What do you consider "little benefit from HA?"

Here is another question. What about if you lost more hearing? Would that change anything for you? I lost 10+ more dB over the course of 8 years which technically isn't much but it gave me a push to get the CI.

The reason I ask is because I wondering if people are happy with their HA because it's good enough for them or because they don't really care to have speech discrimination, and it's just a supplemental for sound awareness.

I met a Deaf person recently, and he talks on the cell phone without his hearing aid. He is moderate (40dB) and the hearing aid distorts the cell phone too much, so he takes it off. I was shocked because it made me realize that maybe I'm a lot more deaf that I thought I was. I know that I have twice the hearing loss he has but WITH the hearing aids, I can "hear" sounds in 30dB range which is more than him unaided, and I STILL have nearly zero speech discrimination! (I say nearly because sometimes I get lucky and guess the obvious words like mother or cat)
 
Daredevel7 said:
Here is another question. What about if you lost more hearing? Would that change anything for you? I lost 10+ more dB over the course of 8 years which technically isn't much but it gave me a push to get the CI.

The reason I ask is because I wondering if people are happy with their HA because it's good enough for them or because they don't really care to have speech discrimination, and it's just a supplemental for sound awareness.

I met a Deaf person recently, and he talks on the cell phone without his hearing aid. He is moderate (40dB) and the hearing aid distorts the cell phone too much, so he takes it off. I was shocked because it made me realize that maybe I'm a lot more deaf that I thought I was. I know that I have twice the hearing loss he has but WITH the hearing aids, I can "hear" sounds in 30dB range which is more than him unaided, and I STILL have nearly zero speech discrimination! (I say nearly because sometimes I get lucky and guess the obvious words like mother or cat)
Click to expand...

The day I hear zip with my hearing aids is the day I will consider a CI but I will be just aiming for what I can hear now with my HAs.

The reason people who have different speech discriminition is their innate ability to process what they hear. My best friend has the same hearing loss as I do and she can talk on the phone better than I do while on the other hand, my brother has absulotely no oral skills despite having the same hearing loss as the both of us. I think that is why the CI works differently despite the users being able to hear at the same dB level.
 
when someone has moderate hearing loss, it's not unusual for them to hear some sounds better (such as speech on a cell phone) without their hearing aids vs. with them.

this was the case for me when i started wearing hearing aids for a moderately-severe loss. sometimes the high frequencies i heard were so painful to hear that i chose to remove my hearing aids instead. i also found that some voices (like male voices) were easier to understand without my hearing aids.

my hearing loss has been progressive since birth. i was diagnosed with severe-profound loss by age 24 and throughout the 10 years prior to receiving my ci, it continued to deteriorate. even when i had my first ci and wore a hearing aid in my nonimplanted (right) ear, the hearing in that ear continued to get worse as well which is why my ci surgeon recommended a second implant.
 
deafdyke said:
Good thread. I have noticed some people posting that they want a CI, b/c they'll be able to hear better in noise or whatever.
I'm awesome with implantation as long as the person really does demonstrate an obvious need for it. I do think that the majority of people do obviously qualify....but there needs to be a bit of tightening just to ensure that the type of person who has to have the latest hardware isn't buying into the hype of CI. (NOT to say that the CI isn't something really amazing.......b/c it IS......it's just that some of the stuff out there makes it seem like it's some super bionic ear)
Oh, and I can totally understand. For profound losses CI vs HA, is akin to what hoh people can hear with BTEs vs dinky aids. The difference is THAT drastic.
Click to expand...

Miss Kat had a moderate loss in one of her frequencies, does that mean she shouldn't qualify. At 250 hz she was hearing UNaided at 70 db. It then sloped to about 90 db.....still severe, not profound.
Why on earth should I leave her hoovering at 30-35 db when (obviously) she could get 15 db with the CI? I asked the audiologist and the surgeon if there was any way she would hear worse with the CI than she was with her aidd, and they said (barring a hardware issue) "Absolutly not".
That is why we went for it. I do not regret it and I have started thinking about a second.
 
Daredevel7 said:
Here is another question. What about if you lost more hearing? Would that change anything for you?

