Another CI failure story. No improvement in speech!

I read an article recently by Rush Limbaugh, who I am not a big fan of, but he was asked by a listener about his implant. I thought if nothing else he gave a frank and honest response about his experience with his particular implant. He said he still had trouble comprehending speech and that he struggled in a noisy environment. On two occasions I have been directed to cochlear implant advocates and cochlear implant forums, where it seems everyone had nothing but positive experiences. When I asked questions regarding negative experiences some of the people got angry. This is surgery and will work for some and not others. Nothing wrong with hearing good and bad stories. I can't think of anything worse then the patient having the surgery only to find out it didn't help and then hearing the patient say, no one ever told me...
Rush Limbaugh is stuck on older programming because he won't take the time necessary to allow more current programming to settle in. A good bit of his experience being poor is his own doing. All programming takes time to be optimized by the brain. It's not a flip-on and go kind of deal. He should be using Fidelity 120, but near as I can tell he is using CIS with 6 electrodes (8 is the norm for the strategy with 16 electrodes total.) That is a huge difference between 120 channels, or even 60 channels if he only used half.

I am on Cochlear Implant Forums all the time and all sorts of experiences are shared, including the negative. The forums are meant to be there as sources of support from others who have similar situations. If people get angry, it's when they perceive people as trolling. A good bit of what comes up around here is propaganda and it will not go over well in a community that actually does understand and know the experience of using an implant. CI Forums are populated with people who value hearing and are willing to do the work necessary. The arguments against implanting that constantly come up here on a Deaf site will not be tolerated on a CI Forum where a good percentage of them are people who have had normal hearing or parents of children who are profoundly deaf. "Risk of failure" doesn't register very high as a concern the way it does here as it is worth the chance to hear again to them or provide their child with the best possible hearing.

Having a positive attitude, as Cloggy pointed out, IS a factor in the whole experience. You focus on the gains and roll with the drawbacks as it is usually an evolutionary process. If you get activated and focus on that the quality isn't what you want while ignoring the fact you can hear frequencies and sounds you couldn't hear before.. you're missing the point. I felt it would be ungrateful to be anything but positive after my activation. I had too much to be grateful for.
 

Angel1989

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
This is how I feel too. Most know my CI surgery had some major challenges and has required a lot of work. I have always been so grateful for being able to get a CI especially seeing so many who can't. One day I was out with my mom and the battery on my CI died and I didn't think to bring the spare. Really made me realize how much I appreciate my CI and I will continue to do whatever I have to do to make it successful. Learning ASL is part of that work and has come in handy in numerous situations.
 
Well, ok, I see I am wanted here.

Bleeding Purist , Smithtr is saying that he knows many people in the deaf community where he live who were implanted. For some friends who are profoundly deaf, it didn't give improvement and they were not successful in hearing and acquiring speech.

In school oral method was forced and it was extremely stressful, and sign language was lost. It was very oppressive trying to communicate orally all the time and to depend on the oral method.

CI do have failure, and the cost to reimplant is not possible for many independent deaf adults, even the batteries can be too much cost.

There is a segment of the deaf population who would prefer to just be deaf and not rely on this technology.
Thank you Bott,

Smithr, profoundly deaf prelinguals are not likely to have great results getting an implant as an adult or even late in childhood. If you don't form the hearing brain you are going to lack the capacity to understand the stimulation as well as the fact that the hear nerve atrophies from disuse. I would never recommend an implant to someone with that history unless they fully understand the reality. They are not going to have the kind of results you'll see in postlinguals or children implanted as infants and their results cannot be compared to them. CI's work very well, but you have to have a hearing brain or one that is developing as with babies.

The cost to reimplant is covered by insurance as well as the manufacturer, especially if it falls within the 10 year warranty. Most people use, and should if they want to contribute to not adding to landfills, be using rechargeable batteries as all implant processors use them now.
 

Smithtr

G.G.H.T
Premium Member
Thank you Bott,

Smithr, profoundly deaf prelinguals are not likely to have great results getting an implant as an adult or even late in childhood. If you don't form the hearing brain you are going to lack the capacity to understand the stimulation as well as the fact that the hear nerve atrophies from disuse. I would never recommend an implant to someone with that history unless they fully understand the reality. They are not going to have the kind of results you'll see in postlinguals or children implanted as infants and their results cannot be compared to them. CI's work very well, but you have to have a hearing brain or one that is developing as with babies.

The cost to reimplant is covered by insurance as well as the manufacturer, especially if it falls within the 10 year warranty. Most people use, and should if they want to contribute to not adding to landfills, be using rechargeable batteries as all implant processors use them now.

I agree you! are you correct!
 

Audiofuzzy

Well-Known Member
When I asked questions regarding negative experiences some of the people got angry. This is surgery and will work for some and not others. Nothing wrong with hearing good and bad stories. I can't think of anything worse then the patient having the surgery only to find out it didn't help and then hearing the patient say, no one ever told me...
Because it's one thing to tell the TRUE story of a TRUE failure, meaning somebody
for example got implanted, say - a somebody born deaf who got implanted as teenager - and while the surgery itself was successful, the effects wasn't as expected.
THAT - although a thing quite predictable under the circumstances - deemed a "failure" - is quite acceptable " CI failure". A person got implanted and didn't hear any better, speak any better - fine.

