It is known that conduction system amplifies HF and have almost no effect on low F.
Your knowledge is much too advanced for me to know that kind of thing - so I would not have an opinion on such intricate matters. However, here is what I do know: the logical implication of your statement means that with no amplification in the low frequency range (as you write), the air conduction hearing loss should be more pronounced than in the higher frequencies. Which is the opposite of what the audiograms of L Francis show (both before and after).
So I am getting lost here sadly. Not good. But I am able to share with you an audiogram sample of a person suffering from otosclerosis:
And as you can see, the inner ear, of the right ear (in the above case), works just fine (as indicated by the top line). However, there is air conduction hearing loss due to the condition mentioned - and the loss is significant due to a deviation of more than 10db (between the two tests ie. top and bottom line). Now, the above audiogram does not show a decline of the air conduction thresholds towards the lower frequencies.
So the fact that "amplification" should have played a role in explaining the audiogram of L Francis does not seem obvious to me. But perhaps it does to you?
Otitis media lowers the aural thresholds does not lower the mastoid bone threasholds
and can go away without any medication in 1-6 months.
I would agree with that. But you would see a decrease in AC across the entire audiogram such as the following one (also right ear, but otitis media):
So... "amplification"...?
So without mastoid bone audiogram and without tympanogram iam not believe it i need more prove.Its more unbelievable than tinnitus "miracle cures".
I see. Well, I guess my own audiograms are also "miracle cures" and that I have been misleading this board for past 1½ years?
As you can see from the above audiograms, I have recovered 25db at 8 kHz, left ear. And in this case, both air and bone conduction tests
were carried out (which you apparently seem so concerned about - not that I understand why, I must admit). And just to be clear: the above audiograms were carried out on the same "machine", same place, etc. And clearly I was not suffering from any condition affecting the middle ear, because that would have presented itself on the audiogram with a deviation between AC and BC.
And just to be clear: a 10db improvement (or more) in hearing threshold is significant (under similar before/after conditions):
With regard to AM-111, the EMA has issued guidance that a 10 dB improvement in hearing thresholds is clinically significant, in line with clinical practice.
Source: Auris Medical Holding AG, Financial Statement 27th June, 2014
Again it's to good to be true iam almost sure that something other happens and not hair cell regeneration.
Does it occur to you that hair cell (re)-generation is not necessary to improve hearing? There are several stages before a hair cell dies.
Member
Founder