The reason I ask is because I wondering if people are happy with their HA because it's good enough for them or because they don't really care to have speech discrimination, and it's just a supplemental for sound awareness.
Click to expand...

If I lost more hearing, then yes. Right now my HAs are just a supplement for sound awareness - pretty much what I said in my earlier post. I did visit a CI audi in November and was qualified for one, but she said my speech discrimination would NOT significantly improve. And it was only 6% now. And the speech discrimination was the main goal of a CI for me, so I opted not to get one. But if I lost more hearing, then I will definitely re-visit the idea.

shel90 said:
The reason people who have different speech discriminition is their innate ability to process what they hear. My best friend has the same hearing loss as I do and she can talk on the phone better than I do while on the other hand, my brother has absulotely no oral skills despite having the same hearing loss as the both of us. I think that is why the CI works differently despite the users being able to hear at the same dB level.
Click to expand...

That makes total sense. It kind of ties in with what I was just saying in that my speech discrimination is only 6% now, and the CI audi didn't think that would improve much for me at all with a CI. She must be thinking that the innate ability to process speech wouldn't change much for me.
 
this is only my opinion, but for a ci surgeon and audi to say that one will "absolutely not" hear worse with a ci than hearing aids is being presumptuous. there is no way to determine how well a person will do with a ci until after they've been implanted. some people (like myself) are lucky enough to receive far more benefit from a ci than hearing aids. others are not so lucky. i know one ci user who could hear 30-40 dB with her hearing aids, but after getting her implant, her ability to hear dropped to 50-55 dB. just thought i'd point that out since there is no way to make this determination until after one has been implanted.
 
AlleyCat said:
If I lost more hearing, then yes. Right now my HAs are just a supplement for sound awareness - pretty much what I said in my earlier post. I did visit a CI audi in November and was qualified for one, but she said my speech discrimination would NOT significantly improve. And it was only 6% now. And the speech discrimination was the main goal of a CI for me, so I opted not to get one. But if I lost more hearing, then I will definitely re-visit the idea.



That makes total sense. It kind of ties in with what I was just saying in that my speech discrimination is only 6% now, and the CI audi didn't think that would improve much for me at all with a CI. She must be thinking that the innate ability to process speech wouldn't change much for me.
Click to expand...

That's interesting!
 
shel90 said:
The reason people who have different speech discriminition is their innate ability to process what they hear. My best friend has the same hearing loss as I do and she can talk on the phone better than I do while on the other hand, my brother has absulotely no oral skills despite having the same hearing loss as the both of us. I think that is why the CI works differently despite the users being able to hear at the same dB level.
Click to expand...

The bolded statement is probably true with the CI. However with the HA, I know I CANNOT hear certain frequencies at all. An high pitch alarm could be blaring into my aided ear, and I'd be spaced out. I've seen people wincing in pain from fire alarms, and Im just like "whaaa...?" :fruit:

I know I couldn't hear the s/sh/ch sounds at ALL even when done stand-alone and loudly. I don't think anyone could ever process what they hear if they simply cannot hear certain frequencies within normal range of the human voice.
 
Hear Again said:
this is only my opinion, but for a ci surgeon and audi to say that one will "absolutely not" hear worse with a ci than hearing aids is being presumptuous. there is no way to determine how well a person will do with a ci until after they've been implanted. some people (like myself) are lucky enough to receive far more benefit from a ci than hearing aids. others are not so lucky. i know one ci user who could hear 30-40 dB with her hearing aids, but after getting her implant, her ability to hear dropped to 50-55 dB. just thought i'd point that out since there is no way to make this determination until after one has been implanted.
Click to expand...

Kinda reminds me of that documentary on HBO about the deaf couple in their 50s or 60s who decided to get a CI and the mother having such high expectations only to get very emotional and depressed when the CI didnt meet her expections but the hubby just being glad to hear what he can hear. I forgot the name of the documentary but it was made by their daughter.
 
