI world, a LOT, in 12 years...

 

[SBirn]

Hoh Me - No need to be sorry.

Sorry but having both I stand by what I said... I'm not an expert, just a user of both and I never got the sound clarity and ability to hear well with a HA like I have with my CI. Technology has changed in the CI world, a LOT, in 12 years...

There are clear differences and that is my warning. In the end, the user is left with a major decision.

I am 59 years old. I am not an expert either and have never claimed to be and I've seen the inception of the CI morph to what it is now. Without that vast change, I did not even consider it knowing at some point in my life, it would likely come into my eyesight for consideration. I've just been wearing aids and helping others since 1963 or 1964.

1. An implant can cost $100k - I've seen the recent bills as stated earlier. That will change based on the hospital, doctor, and cochlear implant chosen.
2. An implant is irreversible. You don't like it, tough, and I'm talking about about a year's worth of mapping and remapping.
3. In everything I have read, the metal is irreversible unless you land in an MRI. Small joke and true.
4. It's surgery. No matter how small the risk, and I will not argue this, there is a certain amount of risk involved.

HAs
1. Two HAs for a severe-to-profound deafness will probably cost 8-9k.
(I spent that much and more for my CI surgery since I have to travel 5.5 hours each time I see the doctor or get a mapping. That's out-of-pocket for me and I'm officially over $10k. There are caveats but due to my age, not needed to be mentioned.)
2. If they don't fit, you return them. No muss, no fuss.
3. I was in a hearing aid dealers sterile room with a digital aid on w/in the last 12 years. He put on classical music and I had tears streaming down my face. But, in my case, my molds killed that venture.
4. It's sort of funny to me but in my 20s, I wrote an article on the cost and charge (including research and development) of an analog aid.

Again, here are the unknowns:
1. What the SR scores are.
2. What bone conduction is.

I am neither for nor against a CI for anyone. If I could get a HA, that is my personal choice merely because if I don't like one, I'll keep trying them. I tried the two digital aids and the sound to me with a family member who had a full scholarship to Julliard (string bass primary, piano secondary). I played viola but due to the length of the neck, learned cello to get the richness of vibrato and that meant, I learned a different clef but no big deal. Can't beat the richness of it. My preference would've been the oboe but I don't have the breath for that divine, double-reeded woodwind. Music was critical. It cannot be now. I have the stereo system I picked out very carefully with speakers to match everything to be fully compatible with my prior hearing. I remember listening to many speakers and my friend asked me with my hearing loss how could I be so picky? My answer was simple: It was just because of my hearing loss I needed components to fill in (where possible) or enrich what I could. But I understood his confusion.

We can absolutely and really must have different opinions here. It takes the subject to a full breadth and, for the most part, expands the information for the reader based on our individual experience.

Thanks Hoh me for sharing your opinion. Really. I look forward to learning more.

 

[SBirn]

Clarification, Botts

Same thing happened to my stepmother in early childhood. She apparently is able to make use of a digital aid, but I thought CI was not an option.

Of course your case may be different.

CI requirements are rigid - non Medicare reqs. are less rigid. To get a CI, it's not only dependent on pure tone scores but your speech recognition scores with aids (and they are not necessarily yours, which aggravates the heck out of me). It's great that your stepmother could use the digital aids. CI may not have been an option.

A guy I met through a physicist cousin, sent me his audiogram. Within two years, his hearing became really bad. He didn't understand why he could not get a CI. Easy schmeezy - at 250 and 500 Hz, his puretone hearing was in the normal range. The rest of his hearing was bad. But those two scores stopped any CI from being done. In this instance, the speech scores were irrelevant.

 

[SBirn]

Translation?

Not 100% true. I have two friends who are a lot deafer then you, very deep profound / off the charts, who actually still get more benefit from their HA then they do with their CI. They've had their CI for about 12 years now and still benefit more from a HA but they still gain very little from their HA as well.

