Cochlear recalls Nucleus CI500

Buffalo said:
I don't like when Iowaboy or anyone else to downplay the downsides of CI.

I drive a car because I can see the other car easily. It is a virus that I can't see that scares me.
Click to expand...
If you think that is downplaying the risk of CI operation.... Then you are REALLY downplaying the risks of driving a car.....
Wake up...
 
Buffalo said:
Wrong! Wrong! Wrong!

A Deaf friend put up a vlog on You-Tube, talking about his son. He said when his twins were born (a boy and a girl), they underwent the hearing tests. The son failed it. The doctors had a talk with the mother (who is a hearing interpreter) about the son getting CI. Well, the father found it out later, he got mad. He refused to consider CI. As the son grew older, he passed the test and he is really hearing. If doctors can make mistakes like this along with misdiagnosing the deaf as mentally retard (in other thread), nothing really had changed. The doctors just found a new way to make the deaf kids hear and talk. That is all.
Click to expand...
Interesting stories.... And I'm sure they circle especially in the Deaf society... Being kept warm... Nurtured...
Our doctor said Lotte could hear... while she heard nothing... So much for testing, and isn't it great that there's such a thing as a second opinion.....

In the end.... Our daughter who was born deaf, heard nothing with HAs, can hear now.....
 
Cloggy said:
If you think that is downplaying the risk of CI operation.... Then you are REALLY downplaying the risks of driving a car.....
Wake up...
Click to expand...

I can always move my car out of the way. Virus... nope, I won't know until it might be too late.

You...Wake up.
 
CSign said:
The point is whether or not they receive benefit from the HA's, not whether or not they can "hear" with out them. If a person receives sufficient benefit from the HA's then they likely wouldn't be a candidate for the CI. I think that's the point that is trying to be made.

The people who are implanted do not receive benefit from the HA's. Their only options are getting implanted and providing the opportunity to develop some access to speech/sounds, or not implant and they would not have the opportunity in that case.

A person who gets a CI does not benefit from HA's- that is the point.
Click to expand...

Well....not really true. I benefit from hearing aids and yet I qualify for implants.
 
Buffalo said:
Wrong! Wrong! Wrong!

A Deaf friend put up a vlog on You-Tube, talking about his son. He said when his twins were born (a boy and a girl), they underwent the hearing tests. The son failed it. The doctors had a talk with the mother (who is a hearing interpreter) about the son getting CI. Well, the father found it out later, he got mad. He refused to consider CI. As the son grew older, he passed the test and he is really hearing. If doctors can make mistakes like this along with misdiagnosing the deaf as mentally retard (in other thread), nothing really had changed. The doctors just found a new way to make the deaf kids hear and talk. That is all.
Click to expand...

If that is true in the first place (which I have severe doubts about), I highly doubt they went through the real testing for the CI, only the initial test (most likely the newborn hearing test called OAE, which I have personally administered before during volunteer work with an audiologist). OAEs alone are NOT used for CI candidacy. They are not reliable as a standalone test. I'm guessing the baby had a OAE and failed it, then.... that was it. No real testing (ABR, etc) was done on the baby for the CI because the father refused to even look into the matter.

I'm not saying that implanting a "hearing" baby would NEVER EVER happen, but I just wanted to clarify the reality of the situation.
 
Daredevel7 said:
If that is true in the first place (which I have severe doubts about), I highly doubt they went through the real testing for the CI, only the initial test (most likely the newborn hearing test called OAE, which I have personally administered before during volunteer work with an audiologist). OAEs alone are NOT used for CI candidacy. They are not reliable as a standalone test. I'm guessing the baby had a OAE and failed it, then.... that was it. No real testing (ABR, etc) was done on the baby for the CI because the father refused to even look into the matter.

I'm not saying that implanting a "hearing" baby would NEVER EVER happen, but I just wanted to clarify the reality of the situation.
Click to expand...

I know babies who failed the ABR tests and then were determined to be hearing. *shrugs*
 
Buffalo said:
I probably would be a candidate for CI as my hearing is severe to profound. I learned to speak anyway. If a parent want the child just to hear, then the hearing aid will do. I believe the parent nowadays really want the child to be a hearing, period! I just don't like it when they do that at the child's expense (health and life). It is just all about the parents not the deaf child. Just like the parents opted for the oral route in my time - it is all about them, not me. It is like the parents are saying "Me, Me, Me" - nevermind if the child is delayed in language because of the oralism. If the deaf child didn't make it to their expections, the parents would point their finger at the child, saying it is all the child's fault for not trying. What do you know? - three of their fingers are pointing right back at them.

If there is such thing as an ASL implant and I want one for the hearing child. Would you keep quiet? I don't think so.
Click to expand...

1. One of the many baseline qualifications for being a candidate is being highly motivated to hear. Is that you? Just being a candidate -- meeting the most basic requirements in the list -- is far from becoming approved. And the requirements for children are far, far more stringent than for adults.

2. Why would I give a damn if you take an ASL implant? :laugh2: Besides, we've turned our lives upside down and around to provide ASL immersion for my daughter at the cost of $90K+ a year and 4 hours a day in which she sits on a van and then attends a far away school apart from her local peers and friends. Do you really think I'd object if there was an implant that provided full language immersion? I'd cheer you on.
 
