Cochlear implants give performance similar to HAs with 80db HL

This study shows CI matches HA with 80db HL

Comprehensive study that demonstrates medium-gain HAs with only 40db gain was able to match the average CI result except in HINT+5 where HAs were significantly ahead!
The average HA was 78db PTA unaided, 38db aided. For CI it was 110db HL aided down to 36db.

My comments: With a 110db HL, even high-gain HAs with 70db gain would aid you down to only 40db. Speech scores with such a profound loss would be far below the scores of CI and those with severe losses because there's extensive cochlear dead regions associated with a 110db loss. Also the surviving hair cells would be of very low quality and contribute little to acoustic information.

CI matches HA with 90db HL

Ive been doing my research on comparing CI vs. HA and I found this! I will keep looking for more articles that compare the two. But from what ive researched, CI today usually gives better hearing than what HAs can give for a profound loss. But CI appears to match the performance of HAs for a severe loss.

I also learned that those with severe losses generally score at least 70% speech on a difficult monosyllable test. I will do more research on speech scores for different degrees of hearing loss. But that article does show that those with profound losses generally scored below 50%. It's that group who with CI could hear comparable to those with severe losses and HAs. Speech would improve from perhaps 40% to perhaps 80% which is significent.

HAs come out way ahead of CIs in most tests

Results: The aided pure-tone hearing thresholds of the hearing aid users were better at low frequencies. In contrast, the cochlear implant group’s thresholds were better at high frequencies. with a statistically significant difference at 250 and 6000 Hz.. The hearing aid users had similar scores to the normal hearing group in vowel identification and pattern perception. In addition, the hearing aid group performed better than did the cochlear implant group in vowel identification, pattern perception, and daily sentences tasks (P = .001, P = .02, P = .0001, respectively). No significant differences were found between the hearing aid and cochlear implant groups in multi-syllabic, phonetically balanced words, and consonant identification tasks. Although similar performances were obtained for three groups in music perception tasks, there was a positive and significant correlation was found between pattern perception and rhythmic perception ability of the cochlear implant group, whereas the hearing aid group, who had better performance in multisyllabic word discrimination, also performed better in tonal and rhythmic tasks.
My comments: Hearing aids are great, no need to say any more!

FIGURE 3. Advances in technology and signal processing in cochlear implants have resulted in improved performance outcomes over time. Shown are group mean percent correct scores for CUNY and HINT sentences in quiet, and for CNC monosyllabic words. Source: Internal data from Cochlear Americas clinical trials.
My comments: CI performance improvement has peaked and leveled off since the early 2000s. Future technologies won't even be CI based as CI has physical limitations due to physics and principle.

Results of Pediatric Cochlear Implantation Compared with Results Obtained with Hearing Aids

Profoundly deaf children with 110db HL and 22% speech improved to 72% speech after CI and they hear with CI comparable to those with a severe hearing loss(70-85db) younger children did better with CI, the performance of children implanted between age 2 and 4 was equivalent to the mean performance of children with hearing loss of 70-85 dB wearing hearing aids.

Image got cut off, to view in full, click here

My comments: The HI group had only 55db PTA HL while the NH group had 5db PTA HL. Properly amplified, a moderate HL(60db max) which involves only the OHC and not IHC can give you near normal hearing except in the most challenging situations. Even with a channel simulator, the NH and HI did far better than CI. CIs do a great job in quiet but not so well in noise. It should be known that CIs aren't a cure and they won't give you anywhere near normal hearing, but they can be great for the profoundly deaf.

I found a recent CI study that shows the average performance for CI speech scores. Different studies show slightly different scores. The concensus is that CI can match HAs for someone with a severe hearing loss. CI is usually better than HAs for those who are profoundly deaf so it's no surprise many become CI candidates.

Four year old gets stem cells, improves 30db! Before, after audiograms provided!

Four year old successfully treated with stem cells for deafness!

This breaking news came from Phi4sius. He got the information directly from them.

From Beike Biotech. I have been in touch with them since earlier this year. They responded earlier that they hadn't yet treated Sensorineural Hearing Loss. Obviously, things have changed on that front:

We are also happy to tell you that we have successfully treated two patients with severe sensorineural hearing loss with stem cell. The last patient was discharged last week from our [name removed to protect privacy] treatment center. We arranged some hearing tests for this 4 years old patient before and after stem cell treatment. Also we carried out a treatment satisfaction survey with the parents after treatment. Patient witnessed great improvement after stem cell treatment and was satisfied with this treatment. 

Below we will give you a comparsion about the change of related hearing tests before and after stem cell treatment of this patient.

ASSR

Before

Freq. - Right (dB) / Left (dB) 
250 - 70 / 70
500 - 91 / na
1000 - 106 / na
2000 - na / na
4000 - na / 98

After

Freq. - Right (dB) / Left (dB)
250 - 60 / 40
500 - 84 / 84
1000 - 74 / 109
2000 - 92 / 107
4000 - 101 / 96

ABR - No significant changes after treatment. 

The results can't get anymore scientific than that other than long term studies. More treatments will probably yield more results after what I've seen online. 

I have compiled the audiograms from the above information to make it easier to read! This audiogram shows both before and after on the same audiogram. It's crowded and I think I made a couple minor mistakes when compiling that audiogram. But the general idea is you can see that he improved in every frequency! Look how far up he hears at 250Hz! Wow!

This is his "before" audiogram. It's considered a left corner audiogram and his good ear is as bad as both of my ears! His bad ear is dead in all frequencies from 500Hz and above, notice the arrows pointing downwards at the audiometer's limit of 110db HL? Even his good ear is dead above 1000Hz. I know what this is like as this is what my current level of hearing is.

This is his after audiogram! He achieved as much as 30db improvement in some frequencies! I was shocked and amazed at his excellent result at 250Hz in the left ear. Hearing unaided at 40db is just amazing! I was hearing at 35db at 250Hz sloping downwards to nothing in the higher frequencies with my old Widex Senso hearing aids! I am so excited to soon get the chance to be hearing unaided better than what many profoundly deaf hear aided! I showed this to my dad and he's all excited for me too! He said that is amazing hearing and I would hear some sounds/speech unaided and with HAs, I would hear alot more speech than I currently do!

Although he responded to every frequency after stem cells, his left ear may still be dead at 1000Hz and above. If they tested 750Hz, he may still have some usable hearing there. Before that, he probably had no usable hearing above 375Hz. So gaining a full octive of hearing is impressive! His right ear improved so much at 1000Hz, it's actually better than at 500Hz(and possibly at 750Hz too!) He has good, usable hearing to at least 2000Hz, possibly even 3000Hz to 4000Hz! We don't know what he's scoring on speech, but we know that stem cells has drastically improved his ability to understand speech, hear sounds, appreciate music and has given him higher frequency hearing which he lacked before!

