AGB In Bed with Cochlear Implant Companies?
Conflicts of Interests? AGB is a non-profit organization to which parents turn for ‘unbiased’ information and advice. How can it be unbiased if it’s sponsored by commercial corporations invested in making millions of dollars and so far hasn’t shown reliable data for its products? I find it disquieting that AGB is so closely affiliated with commercial businesses with vested interests.
Whenever we read research papers, we try to find the source of the funding and whether the researchers have ties to commercial businesses. If there are conflicts of interests, then the data is tainted. More and more medical doctors and scientists are required to release information that may be construed as evidence of conflict of interest.
There is a growing trend towards avoiding research published by scientists with clear conflicts of interests.
Are the parents, audiologists, and oral educators aware of the partnerships that AGB has with cochlear implant corporations?
From AGB site:
Corporate Partnership Program
AG Bell corporate partners are contributing significant funding to the Hear from the Start Talk for a Lifetime campaign. Their generosity enables AG Bell to raise awareness that children with hearing loss can learn to listen and talk and ensure that every child with a hearing loss has access to highly qualified professionals trained to support and facilitate audition and spoken language communication.
Founding Partners
 
Advanced Bionics Corporation
More . . .
 
Cochlear Americas
More . . .
 Premiere Partner
Oticon Foundation
More…Oticon Focus on People Awards Nominees
For more information about the AG Bell corporate partnership program, contact Marie Johnson, Development Officer, at development@agbell.org.
http://www.agbell.org/DesktopDefault.aspx?p=Circle_Alliance_Partners
Advanced Bionics Renews Circle Alliance Partnership with AG Bell
Initiatives to Promote Spoken Language Communication for Children and Adults with Hearing Loss Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing
Cochlear Americas Renews AG Bell Circle Alliance Partnership Initiatives to Promote Spoken Language Communication for Children and Adults with Hearing Loss http://www.cochlearamericas.com/News/1749.asp
Disclaimer: I want to stress that I have nothing against either oracy or cochlear implants, as long as parents are fully informed. However, it seems to be more and more the case that parents are not fully informed and this is disturbing to me. MZ
P.S. From Chronicle of Higher Education (August 6, 2007):
In a speech on Thursday in the Senate (transcript is available some ways down this page), Mr. Grassley worried that the payments could bias the researchers’ findings and advice, as multiple, independent studies have confirmed often happens.
http://chronicle.com/news/index.php?id=2806
Link to original post: http://blog.deafread.com/mishkazena/2007/08/07/agb-in-bed-with-cochlear-implant-companies/
Conflicts of Interests? AGB is a non-profit organization to which parents turn for ‘unbiased’ information and advice. How can it be unbiased if it’s sponsored by commercial corporations invested in making millions of dollars and so far hasn’t shown reliable data for its products? I find it disquieting that AGB is so closely affiliated with commercial businesses with vested interests.
Whenever we read research papers, we try to find the source of the funding and whether the researchers have ties to commercial businesses. If there are conflicts of interests, then the data is tainted. More and more medical doctors and scientists are required to release information that may be construed as evidence of conflict of interest.
There is a growing trend towards avoiding research published by scientists with clear conflicts of interests.
Are the parents, audiologists, and oral educators aware of the partnerships that AGB has with cochlear implant corporations?
From AGB site:
| Corporate Partnership Program | |
|
|
|
|
AG Bell corporate partners are contributing significant funding to the Hear from the Start Talk for a Lifetime campaign. Their generosity enables AG Bell to raise awareness that children with hearing loss can learn to listen and talk and ensure that every child with a hearing loss has access to highly qualified professionals trained to support and facilitate audition and spoken language communication. Founding Partners
For more information about the AG Bell corporate partnership program, contact Marie Johnson, Development Officer, at development@agbell.org. |
http://www.agbell.org/DesktopDefault.aspx?p=Circle_Alliance_Partners
Advanced Bionics Renews Circle Alliance Partnership with AG Bell
Initiatives to Promote Spoken Language Communication for Children and Adults with Hearing Loss Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing
Cochlear Americas Renews AG Bell Circle Alliance Partnership Initiatives to Promote Spoken Language Communication for Children and Adults with Hearing Loss http://www.cochlearamericas.com/News/1749.asp
Disclaimer: I want to stress that I have nothing against either oracy or cochlear implants, as long as parents are fully informed. However, it seems to be more and more the case that parents are not fully informed and this is disturbing to me. MZ
P.S. From Chronicle of Higher Education (August 6, 2007):
In a speech on Thursday in the Senate (transcript is available some ways down this page), Mr. Grassley worried that the payments could bias the researchers’ findings and advice, as multiple, independent studies have confirmed often happens.