Daredevel7 said:
If that is true in the first place (which I have severe doubts about), I highly doubt they went through the real testing for the CI, only the initial test (most likely the newborn hearing test called OAE, which I have personally administered before during volunteer work with an audiologist). OAEs alone are NOT used for CI candidacy. They are not reliable as a standalone test. I'm guessing the baby had a OAE and failed it, then.... that was it. No real testing (ABR, etc) was done on the baby for the CI because the father refused to even look into the matter.

I'm not saying that implanting a "hearing" baby would NEVER EVER happen, but I just wanted to clarify the reality of the situation.
Click to expand...

He didn't said what kind of test but I assume it is OAE and that they talked to the mother to think about CI down the road. I had no idea when they realized that his son passed the hearing test. I know that he didn't like when they talked about CI so early... it is like they are rushing things.
 
CSign said:
The point is whether or not they receive benefit from the HA's, not whether or not they can "hear" with out them. If a person receives sufficient benefit from the HA's then they likely wouldn't be a candidate for the CI. I think that's the point that is trying to be made.

The people who are implanted do not receive benefit from the HA's. Their only options are getting implanted and providing the opportunity to develop some access to speech/sounds, or not implant and they would not have the opportunity in that case.

A person who gets a CI does not benefit from HA's- that is the point.
Click to expand...

OMG. Do you have any idea how many on this form actually benefit from HAs and STILL qualify and get approved for a CI? All it takes is a certain DB level. Believe it or not. I'm one of them. Please know what you are talking about before you post it.
 
GrendelQ said:
1. One of the many baseline qualifications for being a candidate is being highly motivated to hear. Is that you? Just being a candidate -- meeting the most basic requirements in the list -- is far from becoming approved. And the requirements for children are far, far more stringent than for adults.

2. Why would I give a damn if you take an ASL implant? :laugh2: Besides, we've turned our lives upside down and around to provide ASL immersion for my daughter at the cost of $90K+ a year and 4 hours a day in which she sits on a van and then attends a far away school apart from her local peers and friends. Do you really think I'd object if there was an implant that provided full language immersion? I'd cheer you on.
Click to expand...

The first paragraph invalidated the CI implantment in babies/young kids. How can they communicate that they really really want to hear without any prompting from their parents???

The second paragraph tells me that you really can't read. I said if there is such as an ASL implant, I would want it for the HEARING child. :laugh2: I want the child to sign to me, me, me! I am just switching things around to show how I really feel about the CI in young ones. If you don't want me to implant an ASL implant in a HEARING child, then don't implant CI in deaf child.

I have ridden the school bus for an hour and half ONE WAY (and ANOTHER an hour and half on the way home) for a decade. I have learned to speak. Do I feel I am part of hearing world? No, some of them rejected me.
 
AlleyCat said:
OMG. Do you have any idea how many on this form actually benefit from HAs and STILL qualify and get approved for a CI? All it takes is a certain DB level. Believe it or not. I'm one of them. Please know what you are talking about before you post it.
Click to expand...

Exactly what I am trying to tell them. Maybe they aren't satisified with just hearing aids. Also maybe they aren't that patient and they want to see results sooner than later.
 
Buffalo said:
Exactly what I am trying to tell them. Maybe they aren't satisified with just hearing aids. Also maybe they aren't that patient and they want to see results sooner than later.
Click to expand...

some hearing feels that having sound is the essential sense in life.
 
I am a little confused. That happens to me often.

I thought I was clicking on a thread about the recall of the Nucleas CI500.

I haven't seen anything in this thread about that??

C1
 
CrazyOne said:
I am a little confused. That happens to me often.

I thought I was clicking on a thread about the recall of the Nucleas CI500.

I haven't seen anything in this thread about that??

C1
Click to expand...

This thread did talk about the recall of N5 but anything on the subject of CI, it would get derailed by those with opposite views on CI. Nothing new.
 
My crystal ball says (and we all know how accurate those are):

Failure rate could exceed 20%.

Reading between the lines on the press release with the information available publically (i.e. an "increasingfailure rate after implantation) I suspect that there will be non-hermetic implants. Not good. But take it for what its worth. It is a crystal ball predicting this.

-C1
 
DeafCaroline said:
Well....not really true. I benefit from hearing aids and yet I qualify for implants.
Click to expand...
Of course there is an overlap.. And of course CI might be offered when you are still happy with your HAs..
Point is, when you cannot hear/benefit with your HAs, a CI can be the next step...
My apologies that I kept it simple and thereby overlooked the people who do not want CI but got one offered...
 
Cloggy said:
Of course there is an overlap.. And of course CI might be offered when you are still happy with your HAs..
Point is, when you cannot hear/benefit with your HAs, a CI can be the next step...
My apologies that I kept it simple and thereby overlooked the people who do not want CI but got one offered...
Click to expand...

There! That is what I am talking about. If a baby has an overlap of hearing, I am not surprised that the parents would opt for CI when they can opt for hearing aid and let the child choose at later date like after 18 years old.
 
Back
Top