A Hearing Aid thread for Sweetmind

Status
Not open for further replies.
Audiofuzzy said:
Sure. Except in situations when you depend on hearing. For example you are in the store and there is a crazy gunman.. the gunman yells "on the floor or I'll shoot!".......
you are crossing at crosswalk. You don't see crazy driver speeding straight at you form nowhere... someone yells "caution" but ....

etc..


Fuzzy
Deaf people, esp. born-deaf people, tend to be very visual.

In the first scene, a born-deaf person will probably see the car. If not, it's their fault for not looking.

In the second scene, wouldn't a deaf person see what everyone else is doing?
 
Fragmenter said:
Ok, let's get to the bottom of this: tell me how we are wrong for implanting our five year old son? We would still implant him if he was three or a year and half old if we knew he wouldn't benefit from his hearing aids.
You are so screwed up it's not even funny.
Read this carefully:
I DIDN'T MENTION YOU!
I don't care about your son. That's YOUR business.

Fragmenter said:
And where did I, or ANYONE else for that matter, say that cochlear implant is the perfect solution to deafness?
Cloggy did.
 
gnulinuxman said:
Cloggy did.

no he did NOT!! We even pointed that out to you!! The very thread you pasted to try to point out that he said they were perfect proved he NEVER said that!!!
 
neecy said:
no he did NOT!! We even pointed that out to you!! The very thread you pasted to try to point out that he said they were perfect proved he NEVER said that!!!
Then why did he specifically disagree with the one part about the device not working perfectly?
 
gnulinuxman said:
Then why did he specifically disagree with the one part about the device not working perfectly?

From the link to Cloggy's post that you provided on the previous page in this thread:

cloggy said:
It's a good example. The only problem is the "but didn't work fully" which as an example in itself is fine, but with the technology NOWADAYS it does work.

Nowhere does he say it works PERFECTLY

he says CI's do work better now than they did when they first came out (which is true, the one-channel/one electrode implants in the 80's had a lot of problems but technology always improves with time.)

in other threads (I know you've read them because you've posted in them) he's acknowledged that its not perfect that some people get implanted and get no results. Some people have to work harder at understanding speech and for some peope it seems to be much easier. Why don't you really READ what Cloggy says instead of making assumptions or taking what he has said and turning it to a different context. Not once does he use the word "perfect" and yet thats what you keep saying he said!
 
neecy said:
From the link to Cloggy's post that you provided on the previous page in this thread:



Nowhere does he say it works PERFECTLY

he says CI's do work better now than they did when they first came out (which is true, the one-channel/one electrode implants in the 80's had a lot of problems but technology always improves with time.)

in other threads (I know you've read them because you've posted in them) he's acknowledged that its not perfect that some people get implanted and get no results. Some people have to work harder at understanding speech and for some peope it seems to be much easier. Why don't you really READ what Cloggy says instead of making assumptions or taking what he has said and turning it to a different context. Not once does he use the word "perfect" and yet thats what you keep saying he said!
Working fully==working perfectly.
 
gnulinuxman said:
Then why did he specifically disagree with the one part about the device not working perfectly?
I did. You're just making it up..
 
In the first scene there is a gunman and you are in the store (deaf) and with your back to him..

second scene.. I am very visual too and I am a driver. believe me things come up at the last minute. If you are not prepared.. uggh. shudder.

Fuzzy

ps sorry for the confusion - there are two separate scenes.
 
GNU....
I'll give you a hand... It hurts to see you struggle, not being able to let go of the injustice done to you.
Here's all the help you need. (at the bottom.. I highlighted it so that you would be able to find it!)

The pressure was just too much. I cannot handle it any more. Seeing other people becoming the victim of my unfortunate choice of words is just too much to bear.

Confession by Cloggy
Dear readers..
I was wrong to write "fully". The obvious interpretation out of all the possible interpretations of that word was - like you said - "perfectly". How could anyone have missed it. I stand corrected and sincerely hope that in this apology I do not use any words that can be interpreted in any matter other that it was intended by me...
GNU.
You have done a wonderful job in tracking down the true interpretation of the sentence that was buried under 1000+ posts. YOU managed to find it and it is highly appreciated.

Below the proof of GNU's correct assumption. There was room for wider interpretation, but that is not the point.
Again, I stand corrected.

With truefully sorry regards
Cloggy

In the dictionairy, under "Fully" it says......

Fully \Ful"ly\, adv.
In a full manner or degree; completely; entirely; without
lack or defect; adequately; satisfactorily; as, to be fully
persuaded of the truth of a proposition.
[1913 Webster]

Fully committed (Law), committed to prison for trial, in
distinction from being detained for examination.