I think when you say "off the charts," you mean there was no registering of any sound at various frequencies (as in my hearing). That's probably your "deep profound?" For years, I used to point to my head and tell the audiologist I didn't hear a sound in an ear being tested but rather heard it in my other ear. If what I said was true about your friends, it's similar. One ear was "dead" at that frequency what I did not realize until much later in life was the sound crossing over to the other ear meant the tested ear was "dead" at that frequency and my other ear heard the sound.

In those days (not long ago), HAs (really a HA) worked out just fine in combination with my other hearing translation skills. I understand what you said and if I don't, you will correct me.

My CI picks up frequencies I have never heard and my HA just doesn't do it for me. But it's still a matter of being able to tolerate or not tolerate the CI processing sounds. I can hear the timers going off. I'm jumpy because even Marcus' two dog tags and toenails on a hardwood floor are new and loud. THAT's the junk I anticipated driving me nuts and I found the volume control on the CI before the audiologist pointed it out to me .

 

[ambrosia]

Seems to me SBirn that if you had 3 other surgeries at the same time as your implant you have problems that are atypical and your experience shouldn't be foisted off on other people. There are many factors that that would vary a persons experience. Your experience is not the same as someone else's, so you're not doing anyone any favors by applying your experience to theirs.

I'm just saying.

 

[green427]

To the OP:

Most ENT doctors push for CI's, yours did not....

1) He might have a true medical reason, 2) He may not believe in CI's, 3) He may not want to believe someone else can help you hear, 4) He is 100% sure your auditory nerve is dead, or 5) There might have been a communication breakdown and you did not get the whole picture.

Ambrosia is right, the whole purpose of a CI is to simulate the nerves at the bottom of dead hair cells. Other comments above are correct too.

I've been wearing CI's for 10 and 3 years, respectively. Before that, HA in one ear for 30+ years, HA in the other for 15+.

The CI works best in people that have already developed hearing skills at a young age, and have been using their hearing skills for many years (in other words, hearing people losing their hearing suddenly usually have great results with CI's)

So far all teenagers I've met that were implanted before they developed language skills are doing very well these days. Not all are doing well, but most are.

For those of us that had partial hearing since childhood, and wore hearing aids for many years, the use of a CI has produced results all over the place, so every one of us is playing Russian roulette with CI's. You might get lucky and have great results, or you might fail miserably. You might get little benefit.

For those of us that have been profoundly deaf, and never really developed any hearing skills at a young age, and HA's never had much benefit.....the CI most likely will NOT do anything for you (other than making you miserable).

I know of at least 5 folks that had CI's after being profoundly deaf during their first 30+ years of life.....none of them wear the processors since they found them to be a big annoyance.

If you want to be 100% sure whether a CI is right for you, you might have to get 3-5 different opinions from 3-5 different ENT's that have experience with implantation. Beware that many ENT's are getting financial benefits for pushing CI's, so use your judgment accordingly.

Good luck. Remember, many folks claim to be an expert at CI's, especially those that never had one....

 

[SBirn]

You have a point. Allow me to explain. I'm not foisting anything on anyone.

Seems to me SBirn that if you had 3 other surgeries at the same time as your implant you have problems that are atypical and your experience shouldn't be foisted off on other people. There are many factors that that would vary a persons experience. Your experience is not the same as someone else's, so you're not doing anyone any favors by applying your experience to theirs.

I'm just saying.

You make a valid point except that you don't know what the other surgeries were. You did make an assumption and I might have as well. One is done typically with implants (so now we are down to two). Another is done less typically but is still done with other implants. That leaves us with one. That remaining one could be considered separate - it was an ear infection that had to be cleared up and kept that way. I tried to have that done where I live but the catscans apparently weren't clear enough for the local ENT to remove the infection. So, the infection had to be removed at the time of the CI. But that did require clarification, so thanks for pointing it out.

My experience in terms of pain level was higher than a straight-forward implant (my guess). My hearing and subsequent result is very much the same. So, "foist," not in my world. I've confirmed that with the audiologist about my complaints ... had to ... and she said I fall within the same issues that 90% of what the other recipients experience. That leave us with between the ENT and the audiologist, I fall into the same boat as the rest with how I process sounds. And, the time in which to do all this fell under the range given me for the implant.

