Central Gain — A Breakthrough in Understanding Tinnitus: The Entire Hearing System Studied
- Thread starter Candy
- Start date
Member
So @R. David Case may in fact have a valid therapy?
But seriously. This points to a lack of input causing tinnitus. Great hope for FX-322.
So using WNGs 24/7 for a few months could help me?
Anyone had success with noisers?
Maybe I could just listen to music 24/7 for 3 months?
Maybe sleeping with earplugs is bad?
I don't know what to do! Waiting for Lenire...
Anyone had success with noisers?
Maybe I could just listen to music 24/7 for 3 months?
Maybe sleeping with earplugs is bad?
I don't know what to do! Waiting for Lenire...
The central gain theory is quite old actually. Perhaps what's new is the pinpointing of its location in the auditory cortex.
And how does the central gain theory and the over active DCN work together?
This condition is so complex. It seems like the whole auditory system went havoc.
Honestly thinking about going to uni again and study the shit out of this condition and invent something to save us.
This condition is so complex. It seems like the whole auditory system went havoc.
Honestly thinking about going to uni again and study the shit out of this condition and invent something to save us.
The central gain model adds up with most things that is known so far about tinnitus.
The reality is the CBT/TRT guys are going to delude themselves (and us) into thinking tinnitus is a total medical mystery just so pallative medicine seems more appealing, scientist have not cracked the egg but they have information bout what's going on inside it.
The reality is the CBT/TRT guys are going to delude themselves (and us) into thinking tinnitus is a total medical mystery just so pallative medicine seems more appealing, scientist have not cracked the egg but they have information bout what's going on inside it.
https://www.irsst.qc.ca/media/documents/PubIRSST/R-1041.pdf?v=2019-09-01
Original paper
I find the auditory gain theory very interesting. There was another paper that showed if you get a set of subjects to wear an earplug in one ear for one week, some will get tinnitus-https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3366980/
The brain does not like asymmetry in hearing between the two ears and the auditory gain system may be an attempt to deal with this.
I got my tinnitus after 2 months of deafness in one ear due to a misdiagnosed earwax impaction. I think my brain freaked out after a while and created the tinnitus. But why it didn't go when my hearing was restored and become almost symmetrical, I don't know. I did have some permanent hearing loss above 14 kHz in the ear with the impaction but that makes up so little of our auditory input in that frequency.
I want to try WNG after seeing this paper.
Original paper
I find the auditory gain theory very interesting. There was another paper that showed if you get a set of subjects to wear an earplug in one ear for one week, some will get tinnitus-https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3366980/
The brain does not like asymmetry in hearing between the two ears and the auditory gain system may be an attempt to deal with this.
I got my tinnitus after 2 months of deafness in one ear due to a misdiagnosed earwax impaction. I think my brain freaked out after a while and created the tinnitus. But why it didn't go when my hearing was restored and become almost symmetrical, I don't know. I did have some permanent hearing loss above 14 kHz in the ear with the impaction but that makes up so little of our auditory input in that frequency.
I want to try WNG after seeing this paper.
Yes, I have had lots of success with a chaotic sound mix I invented called Tinnitus Mix. I have been tinnitus free for 18 years only because of it. It has also helped many others. It is free to try at https://tinnitusmix.com. You must use headphones that go to higher frequencies like the Koss KTX-PRO1. You should play on repeat on low volume for 6-8 yours all night every night for 3 weeks.
To me, the only thing increased gain explains is hyperacusis. How does increased gain explain phantom tones, crickets, and pulsatile tinnitus? It doesn't. This theory is stupid.
Lynny
Member
- Feb 28, 2019
- 120
- 24
- Tinnitus Since
- December 2018
- Cause of Tinnitus
- Unknown, possibly stress
)
- Apr 23, 2015
- 418
- Tinnitus Since
- 01/21/2014
- Cause of Tinnitus
- High frequency hearing loss in left ear from head trauma (?)
Very disappointing article, still suggesting that hearing aids and white noise generators are the solution. Ha, ha, ha.... I have no doubt that with this kind of research we will all die enjoying our T.
