Will cochlear implants be obsolete when stem cells comes?

[deafdyke]

I already know stem cells can treat diseases far more serious than deafness and am greatful for this. But stem cells is still going to improve hearing and everything else. Perhaps this will require different types of stem cells?

Hearing loss is not a disease. It can result from disease.......but it in of itself is not a disease. You're not sick b/c you're hoh.
And no...........stem cells just represent the potential for healing something.
Disease is different from disabilty you know. Disease can cause disabilty yes.....and disease can be classfied as a TYPE of disabilty, but that doesn't mean that a disabilty is a disease.
Medically speaking it's two different things.

 

[kokonut]

no no, kokonut and miss kat's mom ABI (brainstem implant) is NOT for progressive hearing loss, ABI is for people that cochlea is completely 100% dead/ completely blocked from ossification, destroyed, malformed, or absent of cochlea (the small snail shell shaped organ) but if your auditory nerves is still working/present (its nerves between cochlea and brain) they will put small plate with 16 electrodes and put it on the nerves to get very basic idea of sounds, when CI is for cochlea itself it will be placed directly on the cochlea nerves inside the snail shell the cell can be completely dead but it still can be stimulated with electrodes to produce sound (alive) then you are CI candidates.

I was talking in the sense of genetic deafness where the cochlea is affected but not the auditory nerve (i.e. sensorineural hearing loss). If this is hereditary problem known ahead of time while in the advanced stages of hearing loss then a brainstem implant would be the appropriate choice, and not a CI while cochlea nerves continue to degrade over time.

 

[darkangel8603]

YES. Hearing aids and CIs make dhh people hoh..............we also do not hear like hearing people.
deafdude.................Sigh.....you just don't get it. A cure in one area of medience won't nessarily translate to another area. Also, it's obvious you have never encountered conditions that REALLY honestly effect day to day life, such as mental retardation, autism Aliezheimers, mental illness etc.
You know..........I love being able to "hear" but I would trade it in a SECOND if I could get rid of being bipolar!

Only if that was possible... I'd get rid of my bipolar too. :-S :-D

but seriously there are millions of people who have 'issues' with their bodies. It just the way we are made period. we were born that way and that's it. some may be caused by diseases some may be cause by birth who knows but point it we have it nothing we can do about it.

stem cell... bogus... maybe in 30 years they will finally start using stem cell and be actually approved by FDA, but u know what, I ain't going to wait 30 more years to be able to hear some noises. I am satisfied with what I got now. I am not going to waste my time waiting for the right ''''''cure'''''' which is never going to be a cure. I don't call my implant a cure, it just a hearing aid, just to help me hear period. it's the same as people using glasses to see. It just an aid not a cure. I am still DEAF even if I have an little assistant in hearing some noise and voices, i am still DEAF not hoh period.

And... I would bet you... what will happen when stem cell does come along... everybody in the Deaf community is going to REJECT it just like they rejected hearing aids when it first came out, and then rejected CI, they will do the same to stem cell.

thank you for listening.

 

[ecp]

I was talking in the sense of genetic deafness where the cochlea is affected but not the auditory nerve (i.e. sensorineural hearing loss). If this is hereditary problem known ahead of time while in the advanced stages of hearing loss then a brainstem implant would be the appropriate choice, and not a CI while cochlea nerves continue to degrade over time.

An auditory Brainstem Implant is indicated in cases where the auditory nerve does not work, usually because of Neurofibromatosis type 2 in which benign tumors form on the the 8th cranial nerve (the "hearing nerve" or the nerve that connects the cochlea to the brain).
Cochlear implants on the other hand, are designed to stimulate the auditory neurons directly because the hair cells don't function and thus don't stimulate the auditory neurons.

Auditory Brainstem Implants are ONLY for people without a working auditory nerve.

kokonut- you are sort of right that ABIs are used in "progressive" hearing loss but the "progressive" usually refers to the fact that NF2 doesn't make people deaf until they are in their 20s. And NF2 can be hereditary, though new mutations are common. But because maybe I'm annoying or something but I feel the need to make it exceptionally clear that ABIs are used when the auditory nerve is broken or absent NOT when the damage is confined to the cochlea.
Sorry if I seem annoying but misinformation makes me crazy. If only they could cure slightly neurotic slightly OCD people like me.