Syn: Completely; entirely; maturely; plentifully; abundantly;
plenteously; copiously; largely; amply; sufficiently;
clearly; distinctly; perfectly.
[1913 Webster]


From WordNet (r) 2.0 :

fully
adv 1: to the greatest degree or extent; completely or entirely;
(`full' in this sense is used as a combining form);
"fully grown"; "he didn't fully understand"; "knew
full well"; "full-grown"; "full-fledged" [syn: to the
full, full]
2: sufficiently; more than adequately; "the evidence amply (or
fully) confirms our suspicions"; "they were fully (or
amply) fed" [syn: amply] [ant: meagerly]
3: referring to a quantity; "the amount was paid in full" [syn:
in full]


From Moby Thesaurus II by Grady Ward, 1.0 :

77 Moby Thesaurus words for "fully":
absolutely, abundantly, affluently, altogether, aplenty, at length,
bottomlessly, bounteously, bountifully, completely,
comprehensively, copiously, diffusely, effusely, entirely,
exhaustively, extravagantly, exuberantly, faultlessly, flawlessly,
generously, globally, hundred per cent, ideally, immaculately,
impeccably, in abundance, in detail, in extenso, in full,
in full measure, in good supply, in particular, in plenty,
in quantity, in toto, inclusively, inexhaustibly, infallibly,
inside out, integrally, just right, largely, lavishly, liberally,
maximally, minutely, no end, one and all, opulently, outright,
overflowingly, particularly, perfectly, plenteously, plentifully,
plumb, prodigally, profusely, purely, quite, richly, riotously,
roundly, specifically, spotlessly, superabundantly, thoroughly,
through-and-through, to the full, to the hilt, totally,
tout a fait, unconditionally, unreservedly, utterly, wholly
 
gnulinuxman said:
Working fully==working perfectly.

Okay I'm going to say something that not even you can argue with. You want to go with the belief that Cloggy said CI's work perfectly.

Fine. I'll back him up on that.

My CI works FULLY / PERFECTLY

* EVERY component in the CI works the way it is supposed to

* Every sound that is received is processed by the processor - which works perfectly

* The transmitter perfectly transmists the information supplied by the processor to the internal electrode array.

* Which in turn causes the electrode array to FULLY respond the way it is suposed to.

ITS THE AUDITORY NERVE AND/OR BRAIN THAT HAS LIMITATIONS IN INTERPERETING THE INFORMATION THAT IT IS RECEIVING.

Every single recipient's auditory nerve and/or brain has their own set of limitations, based on past experiences with sound (postlingually deaf) and how long they have had the CI, the maps (processing programs they use) and various other physical factors.

THE CI ITSELF WORKS PERFECTLY

THE AUDITORY NERVE/BRAIN DOESN'T.

there. Now everybody's happy.
 
Unintentionally.... I was right!!!

Sorry GNU... you lose.... game over!
 
Audiofuzzy said:
Sure. Except in situations when you depend on hearing. For example you are in the store and there is a crazy gunman.. the gunman yells "on the floor or I'll shoot!".......
you are crossing at crosswalk. You don't see crazy driver speeding straight at you form nowhere... someone yells "caution" but ....

etc..


Fuzzy

Funny... that you should mentioned it. HOH or deaf have ways with their eyes and feelings. They noticed it more than hearing people. Hearing people don't pay attention with their lazy eyes. They depend on their lives on sounds. Just like blind people, they depend on their lives on sounds and scents. Like a car coming right up at you so fast and you didn't see it, but deaf saw it and avoid it. But if a person in the car screamed or give a warning sound, of course, hearing people would hear that. Etc...
 
Demise,
Welcome...
Have to apologize for the squirmish above. I'm not proud of it...... but it sure feels nice. Childish - I know...

There are better topics than this one... You'll find them.

C U there.
 
neecy said:
THE CI ITSELF WORKS PERFECTLY

THE AUDITORY NERVE/BRAIN DOESN'T.

there. Now everybody's happy.
I am vastly curious about its function of CI.

Can CI work in the space? Can CI work in underwater about 50 feet below? I was worried about CI and the pressure in the brain… I don't know if it can cause brain abnormal if it would be crushed by pressure. I was just thinking about going in the space or probably sky diving in the future. I don't want to wear it if I couldn't do anything I want. I was wondering if that would negative effects on CI users. 'Cause I have no information that CI users was fine after they went 50 feet underwater or in the space.
 
Demise said:
I am vastly curious about its function of CI.

Can CI work in the space? Can CI work in underwater about 50 feet below? I was worried about CI and the pressure in the brain… I don't know if it can cause brain abnormal if it would be crushed by pressure. I was just thinking about going in the space or probably sky diving in the future. I don't want to wear it if I couldn't do anything I want. I was wondering if that would negative effects on CI users. 'Cause I have no information that CI users was fine after they went 50 feet underwater or in the space.

