Why I think that hearing aids are overrated

You learn something new everyday. Hearing loss is more complex than simply hearing at a lower sound level or hearing the sounds of speech (phonemes) at a lower volume. Hearing loss impacts understanding in general. Here is an eye opener from the ASHA.org web site.

Sensorineural Hearing Loss
Sensorineural hearing loss occurs when there is damage to the inner ear (cochlea) or to the nerve pathways from the inner ear (retrocochlear) to the brain. Sensorineural hearing loss cannot be medically or surgically corrected. It is a permanent loss.
Sensorineural hearing loss not only involves a reduction in sound level, or ability to hear faint sounds, but also affects speech understanding, or ability to hear clearly.
Sensorineural hearing loss can be caused by diseases, birth injury, drugs that are toxic to the auditory system, and genetic syndromes. Sensorineural hearing loss may also occur as a result of noise exposure, viruses, head trauma, aging, and tumors.

I had suspected this, but had no proof in my situation. Why is it, when I listen to the TV or radio, I can hear and understand every word, but in person, I often struggle to hear? (Most public speakers or professional announcers do, in fact, speak and enunciate much better than the average Joe, which may explain this. My hearing loss is a typical sloping loss: on a grade from -40 dB @60 Hz to -70dB @2000 Hz and up.

I don’t feel that any amount of intelligence can make up for the listening, hearing and comprehension handicap. Hearing aids are overrated. I was brainwashed that my disability was solved by the hearing aids.

I have my first audiogram from 1961, where a note was written: “Patient is eager to wear the hearing aid, and fitting was successful.” At age 7, that may have been the last time I believed that a hearing aid would give me the ability to hear normally.

For years I have accepted what I was given. But I have learned more in the lat 5 years about my hearing through the Internet than I did over the previous 50 years of living. Now I already knew that hearing aids are problematic. Audiologists have tried over and over to persuade me that the hearing aids are a panaea to the issue.

But truthfully, audiology, as an applied science, is out of touch with the user. They are not properly prepared and they do not truly understand or appreciate hearing aids for all their benefits and drawbacks. as an assistance to sensorineural loss. Neither do they know how to build or properly commission a hearing aid for use by someone else.

[I think they should require that audiologists wear the models they sell for a minimum of 60 days for at least 12 hours a day before they can legally or ethically recommend and sell any particular make and model. If they have not, they should be forbidden to recommend that product for sale. In addition, I think the hearing aid seller may not even offer any device unless they increase the trial period to 60 days, and there should be strict regulations that permit the user to return it for a full refund.

That someone would sell something this complex and pricy, that they have not tried and experienced themselves is just ridiculous. How can you trust someone who does not use his own product??????]

We need more objective criteria for determining the efficacy of the experience:
We need a longer

Device trial period. than 2 weeks.

At most if not all offices this validation period is as loosy goosy as can be. There does not seem to be any way to reject a hearing aid and return it without making a big stink in the office. I’ve tried more than once to return a hearing aid and never been successful.

Speech tests for comprehension should be laid carefully out in format, procedure and must include a component of a noisy environment. These need to be standardized on a noise level similar to a public place, perhaps at two levels (35 and 50 dbA). My personal experience is that audiologists are conducting these tests in sound booths, which either omit noise, or use a stupidly simplistic white noise mask.

This is deceptive. It is an artificial situation that does not resemble the real world. Many, if not all, audiologists have fallen for this lame procedure, that merely raises sound levels, but which fails to validate whether the user is experiencing truly improved comprehension.

Many HOH people have difficulty hearing speech in a crowded room. This has been true all my life. I often remove the hearing aid(s) from my ears so I can understand. This is an apparent discrepancy in the intent of the hearing aid designers. I guess that I have never understood speech in person as well as a hearing person. Hearing loss is not a benign thing: it has an impact on who I am as an engineer/entrepreneur/investor.

We need a measurement of the “down the well “ phenomenon when hearing aids are worn in both ears. There may be a way to quantify this effect, but my idea is to have audiologists around the country rate the quality subjectively, during and after their 60 day trial run. Perhaps we could use a scale of 1 to 10, where a 10 is equal the sound heard without hearing aids, and a 1 is equal to the sound one would hear if you were listening unaided through a 20 foot long, 8 inch diameter schedule 20 steel pipe.
Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.