Before I accepted the other surgeries being done at the same time, I explored (with the doctor) how typical/atypical they were with other people's CI implants to see what I was walkin' into. But I still attempted to head off the fairly common infection surgery and I said that didn't work (had it when I was younger and the doctor wrote it had obviously been done) that a number of people with ear issues have to avoid the amount of drugs that would be put in my system.

I separate them due to the dizziness I experienced after as well as the discomfort/pain level and to add to that, the following day, I had a 5.5 hour drive home. But, they all surgeries are done to others CI implant receivers.

I'm used to having surgery - finger, knee, etc. and getting back on my feet very quickly. This one kept me off my motorcycle for about a week. I am within the norm of others (I was out of the norm in my own extremely fast recuperation time).

 

[AlleyCat]

There is simply no comparison, a CI is so much better then any HA's. If you are really that low on the hearing charts, a HA isn't going to provide much benefit, even the "strong" ones. I would go get evaluated and see what they say. If they say no, you have the HA as a fall back.

Did you get your CI yet?

 

[HOH-ME]

Did you get your CI yet?

Yes--LOVE IT!!!!!

 

[SBirn]

Green: The ENT at Chapel Hill pushed for the implant. I agree. I hated the place, and didn't trust him, so I turned it down. I ended up going a lot further away. This ENT's response was first TWO CIs . Then, he immediately retracted and said one because he didn't know how I'd react to the type of sound produced - usually referred to a R2D2 but in my world, everyone (including my barking dog) sounds like a duck. The other guy didn't push at all and besides his office being cleaner, I trusted him and his staff more.

I don't know about kickbacks. The staff was mute about the brand. I had to figure it out myself and it was not from the marketing packages. While on one hand I understood it, it was a horrendous experience for me to digest in a short period of time. And the end result had nothing to do with the other surgeries. I'm just sayin'. God, it tough gettin' old-er.

 

[SBirn]

HOH - When did you get your implant?

Yes--LOVE IT!!!!!

See subj.

1. When
2. How long could you hear say in the moderate range before you rec'd the implant? (For me - it was probably @30 years ... maybe longer.)
3. Did you wear HAs?

I'm trying to understand why I'm sort of flipping out with this stuff. I'm going to a place that serves the deaf & HoH on Monday because I am so overwhelmed with the sound - that thing my 2nd ENT was concerned about in particular with me. That's also why he immediately said to just start with one CI rather than two.

My hearing (while duck-like) is better when I can understand what has been said. I no longer sound stupid guessing what was said because I can't. I hear more pure tone but less voice. I have a mapping for background noise but it's not right and I assume after the Miracle Ear fiasco it actually works.

Thanks.

 

[BleedingPurist]

See subj.

1. When
2. How long could you hear say in the moderate range before you rec'd the implant? (For me - it was probably @30 years ... maybe longer.)
3. Did you wear HAs?

I'm trying to understand why I'm sort of flipping out with this stuff. I'm going to a place that serves the deaf & HoH on Monday because I am so overwhelmed with the sound - that thing my 2nd ENT was concerned about in particular with me. That's also why he immediately said to just start with one CI rather than two.

My hearing (while duck-like) is better when I can understand what has been said. I no longer sound stupid guessing what was said because I can't. I hear more pure tone but less voice. I have a mapping for background noise but it's not right and I assume after the Miracle Ear fiasco it actually works.

Thanks.

Hi,

Ok, I'm reaching out with sincerity. So let's move on from our previous scuffle. I'd like to help.

What's the hearing history of the ear you implanted? Was it severe/profound unaided for a while prior to your implant?

The duck sound is discouraging, I understand. It actually is a good indicator though as some folks don't even get sound. One or two years from now you stand a good chance of experiencing it as normal sound, as hard as it is to imagine what you hear now morphing into it. It sounds like your higher frequency response is waking up yet still asleep at the moment.

The noise programs do indeed work. I never found hearing aid noise programs to be worth a damn. It's probably just too soon when you just want to hear it as normal. Mappings are also key as your nerve tolerates greater voltages and responds, which is what gets it sounding normal.