Let's go over the facts and myths of stem cells!

1. Myth: Big deal, so youll get a 5db or 10db improvement.

Fact: Uh, no. You can get a 30db improvement with today's stem cells and in 3-5 years from now, many deaf people will be seeing more than 40db improvements!

2. Myth: Stem cells is risky.

Fact: Mesenchymal stem cell(MSC) unlike hematopoietic stem cell(HSC) does not produce immune response. Therefore does not require match. No one has ever died or became very ill due to stem cell complications out of over 5000 patients who have gotten stem cells for all kinds of diseases. Stem cells is far safer than any drug or surgery and is rapidly becomming the top choice to treat diseases.

3. Myth: Stem cells for deafness won't occur for at least 30 years.

Fact: Oh really? It's here now! Some labs have been using stem cells to improve hearing as early as 2006. This four year old was treated in 2009 and it's expected that we will see dozens, if not hundreds of people treated and have their hearing improved with stem cells in 2010 and beyond.

4. Myth: Big deal, cochlear implants are better.

Fact: Today, as of 2009, only in some cases but not for much longer. Stem cell technology is only a few years old. Cochlear implant technology is a few decades old. It wasn't till 2005 that cochlear implants became good enough that those who actually still had a little residual hearing were finally candidates. Before that, only those with no residual hearing or so little residual hearing that you scored 0% on speech were CI candidates. I suggest you view the advantages of stem cells over cochlear implants.

5. Myth: Stem cells is unaffordable.

Fact: The price is estimated at $30,000 for stem cells and that already includes travel and other costs. A cochlear implant costs twice that per ear and even if insurance covers that, youd still need to spend a fortune to get a 2nd CI. We all pay with higher insurance rates for something that's borderline elective anyway. I hope insurance doesn't pay for stem cells other than for diseases that could be fatal. No one has ever died from being deaf. Go and save the money yourself or take out a medical loan. Let us afford insurance to treat life saving diseases!

6. Myth: Stem cells won't cure your deafness.

Fact: Not yet, but as stem cell technology matures, it becomes a question of when, not if. The timeframe could be 5 years, 15 years or even 50 years before enough hearing is restored to make you hearing. This is defined as 25db(average) across the audiogram and 85% speech accuracy. It's been observed that even in birds who have a wonderful, natural ability to restore hearing, a 23db HL was the best possibly achieved. Many birds were mildly to moderately hard of hearing, although still not considered deaf.

7. Myth: I have no residual hearing so stem cells is hopeless!

Fact: Today's stem cell technology can restore a total hearing loss(125db HL arbitrary value) down to the 90-100db range. Severe degrees of hearing loss may be improved to as good as 40-60db. You would hear with HAs far better than CI with this much hearing. Remember that a normal hearing person has 15,000+ high quality hair cells per ear and can hear 0-10db HL to 16-20KHz for children and 10-20db HL to 12KHz for adults. Stem cells currently can regrow several hundred medium quality hair cells which work alongside your existing low and medium quality hair cells. Too many hair cells would only cause you to hear worse! Bird's regenerated hair cells were of medium quality unlike the originals which are high quality.

Further comments from me: I plan to travel and get stem cells to improve my unaided and aided hearing. The estimated timeframe will be 3-5 years as I am going to wait till hundreds of others get stem cells before me. I want to see results, audiograms, facts, blogs, etc from the pioneers who go before me. My friend Phi4sius says I may see enough results in less than 2 years for me to go ahead. He's going ahead soon. I look forward to his result and hope he improves alot in his dead ear!

For those of you who say I could get cochlear implant(s) now, I would rather have stem cells even today than a cochlear implant and for good reasons. If some stem cell lab was willing to take me on as a case study at no cost, I would seriously consider! Otherwise I am not in a hurry unlike the parents of that 4 year old. I don't know why the parents couldn't wait a few more years, maybe they were afraid he was falling too far behind on speech development? He might not have had enough residual hearing like I did back then to develop speech and speak clearly. Well stem cells addressed this and his hearing is much better than mine ever was! His parents didn't want to put him thru surgery for a CI. My dad commented that stem cells even today is the better(and arguably safer) choice since you avoid scary surgery! Stem cells can be administered by an injection or IV.

I am waiting a short while because results(and safety) will only improve. I can't afford to spend $30,000 to get it every year. The first time I get stem cells will be for around 40db improvement and the next time I get it will be for enough improvement to let me hear without HAs. I will post more as I get more news and audiograms of others who are pioneers in stem cells. This will give us a better idea of how much improvement to expect among other fators. Thanks for reading. I am so excited for those who improve their hearing and for my day to come!

Stem cells is superior to cochlear implants. Well worth the wait!

I was discussing with my friend about stem cells vs. cochlear implants and how stem cells will be so much better. After all, stem cells can improve hearing and eventually make you hearing! Cochlear implants are just an aid to give a profoundly deaf person access to sounds but don't come close to natural hearing. I did talk about the fact I might get CI in 3-5 years but seeing that stem cell technology is advancing much faster, ill probably get the chance to get stem cells by then, that's my choice. I have made many valid points for my choice. Below are the advantages and disadvantages for your reference.

Advantages of stem cells:

1. Hear unaided

Perhaps the biggest advantage of them all and something I desire the most! Even a partial improvement of as little as 20db(although ive been told 40db is likley) will give me some ability to hear instead of the silent world I now experience. I get excited just thinking about this! It's going to be so surreal to hear something, reach for my HAs and find they aren't there! This is something cochlear implants can never, ever achieve. In fact, most people actually lose their residual hearing and thus their ability to hear even the loudest sounds. They can never go back to HA if CI doesn't work for any reason as CI usually wipes out your residual hearing. Even those who keep some residual hearing usually end up losing it within a year. Hybrid CIs are a failure for the same reason. Save your residual hearing for stem cells to improve upon that! CI never made sense for anyone with residual hearing but I, my audiologist, parents and friends admit it's great for those with no(or very, very little) residual hearing. No HA would help since you need residual hearing(110db max HL) to amplify.

2. Lower cost

Cochlear implants cost $50,000 per ear of which $35,000 is due to the surgery to implant. Insurance may sometimes subsidsize the cost for one implant. Many feel "one sided" with only one CI but can't afford the out of pocket cost for a 2nd CI which insurance rarely covers. No one knows what role insurance will have in covering stem cells, im guessing they will cover deaf babies and young children. They are very unlikley to cover HOH people since they are very functional with any decent HA and they can still hear some sounds/speech unaided. Also there's way more HOH people than deaf people and insurance can't afford this.

Older children and adults can take out a low(or even no) interest medical loan for the $20,000-$30,000 cost of getting both ears done with stem cells and pay off the loan over a decade. Many others may be able to get some financial support from (hearing) family and friends in the form of gifts and interest free loans. My parents will help me afford stem cells as they know how great it's to be hearing.