I have that same "ski slope" many of you have talked about. In the 100-105 db range. The CI audi said I would most likely be at about 30 db across the board. That was more than good enough for me. (And even if it weren't as good as 30, even 40 or 50 likely would have been just fine as well.) I was disappointed about the whole lack of improvement in speech discrimination she expected to see in me after a CI - she was very up-front with me about that - and that was what made me decide not to do this right now, even with getting 30 db across the board.
 
AlleyCat said:
If I lost more hearing, then yes. Right now my HAs are just a supplement for sound awareness - pretty much what I said in my earlier post. I did visit a CI audi in November and was qualified for one, but she said my speech discrimination would NOT significantly improve. And it was only 6% now. And the speech discrimination was the main goal of a CI for me, so I opted not to get one. But if I lost more hearing, then I will definitely re-visit the idea.
Click to expand...

I'm actually surprised by this. Did she give any reason? I've noticed that doctors are starting to refuse to give CI to adults to have been deaf for a really long time and uses ASL primarily. Apparently, this group has the highest "failure" rate in terms of improving listening skills. My own CI doctor actually refused to do surgery on someone my age because he thought he wouldn't be able to handle it psychologically. My old speech therapist who works with him is very angry and fighting for it.
 
Daredevel7 said:
I'm actually surprised by this. Did she give any reason? I've noticed that doctors are starting to refuse to give CI to adults to have been deaf for a really long time and uses ASL primarily. Apparently, this group has the highest "failure" rate in terms of improving listening skills. My own CI doctor actually refused to do surgery on someone my age because he thought he wouldn't be able to handle it psychologically. My old speech therapist who works with him is very angry and fighting for it.
Click to expand...

Why is it their decision? It is the deaf person's life and just because he/she is an ASL user, doesnt mean that they should be automatically denied a CI. Doctors need to stop playing God sometimes.

If the CI fails for the deaf person, at least the deaf person can die knowing that they know what it is like! :lol:
 
shel90 said:
Why is it their decision? It is the deaf person's life and just because he/she is an ASL user, doesnt mean that they should be automatically denied a CI. Doctors need to stop playing God sometimes.

If the CI fails for the deaf person, at least the deaf person can die knowing that they know what it is like! :lol:
Click to expand...

I thought that too initially. However, the more I thought about it, and it does make sense. As everyone knows, people think that CI is a "miracle", so they rush into the decision and when they actually get it, they get VERY angry at the doctor. So Im pretty sure my surgeon (who has been in the business for almost 20 years) has had his fair share of complaints and failures, most who are probably primarily ASL users (notice I say primary, not just that they know ASL). Honestly, I probably have to work a lot more than any other type of group (babies, or newly deaf) for better listening skills. Not to mention that the surgery is 50K or more, so Im guessing there's been refusal to pay from either the client or the insurance itself.

Also, there's CI failures (hardware/body rejection problem) and self inflicted CI failures.

Just to give you an example: my old speech therapist had a friend who was newly deaf and had the implant. The friend complained about the CI and how much it sucks so my therapist offered a free service since she didnt have much money. The friend agreed, so my therapist tested her. Turns out she NEVER went up even one level from P1 for a YEAR, because "P2 (which is the next volume level) annoyed her".
 
Daredevel7 said:
I'm actually surprised by this. Did she give any reason? I've noticed that doctors are starting to refuse to give CI to adults to have been deaf for a really long time and uses ASL primarily. Apparently, this group has the highest "failure" rate in terms of improving listening skills. My own CI doctor actually refused to do surgery on someone my age because he thought he wouldn't be able to handle it psychologically. My old speech therapist who works with him is very angry and fighting for it.
Click to expand...

Because my word distinction score (and other tests, such as noise vs. speech) was unexpectedly high. I managed to understand 18 out of 20 words correctly. The 6% score comes from sentence discrimination. I only managed to get PORTIONS of 3 sentences out of 20. But because I can apparently pick up many individual words and distinguish a lot between noise vs. speech, she didn't think the speech discrimination in itself with a CI would improve much. Some, yes, but not a lot. She thought I would gain a lot in environmental sounds because I'd get to around 30 db across the board, and while that is great, I can't justify (in my mind) the risks of surgery just so I can hear my cat meowing. I need more than that to want to do this surgery.
 