 

[SBirn]

Your answers and sincere thanks

Hi,

Ok, I'm reaching out with sincerity. So let's move on from our previous scuffle. I'd like to help.

What's the hearing history of the ear you implanted? Was it severe/profound unaided for a while prior to your implant?

The duck sound is discouraging, I understand. It actually is a good indicator though as some folks don't even get sound. One or two years from now you stand a good chance of experiencing it as normal sound, as hard as it is to imagine what you hear now morphing into it. It sounds like your higher frequency response is waking up yet still asleep at the moment.

The noise programs do indeed work. I never found hearing aid noise programs to be worth a damn. It's probably just too soon when you just want to hear it as normal. Mappings are also key as your nerve tolerates greater voltages and responds, which is what gets it sounding normal.

BP, I moved past our scuffle a hundred years ago but I apologize, the BP is just so ... well, it's not you but it is a good reminder for all of us. You actually made a nice comment somewhere in response to something I said. We move forward in peace and disagreements and that's fine. I'll make the best guess I can.
1. My guess was in 12/2008 when I was very ill as in my partner taking out my living will and the guy at the hospital ignoring it is when I thought I moved far to the right to the severe to profound range. I remember crossover hearing tests before that. Last night, my partner said my hearing got really bad six years ago. Close enough?
1a. Mostly unaided because of the "wall down" canals from the earlier surgeries. I could not get an earmold that was usable. But I heard. Bone conduction is fine and believe me, I used that.
2. When Marcus (corgi) quacks, it drives me up the wall. When people talk, I usually refer to them as Betty Duck. Donald's voice does not fit - it's too deep. I had heard of people sounding like R2D2 but it is not that sound.
3. I just went back and reread your last sentence. It gave me real chills. It is, indeed, the high frequencies that have been a problem most of my life. Wow. So, I go back in Feb. what do I say besides silverware clanking annoys me, regular household noises scare me (I am not one to jump - I worked in NYC for a number of years and tuned out - I did not turn off) and one program out of four works okay.
4. I do not expect normal. I've been told not to expect it. That's one issue that is a subjective and sincere concern. Not normal, I believe I can handle (as I have not heard a timer or a seat belt beeper perhaps for most or all of my life). But Daisy Duck will likely drive me batty.
5. My last concern is about someone who blogs with intelligence elsewhere. He has the credibility. He didn't steer me to where I am but steered me away from misinformation from some CI marketers (he happened to be right). HE said he could not use the phone. He has an implant and that statement took me aback. Is this normal?

My partner told our friends (nurse and doctor - retired) that she was amazed (or not) on the first mapping the lower frequencies were all about the same level. Then Susan (audiologist) hit the higher frequencies and I just held out an "h" in sign language until I couldn't tolerate it any longer. Those electrodes were the weaker and, you hit that one on the head.

Thanks, BP,
-- Sheri

 

[Bebonang]

Dead in that I never fit it with a HA that provided much assistance. Dead in that it was totally useless to me before I was implanted. Technically, it was never without some hearing until I was implanted. It wasn't clinically dead, Jim... heh. I had about 110dB loss when that ear was implanted.

I was reading the sentences and those three words "Dead" which does not make any sense in the word of English language. I think he or she meant to say Deaf instead of Dead.

To me, the correct sentences would be:

Deaf in that I never fit it with a hearing aid (HA) that provided much assistance.

Deaf in that it was totally useless to me before I was implanted.

I wasn't clinically deaf, Jim... heh.

I don't know which is worst Dead or Death, usually hearing people always mispronounce for death instead of saying deaf.

Correct me if I am wrong. :P

 

[ambrosia]

I was reading the sentences and those three words "Dead" which does not make any sense in the word of English language. I think he or she meant to say Deaf instead of Dead.

To me, the correct sentences would be:

Deaf in that I never fit it with a hearing aid (HA) that provided much assistance.

Deaf in that it was totally useless to me before I was implanted.

I wasn't clinically deaf, Jim... heh.

I don't know which is worst Dead or Death, usually hearing people always mispronounce for death instead of saying deaf.

