Myths and lies about CIs . . .

deafdyke said:
Jake, reread what I wrote. Humans cannot hear the frequncies that CIs and hearing aids give off. However other animals like dogs and cats can hear the frequncies that CIs and hearing aids emit.(that's why dogs love to attack and chew up the hearing aids/CIs) It's sort of like....radio waves are inaudiable to humans but that doesn't mean that other animals can't hear them....Wait...no. A better anaology would be those whistles or invisable fences which are used for dogs. Do you see now?
Boult, I will address your post in full tomorrow...it's getting late and I have a 9:00 am class tomorrow..:(

Geez, DD, I hope you don't have a test on this tomorrow or you'll get an "F"!

"radiowaves" are ALWAYS inaudable (regardless if you're a woman, dog or alien!)! You need a RF tuner to recieve the signal then convert it to SOUNDWAVES. Now high frequency soundwaves are often unheard by humans but heard by dogs.

The CI doesn't generate soundwaves (or radiowaves for that matter for the most part). The signal is entirely DIGITAL like a computer.

With "invisible fences" the dog doesn't "hear" the fence. The fence sends off a radio signal which is broadcast through the wire buried in the ground (the "fence"). The dog wears a small RF tuner (radio reciever) on its neck which converts it to SOUNDwaves and the dog hears that device on its neck whenever it gets close to the wire.
 
Last edited:
Jake, FYI my best friend can pick up radio frequncies with her hearing aids! She can hear radio stations through her hearing aids.
Second of all, it is a FACT that dogs have MUCH better hearing then humans. There are whistles and things that are so high pitched that only dogs can hear them! Look in your local speciality pet store if you don't believe me! It is a FACT that hearing aids and CIs emit very high frequncies...you must have read(on listservs and things) about how dogs destroy hearing aids and CIs by the dozen. They hear the noise that the CI/hearing aid emits and it drives them crazy so they attack it and go nuts!
Third of all, just b/c some CIers can hear some noises that hearies can't doesn't mean they have superhearing. I wear hearing aids and can hear the buzzing of those anti-shoplifting devices, that they have at the exits of stores. Hearing people can't hear that sound. Do I have "superhearing?" No...even with my hearing aids on I can't hear everything!
 
dd, yes dogs hear in higher freqency range. the buzz you hear at supermarket isn't really sound . . . you're "listening" to an EMF -- to simplify, the electromagnet field is causing your HA to "overload" and buzz.

it is possible to "hear" radio signals on your HA due to the "crystal radio effect." radio signals have a bit of "stregnth" in them that when conditions are right, one hears a radio station coming from odd places . . . braces, ladders, electronic equipment, etc. The radio signal is powerful enough to operate a listening device without batteries -- hence the battery free crystal radio from the olden days.
 
Bush_in_2004! said:
Interesting bit of info from WRAD NEWS . . .


MYTHS AND LIES ABOUT COCHLEAR IMPLANTS

WRAD is SHOCKED that there are lies and myths and a lot of wrong
information being spread about cochlear implants and people who choose
to receive cochlear implants to improve their independence, their lives
and their careers.

Even much worse, a lot of these LIES are being spread by ASL
Interpreters, apparently for two reasons: (1) They are so fascinated
with "sign language" that they do not want any prelingually deaf person
(born deaf or early deafened) to have the ability to hear or to speak;
and (2) they want the MONEY that comes to them from keeping deaf people
dependent... ON THEM!

OK, it is time to STOP these rumors and lies and myths! It is time to
focus on the REAL NEEDS of deaf people, for more independence and more
access to the whole world. Here are the LIES we have been hearing about,
and here is the TRUTH!

LIE #1: THERE IS A "HOLE" IN THE SIDE OF THE HEAD OF A COCHLEAR IMPLANT
RECIPIENT
This is absolute NONSENSE! THERE IS NO "HOLE"! The headpiece attaches
magnetically. There is a small metallic section of the implant under the
scalp skin. There is a magnet in the headpiece. Ask ANYONE you know who
has a cochlear implant to temporarily remove their headpiece and see for
yourself!

LIE #2: SOME HEARING PEOPLE "FORCE" DEAF PEOPLE TO GET COCHLEAR IMPLANTS
This is a LIE. No one can "force" anyone to get a cochlear implant (ci).
When a deaf individual wishes to receive INFORMATION about the ci
technology, they must go through a full ci EVALUATION to get INFORMATION
ONLY. These evaluations are done through a certified ci center, and
simply involve a more thorough audiological test; a test of the hearing
nerves (most deaf people have fully functional hearing nerves --
"deafness" is caused by damage to the cells in the cochlea); a CT scan
of the cochlea bones (about 5 minutes for each ear); a discussion and
education session with a ci audiologist; and a full medical evaluation
by an ci-trained ENT physician. These evaluations are for INFORMATION
ONLY, and do not involve "surgery" or any "pressure" by anyone.