AlleyCat said:
Because my word distinction score (and other tests, such as noise vs. speech) was unexpectedly high. I managed to understand 18 out of 20 words correctly. The 6% score comes from sentence discrimination. I only managed to get PORTIONS of 3 sentences out of 20. But because I can apparently pick up many individual words and distinguish a lot between noise vs. speech, she didn't think the speech discrimination in itself with a CI would improve much. Some, yes, but not a lot. She thought I would gain a lot in environmental sounds because I'd get to around 30 db across the board, and while that is great, I can't justify (in my mind) the risks of surgery just so I can hear my cat meowing. I need more than that to want to do this surgery.
Click to expand...

Oh I see. That explains things better. Thanks!

I got activated a month ago, and turns out that my cat never meows. :)
 
Daredevel7 said:
Oh I see. That explains things better. Thanks!

I got activated a month ago, and turns out that my cat never meows. :)
Click to expand...

Your welcome, and your cat doesn't meow ?? :) You need to get another cat then! Then maybe both of 'em would meow! ;)
 
Daredevel7 said:
I thought that too initially. However, the more I thought about it, and it does make sense. As everyone knows, people think that CI is a "miracle", so they rush into the decision and when they actually get it, they get VERY angry at the doctor. So Im pretty sure my surgeon (who has been in the business for almost 20 years) has had his fair share of complaints and failures, most who are probably primarily ASL users (notice I say primary, not just that they know ASL). Honestly, I probably have to work a lot more than any other type of group (babies, or newly deaf) for better listening skills. Not to mention that the surgery is 50K or more, so Im guessing there's been refusal to pay from either the client or the insurance itself.

Also, there's CI failures (hardware/body rejection problem) and self inflicted CI failures.

Just to give you an example: my old speech therapist had a friend who was newly deaf and had the implant. The friend complained about the CI and how much it sucks so my therapist offered a free service since she didnt have much money. The friend agreed, so my therapist tested her. Turns out she NEVER went up even one level from P1 for a YEAR, because "P2 (which is the next volume level) annoyed her".
Click to expand...

I understand what you mean and it helps, but in my mind I just think that it is all spectulation on the dr's part if they refuse to consider some deaf people the candidancy for a CI because nobody really knows how much it would work for each person until after they are activated.
 
AlleyCat said:
Because my word distinction score (and other tests, such as noise vs. speech) was unexpectedly high. I managed to understand 18 out of 20 words correctly. The 6% score comes from sentence discrimination. I only managed to get PORTIONS of 3 sentences out of 20. But because I can apparently pick up many individual words and distinguish a lot between noise vs. speech, she didn't think the speech discrimination in itself with a CI would improve much. Some, yes, but not a lot. She thought I would gain a lot in environmental sounds because I'd get to around 30 db across the board, and while that is great, I can't justify (in my mind) the risks of surgery just so I can hear my cat meowing. I need more than that to want to do this surgery.
Click to expand...

that's really interesting because for most people, understanding individual words is more difficult than understanding sentences (where context can be used).
 
shel90 said:
Why is it their decision? It is the deaf person's life and just because he/she is an ASL user, doesnt mean that they should be automatically denied a CI. Doctors need to stop playing God sometimes.

If the CI fails for the deaf person, at least the deaf person can die knowing that they know what it is like! :lol:
Click to expand...

this isn't the case for all ci centers. i know my ci center (which is the largest in the midwest) won't refuse to implant a child or adult just because they use asl. they understand that they *can* learn how to voice, understand speech as well as environmental sounds.

in fact, i know one ci user who was Deaf from birth, received a ci at age 18 and learned how to speak and use the phone. she now uses her ci to the fullest extent.
 
shel90 said:
I understand what you mean and it helps, but in my mind I just think that it is all spectulation on the dr's part if they refuse to consider some deaf people the candidancy for a CI because nobody really knows how much it would work for each person until after they are activated.
Click to expand...

I agree, I think everyone should have a chance. Unfortunately, we dont know much in terms of fiscal/risk/probability matters, so there's probably something we don't know.
 
Back
Top