3. Lower risk

There's many associated risks of cochlear implants, surgery being the biggest risk. This is one reason I am not keen on getting CI. Neither my parents nor audiologist recommend CI for me either. Ive seen people develop all kinds of complications and infections including meningitis(vaccines reduce that one risk) damage to nerves and allergic reactions. Nerve damage may cause permanent numbness to the face, twitching of the eye, loss of the sense of taste and constant pain. The materials, including silicone in the internal CI can cause adverse affects. Silicone is toxic to everyone and should never be in the body! I read a blog of a lady who was allergic to the external speech processor and no one could remedy this so she was forced to stop wearing her CI. You also take the risk of being unable to get a MRI or other medical procedures that may ruin your internal CI.

Stem cells that are derived from your own skin/blood are risk free, your body will never reject your own stem cells! The process may be as simple as having a small vial of blood removed or a piece of skin scraped from your inside cheek or arm. Your cells are then processed into adult stem cells and injected(or inserted by IV) back in your arm. About the only risk is failing to improve your hearing. No residual hearing should be destroyed so you can go back to HAs and hear the same as before.

4. Wide acceptance

Once stem cells become mainstream and FDA approved, they will be accepted by 99.9% of hearing people and by 90% of deaf people. The deaf has learned to accept HAs and more recently CIs. They too will learn to accept stem cells for it's wonderful ability to let you hear sounds and speech.

5. Reduce tinnitus

Since tinnitus is very often associated with hearing loss, restoring your hearing even in part will also reduce your tinnitus. Ive read of people that find their tinnitus more annoying than their hearing loss and would trade away the rest of their hearing if they could live in peace without any tinnitus. With stem cells, they get to restore their hearing and reduce tinnitus! Cochlear implants have been known to make tinnitus worse!

6. Reduce recruitment

All deaf/HOH people experience recruitment where amplified sounds can quickly become too loud. Hearing people don't have this problem. Cochlear implants can also get around recruitment but not as well as actually restoring your natural hearing. I know people who still experience discomfort with loud sounds and are forced to turn their maps down. Their ability to hear decreases as well.

7. Best hearing

There is no argument that stem cells gives the best possible hearing. For those unhappy with how poorly they hear with powerful HAs and are considering a CI, they know that stem cells can do way better. After all, CI is just a tool like HAs but only stem cells is a cure. Even those who don't want to be cured of their deafness and become hearing, they can get a lower dose of stem cells and become less deaf. They will then hear better than CI with the right HAs programmed correctly and even if not, they can always get more stem cells! Cochlear implants gives aided hearing comparable to what a severely deaf person gets with HAs. I hear worse(not in the lows though) than what most hear with CI since im profoundly deaf(at 500Hz and above) but this will change when I get stem cells and ill hear better than almost all CI users. When I get stem cells a 2nd time, no CI in the world will even come close.

8. Waterproof

This is another huge advantage for stem cells that no CI(except for the rare totally internal CI) or even HA(I did read of a waterproof CIC HA, but won't help the deaf) can achieve. When I shower, my hair needs 2 hours to dry so I can't wear HAs during that time. When I prespire, I must remove HAs or risk ruining them. I have to stay out of the rain and other wet situations unless I remove my HAs then of course I hear nothing. I would love to experience swimming(pool, lake, ocean, waterpark) and showering with sounds! It would be so surreal!

9. Convenience

I won't have to deal with any of the hassles of HAs, you won't have to deal with CIs. People get lasik, prk, intacs, iols so they can reduce or even eliminate their dependency on glasses. The same will be said for stem cells to reduce or even eliminate dependency on hearing aids! I like HAs because they give me access to sounds but I won't miss them when I am hearing. No worries about feedback, molds, discomfort, changing batteries, repair, avoiding water, etc. Just pure, natural unaided hearing! CIs are just as inconvenient as HAs if not more so. The batteries only last a day or two, the processor is larger, heavier, more fragile. There's a cord and magnet to deal with as well. I often go without HAs when im alone because it's so much more convenient. I only wish I could hear some sounds without HAs! Those of you with more residual hearing than me are so lucky!

10. Reliablity

Face it, HAs and CIs are subject to failure or glitches. Of course stem cells won't prevent hearing loss but as long as you avoid loud noises and stay healthy, your hearing will remain and last way longer than your HAs or CI. I have had to get my HAs repaired about once every 3 years on average. For most people, their hearing lasts a lifetime with only the usual high frequency loss due to presbycusis. They can get stem cells for that when stem cell technology is mature.

Disadvantages of stem cells:

1. Blissful silence

That's about the only real disadvantage. You will be hearing 24/7 if you choose a full restoration of your hearing(25db or better) I was just thinking that alot of deaf people would go for a partial restoration and become less deaf. They would hear with powerful HAs better than CI for cheaper and less risk, yet still enjoy silence without HAs! Initially, stem cells won't be able to restore hearing in full but will be able to several years later. CI will be phased out so for the deaf who were looking to CI to hear more, they can go ahead and get stem cells or just live with what little residual hearing they have. That's your choice and I respect this, just respect my choice to improve my hearing as much as possible and I choose stem cells because it's so much better than CI.

I may get stem cells 2 or 3 times depending on the cost and extent of improvement. The first time, I expect at least 20db improvement but may achieve 40db. The second time, I would prefer to get down to normal or near normal hearing. If I end up with near normal hearing, say 35db loss I may decide not to get stem cells a 3rd time since any further improvement would be small and not worth the $20,000+ cost when for $2000 I can get mini open fit HAs that will aid me to 0-10db HL. I won't need HAs but wear them whenever I feel like and I can turn the HAs off to make very loud sounds much softer. I will decide when that time comes. For now, I have decided that ill get stem cells and can decide later if I want a repeat when stem cell technology matures.

2. Deaf culture

The Deaf fear the loss of their culture. They could get stem cells to be less deaf and not have to experience any of the disadvantages they can come up with. Cochlear implants didn't destroy their culture, stem cells might not either. There may be less deaf people since stem cells will be very popular for deaf babies born to hearing parents. Itll also be popular for late deafened adults and for the "oral only" deaf like me.

3. Few year wait

Stem cells is highly experimental today with only a few anecdotal reports. This "disadvantage" will go away after a few years. Those who are against hearing restoration which includes most Deaf people today say the wait is 20, 30, 40+ years or even that we might never live long enough to experience any restoration of our hearing. Guess what? It's already happening! My friend knows someone who got a 25db improvement in his hearing at a clinic in Costa Rica. Human clinical trials on children/babies under 18 months has begun! My friend says give it 6 months before we see human adult clinical trials and he will be a pioneer, getting stem cells first chance he gets. I will get stem cells after I see it on the news and read testimonals from the pioneers who are among the first, ill be right after those guys.

