What do you guys think of this comment on /r/tinnitusresearch?
"I am an audiologist. 5-10 dB HL difference on an audiogram at one frequency (high or low) in one ear is not significant. When you test hearing all day every day you see it happening often. I would not reprogram a hearing aid based on that difference.... Now, even though 5-10 dB HL is not significant, I would reprogram a hearing aid if there were three or more frequencies that changed by 10dB HL and the patient says their CLEAN hearing aid sounds soft/loud.
I also would not get excited about their word recognition improving from 20% to 40% for one person. Their audiogram did not significantly improve, but their word scores did? There are several reasons for that improvement. For example how the BRAIN (not the cochlea) is processing that sound/word heard. The brain is affected by familiarity with a test, attention, fatigue, mood...
Side note: If the results were actually significant, that would be super exciting, but they would still have a long way to go. My next question would be... is this change temporary? Will they need to get this treatment once every 3, 6, 12 months?"
This is interesting coming from a supposed audiologist and actually also makes me ask some questions about what she bases her comments on/how she can support the claims she is making.
Looking at what she has said, there are some things which simply don't make sense. Someone has also failed to provide evidence for their claims either. These are
>
They say word recognition scores improved due to the familiarity of the test
I don't know how you can be familiar with a word recognition test as usually the words are never the same. In fact from what I got told apparently there are hundreds of words for this very reason as it allows them to randomise and change things up.
>
They dismissed the improvements in word recognition as not being meaningful.
Sorry but I don't know how you can have results in all patients that are somewhat significant and dismiss them as if there was no improvement and benefit whatsoever. When we see someone go from 6 to 15 or from 25 to 47 it is fairly obvious there was some benefit from this medicine. If your word score was so low to begin with that you struggled to get any then it is quite difficult to see how you can suddenly guess 150% more. Same if you go from being mid level to nearly getting a full score.
Also I have never got told the words that I missed in a word recognition test. If you miss them that's it. This simply doesn't happen.
My view is that this audiologist has simply ignored not only the basic theory but the basic fact that you either don't hear or you hear when making her comments. The basic theory of you hear or don't hear has not only been shown as valid but it is also how Frequency Therapeutics has now been able to validate their information from their clinical trirals.
Thus looking at the information, it is much more probable that there was some benefit from FX-322, otherwise they wouldn't have seen the improvements that they did.
>
They say that the 10 dB improvement is insignificant yet also question whether this is a temporary or fixed improvement
Based on what we have seen it is fixed. This actually tells me that this audiologist actually might not have read the information properly or they simply don't know what was achieved.
>
No comments were made about hearing above 8000 Hz
I felt that this was the most unusual part of their response. They have seemingly said that 8000 HZ is where hearing stops based off their one frequency improvement comment and the fact that word recognition test improvements are due to being familiar with the test.
I also would have thought that this audiologist would know that there are frequencies higher than 8000 Hz and that for the medicine to actually get to 8000 Hz it would have needed to pass all those other frequencies first too.
I would have thought that someone who knows this stuff would have known that hearing goes past 8000 Hz and also maybe knows what its benefits were.
However, when I look at some of the comments generally from this audiologist, I either think that their views might be simplistic or that they then are simply ignoring the data and facts that Frequency Therapeutics and other independent scientists have shown about FX-322. This includes the plausible and reasonable hypothesis that FX-322 has also benefited the very high frequencies and also the frequencies above 8000 Hz help with sound clarity.
Overall this supposed audiologist makes some points which may have some plausibility to them. However, I think that the biggest thing that I take away from this is that they have actually ignored some basic data and basic evidence in their comments, which doesn't make me feel confident that she has supported her claims.
I particularly note the facts that she has said that they would have had to be familiar with the word test and also that hearing seemingly stops at 8000 Hz in her points. Both of these claims are simply not true and also she has put forward no evidence to support them.
This inevitably tells me that either this audiologist might be ill-informed or may be being disingenuous like others have been about FX-322. Thus I am going to take what they have said with a grain of salt as they are not making me feel confident when they do not correctly support their claims.