But somebody whose CI electrodes went haywire and didn't even bother to
get it fix it - a failure??? oh please, it's exactly like having a wheelchair going broken and refuse to have it fixed then crying "oh, wheelchair failure, failure!!"

the same goes for Limbaugh who decided to keep his antiquated technology instead of updating it.

Also, from the start nobody is saying implantation is a miracle cure for deafness - you get CI and like with a touch of magic wand once you wake up you will hear and speak like a hearie!!!

Nobody says that.
On the contrary, after implantation there is sometimes grueling work consisting of learning how to hear, how to speak with CI etc
and everybody knows if you are born deaf, chances that you will recognize sounds thru CI diminish the older you are, period.

So, if anyone wants to make a "CI failure argument" - at least make it
smart, reasonable, intelligent argument!!

As for costs - you should think of costs BEFORE you get implanted.
Don't come cry later if you need to fix something or re-implant.
It's only the ADULT thing to do.

Fuzzy
 

AlleyCat

Well-Known Member
Why was there a need to dredge up an old 3-year old thread? The OP hasn't been back since nearly then. There may have been circumstances that were not better explained. Oh well, judge away since he's not here to defend himself. :roll:
 

Smithtr

G.G.H.T
Premium Member
Because it's one thing to tell the TRUE story of a TRUE failure, meaning somebody
for example got implanted, say - a somebody born deaf who got implanted as teenager - and while the surgery itself was successful, the effects wasn't as expected.
THAT - although a thing quite predictable under the circumstances - deemed a "failure" - is quite acceptable " CI failure". A person got implanted and didn't hear any better, speak any better - fine.

But somebody whose CI electrodes went haywire and didn't even bother to
get it fix it - a failure??? oh please, it's exactly like having a wheelchair going broken and refuse to have it fixed then crying "oh, wheelchair failure, failure!!"

the same goes for Limbaugh who decided to keep his antiquated technology instead of updating it.

Also, from the start nobody is saying implantation is a miracle cure for deafness - you get CI and like with a touch of magic wand once you wake up you will hear and speak like a hearie!!!

Nobody says that.
On the contrary, after implantation there is sometimes grueling work consisting of learning how to hear, how to speak with CI etc
and everybody knows if you are born deaf, chances that you will recognize sounds thru CI diminish the older you are, period.

So, if anyone wants to make a "CI failure argument" - at least make it
smart, reasonable, intelligent argument!!

As for costs - you should think of costs BEFORE you get implanted.
Don't come cry later if you need to fix something or re-implant.
It's only the ADULT thing to do.

Fuzzy
Because it's one thing to tell the TRUE story of a TRUE failure, meaning somebody
for example got implanted, say - a somebody born deaf who got implanted as teenager - and while the surgery itself was successful, the effects wasn't as expected.



well, you didnt full on 100 percent aware it


you said on true story? what said on true story about?

have people depend on have implant failure or problem failure doesn't work

can't replace second implant risk on health high, dangerous!! also wont' remove implant also won't surgery fix on remove implant, serious health system affect your implant, cause on dangerous implant!


That is dangerous Risk implant second, people.. can do screw up system affect to second implant risk!

you can't do accurate 100% how obviously full aware it full how specialize cochlear implant!


It is very complication second implant will again failure,

Many people have problem on failure!
 

green427

Active Member
have people depend on have implant failure or problem failure doesn't work

can't replace second implant risk on health high, dangerous!! also wont' remove implant also won't surgery fix on remove implant, serious health system affect your implant, cause on dangerous implant!


That is dangerous Risk implant second, people.. can do screw up system affect to second implant risk
!

you can't do accurate 100% how obviously full aware it full how specialize cochlear implant!


It is very complication second implant will again failure,

Many people have problem on failure!
Let me try to make it as simple as possible for you to understand:


You buy 100 apples because everyone says they are good for you.

Five apples are bad, you had to throw them out.

5/100 = 0.05 = 5%

5% of the 100 apples you bought are bad.

Does that mean everyone should stop buying apples because 5% were bad?

Now let's talk about CI's:

200,000+ people got CI's implanted in their heads.

1000 people had problems.

1000/200,000 = 5%

This means that 5% of implants had problems, and 95% did not.

Does that mean ALL implants are bad and should be avoided?

Facts:

Cochlear implant failures and revision. [Otol Neurotol. 2005] - PubMed - NCBI

Cochlear Implant Failure Rate Generally Low


Now, back to Fuzzy's other post:

Mary buys a new Toyota Corolla.

Mary drives the car for two weeks.

The tires go flat.

Mary goes online to ToyotaCorolla.com and says "I bought a Corolla, but the tires are flat, the car is a failure. I will never buy another one, and no one should buy one.

Does that mean all Toyota Corollas are junk because Mary's tires went flat?

Of course not.

Mary never called the dealer to get them to fix the tires. She thinks the car is no good because the tires went flat.