Correct me if I am wrong. :P

No they don't usually pronounce death deaf. But if you look at a keyboard the d is right next to the f. If your posting on a smart phone the qwerty keys are really small and it's easy to hit the wrong one. I'm forever hitting the i instead of the o right next to it, and in short words like on of and for, if you hit the I instead autocorrect won't fix it, because they're real words. Sane thing with dead, that's a real word so it's not going to autocorrect it deaf. It's not so smart it fixes grammar.

Most people realize this so they just let it go

 

[BleedingPurist]

I was reading the sentences and those three words "Dead" which does not make any sense in the word of English language. I think he or she meant to say Deaf instead of Dead.

To me, the correct sentences would be:

Deaf in that I never fit it with a hearing aid (HA) that provided much assistance.

Deaf in that it was totally useless to me before I was implanted.

I wasn't clinically deaf, Jim... heh.

I don't know which is worst Dead or Death, usually hearing people always mispronounce for death instead of saying deaf.

Correct me if I am wrong. :P

No, we, or at least I, meant "Dead." I had a severe-profoundly deaf ear that was implanted, but it was not dead. It had been aided with a hearing aid since the loss began and even in the end it was never completely without sound. By "Dead" I was referring to an ear that had never been actually used for hearing. It's been dormant. When you implant a dead ear, you aren't going to have the same results as someone implanting an ear they've been using all along.

 

[BleedingPurist]

BP, I moved past our scuffle a hundred years ago but I apologize, the BP is just so ... well, it's not you but it is a good reminder for all of us. You actually made a nice comment somewhere in response to something I said. We move forward in peace and disagreements and that's fine. I'll make the best guess I can.
1. My guess was in 12/2008 when I was very ill as in my partner taking out my living will and the guy at the hospital ignoring it is when I thought I moved far to the right to the severe to profound range. I remember crossover hearing tests before that. Last night, my partner said my hearing got really bad six years ago. Close enough?
1a. Mostly unaided because of the "wall down" canals from the earlier surgeries. I could not get an earmold that was usable. But I heard. Bone conduction is fine and believe me, I used that.
2. When Marcus (corgi) quacks, it drives me up the wall. When people talk, I usually refer to them as Betty Duck. Donald's voice does not fit - it's too deep. I had heard of people sounding like R2D2 but it is not that sound.
3. I just went back and reread your last sentence. It gave me real chills. It is, indeed, the high frequencies that have been a problem most of my life. Wow. So, I go back in Feb. what do I say besides silverware clanking annoys me, regular household noises scare me (I am not one to jump - I worked in NYC for a number of years and tuned out - I did not turn off) and one program out of four works okay.
4. I do not expect normal. I've been told not to expect it. That's one issue that is a subjective and sincere concern. Not normal, I believe I can handle (as I have not heard a timer or a seat belt beeper perhaps for most or all of my life). But Daisy Duck will likely drive me batty.
5. My last concern is about someone who blogs with intelligence elsewhere. He has the credibility. He didn't steer me to where I am but steered me away from misinformation from some CI marketers (he happened to be right). HE said he could not use the phone. He has an implant and that statement took me aback. Is this normal?

My partner told our friends (nurse and doctor - retired) that she was amazed (or not) on the first mapping the lower frequencies were all about the same level. Then Susan (audiologist) hit the higher frequencies and I just held out an "h" in sign language until I couldn't tolerate it any longer. Those electrodes were the weaker and, you hit that one on the head.

Thanks, BP,
-- Sheri

You have two things going for you. Number one is that you have very low expectations, so any gains from here will be appreciated. Number two is that you don't just give up. That one is the most important to moving beyond the ducks. I do know what you are trying to describe. It really is a lot like the hearing equivalent of being in a dark room for years and then the door opens and you are blinded by light, not seeing/hearing the details. With time, that will come more into focus. It is not likely you will hear ducks from here on out.

By keeping the processor on during all waking hours you'll build your tolerance and be able to get those high frequency levels up there. Hopefully, you will be able to get your levels pretty much uniform. I'm hoping the best for you! How often do you go to mappings? I believe it's a drive for you so you only go so often?