 

[kokonut]

Progressive also means kids lose the hearing earlier and get the ABI because of NF2. Then again you have kids born without any auditory nerve and get the ABI And then you have kids who get meningitis and get ABI. Or kids born without nerves in the cochlea and get ABI. It's just that ABI is not only for those with NF2.

 

[deafdude1]

You didn't see my last reply to you? I thought it was showing properly? I have some questions and comments for you.

Regarding Cord Blood regenerating hair cells, I thought of a major problem with that today. The cochlea is poorly vascularized, it barely gets any blood. Cord blood must get to the intended place in order to have any effect.

Perhaps the cells can pass thru tissue/bone? It worked on mice model.

And clinical trials take years. You must first prove that the treatment works in animals without causing harm (2 to 3 years)

During the 2009 HLAA a few months ago, they said it would take 10 years before we begin clinical trials with monkeys and no less than 20-30 years to begin clinical trials on the first humans. We are way ahead of this!

Then you must get IRB approval for a limited human trial (another 3 to 5 years), they you have to analyze the results from the trial and decide whether to go forward (all this assumes that you keep your funding). If you go forward you begin a stage two trial. (another 5ish years) then there is stage 3 (another 5ish years). Then it can possibly be approved by the FDA or CE (in Europe). Then individual institutions decide whether they wish to use the still experimental treatment.

I plan to join stage II trial and if all the slots are full, ill just travel to another country to get it experimentally after seeing positive results from stage I trials. I am not gonna wait around 15 years for FDA approval, ill just wait 3-5 years before joining stage II trial or getting it done in another country.

Maybe cord blood can somehow reach the cochlea and magically become the right type of cell that innervates the spiral ganglion in the right place.

There's no "magic" in science and medicine, there's a perfect logical explaination that is probably already known.

A small number of cells migrate? Awesome.
I did an experiment in which I was able to improve a mouse's ABR by 20dB because of a "small number of cells" taking the gene I was studying. This improved their hearing from really damn deaf to slightly less really damn deaf. The ABR was still abnormal. They most likely wouldn't understand mouse speech. The ABR has a specific meaning with each wave representing a different part of the journey from hair cell to brain. These mice had a great first and second wave but nothing after that. The brain didn't get the message.

At what frequencies was the 20db improvement? Im guessing in the lows and mids, of which are most important anyway. I wouldn't use the word "damn deaf" it's not politically correct. Try "This improved their hearing from really profoundly deaf to marely severely deaf." As for abnormal ABR, itll be less abnormal and unaided and aided hearing will improve(in humans of course) How many of you would love a 20db improvement? I surely would!

But just because a cell goes to a place and even looks like it should doesn't mean it will work the way it is supposed.

Should and shouldn't don't matter. It does work!

You have to put the cells in the correct place in order for them to develop. How do you do that? Drill a hole in the cochlea and inject the cord blood. If you inject the cord blood into the cochlea, what will happen to the components that don't attach and begin to release cytokines which will kill other cells? The cochlea already has fluid, which is necessary for cochlear function. If you displace this fluid with the cord blood transplant, you disrupt the very precise ionic balance of the cochlea.

I would like to avoid surgery and preserve my residual hearing. Ill take my 20db improvement by injecting cord blood in my arm and letting some cells make their way to my cochlea. I am not gonna gamble with surgery/drilling any holes and risk losing more hearing than gaining, It's for that reason I have little interest in CI unless I lost all my residual hearing because CI will destroy it anyway. I would also like to avoid other associated risks, if this means taking a safe, easy 20db instead of risking most/all my residual hearing for a 40db improvement, then be it. Most of us will take the injection to arm for +20db instead of surgery/drilling to inject the cord blood for +40db if lucky or probably -20db or lose all if unlucky.

I've been trying to say that the debate about CI vs. stem cells is irrelevant because CIs are here and people can choose to get them if they want to. But the hope that stem cells will "cure" us all in the next few years is, in my opinion, a bit exaggerated. And frankly, I don't want to be cured.