The saying goes "the time to hear is now" but keep in mind that those with CI may have to wait a decade longer before stem cells becomes advanced enough to repair the damage that CI causes. For one, you kiss your residual hearing bye. A 40db improvement for someone with an infinite loss might get you to 90db loss. But if you kept your 90db loss, you could be enjoying a 50db loss! The electricity CI uses can cause cochlea scarring gradually. Some fluid is removed from the cochlea to make room for the electrodes. Id rather just skip CI and wait 5 years for stem cells than get CI and have to wait 15 years for stem cells, but the choice is yours. Thanks for reading and feel free to ask questions or comment.

Update! 

Hearing regeneration with pills? They project 2010 as the year for human clinical trials! This could present another option besides stem cells!

Stem cells for deafness begins human trials? Great news!

Check this website!

Center Announces Hearing Loss Study

CBR is collaborating with three leading medical institutions to initiate a clinical study within the next few months that will evaluate the use of a child's own newborn stem cells to treat hearing loss caused by an accident or severe illness.

---------------------------------------------------

My friend says clinical trials are being planned or may already be underway to treat hearing loss and other conditions in children using their own cord blood. Adult trials could occur next year, according to him. He already applied to be on the list and wants to be a pioneer for the first adult human deaf clinical trials. I give it 3-5 years. The wait is not so long, certainly not "decades" like some experts say to appease the Deaf who would oppose everything that treats hearing loss.

Stem cells is already being used for dozens of different diseases/conditions of which hearing loss is one of them. He wanted a cochlear implant but after learning that a hearing loss treatment is around the corner, he canceled the CI appointment and is going to wait for the real thing. He says if he isn't accepted to a clinical trial, he will just travel and get it done in another country. He's sick and tired of being deaf and not hearing good enough with HAs.

Hes currently emailing doctors and scientists for additional information and when they will perform their own trials. Adult trials will either use cord blood stem cells(making sure it's a good match) or your own adult stem cells which can be harvested from your skin/blood. Countries like China have been treating deafness/hearing loss for over a year now. The improvement is supposed to be on the order of 20-30db today but this will increase as stem cell technology matures. Ultimately normal hearing of 25db or better will be attained.

He told me that cochlear implants will be obsolete shortly after we hear news all over of success with hearing loss stem cells. He says those who got CI recently will be furious/irate that they didn't wait just a little longer. He also says that a CI damages/destroys all your residual hearing and other parts of the cochlea making your chances of ever being able to benefit from stem cells in the implanted ear poor. He's recommending anyone with residual hearing to save their ears and have a little patience for stem cells.

We also talked about it becomming mandatory for all deaf/hoh babies to get their hearing loss treated once stem cell technology is mature, could be 20 years from now. Just about all hearing parents will be more than happy to have their baby be hearing. Some deaf parents may oppose this which is selfish and unfair when such a safe, easy treatment is available.

There are so many advantages to stem cells over cochlear implants that it's worth the 3-5 year wait. He says itll be just a year. The cost will be perhaps $15,000 for both ears, the risks will be much less and the rewards much greater. He also believes that while todays stem cell technology can partially restore your hearing, in the near future youll be able to fully restore your hearing. I say this remains to be seen, it's a question of when, not if. But he knows about realistic expectations and we would be very happy to achieve a 20db improvement initally and later on achieve further improvements as stem cell technology matures.

Imagine that today is the year 2012 and that stem cells is being done on humans with great results. A such example would be something as shown below(see audiograms) from what we know so far. We know very little and still don't have a real answer on the date and such but im hearing from a growing number of people and the number of anecdotes is rapidly increasing. At this point, it is almost certain that before 2020 we will see large numbers of people getting stem cells. The wait is on the order of a few years, not decades! My parents are very excited for me and my dad will help me afford stem cells, including making the trip to another country if I can't get into a clinical trial in America.

This person wishes to hear better. Even with max gains(Deafdude: Max gains improved my speech by 20%!) on his HAs, his hearing still isn't that great. His unaided audiogram is very similar to mine and is typical for profound losses. Aided he hears great in the lows(Deafdude:  That's one reason I skipped CI) but it takes a nosedive above 500Hz in both quantity and quality. His mid frequency hearing, like mine is very poor and his highs are nonexistant. He is glad he saved both ears for stem cells instead of destroying/wasting it with CI.(Deafdude: I am not against CI if you already have no residual hearing to risk)  His old audiologist had recommended he wait a few years for stem cells and that a CI would probably disqualify you from being able to get stem cells for many reasons. The audiologist also pointed out that CI will soon be obsolete and no longer manufactored nor supported. 

He got the stem cell treatment and begin to improve. He is so glad he resisted the temptation for CI and saved his residual hearing in both ears. Some of his friends got CI and are happy with CI(Deafdude: I give CI the credit it deserves for those with no residual hearing) but won't be able to benefit from stem cells in the implanted ear.(Deafdude: More and more of my friends are skipping CI for stem cells) When all the hair cells have settled down in their new home in his cochlea, he noticed a very drastic improvement(Deafdude: A realistic improvement is 20db) in both unaided and aided hearing with the same HAs he had prior to the treatment. His HAs were reprogrammed with less than max gains in the lows as not to overamplify.(Deafdude: HAs can't give better than baseline of 0db HL)  He hears better than CI at 1000Hz and below. His speech score is almost as good as those with CI!  He can still attain further improvement so he will return when stem cell technology matures.



True to his word, he returned about three years later and achieved another huge improvement even though there's diminishing returns in the lows. He knows that stem cells can't give him normal unaided hearing. Even chickens/birds with their amazing natural ability to regrow hair cells still end up with a mild hearing loss! Given the fact he finds high frequencies annoying(Deafdude: My hearing friends and family cover their ears) and that very little sounds/speech takes place above 2000Hz(Deafdude: As I learned from my dad and others) and also the fact he hears way better than the now obsolete cochlear implant technology, he is leaving well enough alone on his doctor's advice. Getting more hair cells would not achieve much, if anything and risk hearing worse in the lows due to overcrowding. Too many hair cells living in your cochlea is as bad as too few!

All my audiograms thus far with my comments on them!

My audiograms are shown below. Click on each to enlarge.

This is the oldest audiogram I can find, its from 1998. That audiogram did say I have a stable profound hearing loss so I assume it was the same on previous audiograms. Maybe the audiologist somehow kept a copy before 1998, we will have to call around and find out. I can tell you that I didn't hear unaided even when I was little so I certainly wasn't HOH but deaf since birth.

