Flexible device could treat hearing loss without batteries
acs.org
acs.org
Starting with a processor box the size of a large matchbox mounted to my chest, with wires going to my ears into hard plastic ear moulds. Moving to all the electronics (including the ‘receiver’, the speaker element) going behind my ear with a tube going into an acrylic or silicone ear mould. Finally today, it’s Receiver-in-Canal where the electronics are still behind the ear (but much smaller and direct Bluetooth connectivity) and the receiver moved to inside my ear canal inside a tiny plastic tip, making it nearly invisible (invisibility is both good, and bad. It can be useful for people to know you’re deaf with a quick glance at your ears.)
There has also been a shift from analog to digital along the way. Interestingly there’s a product called Phonak Lyric that uses analog but in a new way (a product that sits right next to your eardrum for months at a time). I’ve heard good things about it for mild hearing loss.
Really? This wasn't an option for my child, although I imagine that's because he's growing, and he needs new ear molds every other month :)
Say you've been born with hearing loss, or have developed it over time due to loud noises, etc. The solution being sound AMPLIFICATION, no matter how selective and attuned to the hearing loss, is at best a band-aid solution.
I am a parent of a child with hearing loss, so my understanding of hearing aids is secondary at best. I'd defer to others more knowledgeable than I on the matter.
That being said, I love reading about innovative research like this.
Cochlear implant are designed with electrical signals directly to nerves but needs therapy to understand. Its akin to a legless person learning to walk again with new metal legs. Has similar issues as above with noise, etc, but the nerves are stimulated directly which allows more accurate hearing but not 100%. A major downside is that you lose 100% natural hearing in that ear as the nerve stimulation wires go inside the cochlear, effectively blocking any sound from going in. So imagine you lose a foot, and they offer you a metal leg to walk again and that requires therapy. Its a tough choice for some: some natural hearing or accurate but stimulated hearing.
Then the ear implant. Or really a natural cochlear implant is akin to attaching a new human leg to a legless person. Still, there's therapy needed. However, the cochlear is around the skull. So it's not as simple as taking it out and reattaching it. A lot of research is being done with promising results.
Later, the bionic cochlear, a complete electrical replacement of cochlear where you hear as well as a dog, but that's a dream.
The ideal solution would be to repair the hair cells or replace them with a drop-in solution that restores their function. Likewise with the auditory nerve. Of course, these are pie-in-the-sky ideas currently.
Sound amplification essentially symptomatically resolves the problem by playing the appropriate frequencies louder, but in the case of hearing loss due to damage, amplification would just exacerbate the problem, unless I am fundamentally misunderstanding something.
In layman's terms, it would be like temporarily losing your hearing by going to a rock concert, and then raising the volume of everything around you to rock concert level, so you can continue to hear things.
I wear Bluetooth bone conduction headsets all day every day. I barely notice they're there and the battery lasts all day.
Why cant they just adapt this tech?
Easing regulations for non-implant devices could really shake up the market in a good way, implantables OTOH should always be regulated as medical devices.
But certifications with TÜV or similar are really getting out of hand with the new medical device regulation. The amount of paperwork for even pretty simple devices like a remote control is extraordinary. Source: I work for $company in that specific sector
I wish we had FDA approved computers so that we would have stayed in the glorious 8 bits era for another century.
An off-the-shelf headphone reproduces sound that has already been engineered for consumption. Real-world sound on the other hand is unstructured and chaotic, so you'll need software to prioritize speech sounds while de-prioritizing background noise. That's going to require a bit more power to solve than a pair of headphones. On top of that, you'll need to understand which frequencies need boosting based on the patient's audiogram (basically a hearing loss profile).
Can hearing aids be cheaper? Probably. Should they be covered by insurance? Absolutely. Should you research a bit more before spouting off some sort of feelgood soundbite? Yes, as well.
Can’t you make phone calls with those headphones?
A friend of mine uses hearing aids where the batteries last them about a week until they need to change them, which takes them not even a minute. Batteries cost only a few bucks and are well worth the "empty to full in 1 minute" feature. Plus batteries don't require you to give the whole hearing aid away when the rechargable battery eventually dies.
Her hearing aids use the 312 "size", maybe you a hearing aid that uses smaller ones? But still they should last more than just a couple days.
He gets 3-5 days out of it, but he doesn't use it all the time either :-/
Definitely it is the Bluetooth part.
The ones my mom have (switched on from say 9:00 AM to 11:00 PM let's say 14 hours/day or so), use some (very short range) radio system to listen to a thingy mom wears as a necklace (the actual cord around the neck acts as antenna), size similar to a largish matchbox.
This latter has a rechargeable battery and the Bluetooth part to connect to phone (and TV) with actually a rather good range.
This matchbox thingy lasts barely 10 hours before needing to be recharged (I replaced the battery in one of these, it is a teeny - tiny one[0]) so I gave my mother also a (smallish) battery pack to connect when she watches TV that powers and recharges the thingy.
But the actual button sizes batteries in the earpieces last 7-8 days.
[0] only for the record, asked cost for replacement of battery 50 Euro + 25 Euro x 2 times handling and shipping to/from the laboratory (with insurance), total 100 Euro, 3-4 weeks time.
Cost of a new "thingy" (discounted) 200 Euro.
Bought a new one when the first started giving battery issues, then 2 no-name batteries via AliExpress 13 Euro (6.50 Euro each), 40 days wait or so, time to change one on the old thingy 10-15 minutes (as I was slow and careful, probably now that I know how it is made it would take 5 minutes or less)
I read on HN awhile back that you can even upload audiograms so your AirPods can function like hearing aids. That sounds really interesting to me.
[0] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.and...
(Seriously though, I’d we actually do understand any nerve “protocols” beyond ‘Tony current make nerve fire’ I’ve not heard of it and would be interested!)