[NOTE: If you wish to have a ci evaluation, go to
http://www.bionicear.com/clinics/clinics.html , contact the location
near where you live and ask for a ci evaluation. If you are under an HMO
medical insurance plan, tell your Primary Care Physician (PPO) to refer
you to an ENT specialist within your HMO network for a ci evaluation]

LIE #3: COCHLEAR IMPLANTS ARE "DANGEROUS"
Absolutely WRONG! No one has ever died from ci surgery. In fact, ci
surgery is MICROSURGERY, so small that the surgeon needs to use
magnifying glasses. The entire "surgery" through the skull bone is no
bigger than this typed "O". There are very few side effects after
surgery and all of them are TEMPORARY. Proper care of the stitches after
surgery prevents skin infections. The "meningitis risk" you have been
hearing about is primarily in young children between birth to 6 years
old, and is preventable by a simple immunization (everyone should be
immunized against meningitis anyway).

LIE #4: COCHLEAR IMPLANTS MAKE PEOPLE INTO "ROBOTS" OR "ALIENS"
Absolutely, definitely NOT TRUE! The cochlear implant is simply an inner
ear radio transmitter. It just sits on top of the damaged cells on the
surface of the cochlea bone and sends radio signals of ALL sounds to the
hearing nerves. There is NOTHING "connected to" any nerves of the body
or to the brain.

LIE #5: COCHLEAR IMPLANTS "DESTROY DEAF CULTURE"
No they DON'T! "Deaf Culture" is primarily about the gestural languages
(such as ASL in the USA and Canada), unrelated to spoken phonetic
languages, that are used by BOTH deaf AND hearing people all over the
world. These gestural languages can be learned AT ANY TIME in any
person's life. In fact, many late-deafened people and many ASL
interpreters have proved that gestural languages can be learned at any
age. If an ASL interpreter can have the best of BOTH worlds (gestural
and phonetic), then why can't a deaf person have the same benefits? WE
CAN!

LIE #6: COCHLEAR IMPLANTS COST "A LOT OF MONEY"
Not true! All major health insurance plans pay IN FULL for the ci
surgery and TWO sound processors (body-worn and BTE) and all
attachments, and most of them also cover, or reimburse for, all of the
replacement batteries, cords, etc.

LIE #7: COCHLEAR IMPLANTS "DON'T WORK" FOR PRELINGUALLY DEAF ADULTS

WRONG AGAIN! We all have TWO different "auditory systems" in our brains!

The BASIC level of the human auditory system is for identification of
ENVIRONMENTAL sounds. This is called the "WHERE" auditory system, and
this part of the auditory system has ALWAYS BEEN activated and fully
functional, for ALL sounds, for prelingually deaf adults, from the time
the ci is first activated.

The other part of the human auditory system is at a higher level for
understanding of other people when they are speaking. This is called the
"WHAT" (speech identification) part of the auditory system. IN THE PAST,
this benefit was not available to prelingually deaf people because of
limitations of technology. BUT THIS IS NOT TRUE ANYMORE! The most recent
advances in ci technology, in just the past few years, NOW permit
prelingually deaf people to be able to learn listening skills for
understanding human speech.

Because of the most recent improvements in ci technology, it is now
possible, FOR THE FIRST TIME IN HUMAN HISTORY, for a prelingually deaf
person to activate BOTH their "WHERE" auditory system AND their "WHAT"
auditory system. If a deaf child is implanted during the period of
development of the "WHAT" auditory system (between birth and age 3,
preferably), and IF that child is properly educated in listening skills,
the deaf child functions as a MILDLY HARD OF HEARING person, with
outstanding and clear speech and without the need for continual
"communication assistants" (which is why ASL interpreters and others who
MAKE MONEY from keeping deaf people dependent are trying to PREVENT deaf
people and especially deaf children from becoming independent).

If you want to see the NEW GENERATION of deaf children, go to
http://www.oraldeafed.org , click on "Oral Deaf Education Schools" and
go visit these children at a school nearest to where you live!

Also, on the same webpage, click on "Free Materials" and order the 60
minute videotape called "Speaking for Myself" and WATCH IT (it's
captioned), and order any other materials you want -- THEY ARE ALL FREE!