I do wonder if I had cochlear dead zones in the high frequencies. I do remember being able to hear birds and whistles so I probably was still able to hear 3000Hz. My aided hearing took a big dip past 1500Hz despite my unaided hearing being flat. My dad says the audiologist programmed maximum gains in the mid and high frequencies but did turn the gains down a bit at 250Hz, that's why im missing out in that frequency :(

My mom found this audiogram in July 2009. I was shocked and surprised to see that I had no residual hearing above 500Hz! The arrows point downwards at 750Hz and up at the 110db max(90db max at 8000Hz) that this audiometer was capable of outputting. I was also shocked how much worse my hearing got! I never noticed that I lost what little high(er) frequencies I had! This means there's so few sounds that are high frequencies I never noticed I lost them!

My aided audiogram taken 20 days later. My unaided audiogram was input from 20 days ago, I don't think they retested my unaided hearing. My aided hearing at 250Hz remained the same 35db as it was in 1998 but it took a huge dive in the other frequencies. I am surprised at only hearing 50db aided with 95db unaided when I heard 30db aided with 90db unaided in 1998!

I am also surprised I heard aided to 3000Hz when I had no unaided hearing past 500Hz! Perhaps this was a false response due to cochlear dead regions? I am impressed I could understand some words on a speech test with such poor aided hearing! It goes to show how important the low frequencies are!

I was surprised at that 65db threshold at 250Hz! I also recorded better thresholds across the audiogram compared to 2002! Surely my hearing didn't improve? Maybe those are just false positive responses due to cochlear dead zones above 750Hz.

This left corner audiogram is from September 2008. My hearing falls off the bottom in the higher frequencies. Pretty much identical to my 2002 audiogram. The audiologist then said that no HA would touch a 120db loss and that he recommends CI. The next day he retracted his recommendation after seeing that I got some benefit from the new Phonak Naida HAs. I still hear pretty good in the lows.

I was surprised at the poor scores at 250Hz. Ive tested my hearing on several occasions after this audiogram and I can hear 70db at 250Hz. My aided 250Hz hearing is way better than 35db, I know because I hear 250Hz louder and further than 500Hz at home on my speakers. That audiometer needs to be recalibrated at 250Hz. However my other scores are accurate.

This audiogram from July 2009 was taken in-situ with audiogram direct, a feature my HAs support. My unaided hearing is 120db at 1000Hz and up. The aided scores are a home test with my speaker but they make sense given how much gain my HAs were programmed for. I plan to have another aided test in a soundfield for official scores now that my HAs have been reprogrammed. Ill edit this post with all future audiograms.

I might get CI in 3-5 years, need to learn more! My thoughts posted here.

Ive been thinking to myself about my future plans. There's still so much I need to learn about CI and so much more I need to research. Ive read many CI blogs and most with CI have a positive experience. But I just got done reading her negetive experience.  Although she did hear better with CI, she experienced complications with her CI and has stopped wearing her CI. She started wearing it again but is still experiencing problems and has stopped again. She also is sad to lose her residual hearing. I hope she can have her problems addressed and be happy with CI again. I do wish her well.

You may ask what happened to my plans for stem cells? The plan is still in action but no one yet knows when human clinical trials will begin. I plan to get a CI consultation in 2 years or so and if CI technology in 3-5 years can meet all my requirements and stem cells isn't around the corner by then, ill get one ear implanted and save the other one unless I lose all hearing in that ear.

Right now I have a 70-75% chance of improvement with CI over what my HAs can deliver. That comparsion was made with my current HAs programmed for maximum gains. I definately plan to try different HAs before getting CI. It makes me sad to see some people skip this important step. What if better HAs improve your speech from 20% to 70% or lets you hear 0db at several frequencies? Some of you do have enough residual hearing to accomplish just that.

Ive checked previous audiograms and my hearing has gotten worse. Ill post all my audiograms in another thread very soon. This is very important information for myself and for everyone reading to learn. I expect my hearing to slowly get worse and I might not hear above 500Hz a few years from now. In fact my 2002 audiogram shows no residual hearing above 500Hz but more recent audiograms place my loss in the 110-120db range above 500Hz. I will need a TEN test for cochlear dead regions.

Cochlear dead regions deserves it's own thread. But from what ive read, it's very interesting. A dead region is where you have no hair cells left and no residual hearing. You could still respond on the audiogram but the response is false and in fact arises from off-frequency stimulation. For example, a 120db stimulus can be heard by me as high as 2000Hz. But am I really hearing 2000Hz or are my hair cells at perhaps 500Hz responding? The piano thud test shows my hearing is "good" to 900Hz and goes downhill fast and ends at 1200Hz. Speech tests show pratically no benefit above 500Hz, any hearing above 500Hz doesn't really improve my speech score for some reason. Ill post about that in detail on another thread.

Ive been told that a CI should and probably will significantly benefit me today. My math places around a 3 out of 4 chance of hearing better with CI based on how much residual unaided hearing I have on a recent audiogram. You see, the more residual hearing a person has, the more benefit he will get from HAs. If I can hear 50db aided at a certain frequency and someone has 30db more residual hearing(say 90db vs. 120db) that person could be hearing 20db and not only that, the quality would improve since there's alot more surviving hair cells! There's some people who got CI who's audiograms I wish I had, id hear great with HAs with that much residual hearing. Ill have to wait for stem cells to improve my hearing to where their hearing currently is.

Hopefully CI technology gets to the point in 3-5 years where there's at least 90% chance ill hear better than with HAs. I am not comfortable with today's 70-75% odds. My friend says AB is working on 32 channels. We have seen 22 channel CIs for around 20 years now, about time for more channels! Ill be alot more interested if one of those CI companies can come out with 32 or more channels! This is very important for pitch perception but helps improve quality and even quantity of sounds!

There's alot of conditions that need to be met regarding CI.

1. I would like to hear better than 30db in the lows(125-500Hz) better than 40db in the mids(500-2000Hz) and better than 50db in the highs(2000-6000Hz+) and I would like to hear equal or better than my HAs at every frequency, even 125Hz and 250Hz! Today's CI technology stands a good chance of meeting my conditions in the mids and highs but a poor chance of just matching what I can hear with HAs in the lows. Maybe tomorrow's CI technology can at least match what I hear with HAs in the lows?

2. I would like to hear 100Hz or better all the way up to 6000Hz or better. For this, ill need a long electrode array inserted deep towards the apex of the cochlea. The low frequencies are the most important since most of the sounds and speech comes from the lows. I am simply curious what the highs sound like but regardless, getting to 6000Hz and better than 50db sounds realistic. The highs aren't of much importance from what my hearing friends say.

3. I want a 40% improvement in speech scores on a HINT-Q test or some other standard test. If I score 30% with my HAs, id like to reach at least 70% with CI. If I can score 40% or better with HAs, I will leave well enough alone even if I am a "borderline" candidate due to very loose CI criteria.