http://chronicle.com/news/index.php?id=2806
Link to original post: http://blog.deafread.com/mishkazena/2007/08/07/agb-in-bed-with-cochlear-implant-companies/
August 7th, 2007 at 8:41 am
Yes,
Thanks for sharing info with us. It is difficult to draw the line between roles of AGBad and corporations. More and more organizations have found loopholes to get fundings. It is very hard to make clear rules but most important of all is that you have brought this up to us all.
I would suggest that we should use any funder to help us combat strict AVT programs. I have always thought of HOVRS, Sorensens, and many other corporations that have served ASL users as their true consumers. No ASL = NO VRS! It appears that AVT threatens VRS businesses.
Deafchip
August 7th, 2007 at 8:51 am
Elizabeth,
Yes, I agree with you that we need to be unbiased and every parent of deaf children should have the opportunity to learn the value of visual language for their deaf child without any misconceptions from biased groups.
John F. Egbert
August 7th, 2007 at 9:01 am
Thanks for the excellent post. Bottom line, as with most other stories of human intrigue: “Follow the money.” AGB is in bed with the Implant Industry because there is a lot of money to be made. If every surgery costs 50 to 80 thousand dollars, a lot of people are making a LOT of money! Imagine doing 100 implants a year, and thats just a minimal estimate…
August 7th, 2007 at 9:12 am
The relationship between hearing aid companies and AGBell has existed for many decades, so long that people now tend to think of the companies as altruistic and funding many programs for the deaf. It is difficult to separate these program goals from their sponsors’ financial goals.
Money talks. This is clearly seen in these relationships. Money also can suppress and obliterate and cancel out what is not promoting of their goals.
Professionals who should know better get defensive when differing opinions threaten their personal beliefs on what is good for the deaf people…and their livelihood.
This web is so tightly knit that we may never be able to make the separation.
August 7th, 2007 at 9:39 am
Unfortunately, it is happening out there and we are very slow to “catch” that.
One day soon, we will prevail.
August 7th, 2007 at 9:45 am
This is what I call a self interest agenda at the expense of deaf children’s welfare. It is not only AGBAD but also some deaf schools across the nation who put their affiliations with the CI industry above ASL and educatioal needs of deaf children. It is heartbreaking.
August 7th, 2007 at 10:10 am
It is audism at its best. Starting in 1984, when cochlear implant came out, the oral school that I went to got richer and got more money than ever before. They use it to influence the parents and the public into thinking cochlear implant is the answer to deafness.
It is NOT!
It is full of corruption and lies from the start…. it is only that doctors and investors laughing their way to bank using snake oil.
It is merely an expesnive amplifier….to date no deaf can understand words… it is waste of time, life and money!
They are blamed for audism and negative issues.
August 7th, 2007 at 10:19 am
know that ci corporate bought her a 30 acre with a huge house in north carolina so she can keep on research implanted deaf kids enjoy quiet life with beautiffffffffffful view. she already retired but ci corporate smoooooooooooch her fat ass.
see her face more clear
August 7th, 2007 at 11:12 am
Paul,
The edge over hearing aid cochlea implant has is sending electrode stimuli of higher frequency sounds that hearing aids often cannot do for people (very common) who lost hearing at higher frequency like s, z, ch, at the end of audiogram. Cochlea implant is not an amplifier. This device simply transmits electrode stimuli of many sounds, pushing the trend pretty upwardly and more horizonally. The technology is getting more cuttingly fine by increasing 24 channels to (the last I know) 44 channels that transmit more and more speech sounds like, several type of p sounds opposed to just one plain p sound.
The real issue is whether one’s brain can interpret speech stimuli well. This is another area of neuroactivity that comes in range of “works to not working well”. This is really important to see if it is really worth wearing devices. I do not know very much about this and will investigate on this.
I ((think)) there are two things going on with speech perception..one is born with neuronic defects in this area and one another part, whether anyone likes it or not, neuronic atrophy (a wasting away or progresssive decline from not stimulating or “too late” stimulating, CI at later age as 3, 4 years old or into adult life). That is why FDA supports earlier cochlea implantation as 6 months nowadays.
