The Hyperacusis Network Message Board
Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
Kevin

Registered:
Posts: 10
Reply with quote  #1 
Hello all,

My apologies if this article has already been posted, but I came across this and found it interesting.  It's a 2015 article that challenges the conventional "the brain is trying to compensate for damaged cilia in the cochlea" theory.

While I was joyful that progress is being made towards really defining what causes tinnitus, I was also let down by their findings.  If they are right, tinnitus is a much more complicated beast than initially thought.

http://commonhealth.wbur.org/2015/05/tinnitus-research-ringing-ears

Kevin
0
Paulbe

Registered:
Posts: 176
Reply with quote  #2 
You know, I found the comments more informative than the article.
0
jirimenzel

Registered:
Posts: 183
Reply with quote  #3 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulbe
You know, I found the comments more informative than the article.


Yes, welcome to the internet, I says while pointing to the box, IT crowd style. No wonder techdirt complains when online periodicals think they're so popular they can decide to ditch disqus.

Let's face it, the article is absolute garbage. It reminds me of the subprime crisis in 2006. And serves as a good example of how the observer influences the result of an experiment. We have the writer, the observer, and the inflow of patients, the statistics of the experiment. And the writer finds his subject complicated and instead of turning towards afferent nerves or the ear itself, makes a u turn and goes to the brain, and as a result, the hundreds of patients talk about their diagnosis, which is really just a symptom, this thing called tinn-uu-tis. Not one of those in the comments is aware that they very possibly have middle ear myoclonus, dystonia, not a mention of TTTS, not even the ones talking about random fluttering.

So what do the statistics these kind of doctors build? Well this is a great example. A ton of patients trying to decipher their ''brain plasticity'', dubious results if any, mostly talking about setbacks, and, spammy little crappy apple store app with white noise box - just to make Steve Jobs and the Wolf of Wall Street proud. And then we have a few ''isolated'' comments here and there of their ''tinn-uu-tis'' getting solved by taking their broken tooth out or anti-fungal treatment or how it was caused by tympanic membrane perforation, yes, because as we all know the tympanic membrane is sitting shock and awe right in the middle of the brain.

This crap is snowballing at an alarming rate. Today I had to find on tinnitustalk the infamous Spanish Zaragoza Quiron sound therapy success story from a decade ago where ''hyperacusis'' was cured by 10 weeks of music boxes. Its almost as if knowledge about this condition is getting worse as time goes by, that Lib might turn out to be the Erin Brokovich and the probably dead by now Sismanis the canaries in the coal mine.

In the real world, I am still nagged by that journal entry with the south koreans finding that those suffering myoclonus were usually young as opposed to those supposedly with hearing loss, and how 42% of them had ''subjective hyperacusis''.
0
Paulbe

Registered:
Posts: 176
Reply with quote  #4 

"Its almost as if knowledge about this condition is getting worse as time goes by"

Pharmaco-medical sidetracking will do that.  A recurring treatment of a pill targeting the CNS (with all its attendant unintended consequences) is still far more lucrative than a simple surgical one-off treatment.

0
jirimenzel

Registered:
Posts: 183
Reply with quote  #5 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulbe

"Its almost as if knowledge about this condition is getting worse as time goes by"

Pharmaco-medical sidetracking will do that.  A recurring treatment of a pill targeting the CNS (with all its attendant unintended consequences) is still far more lucrative than a simple surgical one-off treatment.




My 'tinnitus' used to be high pitch and only low pitch when sounds were present. I can't remember but the high pitched tinnitus used to go down with Idaptan and the lower pitch might have also disappeared. But when the sound pain's threshold was lowered to all sounds, the low pitched vibration became permanent and the higher pitched sound was louder and would no longer react to Idaptan. This was over a decade ago of course, before the half-wits realised Idaptan was dangerous.

Somehow I doubt my vibration reacting to every sound, not just to certain tones or to hearing loss like it seems to Richard Knox in Ringing In Your Ears? Finally, Researchers Finding New Clues About Tinnitus (the complete search values so he can have a little page domain rank love)

I'm much more inclined to think I have the stuff below

Clinical Characteristics and Therapeutic Response of Objective
Tinnitus Due to Middle Ear Myoclonus: A Large Case Series

http://wikisend.com/download/990998/10.1002@lary.23854.pdf

''Approximately 90% of the patients in this series were
younger than 50 years when their tinnitus began. Interestingly,
the incidence of MEM tended to decrease with age in
our study subjects, suggesting that MEM is a disease of
younger people, unlike sensorineural tinnitus, which is
more frequent in older people. There was no right/left predominance
in unilateral MEM; bilaterality was observed
in approximately half of the patients in our series.''

Misophonia theorists struggle to explain soft sounds, often offloading the blame on the patient, but in myoclonus theory soft sound irritability seems so much easier to understand.
0
Paulbe

Registered:
Posts: 176
Reply with quote  #6 
Just looked up Idaptan.  Interesting approach.
0
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.



This message board is for informational purposes only. It is not intended to substitute for any medical advice. MANDATORY BOARD ETIQUETTE: 1. No personal attacks. 2. No profanity or use of inappropriate usernames. 3. No self solicitation of goods or services. 4 No discriminatory remarks based on race, gender, or religion. 5. Prohibitive postings include the following: discussing or suggesting the intent to end one's life, moderating or actions made by the moderators, and/or revealing personal information (full names, address, phone number). Rule infraction may result in either a warning or ban, depending on the severity. Kindness matters.