4. Id like to hear aided with CI comparable to what a severely deaf person hears aided with HAs and comparable to what a mildly HOH person hears unaided. Id of course like to hear better than what I and other profoundly deaf hear with the best HAs set to maximum gains.

5. I will need to be approved and financed by insurance, I can't afford the $50,000+ cost myself and even if I could, id be saving that for stuff such as a house, life saving surgery, retirement and even stem cells.

6. Id need to know what kind of risk id be taking by undergoing CI surgery. Id also need to know what complications can occur and the percent odds of them happening to me.

7. Id need to find an expert CI surgeon, team and audiologist to ensure the best possible CI results and to hopefully hear better than what I hear with HAs. Id want to talk in person to others who got CI and determine objectively how well they hear. Ill tell them to turn around and ill say sentences and see if they hear/understand. Ill also play tones and see if they can hear them further than I can.

8. Id be interested in the surgeon who has set records with CI, like he did with this lady who hears from -5 to 10db with her CI! He must have done everything right for her to get a record breaking result!

9. The audiologist will need to know how to correctly program/map my CI. He/she will need to work with me and let me see all the numbers/results entered. I will want to learn much about mapping a CI so I can help the audiologist map my own CI. I want the best possible thresholds and large dynamic ranges. 80% of a CI is the mapping and there's thousands of ways to map a CI, it's way more complicated than HAs.

10. I will need to learn more about CIs, what factors give good/bad results and see all the numbers/audiograms so I can compare and learn what results I can expect for myself. Those of you blogging your CI experience, please include all information/facts. Your subjective experience only tells half the story. How much residual hearing did you have before CI? Why were you not getting enough benefit from HAs? Did you try the best HAs with maximum gains? How well were you aided in the soundfield and what was your speech scores? How well do you hear with CI and how much, if any residual hearing did you keep per your new audiogram?

11. Stem cells is the wildcard. A CI will damage my hearing and cochlea and make it harder to get good results with stem cells in the far future. It would suck to be left out of stem cells for a long time in the implanted ear. I know the saying "the time is to hear now" but what if it means you end up not hearing in the future? I expect CI to be obsolete and no longer made/supported once stem cells takes off.

12. I will be paying close attention to the progress of stem cells all along the way. Ive seen a website in China that claims they can treat a variety of conditions including deafness today! What if in 3-5 years thousands of people travel overseas to become less deaf or HOH with stem cells and hear way better than CI with their HAs using their much improved residual hearing? Ive been thinking I could risk one ear with stem cells and if this doesn't work out then ill get a CI in that ear and wait for stem cell technology to mature. Then ill get stem cells in my non implanted ear while waiting for stem cells to make it possible to repair the damage CI does and improve my hearing enough in the CI ear too.

13. I am particularly curious why CI candidacy criteria is so loose and why they are/have implanted those with only a moderate hearing loss(such as 50db at 250Hz) a such person would still hear some sounds unaided that would be destroyed with a CI. I have a 70db loss at 250Hz and even I am worried about losing this residual hearing and hearing worse in the low frequencies. Why would someone who with the right HAs can hear 0-10db aided in several frequencies want to hear only 25-40db with CI? If they are that interested in hearing the highs, surely transposition would work?

14. I will try every powerful HA out there, especially the ones with transposition. I will do my best to make HAs work since CI is a last resort. My audiologist agrees that too many people buy into the CI hype and are too quick to give up on HAs that could be benefitting them! I know someone who scored 20% speech which improved to 70% when he tried different HAs! The longer you stick to HAs, the better CI technology will be when you finally get CI and if you can wait long enough, you can get stem cells!

That's all for now. I will keep blogging as I learn more. Feel free to comment and ill respond.

update(Nov 22) I spoke too soon about thinking about CI in 3-5 years. Stem cell technology has advanced faster than I previously thought and ill be getting my chance to get stem cells in less than 3-5 years. The experts predicting a 20+ timeframe for stem cells were wrong. I now see that stem cells for deafness has recently become available, making CI a moot point now and especially in 3-5 years. Hypothetically, if stem cell technology never existed then yea id get CI when CI technology improved some more. But now CI is old news and will quickly fade away.

Getting some facts straight regarding audiograms, hearing loss, HAs and CI.

Someone said to me: I learned something at JTC I thought I would share with you.

(you showed me the image)

Do you see that triangle at the top of the audiogram? You hearing aids should be programmed inside that triangle for speech perception. If they aren't able to reach that high, they need to be, at least, shaped like the triangle. Low frequency sounds like "ahh" and "b" are much louder when produced than sounds like "th" and "f", so they need to be amplifed LESS than the high frequency sounds. If they are louder, they will overpower even more. Your audiogram should ALWAYS slope UP, even if that means that you need to amplify the lows less.

Also, the line at the bottom represents the WORST your hearing can be and still be aided into the speech banana.

Caution: This is only true if you are seeking the ability to understand speech through audition.




It's impossible to get to the triangle(25db HL) in the high frequencies. For that ill need the transposition cutoff to be closer to 500Hz than 1500Hz. Maybe Phonak will design a new HA where the transposition has more programmable options. With a 1500Hz cutoff, I pretty much don't benefit from transposition since I have 120db loss at that frequency.

When my HAs were reprogrammed, different aided results were tried and with the gain on the lows reduced, I heard less. My parents said I begin to talk too loud and they had to shout at me so I could hear them. My ability to understand speech dropped as well. I also was missing out on some environmental sounds with less gains. So yea it's always good to give as much gain as possible, why hear less?

As for the bottom line(black dots) that's not true! Look at the 750Hz, 1000Hz and 1500Hz results. It's a matter of getting the most powerful HA and correctly programming it for the best possible aided hearing. I am sad when I see people with better unaided hearing than me hear worse than me aided. They need better HAs and more amplification!

------------------------------------------------------

Levels of Hearing Loss. What's the difference?

(note: I had to correct some of the grammar. Whoever wrote the guide below needs to go back to school)

Mild Hearing Loss(25-40db unaided, 0-10db aided)- a child with mild hearing loss usually has normal speech, but will have trouble in the school setting because it will be difficult to hear speech from more than 12ft away or when there is background noise. This is because much of the meaning in English is contained in the voiceless consonants which are high-pitched and soft. They are s, sh, t, p, k ,f, ch, and th.
A child with a mild loss in both ears will need some amplification in each ear to hear clearly at school , in groups, or at a distance.

My comments:  Makes sense. People who get a CI on average end up hearing 25-40db aided. So I want to make it clear that a CI does not cure your deafness nor does it give you normal hearing in the large majority of cases. You will hear equal in quantity to someone with a mild hearing loss after CI. Someone with a mild unaided loss should be aided to 0-10db with HAs. Low power, open fit HAs can do the job in this case and will give you normal aided hearing.