This is seemingly “hit or miss”, few ones of 10 with severe to profound hearing loss happen to still have good speech perception then with CI or digital aids (less possibility because of lesser transmittion of higher frequency sounds than CI) these children are able to develop good speech skills and spoken language skills close or par to their age hearing peer group. Again, research results remain very varied.
August 7th, 2007 at 12:30 pm
Anne Marie: There are many risk factors involving the CI. Many professionals are raking the crop and seal as a confidential file, or silencing the world. I’ve seen some children who lost their face permamently. I met audiologists in other states and discovered that they have seen the same thing and even more associated risks. It made me feel upset because it wasn’t coincidential incident anymore. There are more out there.
It is worthless really. More parents are pursuing the malpractice suit against the doctors than ever. Is there any way you could find this subject?
Many HMO hospitals are sued, but not the CI industries. I hope one day medical professionals will get smarter by dumping the candidates to somewhere else. Parents are very upset about being one of them statistically to tackle their advertised bait. Parents are collecting money.
Well, something really went wrong in every directions.
August 7th, 2007 at 1:14 pm
Would you, by any chance, know if there is anyone out there who has filed a lawsuit against Cochlear Corporate for the cause of bacterial meninigitis? If not, why not file a suit? That would help alert CIer-to-be, would it not?
August 7th, 2007 at 1:26 pm
Geez in #10:
I would not be surprised that they keep it confidential. Why? Because Cochlear Corporate helps rocket the Wall Street
In 1990s, elderly women sued several TV networks for advertiszing on “Miracle Ear.” Results? Miracle Ear Company was out of business.
This is very telling that Cochlear Corporate could be bloody bankrupt if CI failures would be courageous enough to sue. I seem to recall that some CIers suffered bacterial meninigitis. If my memory serves me right, a European or two died from that illness.
Actually, anyone can sue for anything that is detrimental or fatal. Look at people who sued and won cases against pharmaceutial companies for the cause of their spouses’ deaths from
drugs for arthritis. Why silent about CI that
is harmful?
August 7th, 2007 at 2:43 pm
Geez, I am just giving information from articles and professionals who worked or research on CI implantees to explain why it has been a big deal.
August 7th, 2007 at 3:38 pm
Anne Marie, so you are saying that CIs would likely fail more often in older people with neuronic atrophy? That the success rate of CIs is higher in the babies than in the older children/adults?
August 7th, 2007 at 3:43 pm
Anne Marie: most of us already know their business operations. they research and advertise the products. they don’t advertise what we should not know. agbad and ci industry both get along because they want more. don’t you think so? they put all medical professionals, parents, kids and others greater risk by playing the product.
August 7th, 2007 at 5:07 pm
I meant to do research on the AGB’s financial disclosures for their annual nonprofit tax-exemption whether this organization did have stocks invested in CI companies and speech therapy associates.
Yes, that would be seen as a “conflict of interest” and violate several federal laws from deceptive to fraudlent practices.
Anne Marie Baer is definitely correct about why many audiologists and CI proponents on the successful culivation of deaf babies with CI devices at much early age and speak clearly.
The FDA approved the CI surgery on deaf babies at age of 6 months due to much easier responses to sound stimulus than any babies at later age.
What about the psycoeducational impacts on deaf babies with CI later in life? We need to look into this subject to convince the federal regulators to deny the CI devices to any deaf youngsters.
Robert L. Mason (RLM)
August 7th, 2007 at 5:51 pm
Karen, yes more failure rate for deaf adults who decided to get implanted. For latened deaf adults, they have more successful rate due to having their auditory experience although some said they really have hard time retraining their brain. Also if their speech perception is still good then CI works well.
One guy who became deaf by 30 and finally cannot wear hearing aids anymore resorted to CI found that when speech perception degenerates (fade out), he only can hear environmental sounds and is using it for his work as an auto mechanican.
So deaf infants rwally have more success rate after all. Like I said before, more of like 2 to 3 out of 10 get greatest benefit then after this, there is a decline.
August 7th, 2007 at 6:01 pm
Robert, we cannot deprive babies from having opportunities to benefit from CI. Only that we need to see that deaf and hoh children have the opportunity to acquire ASL and be bilingual to their own greatest advantage.
In my opinion, Deaf Ed system (residental programs to large numbered mainstreaming program have greater obligation in providing a bilingual environment more than parents of deaf children for two reasons:
1) parents cannot be expected to be fluent in ASL within a very short time and
2) secondly, let families gradually acquire ASL with support and right, healthy motivation while their deaf child (ren) continue to acquire spoken language in their normal home environment with good CI technology or finest digital aids whatever. If it is not working out well, their family will continue to develop ASL skills with ongoing support from Deaf Ed system and Deaf Community as well. Balance with the child having all options is the key to everything.