LIE #8: COCHLEAR IMPLANTS ARE THE SAME AS "HEARING AIDS"
Absolutely WRONG! A hearing aid blasts sound into the outer, middle and
inner ears. For a deaf person, the cells in the inner ear that transmit
sounds are DEAD. If doesn't matter how much sound you blast into the ear
since those sounds won't ever be heard by the auditory nerves. All a
deaf person gets from a hearing aid is VIBRATIONS, not actual sounds,
and a lot of headaches.

A cochlear implant provides direct transmissions to the auditory nerves.
There are NO vibrations at all, and the sounds are very clear and
distinct, ALL SOUNDS, much more than anyone can hear with a hearing aid.
A person with a cochlear implant hears sounds the same way as a hearing
person. Ask ANY hearing person how they "hear sounds" -- they don't feel
ANYTHING AT ALL when they hear! In fact, hearing people don't even know
their ears are there -- they hear in their brain, NOT "in their ear"! So
do ci users, and there are no "earmolds" to bother them either.

LIE #9: COCHLEAR IMPLANT USERS "DISAPPEAR" FROM THEIR OWN DEAF COMMUNITY
No they don't! Most ci users, especially prelingually deaf adults, were
implanted too late in life for their "WHAT" auditory system to be fully
functional, even though their "WHERE" auditory system IS fully
functional, which greatly improves and assists lipreading ability. MOST
ci users DO want to participate in the deaf community, but they are
BEING INSULTED, DEFAMED, EXCLUDED, ISOLATED AND ATTACKED by stupid
people who do not understand the truth about cochlear implants. THIS IS
WRONG! It is WRONG to attack and hurt innocent people in the deaf
community who want to be more independent!

ASL interpreters, who regularly participate within Deaf Culture and the
deaf community have FULL hearing and speech ability, PLUS the FULL
ability to communicate in gestural language, too. WHAT IS SO "WRONG" IF
DEAF PEOPLE WANT TO DO THE SAME?

If HEARING or even hard of hearing people within the deaf community are
"threatened" by this, then they should NOT BE IN the deaf community or
in OUR Deaf Culture organizations and groups! We who are PHYSICALLY DEAF
have the same rights as everyone else to have as much access as possible
to BOTH the world of sound AND the world of silence!

[end of part 1]



Thank You! thank you! I join this site to learn more about CI. I hope to get one and I wanted to learn more and not just jump into something without reasearching it and this has been most helpful.
 
I hope to get one and I wanted to learn more and not just jump into something without reasearching it
Donmayjon, excellent!!!!!! You're doing the right thing. Do lots and lots of extensive research on BOTH sides. Listen to the sucess stories, but also be healthily skeptical and try to find some failure stories as well. (real ones, not just anti-CI radical deafies yapping that CIs don't work)
 
Boult said:
Pez,

for three days straights, I don't hear any bleeps or bloops after I got activated! It is extremely amazing! althought first hour, I heard bloops, but that was the computer sending the signal to determine how loud it is to me to set the comfort level. And when they turned on to let voices go thru to me. I heard the sounds not beeping or quacks. Keep in mind, I am not using CIS or ACE whatever. I am using Clarion's HiResolution sound processing strategy. HiResoultion is a software that proecesses full range of sounds instead of a series of bleeps and bloops like CIS does. ( http://www.bionicear.com/products/hires_trials.html )

Again, you don't know much about cochlear implant so stay out of it. See what you are causing...(myths!)
Just wanted to update the link since I can't edit my post in this old thread :D

so the link is currently; http://www.bionicear.com/products/hires_trials.asp
 
This article is pure :bsflag: . ASL interpreters don't spread these lies. Some of them are waaaaay too hostile towards people to spread anti-CI lies.

Cochlear implants don't work perfectly. They can be expensive--not all insurance companies cover them. In fact, Audiofuzzy was talking about how expensive they are, and you pro-CI people seem to agree with her.

Oh, and if you read in another thread, cochlear implants do NOT need to be implanted at an early age for effect--remember Heather Artinian?
 
gnulinuxman said:
Cochlear implants don't work perfectly.

Straw man - no one is claiming this. Your emphasis on this in many posts suggests you believe that unless they work 100% of the time for every single person that CIs as a whole are a failure.

They can be expensive--not all insurance companies cover them. In fact, Audiofuzzy was talking about how expensive they are, and you pro-CI people seem to agree with her.

This is not in itself an argument. Generally medical care everywhere in the US is expensive. We are saying that it shouldn't be. In Australia and other countries it is provided free of charge through a public health system to qualified candidates.

Oh, and if you read in another thread, cochlear implants do NOT need to be implanted at an early age for effect--remember Heather Artinian?

