Stanford Discovery Could Lead To Cure For Deafness

CJB said:
:werd:

It's not right for anyone to tell other people how to live. Blindness and deafness aside. Audism is just a deafness-specific case of people who feel the need to control others Syndrome. Often with a side effect of not being able to get past their own negative ideas about deafness.
Click to expand...

If one want to be stay blind, I support them 100%. I don't mind helping them if they ever need it. You can be the most perfect person in the world and still need support from someone somewhere. No one is that indepedent from the society.
 
the studies are good to do for tose instances of hearing loss from those whove had excessive noise exposure. Those of us who areDeaf wish to be accepted for our culture. there can be no cure for all deafness, as deafness is caused by countless things(diseases, genetics, deformaties, and ect.). therefore, only some instances of deafness could ever be cured. it is good for people who wish to regain their hearing to have the option to do so. but the article in this post is too vague as to what types of deafness it can cure.
 
I've not gotten any response from a previous question I posed before as a matter of curiousity. Do you or do you not support for the cure/restoration of hearing loss for troops as a result from excessive noise in combat and such ?
 
kokonut said:
I've not gotten any response from a previous question I posed before as a matter of curiousity. Do you or do you not support for the cure/restoration of hearing loss for troops as a result from excessive noise in combat and such ?
Click to expand...

Yes, if they choose to have the cure for themselves. I fully support making the cure available to anyone who wants it. As long as no one who doesn't want it is being forced.
 
i believe parents should not be a criminal for not curing their child and have their children taken away. It's an embryo stem cell, and I am against my tax money on that anyway.

We really need to work on improving Deaf education and colleges because it is the why a lot of people is so worry about deafness. We need something solid and strong-- ASL and English and no other confusion like SEE/PSE to shape our school. or hearing will look back and think," oh being deaf is not good, we HAVE to force parents to cure/implant their children"
 
t's common, not rare as studies have already shown when it comes to induced hearing loss from combat conditions in troops.
Click to expand...
No. It's a common cause of disabilty in the ARMY.....but as a cause for hearing loss OVERALL, it's rare b/c there aren't too many people are in the army.
It was VERY common back during WWII, and the returning vetrens basicly popularized hearing aids.
I do think there should be research into combat induced hearing loss....nothing wrong with that....but therre's a HUGE difference between a cure for aquirred loss vs a cure for our type of loss.
 
It's up to parents who wish to open their child's head to fix. :-\
 
deafdyke said:
No. It's a common cause of disabilty in the ARMY.....but as a cause for hearing loss OVERALL, it's rare b/c there aren't too many people are in the army.
It was VERY common back during WWII, and the returning vetrens basicly popularized hearing aids.
I do think there should be research into combat induced hearing loss....nothing wrong with that....but therre's a HUGE difference between a cure for aquirred loss vs a cure for our type of loss.
Click to expand...

It's common according to the Dept of Veterans - "Hearing damage is the No. 1 disability in the war on terror." It talks about from the recent two wars and how hearing loss was acquired while over there. I'm talking about the actual damage as a result.

you seem to be dancing around my question here. If there is a cure available to help restore hearing loss found in soldiers whose hearing was damaged from loud noise or sudden noise should they be given the opportunity to have their hearing loss restored? Do you or do you not support for the cure/restoration of hearing loss for troops ?
 
Steinhauer said:
why stop with blindness, what if you can't smell anything and there was a stem cell program that allowed people the ability to get their sense of smell back?


Would there be groups of people saying "dude .. we don't need to be 'fixed'" all the while you have to remain about 20 feet away from them because their socks stink so bad and they don't use deodorant?
Click to expand...

Wow, judgement of those with those who don't have a sense of smell?

None of them ever smelled to me. Their homes are still clean and smell clean to me.
 
kokonut said:
I've not gotten any response from a previous question I posed before as a matter of curiousity. Do you or do you not support for the cure/restoration of hearing loss for troops as a result from excessive noise in combat and such ?
Click to expand...