August 7th, 2007 at 6:05 pm
Why does AGBell have to provide unbiased information? Non-profit status has nothing to do with their philosophy. Just like NAD or DBC can spout whatever opinions they want, so can AGBell. You don’t agree with it? Fine. Don’t donate. Don’t join. There are plenty of others who will. They are free to do whatever they want.
August 7th, 2007 at 7:02 pm
Elly,
It is a moral fraud to focus exclusively on speech while at the same time attempting to portray the organization as being concerned with a deaf child’s overall well being.
If an organization is concerned with a deaf child’s overall well being, it will not focus exclusively on speech, but be open to whatever is necessary for the well being of the child.
This is not difficult to understand. We are talking about educating and raising children! We are not talking about hiring an interior designer to help us choose a new sofa or pick a new color of paint for the walls.
Children are human beings. They are not sofas.
August 7th, 2007 at 8:34 pm
Annmarie:
I agree with you.
One thing I want to point out. High quality of education and fluency in ASL and English by staff have to be standardized to achieve bilingual results in deaf children.
English as a language is standardized for hearing children, but English and ASL aren’t standardized for deaf children across the nation. This explains the vicious cycle of illiteracy after oralism, which is one of MCE systems.
Imagine the money we save for taxpayers if more and more deaf children get bilingual education in a language rich with quality education atmosphere. How? More deaf children grow up to be literate and healthy, linguistically, socially, emotionally and psychologically wise, thus less $$ invested in social services to be used as a crutch to those who depend on them for lifetime.
I feel some organizations and schools manipulate and exploit deaf children/people in order to collect funding. The more oppressed they are, the longer they need the service.
Katherine
August 7th, 2007 at 11:23 pm
Katherine, you used the same argument that proponents of early CI implantation use. A child who is implanted very young will learn to speak and hear much like a typical hearing child, and will save taxpayers loads of money on interpreters, support services, special education, etc. The fact is, CIs work. What parent will want to learn a language that nobody else in their family knows, that their child will soon outgrow because they’re speaking AND hearing?
August 7th, 2007 at 11:44 pm
Not every CIs on babies will work. I know what I’m saying. It doesn’t work in many ways. It fails and works just similar as hearing aids.
Life sucks for those who believe the campiagn and statistics with many bias. Again, CI will be worthless and completely artificial product to buy and wear. You will need to take a look at bigger picture in long term effect.
The only one thing that I may not argue would be anything so biological through a biogenetic engineering. This might be working, along with depth studies, well for a long term to regenrate hearing cell and its physiology.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:21 am
You need to talk to deaf kids and teens who had early implantation. They are currently found in many schools for the deaf or signing schools. Educators and school administrators are working tirelessly to help innocents. Many of teachers and audiologists say right now an influx of kids (hourdes, literally, from many academy schools) into the signing schools, and they are being sent again to the special needs department because many cannot read or follow instructions academically that ASL and hearing students who can.
One of many audiologists complained to me another day that those special needs whose from affluent families do not support them – as if they are dumped. The influx of new CI/AVT students sounded like a parrot, and make many unnatural intelligble voices. That’s so embarrassing for AGBell not being honest to the deaf and hearing society.
Rest assured, parents are still defensive and in denial will eventually come out.
More and more parents come out and share their experience from day one and the media shall jump in and dig the interesting untold stories and failures from AGBell’s dream products and services.
August 8th, 2007 at 3:54 am
Katherine – “One thing I want to point out. High quality of education and fluency in ASL and English by staff have to be standardized to achieve bilingual results in deaf children.”
In reality, we all strive to achieve proficiency in languages we use, especially weaker ones. It is common everywhere in bilingual – multilingual communities. Training and evaluation of ASL as second language continue to advance to this day. We still fare better given a more natural framework, bilingualism not just to work with, we simply live with it. Thanks Karherine.
Geez, what you said is true. We have and will continue to have plenty of deaf children with CI not working that well. But do CI children (those who do well) sound like parrot? From my understanding, no. But for those with CI not working well, yes, their speech skills reflect it, just like hearing aids plus AVT, speech training etc that do not work either.
After all, AGB is one grossest and lousiest lover ever and this guy needs to be castrated.