Any person can get some sort of "effect" from a CI. But the quality of the effect is strongly correlated with the age of implantation. If you deny this then you are going against the findings of many independent studies.

Just using one person as ancedotal evidence is not an argument.
 
gnulinuxman said:
This article is pure :bsflag: . ASL interpreters don't spread these lies. Some of them are waaaaay too hostile towards people to spread anti-CI lies.

Cochlear implants don't work perfectly. They can be expensive--not all insurance companies cover them. In fact, Audiofuzzy was talking about how expensive they are, and you pro-CI people seem to agree with her.

Oh, and if you read in another thread, cochlear implants do NOT need to be implanted at an early age for effect--remember Heather Artinian?
About Heather, So, she would have gotten it at 5yrs instead of later due to flacks from deaf community. Afterward, the deaf community in MD and LI are now more accepting and realized that Heather should have gotten it earlier than she got few years later.

Remember Chris's twins one of them is deaf and has CI. he's is also featured in the documentary, he was implanted at early age. and He has been in study about Twins with CI. (Under Cochlear Americas) http://clerccenter.gallaudet.edu/CIEC/resources-manufacturer.html
and http://www.filmakers.com/indivs/twins.htm It's a study that follows the language development of three sets of twins up to 3 years of age; each set of twins has a deaf twin with an implant and a hearing twin.

I won't be surprised that both progressed at close rate than few years behind. :dunno:

here's video on CMP if you want to watch but one needs to have a account with CMP;
http://www.captionedmedia.org/titledetail.asp?dn=11479&eid=1
 
R2D2 said:
Straw man - no one is claiming this. Your emphasis on this in many posts suggests you believe that unless they work 100% of the time for every single person that CIs as a whole are a failure.
The point is that they are not the cure-all for deafness that many parents wish or want to think it is. Oh, and do you even know what a "straw man" fallacy is? (you've used it against me a number of times)
R2D2 said:
This is not in itself an argument. Generally medical care everywhere in the US is expensive. We are saying that it shouldn't be. In Australia and other countries it is provided free of charge through a public health system to qualified candidates.
So this "cochlear implants are not expensive" thing isn't a valid argument because it isn't true everywhere.
R2D2 said:
Any person can get some sort of "effect" from a CI. But the quality of the effect is strongly correlated with the age of implantation. If you deny this then you are going against the findings of many independent studies.
It seems you want to "save" deaf kids from a "terrible world of silence" ASAP in this comment. How do you know that the kids who grew up with the cochlear implant from a young age weren't forced to be hearing? Maybe the ones who got it later in life didn't "benefit" because they didn't want it. Not everybody wants to hear. But, as the saying goes "Hook 'em early, and you got them for life."
R2D2 said:
Just using one person as ancedotal evidence is not an argument.
How about her siblings? I know some people who got their implants after they were old enough to decide and do really well with them.
 
gnulinuxman said:
...........
Oh, and if you read in another thread, cochlear implants do NOT need to be implanted at an early age for effect--remember Heather Artinian?
GNU.. your should be careful showing your ignorence in such an elaborate way. People might get the right impression of you.

To relief some of the ignorence,
In one of the topics I presented an article that showed the difference in performance between children implanted BEFORE 3 years of age and AFTER 3 years of age... The link is here. (You need to click on the word "here" in the previous sentence in order to go to the topic.)
Read the article first. before you read on....
....
...
.. (giving some time to read...)
...
...
..

Now, with this study freshly in your mind, imagine the results for Heather when she was implanted earlier..

But for heather it's irrelevant. She is connected to Deaf culture, she knows sign, she can hear, she learns to listen and understand.
The latter - "understanding" is something that is difficult even for hearing people.

I hope that you will remeber the information I gave you. Because, when you post a similar statement again, people will again believ that you are ignorant, and that is not the case. Is it?

Feel free to ask me anything, anytime.

Regards,

Cloggy
 
Cloggy, next time, use an article without so many typos in it. Those make the article less believable because they didn't even take the time to check it over.
 
gnulinuxman said:
Cloggy, next time, use an article without so many typos in it. Those make the article less believable because they didn't even take the time to check it over.
That was all you could come up with.
Well, I'm sorry about the typo's.
Those Spanish researchers probably don't know anything about it.

I'm sorry for you that you grade the validity of an article on the amount of typo's.
I have to admit, I did not find them distracting, actually, I never noticed them. Guess I was too busy reading and understanding.

Well, I tried to help you.. Perhaps next time I'll present an article without typo's.