From Listenup.org:
Cochlear Corp.- "Recreational scuba diving will not harm the implant. The Nucleus implant has been validated to withstand static pressures in excess of 4 atm and therefore recreational scuba diving to a depth of 30 meters will not harm the implant itself. Care should be taken that headgear or face mask straps do not damage the site of the implant. Recipients should consult their doctor to confirm there is no vestibular impairment. If anyone has additional questions about this, please let us know at info@cochlear.com"

Advanced Bionics - "Based upon pressure testing conducted in a simulated environment (hyberbaric chamber), the 1.2 Internal Cochlear Stimulator (ICS) of the CLARION® cochlear implant system may be subjected to depths of 4 Atmospheres (ATM) absolute (@99ft below surface). These test results apply only to patients implanted after January 1, 1997. These tests were conducted by subjecting a number of ICS units without attached electrode to 10 cycles in this simulated environment. The rate of ascent/descent was 1ft/sec. following US Navy Diving Tables for uncompressed dives. Full electrical and hermeticity testing was performed before and after this testing. This testing is not an endorsement of scuba diving per se for recipients of the CLARION® Cochlear Implant System as there may be other medical factors that would preclude the patient from participating in this activity. Patients wishing to scuba dive should consult with their physician before engaging in this activity. The long-term effects of repeated pressure cycling on the ICS are
unknown."

As to going into space - I honestly have no idea - I think zero gravity itself would have no effect on the implant as its sutured into place in the skull, but the G-forces a person would be subjected to while in a shuttle escaping earth's gravity in order to go into orbit might be too much - I don't know how many atmospheres of pressure an individual in the Space Shuttle is subjected to when it blasts off. Somebody else might know.
 
Demise said:
I am vastly curious about its function of CI.

Can CI work in the space? Can CI work in underwater about 50 feet below? I was worried about CI and the pressure in the brain… I don't know if it can cause brain abnormal if it would be crushed by pressure. I was just thinking about going in the space or probably sky diving in the future. I don't want to wear it if I couldn't do anything I want. I was wondering if that would negative effects on CI users. 'Cause I have no information that CI users was fine after they went 50 feet underwater or in the space.

In space... yes. I cannot see a problem. Skydiving should be fine as well, but I don't think you'll wear the external part. It will be useless with all the wind-noise..
In water... no. The processor outside will malfunction unless it's really sealed. But then the microphone won't work... But you can swim AND dive with the implant. I have a study about it where the went to 30m depth. No problem.

The internal parts can't be crushed in the sense that the skull will give up before the implant I think.

I'll look for the article regarding scuba diving with CI.
First... I'm going to bed.

C U later

Oh, and if you want some info from CI-users and people that are thinking about it.. Try Neecy, Boult, R2D2, Fragmenter, Audiofuzzy, loml, and many more that you will come across.

Happy hunting.
 
Demise said:
I am vastly curious about its function of CI.

Can CI work in the space? Can CI work in underwater about 50 feet below? I was worried about CI and the pressure in the brain… I don't know if it can cause brain abnormal if it would be crushed by pressure. I was just thinking about going in the space or probably sky diving in the future. I don't want to wear it if I couldn't do anything I want. I was wondering if that would negative effects on CI users. 'Cause I have no information that CI users was fine after they went 50 feet underwater or in the space.

We have a member hear called "Deafscuba98" Not sure if that's his name but he has a CI and does scuba diving.

By the way the limit of 30 meters as per the Cochlear website Cloggy cited translates to about 90 feet....
 
neecy said:
Okay I'm going to say something that not even you can argue with. You want to go with the belief that Cloggy said CI's work perfectly.

Fine. I'll back him up on that.

My CI works FULLY / PERFECTLY

* EVERY component in the CI works the way it is supposed to

* Every sound that is received is processed by the processor - which works perfectly

* The transmitter perfectly transmists the information supplied by the processor to the internal electrode array.

* Which in turn causes the electrode array to FULLY respond the way it is suposed to.

ITS THE AUDITORY NERVE AND/OR BRAIN THAT HAS LIMITATIONS IN INTERPERETING THE INFORMATION THAT IT IS RECEIVING.

Every single recipient's auditory nerve and/or brain has their own set of limitations, based on past experiences with sound (postlingually deaf) and how long they have had the CI, the maps (processing programs they use) and various other physical factors.

THE CI ITSELF WORKS PERFECTLY

THE AUDITORY NERVE/BRAIN DOESN'T.

there. Now everybody's happy.

Part of this whole train of thought is a semantic one...and that causes heartburn for everybody.

I will say Neecy, that is a good way to put it but I have to point out and clarify something so we don't proprogate anymore misunderstandings about this issue.

A CI in its current technological state is currently incapable of reproducing the full range of hearing. For one thing, the implant doesn't "wrap" around the whole cochlea due to safety reasons (it wraps about 3/4 of it or so). Another reason it cannot stimulate the 30,000 points matching that of the original cochlear hairs. The number is way less than that. That will explain why those who had had normal hearing (and a good auditory memory) before often have adjustment issues getting used to the reduced input. It is getting better all the time and who knows what the future will bring.

So, we can still say that the CI works like it is supposed to and even say that the cochlear nerve and brain works fine as well (as it can). The only issues or "problems" is twofold; 1) That sometimes the brain is unable to make full use of the information (which is what you were saying), 2) The CI is incapable of providing all the information that a brain could use. Between the two, that explains the limitations better.

Sorry to be "nitpick" and be technical but I just had to say something.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top