August 8th, 2007 at 7:50 am
Elly:
I appreciate your participation in the deaf blogsphere.
It has been proven that oralism and all of Manually Coded English systems have contributed significantly to the illiteracy problem among many, many deaf children since Milan Conference in 1880.
Granted, CI is still a new thing. I wouldn’t be too quick about its existence yet until there is consistency in success among many deaf children, not only in speech/listening ability but also literacy. What I was told CI is an advanced version of hearing aids. The ability to hear and speak doesn’t correlate with the ability to read and write — a misconception among many hearing folks. The reason is because I do not want to see another generation get past us with illiterate deaf children.
I understand that many deaf children belong to their hearing family and I used to be a live in ASL and Deal Culture model for a hearing family years ago. I saw the love the family has for their deaf son and it touched my heart. I have learned so much from living with them. I hope families can understand how it affects us as a close knitted community. We live with and talk with deaf people from all walks of life in our daily lives.
As for social services being a crutch, many of them are a product of oralism and one of MCEs. That’s what their proponents have been saying all those years and look at where we are. We will always be deaf with some support services like interpreters, notetakers, etc but not to a point where social services is a crutch. Even some CI’ers will need interpreters and notetakers.
Elly, is there anything wrong about bilingualism for deaf children in ASL and English? Switching between two communities and languages can be a wonderful thing. Yes, it’s parents decision to refuse ASL as part of their child’s life.
Katherine
August 8th, 2007 at 8:52 am
I think the crux of this issue with the use of ASL with deaf children wearing cochlear implants promotes full access to a language. What many hearing parents don’t understand that many organizations and specialists promoting oralism has a long extensive history of deception leading parents to think oralism is the best solution, when in reality, the deaf children missed out a lot because so much of spoken English isn’t visible to the eyes. Frequently it is difficult to decipher what a deaf child hears, as most of it comes through as static even though the child can hear with the assistance of hearing aids.
Cochlear implants supposedly resolve this pesky problem of ‘static’. Unfortunately it is not as successful as the doctors, audiologists, oral education professionals and organizations promoting oralism. Cochlear implants enable deaf children hear environmental stimuli, yes. But successful full comprehension of spoken English is a completely different ballgame. C.I.s are very successful in a minority of the deaf children, but apparently with the majority, C.I.s are still not sufficient to enable the deaf children to achieve language fully by listening solely, like hearing kids do. The deaf children still experience difficulties with information input, especially in group settings and classrooms. That is what parents don’t understand. Without realizing, the parents are gambling with their children’s linguistic skills by devoting all their training on an iffy device that may be successful or not. By the time the parents realize the cochlear implant isn’t helping with the deaf child’s verbal comprehension, the critical period of language mastery has expired and the child will always struggle with the foundation of the first language. It is for this reason why it is important to have a visible language (ASL) to use while mastering the fine arts of listening and speaking with English.
Apparently many parents aren’t aware of the mixed success rates of cochlear implants and that the majority of the cases according to an AVT audiologist cannot relay on cochlear implants alone for linguistic input. Parents don’t understand that the experts are also motivated by money pouring in as cochlear implantation and audiological-verbal therapy are very lucrative, so they aren’t completely honest. Check with deaf people who are not motivated by money but truly cares about deaf kids and know what it is like to be an oral deaf kid.
August 8th, 2007 at 11:53 am
Anne-Marie says in #25: “After all, AGB is one grossest and lousiest lover ever and this guy needs to be castrated.”
That is the funniest comment I have ever heard
about Bell! He was obsessively oral.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:29 pm
Right on, he never gets past the oral stage, let’s put tape duct on his mouth as well!
August 8th, 2007 at 12:48 pm
Katherine
you is always obsessively MCE what you tend to make comment “MCE” blah, blah….. you never change by yourself.
August 8th, 2007 at 2:14 pm
I’m pretty sure he would have been well-trained. Got him an ASL specialist to assist his both hands, arms and charming facial work (sorry I had to delete the next several words as they aren’t appropriate for a P.G. site. mz) Oh, that’s right his wife was deaf and used sign. Nevermind, he got all what he needed which was still luractive…
August 8th, 2007 at 7:31 pm
Anne Marie,
With due respect, I respectfully disagree about approving cochlear implant devices on deaf babies.
What about our own humanity to be free from technopoly (technology monopoly)?
I got the surgery on my right kneecap lafrom the unforunate car accident. I was struck as a pedestrian from the 18-years old guy in his jeep. At first, I refused the idea of surgery. My assigned doctor insisted of having the correctional surgery on my right knee and installed the titanium steel plate to replace the broken femur bone.