Similar timeline here. I got my T about 6 weeks after I lost some hearing in one ear.
I believe in the brain and ear connection. They both are together. Hopefully, they will put them together.
- Oct 4, 2017
- 201
- Tinnitus Since
- 2000
- Cause of Tinnitus
- Stress, hearing loss, sinus infections, ... ?
It's true that exposure to music, even if it's loud seems to help better then silence here ... but what actually helps most is less stress, more sleep & especially emotional balance. From my experience living almost 20 years with T that's what I need to work on, it's not just the ears, and my last tests with some supplements seem to confirm this, sure it doen't cure it but the fluctuations are quite important from moments which gives me hope.
Sorry for the delay, but I needed to read all the study (see attached file) before making an opinion. I am a layman but I will try to do my best in terms of criticism.
There are 2 studies.
Study 1 : two homogeneous groups of healthy people (no HL, no T). One group wore earplugs during one week, the other group wore noise generators during one week. The purpose was to analyze what changed in terms of detection thresholds and pain thresholds (before and after treatment).) + to analyze what changed with tests like DPOAE, ABR and stapedius reflex (before and after treatment).
If I understood correctly, there is the assumption that if tests (DPOAE, ABR and Stapedius reflex) are the same before and after treatment, every change in thresholds is the result of a process that occured in the highest part of the brain and not in the lowest part of the brain (ie the cochlea). So is the theory of the central gain.
Edit : discussion of the study 1
"The results of the first study show that after one week of temporary hearing deprivation or
stimulation at comparable levels, the auditory system compensates by amplifying sound after
deprivation and by lowering it after stimulation. This change takes place at the highest level of
the auditory system, in the cortex. In fact, no change was observable in the lower levels of the
auditory pathways, i.e., the cochlea (by the growth of distortion product otoacoustic emissions),
the brainstem (by stapedius reflexes) and auditory nerve evoked responses (by waves I, III, and
V)."
In my humble opinion,
The groups were not homogeneous :
- given the fact that each person had the choice to belong to the group he wanted to.
- according to the datas of the tests of the two groups before treatment.
The results are not pertinent, I forgot some of my statistic skills but to me it appears that the differences are too small compared to the intervals of confiance.
There are 2 studies.
Study 1 : two homogeneous groups of healthy people (no HL, no T). One group wore earplugs during one week, the other group wore noise generators during one week. The purpose was to analyze what changed in terms of detection thresholds and pain thresholds (before and after treatment).) + to analyze what changed with tests like DPOAE, ABR and stapedius reflex (before and after treatment).
If I understood correctly, there is the assumption that if tests (DPOAE, ABR and Stapedius reflex) are the same before and after treatment, every change in thresholds is the result of a process that occured in the highest part of the brain and not in the lowest part of the brain (ie the cochlea). So is the theory of the central gain.
Edit : discussion of the study 1
"The results of the first study show that after one week of temporary hearing deprivation or
stimulation at comparable levels, the auditory system compensates by amplifying sound after
deprivation and by lowering it after stimulation. This change takes place at the highest level of
the auditory system, in the cortex. In fact, no change was observable in the lower levels of the
auditory pathways, i.e., the cochlea (by the growth of distortion product otoacoustic emissions),
the brainstem (by stapedius reflexes) and auditory nerve evoked responses (by waves I, III, and
V)."
In my humble opinion,
The groups were not homogeneous :
- given the fact that each person had the choice to belong to the group he wanted to.
- according to the datas of the tests of the two groups before treatment.
The results are not pertinent, I forgot some of my statistic skills but to me it appears that the differences are too small compared to the intervals of confiance.
Study 2 : two groups of tinnitus sufferers. One group whithout hearing loss, the other group with hearing loss. Both groups wore white noise generators (duration non explicitly specified). The purpose was to to analyze what changed in terms of detection thresholds and pain thresholds, tinnitus loudness and THQ (before and after treatment + follow up ?).
With this assumption that if you wear white noise generators, your tinnitus loudness decreases.