On behalf of the Spanish researchers, our apologies.

Cloggy
 
Cloggy said:
That was all you could come up with.
Well, I'm sorry about the typo's.
Those Spanish researchers probably don't know anything about it.

I'm sorry for you that you grade the validity of an article on the amount of typo's.
I have to admit, I did not find them distracting, actually, I never noticed them. Guess I was too busy reading and understanding.
Typos mean that the authors were too careless to check their article for errors. If they're that careless, how do I know there aren't factual errors? It was something I learned in high school--if you really care enough about the information to present it in a form to persuade people, you should hit the "check spelling" button and proofread it.
 
Boult said:
About Heather, So, she would have gotten it at 5yrs instead of later due to flacks from deaf community. Afterward, the deaf community in MD and LI are now more accepting and realized that Heather should have gotten it earlier than she got few years later.
That has NOTHING to do with my point.
Boult said:
Remember Chris's twins one of them is deaf and has CI. he's is also featured in the documentary, he was implanted at early age. and He has been in study about Twins with CI. (Under Cochlear Americas) http://clerccenter.gallaudet.edu/CIEC/resources-manufacturer.html
and http://www.filmakers.com/indivs/twins.htm It's a study that follows the language development of three sets of twins up to 3 years of age; each set of twins has a deaf twin with an implant and a hearing twin.
And this is something that sorta disproves the "ASL interpreters are spreading lies about CI's" BS in the article. Oh, and by "language development", they really mean "oral language development", right?
Boult said:
I won't be surprised that both progressed at close rate than few years behind. :dunno:
Huh?
Boult said:
here's video on CMP if you want to watch but one needs to have a account with CMP;
http://www.captionedmedia.org/titledetail.asp?dn=11479&eid=1
OK, I'll look. I like videos.
 
gnulinuxman said:
Typos mean that the authors were too careless to check their article for errors. If they're that careless, how do I know there aren't factual errors? It was something I learned in high school--if you really care enough about the information to present it in a form to persuade people, you should hit the "check spelling" button and proofread it.
My dear boy. We are ruining Boults thread. This is undesireble.
Sit down, and log off, because all this exitement cannot be good for you.
Relax and try to give a coherent reply regarding Heather, remember, the girl that eventually decided to use CI.

Boult, my excuses for being off topic.
I would recommend you to contact the moderator and have this cleaned up.

Regards, and sincere apologies,
Cloggy
 
gnulinuxman said:
The point is that they are not the cure-all for deafness that many parents wish or want to think it is. Oh, and do you even know what a "straw man" fallacy is? (you've used it against me a number of times)

It's when you misrepresent an opposing person's position and then proceed to refute it. Seems that is what you are doing a lot of.

It seems you want to "save" deaf kids from a "terrible world of silence" ASAP in this comment.

Straw man! You've misrepresented my position and then down below you proceeded to refute it.

How do you know that the kids who grew up with the cochlear implant from a young age weren't forced to be hearing?

How do you force someone to be hearing? Is a whip used? Please describe this forcing process because I hear a lot about it and I want to know what is involved in forcing someone to be hearing.

Maybe the ones who got it later in life didn't "benefit" because they didn't want it.

Gnu, do you understand that in the early years the brain is very plastic and adaptable to new inputs and in later years this is much less the case? This is basic biology.

Not everybody wants to hear. But, as the saying goes "Hook 'em early, and you got them for life."How about her siblings? I know some people who got their implants after they were old enough to decide and do really well with them.

Personal ancedote is a debating fallacy. But if you insist I know someone who was so profoundly deaf that he had never heard sound before. As soon as CIs became available he went and got one done because he very much wanted to experience sounds. His brain didn't know what to do with the sounds and he got headaches. He had to turn it off.

I know that had CIs been available when he was a child he would have wanted his parents to get one for him. But now he doesn't have that choice due to circumstance. At least someone who was implanted as a child does have a choice to turn it off later on if they don't want to hear. But by leaving it until the child is aged 18 or older it is too late for very profoundly deaf people who don't benefit from aids and the choice is very hollow.

We cannot assume that every deaf child doesn't want to hear. As this forum shows we deaf people have a wide range of views and as such any approach that maximizes individual choice is the way to go for me. I find it amazing that you, a hearing person are explaining me a deaf person how a deaf person thinks. You are in actual fact only explaining to me how your fiancee and your friends think - however they do not represent all deaf people.
 
Well he surely ain't speaking for me.. I'm a deaf person and he ain't talking for me. He is probably just talking this way to impress his lady - Basically get over it - NOT all deaf people think and are alike.
 
Back
Top