I regretfully had the surgery on my right knee which was not fully normal. The doctor put the broken pieces of kneecap together with metal soldering. I couldn’t feel normal with this kind of kneecap surgery. I rather had the broken kneecap and leg than artifically corrected them.
I kinda have a mixed feelings about the future of stem embryonic cell therapy to repair the damaged audiological functions inside deaf babies. That would be definitely the end of future deaf generation.
Many doctors still have agruments about the so-called bioethics with stem embroyonic cell therapy.
The future of humanity hang at the thread of mixed human flesh with cyborg materials. How much for the remaining human soul with technology installed any of us, human beings?
Physical flaws within every of us make our humanity truly enlightening and blessful.
Robert L. Mason (RLM)
August 8th, 2007 at 7:33 pm
I meant to say “last two months ago” connected to the sentence – from unfornuate car accident.
I accidently hit the computer key.
RLM
August 8th, 2007 at 7:47 pm
Anne Marie – #25
I understand about how we all strive proficency
in languages we use. It is part of being a human.
In an education setting, it is of a concern when language rich environment by visual means is not standardized with the highest quality. Without effective and proper language modelling, it will have impact on deaf children, especially those who come from families who do not communicate with them or model to them linguistically on a daily basis.
Schools to commend for a language rich enviroment with great language models would be to CSDF, CSDR, NMSD, ISD, TSD, MSD and to name a few. There, you’ll find many deaf fluent/native ASL users besides English, highly skilled ASL users by hearing and deaf children of deaf family attending. All of that combined does accelerate the overall linguistic progress for these deaf children, who come from a hearing family that doesn’t use sign or are learning as they go. It’s no wonder people from all over flock to these schools to enroll their child and/or work. That’s what I mean by the need for standardization.
I realize it hurts deaf children in other schools when they lose these people but it’s the administration and their practices at those schools who are at fault for such arrogance.
August 9th, 2007 at 6:56 pm
Misha – no problem for deleting a few words. You know what I was adding the joke, so I couldn’t believe it makes all sense after all! AGB was…..smart…enough to reel all hearing suckers in with money and hinged his ASL wife in the bedroom for many years. What a poetic justice here – so amusing of him. He loved his wife becausse she was so happy; he got all money from people who wanted to fix the deaf.
Should you write a book of AGB’s smartest move? That way you can reel HIS fame?
August 9th, 2007 at 10:53 pm
Robert, I completely understand what you think about artificial procedure done on body. I personally feel the same thing. That is one of reasons I and (we) decided not to implant my second son with 95 db hearing loss in both ears. This morning he had a “final” adjustment with his new digital aids. His rough hearing evaluation showed him responding to low pitch sounds – voice at 40 – 50 db and apparently declines some with higher frequency sound. That is something we already expect. For now Noam has “half hour to about an hour” of just listening to different music every morning. We plan to hire someone fluent in spoken English to play with Noam once or twice week in addition to once weekly speech-auditory training at our house.
Katherine – Things continue to improve, incrementally and really still better than SEE or full oralism. Also more more ASL second language signers including deaf children will start to see better ASL model signers on Internet and more dvd products never like before. So we stay positive.
Last June three of us gave two days ASL linguisitics, bridge English – ASL, literacy, and assessment workshops to 22 teachers from mainstreaming programs in Denver area. We noticed that about 1/3 of them sign fluent to pretty good then the rest declines. But we were soooo amazed at their excellent questions about ASL linguisitics and their 5 min try-see assessment revealed that average signers still can recognize many ASL features in video clip of an ASL child signing a short narration.
Honestly I was relunctant to give a workshop like this but glad I (also we) did. We have to somehow start somewhere and we will get better.
Oh one more thing, language researches show that children raised with parents from other country struggling with a new language..do somehow fix and do better than their parents. Actually – only – if it is full accessible sensory experience of language input. Children are smart.
August 10th, 2007 at 12:58 am
Anne-Marie,
I am curious about your baby’s audiogram. How would an audiologist determine the deciBels of his hearing loss without the baby’s raising the hand when hearing each sound? By his body language or facial expressions?
August 10th, 2007 at 7:34 am
By his facial expression. He looks up when he hears something. His audiogram as of now is still sketchy. The next thing is to find out whether he has good speech perception.