Yea, u raise a good point. Ok I support a cure! Just pls dont let the laws get passed to force them on deaf children. However, I dont have much hope for that anyway because the medical community is too powerful.
 
It's common according to the Dept of Veterans -
Click to expand...
souggy, what I mean by that, is that if you listed the top ten causes of late deafness, it wouldn't make the list. It is common in the armed services, but its not common overall. Do you understand now? It might be a common cause of deafness for a particular age range. And no, I'm not dancing around this. I fully support a cure for hearing loss for late deafend folks.
Wasn't there a poster a few years ago who was claiming that they already have a cure for hearing loss for vets from Iraq/Afghanistan?
 
Not a cure but I think it was a steroid type of application or something as a preventative measure against hearing loss.

Great, you support for the cure/restoration of hearing loss for late deafened people. What about parents of deaf/hh children who can take advantage of that cure for sensorineural hearing loss and help restore their children's hearing loss? Do you support that, too?

BTW, I'm not souggy. :)
 
kokonut said:
Not a cure but I think it was a steroid type of application or something as a preventative measure against hearing loss.

Great, you support for the cure/restoration of hearing loss for late deafened people. What about parents of deaf/hh children who can take advantage of that cure for sensorineural hearing loss and help restore their children's hearing loss? Do you support that, too?

BTW, I'm not souggy. :)
Click to expand...

It wouldnt even be a question of whether we suppoort it or not because once it is available, the medical community will lobby for it to be mandatory for all children. Just watch.
 
shel90 said:
Yea, u raise a good point. Ok I support a cure! Just pls dont let the laws get passed to force them on deaf children. However, I dont have much hope for that anyway because the medical community is too powerful.
Click to expand...

If parents decide that it'd be a better, safer and more natural option for their deaf/hh child/baby to have his/her hearing loss reversed or restored then we shouldn't be in the business of denying their parental decision.
 
kokonut said:
If parents decide that it'd be a better, safer and more natural option for their deaf/hh child/baby to have his/her hearing loss reversed or restored then we shouldn't be in the business of denying their parental decision.
Click to expand...

Then why ask the question in the first place if you feel that way?
 
shel90 said:
It wouldnt even be a question of whether we suppoort it or not because once it is available, the medical community will lobby for it to be mandatory for all children. Just watch.
Click to expand...

It's possible. However, a cure is a cure and many people will want that. Nor more than people who would want to see their vision improved or restored as well. The same for people who are paralyzed with damaged spinal cord injuries and so on.
 
What about parents of deaf/hh children who can take advantage of that cure for sensorineural hearing loss and help restore their children's hearing loss? Do you support that, too?
Click to expand...
Well, you're assuming that a cure for late deafened people will also help dhh kids. It MAY, especially if the loss is postlingal (5% of dhh kids are postlingal)
But, it also might not, since etoilogies would be different. it's also assuming that b/c the coachlear is repaired, the kid could process the normal sound.
I think it's going to be a LOT more complicated to cure dhh kids, then it is going to be for old folks.
 
deafdyke said:
Well, you're assuming that a cure for late deafened people will also help dhh kids. It MAY, especially if the loss is postlingal (5% of dhh kids are postlingal)
But, it also might not, since etoilogies would be different. it's also assuming that b/c the coachlear is repaired, the kid could process the normal sound.
I think it's going to be a LOT more complicated to cure dhh kids, then it is going to be for old folks.
Click to expand...

Let's get past the mumbo jumbo on etoilogies, assumptions of what works, complications, post/pre-lingual stuff, age requirement, cost of treatment and the dodging of the trees here. Ok? Outright, let's say there is a cure for deafness, a guarantee cure for, say, sensorineural hearing loss (not genetic) is available, would hearing parents of deaf/hh children/babies be much more likely to go for the cure and help restore their deaf/hh children/babies? Or would they more likely to go for cochlear implant? Or would they be more likely to not do both and leave it alone? Would you support a cure even for children?
 
Back
Top