Moderate Hearing Loss(40-70db unaided, 0-10db aided)- a child with a moderate hearing loss can clearly hear speech only when the speaker is very close-less than two feet away. They need hearing aids to hear the softest sounds and to acquire understandable speech. If they receive hearing aids before four years of age, they usually progress rapidly in learning to talk.

My comments: Powerful HAs can aid a moderate hearing loss to 0db and no worse than 10db. I have a 55db loss at 125Hz and am aided to 0db. At 250Hz, my loss is 70db and im aided to 5db. There's still enough residual hearing to hear normally and even get to 0db.

Severe Hearing Loss(70-90db unaided, 10-30db aided)- Children with a severe hearing loss do not perceive speech no matter how close they are to the speaker. They will not learn to talk clearly and be understood without hearing aids or cochlear implants (70db or worse across the audiogram should consider a cochlear implant). All children with a severe hearing losses require special help because they receive only a portion of the clues usually available in speech sounds. With hearing aids they can detect vowel sounds,pitch,some consonants, and stress clues from speech. With their eyes they can learn to detect about 25 consonants sounds. With lipreading and listening together, they may receive about half of the clues that normal hearing people use to understand speech.

My comments: While severely deaf people experience a silent world unaided, they can be aided to normal or near normal with powerful HAs. A CI is not a wise option when powerful HAs can aid a severe loss similar to what a CI can aid. I have friends with a severe hearing loss and with the right HAs, they hear/understand speech(including S and F) as good as a CI. 

Profound Hearing Loss(90db+ unaided, 30db+ aided)-

Children with a profound hearing loss receive even less auditory information. If the child is under one year of age, they are too young to get a cochlear implant. In most states, the child needs to be at 9-12 months old. Hearing aids are not going to give much to a child with a profound hearing loss. Example: A child wearing hearing aids with a profound hearing loss will hear the sentence "Go get your shoes" as "oh eh yoo ooh" If you have dreams of your child talking and speech sounding very clear, then hearing aids are not an option for a child with a profound hearing loss. Remember 70 db or worse across the audiogram. Match the technology with the hearing loss. No Hearing aid in the world will help a profound individual like a Cochlear Implant will. 

My comments: This is only half true. I was born profoundly deaf for the most part and my old audiograms show a 100db HL at 1000Hz and higher frequencies. I was still severely deaf in the low frequencies with a 70db HL at 250Hz. I had to make do with analog HAs as well. Someone today would hear much better with powerful digital HAs.

They can still get decent benefit depending how profound their loss is. I was able to talk/speak clearly and hear/understand some speech as a child. I had much worse than 70db in the mid/high frequencies, try 100db! Not only that, I did great with old analog HA technology. Today's HAs can give good aided results for hearing loss as profound as 110db and have fitting ranges as high as 120db HL!

There's no guarantee if you have residual hearing that youll hear better with a CI, especially if you have plenty of residual hearing. CIs are great technology but should be considered a last resort after you have tried all the best HAs programmed with maximum gains. As for understanding speech, most deaf people are great lip readers and combined with sound awareness, they can score around 90%. Many of them also use sign language as a means of communication. There is a $50,000 cost(sometimes paid for by insurance) for CI as well as many risks including surgery itself.

I am not against CI but realise there is way too much hype surrounding this technology. Ive read many CI blogs and alot of people have unrealistic expectations. They claim that they will(as in 100% chance) that they will hear perfect or at least much better than with HAs. I hate to say this but there are no guarantees with CI or any other technology. The more residual hearing you have, the more you will benefit from HAs. I get great benefits from HAs(at least in the low frequencies) and if you have equal or greater residual hearing than me, you will hear more/better/louder with the right HAs than I can. Go visit your audiologist and get your HAs reprogrammed like I did, you will thank him and hear much better.

Move over cyborg queen! The Ambling Rambler sets new CI record at -5db!

Move over Deanna Bono the Cyborg Queen with her record 10db! Robyn Carter, the Ambling Rambler sets new CI record at -5db! I nearly fell out of my chair when I saw her audiogram! Thanks DeafLissa90 for the link to her audiogram and blog!

Check with Guinness world records, you could be famous! 

Her amazing CI score! Great blog, thanks for sharing your story! She lost all her hearing years ago so no residual hearing was sacrified.

She included her audiogram. I extrapolated/estimated additional frequencies to show the full range of 11 audiometric frequencies.



I have devised a foruma to calculate hearing. Ill explain it fully in another post. 

125Hz=0db HL
250Hz=5db HL
500Hz=0db HL
750Hz=5db HL
1000Hz=10db HL
1500Hz=0db HL
2000Hz=-5db HL
3000Hz=5db HL
4000Hz=10db HL
6000Hz=10db HL
8000Hz=0db HL

LFA=5/3=2(2x0.6=1) *normal*
MFA=10/5=2(2x0.3=1) *normal*
HFA=20/5=4(4x0.1=0) *normal*
OFA=40/11=4 *normal*
WFA=1+1+0=2 *normal*

Her current aided audiogram with CI. I rounded the db numbers to the nearest whole number. According to my math, she hears normally across the board! In fact she hears better than most hearing people, at least as far as quantity and thresholds goes! That is one amazing CI result you got there. Nothing worse than 10db and several with scores of at least 0db! Your record will probably last a very, very long time!

Furthermore, I was told that 10db was the best possible CI score and that 0db was impossible with CI and for the matter, with HA. I will need an official HA test to confirm the 0db aided score at 125Hz. However at that frequency, I hear better than hearing people. I don't have enough residual hearing to achieve 0db at above 250Hz. However I am interested in those with only a mild/moderate HL getting their HAs programmed for gains equal to their HL and ending up with 0db aided.  Don't you want to hear great at 0db?

I would be very interested to see how it was possible for her to achieve this record breaking CI results. Her audiologists and surgeon(s) should investigate and discover the factors contributing to such a steller result. They then can learn and share the knowlege with others and help improve CI technology. This will allow more people to end up hearing better with CI over what the best HAs with maximum gains could offer. It would also decrease the number of people who hear worse after CI, especially the borderline candidates with plenty of residual hearing and who should benefit great from HAs.

More information on stem cells to treat/cure deafness and diseases.

source1

The difference between he and I is that a symptom of his MS involved the loss of hearing. His hearing improved dramatically after the first treatment. Richard returned because scientists there believed they discovered the stem cell responsible for inner ear hair growth. His return involved the hope that his hearing would be improved even more.

source2

This was repeated again intrathecally and then an extra 3 million CD 34+ & CD133+ concentrate for inner ear nerve hair growth.