There is a research on a new test tool that can tell if a child has good speech perception, it is called P1 wave. We want to have this test to figure out if speech – auditory training will be worth for Noam. We will have this test this fall.
I tried to locate a web site about this project, for some reason I cannot find it, I will later today.
August 10th, 2007 at 10:19 am
Here is the research project at our university.
Research about human central auditory pathways
This project mainly questions how long human’s auditory pathways (for speech perception) can withstand no stimulation before they deteriorate. Also I think this research will help to find out if there is neuron defects, meaning absence or some absence of neurons because if there are, intensive speech – auditory training plus wearing CI, hearing aids are not worth it especially for the child’s psychological well being and language development.
I happen to know myself for sure that I do have a good speech perception. If I had that fantastic digital aids like what Noam has when I was at his age, I would be able to use cellphone for routine conversation and can go around without paper pen. It is too late, I am an old dog. BUT I WOULD K I L L my parents if they did not use ASL anyway.
August 10th, 2007 at 12:06 pm
I agree with you 100%! I was shocked to learn from New York League for the Hard-of Hearing that in 1977 I had 65 dB of speech awareness when wearing biaural hearing aids (without the aids I had 95 dB in the better ear and 115 in the other ear). I felt as if I were crashed under the Empire Building. So I immediately wrote to Maryland School asking for my audiogram. Sure enough, Miss Kent wrote “speech awareness = 70 dB. Again I was devastasted! Kent put DOD at bay because DOD were hopeless to her. She was wrong! I cannot turn the clock back.
. I would be perfectly content with digital hearing aids because it is the most powerful of all HA brands. I can predict in 5, 10 years CI will become obsolete.
August 10th, 2007 at 1:42 pm
CI surgery procedure, device being fragile, and overall imperfection is scary for us.
Our two deaf cousins in Tel Aviv (10 (90 db both ears) – 14 yrs old (80 db both ears) started wearing digital aids when they were few months old. Now they speak Hebrew fluently and both of them can use cell phone, older can converse, younger can do routine – simple conversation) They are mainstreamed doing well and have their own good social life with mixture of deaf, hoh, and hearing peers. They were here last April and said NO to CI. Digital aids while having retained good speech perception will do fine at the most of time. I asked about higher frequency sounds with careful clear explanation why many people are scrambling after them, they said they think it is not necessary to have higher frequency sounds for better language and speech. They live to see almost all of their deaf CI peers doing just about as well as they do.
I asked Noam’s audiologist if she agrees to an analogue, missing out some sounds is like not being able to detect the difference between handshapes of T, N, M while signing although for movement and location remain clear. She said yes, it is like that when listening to speech being able to hear most sounds while missing out some. This is nothing compared to what I had with analog hearing aids years ago, I cannot hear words and sentences with intonation and pauses that I can hear with Noam’s digital aids.
We remain conversative, no invasive artifact in body and elective surgeries if possible for peace of mind.
August 10th, 2007 at 2:58 pm
I’d like to add one thing to AnneMarie’s comments.
My son, who has 100dB loss in both ears (progressive) wears digital aids and he speaks English fluently and can converse on the phones. With aids, he has 25 to 30 dB in both ears… as long as digital aids benefit him, there is no need for CIs UNLESS his hearing loss got progressively worse, and then we will talk about CIs. My daughter, having 65 dB loss in both ears, wears digital aids also and with aids, she is practically normal hearing (15 to 20 dB). That is why I am not too keen on the implantation of babies UNLESS the deafness is POSITIVE.
I wear a combination of analog/digital aids and I love them. I can hear birds singing, bacon sizzling, leaves crunching under my feet, I can even tell the differences between my children’s voices, etc. So I know I don’t need CIs as long as I can hear both normal and high frequencies. I am pretty weak in low frequencies.
AnneMarie says CIed born deaf babies have better chances of succeeding, so I am interested in learning about the statistics of CIed babies/children which I guess won’t happen until 2010′s…
August 10th, 2007 at 3:18 pm
Karen, I am not sure if I said that. That’s ok, we get bit confused with what others said. Or maybe I was not clear. You are right, we won’t know much until later with more research information, just be careful with research funded by CI corps ;^)
It is reassuring to hear your testimonial of your two kids with great hearing losses but do well enough with digital aids than having to resort to CI. I have doubts about many parents resorting to CI, it seems insurance issues?