That is not smart, right? All she had to do is get the tires replaced, and the car will be fine, right?

Ok.....now, think about CI's.

If one person's CI broke, is it fair to go online to alldeaf.com and say "All CI's are junk, waste of money", because one CI broke and that person did not get it fixed?


That is what Fuzzy is trying to say.
 

Smithtr

G.G.H.T
Premium Member
Let me try to make it as simple as possible for you to understand:


You buy 100 apples because everyone says they are good for you.

Five apples are bad, you had to throw them out.

5/100 = 0.05 = 5%

5% of the 100 apples you bought are bad.

Does that mean everyone should stop buying apples because 5% were bad?

Now let's talk about CI's:

200,000+ people got CI's implanted in their heads.

1000 people had problems.

1000/200,000 = 5%

This means that 5% of implants had problems, and 95% did not.

Does that mean ALL implants are bad and should be avoided?

Facts:

Cochlear implant failures and revision. [Otol Neurotol. 2005] - PubMed - NCBI

Cochlear Implant Failure Rate Generally Low


Now, back to Fuzzy's other post:

Mary buys a new Toyota Corolla.

Mary drives the car for two weeks.

The tires go flat.

Mary goes online to ToyotaCorolla.com and says "I bought a Corolla, but the tires are flat, the car is a failure. I will never buy another one, and no one should buy one.

Does that mean all Toyota Corollas are junk because Mary's tires went flat?

Of course not.

Mary never called the dealer to get them to fix the tires. She thinks the car is no good because the tires went flat.

That is not smart, right? All she had to do is get the tires replaced, and the car will be fine, right?

Ok.....now, think about CI's.

If one person's CI broke, is it fair to go online to alldeaf.com and say "All CI's are junk, waste of money", because one CI broke and that person did not get it fixed?


That is what Fuzzy is trying to say.
I understood, I reading your comments!
 
Let me try to make it as simple as possible for you to understand:


You buy 100 apples because everyone says they are good for you.

Five apples are bad, you had to throw them out.

5/100 = 0.05 = 5%

5% of the 100 apples you bought are bad.

Does that mean everyone should stop buying apples because 5% were bad?

Now let's talk about CI's:

200,000+ people got CI's implanted in their heads.

1000 people had problems.

1000/200,000 = 5%

This means that 5% of implants had problems, and 95% did not.

Does that mean ALL implants are bad and should be avoided?

Facts:

Cochlear implant failures and revision. [Otol Neurotol. 2005] - PubMed - NCBI

Cochlear Implant Failure Rate Generally Low


Now, back to Fuzzy's other post:

Mary buys a new Toyota Corolla.

Mary drives the car for two weeks.

The tires go flat.

Mary goes online to ToyotaCorolla.com and says "I bought a Corolla, but the tires are flat, the car is a failure. I will never buy another one, and no one should buy one.

Does that mean all Toyota Corollas are junk because Mary's tires went flat?

Of course not.

Mary never called the dealer to get them to fix the tires. She thinks the car is no good because the tires went flat.

That is not smart, right? All she had to do is get the tires replaced, and the car will be fine, right?

Ok.....now, think about CI's.

If one person's CI broke, is it fair to go online to alldeaf.com and say "All CI's are junk, waste of money", because one CI broke and that person did not get it fixed?


That is what Fuzzy is trying to say.
You did a great job breaking that down.
 
Why was there a need to dredge up an old 3-year old thread? The OP hasn't been back since nearly then. There may have been circumstances that were not better explained. Oh well, judge away since he's not here to defend himself. :roll:
Interesting.... why are you here? Trolling?

Since... you don't see a good discussion in here..
 
Let me try to make it as simple as possible for you to understand:


You buy 100 apples because everyone says they are good for you.

Five apples are bad, you had to throw them out.

5/100 = 0.05 = 5%

5% of the 100 apples you bought are bad.

Does that mean everyone should stop buying apples because 5% were bad?

Now let's talk about CI's:

200,000+ people got CI's implanted in their heads.

1000 people had problems.

1000/200,000 = 5%

This means that 5% of implants had problems, and 95% did not.

Does that mean ALL implants are bad and should be avoided?

Facts:

Cochlear implant failures and revision. [Otol Neurotol. 2005] - PubMed - NCBI

Cochlear Implant Failure Rate Generally Low


Now, back to Fuzzy's other post:

Mary buys a new Toyota Corolla.

Mary drives the car for two weeks.

The tires go flat.

Mary goes online to ToyotaCorolla.com and says "I bought a Corolla, but the tires are flat, the car is a failure. I will never buy another one, and no one should buy one.

Does that mean all Toyota Corollas are junk because Mary's tires went flat?

Of course not.

Mary never called the dealer to get them to fix the tires. She thinks the car is no good because the tires went flat.

That is not smart, right? All she had to do is get the tires replaced, and the car will be fine, right?

Ok.....now, think about CI's.

If one person's CI broke, is it fair to go online to alldeaf.com and say "All CI's are junk, waste of money", because one CI broke and that person did not get it fixed?


That is what Fuzzy is trying to say.
So basically, Fuzzy is just pulling a lot of straw men?