In my humble opinion :
- The groups are statistically too small (the authors admitted they have difficulties to recruit patients)
- It is very weird that there was no objective tests like those mentionned in the study 1, maybe we could have learned something with.
The results are not pertinent, to me it appears that the differences are too small compared to the intervals of confiance + it appears that results come back to the baseline after one month post exposition.
Did I miss something? Tell me if I am correct.
With this assumption that if you wear white noise generators, your tinnitus loudness decreases.
In my humble opinion :
- The groups are statistically too small (the authors admitted they have difficulties to recruit patients)
- It is very weird that there was no objective tests like those mentionned in the study 1, maybe we could have learned something with.
The results are not pertinent, to me it appears that the differences are too small compared to the intervals of confiance + it appears that results come back to the baseline after one month post exposition.
Did I miss something? Tell me if I am correct.
- Feb 17, 2017
- 10,400
- Tinnitus Since
- February, 2017
- Cause of Tinnitus
- Acoustic Trauma
Did they use those noise generators to expose tinnitus sufferers to noises louder than the sufferers' tinnitus, and then the sufferers reported relief upon the noise generators being turned off?
If one gets used to hearing a loud noise, then one's quieter tinnitus noise would appear to be quieter and would also not bother one as much...
This reminds me of
https://baybusinesshelp.com/2012/11/19/story-the-rabbis-goat-prescription-how-to-really-be-thankful/
A review of auditory gain, low-level noise and sound therapy for tinnitus and hyperacusis
Abstract
Objective: This article reviews: (1) the evidence related to enhanced central gain as a potential mechanism for the generation of tinnitus and hyperacusis, (2) the neuroplastic changes induced by prolonged, low-level sound stimulation and (3) the clinical effectiveness of various sound therapies and amplification for the treatment of tinnitus and hyperacusis.
Design: General literature review.
Study sample: Peer-reviewed articles related to auditory neural gain, prolonged low-level noise exposure and effectiveness of sound therapy.
Results: A large body of literature exists supporting the enhanced neural gain model of tinnitus and hyperacusis. Neuroplastic changes associated with prolonged low-level noise show evidence of reversing enhanced neural gain, which should theoretically reduce percepts of tinnitus and/or hyperacusis. However, the available clinical evidence assessing the efficacy of sound therapy to reduce tinnitus or hyperacusis lacks controlled clinical trials to accurately assess the effectiveness of sound therapy.
Conclusions: The available literature from basic science studies supports the neural gain model of tinnitus and hyperacusis, which conceivably should be effectively managed with sound therapy. However, well-controlled clinical trials are needed before conclusions can be made on the effectiveness of sound therapy for tinnitus and hyperacusis.
Source: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14992027.2019.1660812
Abstract
Objective: This article reviews: (1) the evidence related to enhanced central gain as a potential mechanism for the generation of tinnitus and hyperacusis, (2) the neuroplastic changes induced by prolonged, low-level sound stimulation and (3) the clinical effectiveness of various sound therapies and amplification for the treatment of tinnitus and hyperacusis.
Design: General literature review.
Study sample: Peer-reviewed articles related to auditory neural gain, prolonged low-level noise exposure and effectiveness of sound therapy.
Results: A large body of literature exists supporting the enhanced neural gain model of tinnitus and hyperacusis. Neuroplastic changes associated with prolonged low-level noise show evidence of reversing enhanced neural gain, which should theoretically reduce percepts of tinnitus and/or hyperacusis. However, the available clinical evidence assessing the efficacy of sound therapy to reduce tinnitus or hyperacusis lacks controlled clinical trials to accurately assess the effectiveness of sound therapy.
Conclusions: The available literature from basic science studies supports the neural gain model of tinnitus and hyperacusis, which conceivably should be effectively managed with sound therapy. However, well-controlled clinical trials are needed before conclusions can be made on the effectiveness of sound therapy for tinnitus and hyperacusis.
Source: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14992027.2019.1660812
Log in or register to get the full forum benefits!
Similar threads