I did vlog explaining about how reliable research information is from a general science’s point of view, its pros and cons etc. When it comes to our deaf population, it is another can of worms. My vlog is 15 min long as I tried to explain succiently but I do not know if it is worth posting a lengthy video with some discouraging news, that is my response to some of us trying so hard to cite resources to back up our argument. I actually cried afterward. That is why I hardly cite as much as I wish I could.
Another can of worms.. and yes be extremely wary of research works with people after $$, status, power etc.
August 10th, 2007 at 3:31 pm
Karen,
I overlooked a line you saying you will talk abt CI for your kids if their hearings get worst. CI is completely different than hearing aids, brain will have to start all over again. Audiologist explained to me yesterday that actually the window for optimal language development including speech auditory development closes by at age of around 3 years. But children do benefit some from CI when implanted after 3 years up to 13 years but not past that. It will leave to listening mostly environmental noises. Just FYI
August 10th, 2007 at 4:18 pm
Anne Marie, can you post the link to your vlog and let us be the judge of it? We could benefit from it…
August 10th, 2007 at 4:54 pm
I did it once through, I usually do 2 to 3 times before turning in my vlog. It is a 15 min long, I looked at it again to see if I can delete more and I think I can squeeze to around 13 min then break up with fade out transitions. Give me one day to do this. I promise!
August 11th, 2007 at 1:39 pm
#44 and #45:
That is what my friends (educators) have said. The process of language development fucntions differently at three and thereafter. The plasticity also goes away gradually and gradually and eventually disappears as a child grows older after being adapted by the environment that exposes to him daily. That is precisely why doctors urge babies to be implanted before three of age, preferrably between six months and 12 months.
Something that has been recently invented goes throdugh a lot of trials and tribuations. The processors i 1980s were much less sophisticated than those in 2007. Implantées of the 21st century are “much luckier” than those of the 20th century.
As for those who have lost hearing late in life,
no problem if they want to be implanted. Entirely
different from those who were born deaf or lost
hearing before six of age.
C’est la vie.
August 11th, 2007 at 10:48 pm
There was a moment outside at the hotel where AGB was meeting…participants were lining up to get on a bus…that’s where DBC started giving out flyers outside to that line of people…where were these people going in the bus?
Hmmm, I imagined it was an expenses-paid trip to somewhere…perhaps an expensive restaurant under the pretense of new product seminar? This happens a lot with the drug companies and the doctors…hey this could be true for CI doctors…for every 100 Cochlears implanted, they might be getting a free trip to Hawaii.
Can anyone find out?
(I wasn’t there…but read some of the DBC blogs about this lining up at a bus coach)
August 12th, 2007 at 11:13 am
Check out the today’s jamie berke’s article on russian girl waiting to get an CI. How pity. From what I understand, there are many deaf kids in Russia. Do they have a proper care? Or they are put as a bay waiting until implant is ready for learning? CI corporations and AGB need to voice them for s severe misleading family planning. They will need to edcuate the family not to sit and wait, watching their kids blown up full of air before getting CI. Another shame?
August 12th, 2007 at 4:51 pm
Wondering…if you look at the schedule for the conference it says that there was a working lunch held at the hotel for the participants. (AG Bell was providing box lunches.) The buses were for another group having a convention, that had nothing to do with AG Bell. At the time of the AG bEll convention at the Marriott, there were at least two other conferences going on. This has bothered me from the very beginning. I don’t know what information to trust and what not to trust. It just seems as if people are talking just to talk (to stir the pot!)
I know that drug companies supply incentives to doctors, as well as to organization that are in line with its products, but this is for all drug companies (Cholesterol, Diabetes, Cardiac, etc.), it doesn’t make it illegal for AG Bell to be receiving incentives or support from these companies. The main issue is getting clogged with all the accusations. If the issue is you don’t like AG Bell, then say that. If the issue is that you are concerned that children who are deaf aren’t being allowed to use sign language, then stick with that issue. Instead of trying to take AG Bell down, why not try to educate parents, so that they make the right, informed decision for their child. All we as parents are hearing right now is: Some people who weren’t successful with CI, are mad at an organization, for the philosophy that it’s namesake had. I still haven’t seen proof that AG Bell bans sign language, none of their literature or anything says anything about it. I am willing and wanting to listen, but the badgering is getting rather old and tiring.
August 17th, 2007 at 3:41 pm
Show me where AG Bell says it is OK to use sign language
August 21st, 2007 at 7:27 pm
Auditory-Verbal Therapy (AVT) as announced at the AG Bell Association for the Deaf website:
The principle #3 of 10 prohibits sign language and speech reading.