7. Risks are very minimal. The very small percentage of patients that have issues are nerve bruising at the spinal cord site but goes away in about 24 hours. Preston had this but I did not that. There are no side effects, how can there be? We as humans are composed of stem cells and if they body rejects it, it is simply eliminated out of the body. PERIOD! It is not a drug. Some have side effects from every single medicine but not with stem cells.

On Feb. 15-28th I return to Costa Rica for another treatment. ICM will be trying two new experimental treatments. One includes using the stem cell CD 133+ that was proven in Israel last Dec. to improve inner ear nerve hair growth. Since MS robbed my hearing we will now try a concentration of this stem cell to see what it can do. It was included in our original stem cell treatment and I have had to have my hearing aids turned down 4x.

source3

recently ive been reading so much about the future and the future of technology.....man, as someone once said before on this board, there really hasnt ever been such a good time to have tinnitus! all the research and funding going into tinnitus and deafness is higher than ever before, and we're constantly getting news of stem cell/gene therapy research into these areas - the scientists are ON it!!

I know how awful tinnitus etc is, but guys, we're making so much progress at such an increasing rate...there WILL be a cure for all these aural conditions soon enough! im no futurologist or anything but from what ive read about the exponential progress of technology in the futur...man, its SURELY relasitically just a matter of years away!!

I mentioned stem cells/gene therapy as personally i'm concerned mostly by hearing loss, which either stem cells or gene therapy will cure, within a decade (i base this on the research i've done thus far). i agree that the cure for tinnitus may not be based in one of these approaches, but that doesn't mean it won't be cured very soon. Diseases are most definitely on their way out...

source4

Dennis finally got time to post the answers regarding treatment for the deaf. Id be interested in seeing what the doctors and experts say about anecdotal reports of people who are having their deafness(sometimes in conjuction with other conditions/diseases) treated/cured now!

Ive seen anecdotal reports of deafness being treated/cured several times since 2007. If this is really true then we can expect human clinical trials by 2015-2020. Perhaps it's too risky and expermental to be done on healthy humans today but it may still be done on humans that have serious diseases such as MS. They can treat both the MS and deafness together with taking the risk only once. When they establish more safety, that's when we will see deaf clinical trials.

We will probably see such clinical trials in other countries first then later on in America. I will keep searching the net and get more news. Some experts are now forecasting 2015-2020 for human clinical trials to restore some hearing loss. If the anecdotes are any indication, we won't have to wait as long as feared. There still is no date yet on when human clinical trials will begin but once we have a date, itll be around the corner.

I applaud the brave souls who will risk their hearing, health and even lives being the first clinical trial subjects. Ive read that demand will be fierce with thousands applying to get into the first trials. I am not a risk taker so ill bow out and eagerly await the results of pioneers. When a high degree of safety is proven, ill try to join the later trials(phase II or III)

Update: I read more and found out that having *too* many hair cells actually results in a hearing loss as bad as having too few! Too many also increases the risk that some hair cells could become cancer! So yes just like CI, those with too much residual hearing may in fact hear worse after stem cell treatments!

However I also read that methods for halting the growth of hair cells is being developed to minimize this problem of ending up with excess hair cells. Even if you do end up with a few too many, it should be possible to kill off the extras with loud noise. It remains to be seen how much of a hearing loss is required to be a candidate, however I see no reason the severely and profoundly deaf won't make good candidates.

Good Wikipedia on Cochlear implants

People were getting CI before FDA approval and even before clinical trials. Even if it takes around 30 years to see clinical trials for stem cells to treat/improve deafness, there will be thousands of people who seek that treatment well before the first clinical trials. We are already seeing a few dozen people getting stem cells for their deafness, expect that number to rocket in the next few years. I will be following closely to evaluate results and safety.

Update! Another anecdote!

Stem cells!

My son has CP and severe to profound hearing loss. We went in 2007 and 2008 in
China for umbilical stem cells treatment. One of teh outcomes and they have been
many was the improvement in hearing loss. Each time I decreased teh power of teh
hearing aids. From their case studies they say in 6-7 treatments you recover
your hearing loss.
 
I also know they had several patients with no vision that after one treatment (
6 injections) started to see with glases. This is something you may want to look
into. There is a group BIA4kids on which lots of parents went to China for
treatment of neurological and degenerative diseases including hearing loss and
lack of vision.

My HAs have been reprogrammed. 5db aided at 125Hz, 98% speech score!

I have talked for a few months about getting my HAs reprogrammed and finally I got them reprogrammed! One of my HAs suddenly died, but the other is going strong. The dead one will be sent in for repair/replacement. Many others have experienced this bug with their Naidias dying on them. I learned alot more about hearing loss and hearing aids when I can see all the reprogramming going on.



I posted about this in a previous post. My speech comphrension has increased and my best score is a whopping 98%, higher than many with CI who took this test. I constantly score around 85% which is a 15% improvement just from boosting the lows! More gains has brought out extra loudness and makes it easier to hear!

The funny thing is "John" and "Joan" both sounded identical before my HA was reprogrammed for more gain and before I kept training my brain. Now I can differnate the two most of the time.

Im still stuck unable to distinguish between "has" and "had" although I hear both words. My dad says I need to listen closely for the hissing "s" sound. Can you hear that sound with either HA or CI? How do you score on the above speech test, see my earlier post for a link.

My dad said a bunch of numbers such as "four hundred sixty six" or "six hundred fifty two" and I got it right most of the time. Fifty and sixty still give me trouble for now, gotta keep training my brain to tell the subtle differences!



Red dots: My unaided hearing for both ears.
Blue dots: My aided hearing for both ears.

The difference is amazing! Reprogramming my HAs for more gains has gotten my low frequency aided thresholds down to normal hearing, quantity(but not quality) wise. I hear (low frequency) sounds that my mom, dad and brother don't hear! When there was a thunderstorm, I could hear the pattering of every drop of rain on the roof! I heard thunder before my mom and dad did! It was a loud, rumbling sound!

I am still learning what makes some people with similar audiograms get more benefit from HAs than others. My audiologist says it has to do with training your brain and he says I need to keep training my brain or I won't properly understand speech.

If everyone is different, why can't others train their brain to understand speech(provided they still have a measurable amount of residual hearing, such as similar to mine) I do know you still need to train the brain with CI to improve speech. Hopefully you can train your brain in your HA ear to hear lots of environmental sounds and a good deal of speech. Can your HA be reprogrammed for more gains? It's made a big difference for me in my experience. Ill be sharing it in my blog.

Right now, it's mostly the S and F that I can't differnate although I hear both of them, they sound the same! However if someone says "snake" and "snakes" I can tell there's an extra S. But between "fun" and "sun" they are so similar. So yea even with me hearing mostly low frequencies(nothing much above 1000Hz) I still am able to convey a high percentage of speech information. I read that frequencies of 2000Hz and up only account for 10% of speech.

I will post more as I learn and get fine tuned programming on my HAs