A 20db improvement isn't a cure, just "upgrading" a profound loss to severe. Very, very, very big difference in how much better youd hear! I know CI has been here since before I was born but I still choose stem cells and this is my choice. I understand the advantages of stem cells, of which are numerous. I hope for a 20db improvement, this is way more realistic than a complete cure and something I may be able to attain in 3-5 years. I will worry about a complete cure in the far future when that time comes. Right now I am taking it one step at a time and a 20db improvement is my first step.

 

[deafdude1]

I wouldn't start placing bets on only a 20 dB improvement when they've mentioned SEVERE hearing loss in their press release. This means they have ways of restoring at least 40 dB hearing already if not more. They wouldn't be experimenting on humans unless they have plans for significant gains in SEVERE losses already.

Will it matter what your loss is currently in terms of improvement? Perhaps someone with 100db loss could improve to 60db loss but someone with only 75db loss may improve to 55db. Still a big improvement for a severe loss but a really huge improvement for profound losses. We really need to see some audiograms(before and after) and objective numbers. Right now we are just estimating everything.

If almost everyone with my degree of loss is getting 40db improvement then yes I would be expecting 40db as well. But if only some people are getting 40db while some get 20db or 30db, I will expect at least 20db and be very happy for more. With CI, I expect to get around 40db aided. People are getting anywhere from 10db(well one lady got -5db, she won the CI lottery) to 60db with their CI. The biggest risk and what my audiologist pointed out that if I hear worse with CI, there's no going back to HA cause my residual hearing will be history. You are gambling your residual hearing in the hopes that CI will work for you. With stem cells, I keep my residual hearing plus any improvement I can get. If stem cells doesn't work, I just get no improvement but countinue hearing with what I currently have.

For those of you with CI who have no interest in stem cells, why the need for CI if you are happy being deaf? If I was happy being deaf and didn't want stem cells, I most certainly don't want CI and it's surgical risks, id stick with HAs or just embrace "silence is golden" and get by just fine reading lips and communicating using a computer. What would be the need for sound for those who are happy being deaf?

 

[overthepond]

Excuse me Dude.... I am happy to be deaf as this is who I am. I cannot change who I am since i was born with profound deafness. majority of my friends are deaf, I feel very comfortable in their environment but it's same with my hearing friends. I just grew up with it and had best of both worlds.
I NEED to beable to hear what other people are saying along with lipreading. I am In profession where I wanted to be and have barrage of different people every single day. At the end of day I was always exhausted with conterating on reading lips 14 hours a day, I couldn't hear them well nor understood and it's very heart breaking. I didn't know i would score quite poorly 40% in lipreading/listening IN A SOUND booth room, outside it's probably 20%-30% and there's tinnitus on top of that. Now with CI i don't struggle, i am not exhausted as i used to be, I go to bed and wake up much fresher person who look forward to new day with new people... Now days I could finally say my own name correctly which i could not possible do with HA's and not to wear my name badge anymore. I could understand people with background noises going on. And now days I have the extra pleasure to hear music, birds, dogs tags... Is going through open/closed sets speech therapy and scoring 80's, the SLT and i know that there is few letters i am missing so would have that tuned on the 15th september (it's L R oo) the SLT had taught me many things which helped me a lot on how ears works. She said I am the easiest person to work with because I could tell her where I am not hearing and I haven't heard any word for 30 years she is very interested in seeing how I progress and asked me to do some trials for the centre/cochlear.

You sound so so so desperate to be "hearing"

 

[SkullChick]

no kokonut, if you have working auditory nerves but dead cochlea Normal CI is considered if it can be stimulate to send sound to auditory nerves. ABI is for severe case of malformed, missing cochlea, NF2 tumors, progressive loss even to the deafest possible point in hearing loss, its still can be stimulated with normal CI to send sound to auditory nerves, take me for a great example, i had moderate loss of 50 for first 17 years of my life, and today im completely deaf, the most powerful hearing aid only will give me vibration, no sound. but i still can get CI because it can be bypassed with CI electrodes.

anyways, i cant be any more clearer than this....
by the way dont forget people with stem cell for trauma causing deafness (accidents, meds, whatever thats not genetic) if successful will you really want to have sound on 24/7 without any ability to turn it off? hah yeah right good luck not getting into mental insistution, i'd rather to keep my ability to turn sound off by simply pop coil off (CI)

 

[kokonut]

no kokonut, if you have working auditory nerves but dead cochlea Normal CI is considered if it can be stimulate to send sound to auditory nerves. ABI is for severe case of malformed, missing cochlea, NF2 tumors, progressive loss even to the deafest possible point in hearing loss, its still can be stimulated with normal CI to send sound to auditory nerves, take me for a great example, i had moderate loss of 50 for first 17 years of my life, and today im completely deaf, the most powerful hearing aid only will give me vibration, no sound. but i still can get CI because it can be bypassed with CI electrodes.

anyways, i cant be any more clearer than this....
by the way dont forget people with stem cell for trauma causing deafness (accidents, meds, whatever thats not genetic) if successful will you really want to have sound on 24/7 without any ability to turn it off? hah yeah right good luck not getting into mental insistution, i'd rather to keep my ability to turn sound off by simply pop coil off (CI)

I am not saying that!!! Not working cochlea (i.e. all dead nerves in the cochlea) = no CI. Option would be an ABI. Just as ossified cochlea would require an ABI as an option but not CI which wouldn't work anyway.

Anyways, I can stil sleep with my hearing aid on. The only thing that's bothersome is that the HA is in the way when put my head on a pillow. So, if there's a cure for sensorineural hearing loss I'd be quite interested in it. And so would the million of moms with deaf babies who would consider that option very, very quickly, too, for those born with a specific kind of hearing loss that's treatable with stem cell.

 

[deafdyke]

this is way more realistic than a complete cure and something I may be able to attain in 3-5 years. I will worry about a complete cure in the far future when that time comes.

Sigh............deafdude, you just don't get it at ALL!!! Virtually ALL of the " exciting advances were seen in the lab.
That doesn't translate very well to the real world.
And I wouldn't hold my breath too long......I doubt that hair cells will ever be a viable option. Besides, how the heck do you actually KNOW that you'd actually like hearing better? It sounds good.........and I mean I understand. Until I was about 18 I HATED being hoh, and hated my hearing aids, an would have given ANYTHING to be hearing. I actually had surgery to improve my hearing.(atresia repair...born without earcanals or eardrums) ....and at the time I thought I really wanted it. Looking back I now realize that I had simply not come to terms with the fact that I'm hoh....and there's nothing wrong with that. Matter of fact, I wish I was still that deaf!!!!

 

[kokonut]

I love my hearing aid and I thank God everyday for the gift of hearing I have.

We all know that research in stem cell is progressing faster and faster as more research medical scientists improve their knowledge and power of stem cell and it's ability to heal and transform. The list of successes continues to grow every month.

 

[JennyB]

So, if I lost my hearing tomorrow, you actually think in 6 months I would forget what it was like to have normal hearing? That is just ridiculous. I have had excellent hearing for 30 years, there is no way I could ever "forget" it. That is just laughable.

It takes about 10 years to lose auditory memory. So yes, you are right. After six months you would stll remember.

 

[neuro]

regeneration of neuritas spiral ganglion neurons

"The big news involved in the regeneration of neuritas spiral ganglion neurons with respect to hearing aids and cochlear implants is that the patient will be hearing their own neurons responsible for transmitting the message to continue to sound at all frequencies and intensities to the track hearing. While current technology has not achieved more than a replacement for certain frequencies and intensities. The patient is currently hearing must adapt to "a new way to hear" when is the bearer of a prosthesis or cochlear implant.

This methodology allows the cochlea of the patient, without the need to destroy an implant without the risk of not having more opportunities to replace it with another hearing in the event of damage or non-viability. It can be used in situations where cochlear implants are not advisable, as are some diseases or hearing certain ages".

source: ::: COMPLUTECNO ::: Cartera Tecnológica de la Universidad Complutense de Madrid

 

[neuro]

hello friend deafdude!,
I think your blog is doing great advocacy, and give it much importance. For example, he cites his blog even France! It's a good sign is quoted in his blog Acouphène France Forum Forum de France Acouphènes :: Voir le sujet - l'hyperacousie peut elle etre psychosomatique ?