At the most I'm thinking a few months or so, so sounds like I should be good...Once they have green lit you for the treatment that's basically it for the near future. So they might make you take the hearing test again if you delayed it by years but beyond that you've got basically as much time as you like to decide.
I believe that they tried delays and found that synchronised timings produced longer lasting results.I still don't get why Neuromod uses 0 delay for their PS1 program, when both Shore and Minnesota seem to prefer delayed stimuli.
Has anyone got more knowledge about this?
I mean, Hubert Lim should have interfered if they were wrong?
That must be the case, yes.I believe that they tried delays and found that synchronised timings produced longer lasting results.
In the podcast, Dr. Ross O'Neill mentions that one of the doctors who is working on the Minnesota device worked with him on Lenire for two years or so before they released it to the public. So I would imagine both devices will be similar.I still don't get why Neuromod uses 0 delay for their PS1 program, when both Shore and Minnesota seem to prefer delayed stimuli.
Has anyone got more knowledge about this?
I mean, Hubert Lim should have interfered if they were wrong?
Contrary to their rhetoric, I am not seeing a real clear grasp on their part of what a stimulation parameter will yield with patients. I see them engaging in a lot of what looks like almost random trial and error with patients.I believe that they tried delays and found that synchronised timings produced longer lasting results.
Kind of really sucks. Especially if the change doesn't agree with you.I wish it was possible to just update the firmware or flip a switch on the device for the different settings. Travelling to have it done kinda sucks.
I know Susan Shore has several patents for her device/research. Maybe the delay timings per her research are patented and Neuromod can't use them. I see no other reason why they wouldn't be using them as one of their settings.I still don't get why Neuromod uses 0 delay for their PS1 program, when both Shore and Minnesota seem to prefer delayed stimuli.
Has anyone got more knowledge about this?
I mean, Hubert Lim should have interfered if they were wrong?
We're not talking about a patent on something innocuous like a doorknob here where there are many ways to do the same thing. If you're faced with a patent on something that works and to avoid the patent it either does nothing or makes your condition worse, then I'd say the system is profoundly and comically f*cked.I know Susan Shore has several patents for her device/research. Maybe the delay timings per her research are patented and Neuromod can't use them. I see no other reason why they wouldn't be using them as one of their settings.
I cannot imagine that. They have been working on Lenire for ~10 years. Hubert Lim works with them. Shore's results are public. There is just no way they are not aware of this. The only reason I can see why they use these timings is that they think they work the best.A more likely reason is Neuromod just doesn't have as firm a grasp on the underlying science and methodology as they sound--especially given the track-record of their prior failure with MuteButton.
Kind of like some video games and some software programs do. Sell you the product and get you to do their beta testing.Or they are using people as guinea pigs to acquire data... like a work in progress or on the job training (for them).
If this turns out to be the case and it wasn't disclosed, sounds potentially like a class action lawsuit.Or they are using people as guinea pigs to acquire data... like a work in progress or on the job training (for them).
Someone literally just posted that it made theirs better. And not just their research, but my own independent data gathering has said it's 70%.I have been following this thread for a while now and reading all the user experiences has really killed my hope for this device. I'm now convinced Lenire's self-reported 70% success rate is a lie and they actually are no better than placebo. And for some even worse than that.
Yeah I highly doubt this is the case especially since that kind of thing is extremely regulated with medical devices. People seem to think medicine is like technology. It very much isn't.If this turns out to be the case and it wasn't disclosed, sounds potentially like a class action lawsuit.
Just like Jastreboff's so called 95% success rate. Charlatans of the modern day.I have been following this thread for a while now and reading all the user experiences has really killed my hope for this device. I'm now convinced Lenire's self-reported 70% success rate is a lie and they actually are no better than placebo. And for some even worse than that.
Neuromod has been guilty of opaqueness and doublespeak for some time now. They have created the perception among the public that the probability of statistically significant for anyone accepted for treatment is very high. But when asked, they have categorically refused to release any details other than things about hyperacusis sufferers being super-responders. * The closest to hard data we got was in a Vimeo video from a conference Hubert Lim did which was summarily smacked down by Neuromod. Then they gave all sorts of excuses for the lack of data:If this turns out to be the case and it wasn't disclosed, sounds potentially like a class action lawsuit.
I don't know... one would have to prove it. I'm not saying there was anything necessarily nefarious, other than a company seeking profits for an "unfinished" device.If this turns out to be the case and it wasn't disclosed, sounds potentially like a class action lawsuit.
Medicine doesn't work like technology. If this were a beta like technology, they would market it as such. There will be an improved Lenire II, but it's a completely different product that uses Minnesota timing instead of current timing.I don't know... one would have to prove it. I'm not saying there was anything necessarily nefarious, other than a company seeking profits for an "unfinished" device.
IMO they released an unfinished product... they never said it was a cure. To increase confidence they pay someone with scientific recognition (MN).
Don't corporations do this all the time? They release something rushed to market and constantly improve upon it as they get customer feedback. As someone said, it's like a beta device... and I really had high hopes this would work.
I agree with you and we'd definitely want to do that. Besides that, come summertime, I'm really hoping we'll be seeing the peer review published. It's been a long time coming. I can't blame people starting to become suspicious at some point if it keeps being delayed.At the very least, Tinnitus Talk's data (and based on the preview, it's going to be really well done) should be brought over to them and they should be asked to answer for it in classic 60 minutes fashion. If they slam the door or give increasingly farcical answers then it will be pretty hard to hold onto that initial benefit-of-the-doubt trust.
Define "ineffective." If it shows a few have benefited... then it isn't ineffective, however... it doesn't mean it's not an unfinished or "raw" device.If it was ineffective or actually caused damage there would be a recall. In all the countries Lenire is in right now there has been no recall.
You do realise that this was never going to be a 100% effective cure right? The people it doesn't help were always going to rack up on here.A few more experiences from users saying that Lenire didn't help or worsened tinnitus, and the reputation will be ruined
If people look at the data and think it's still worth gambling their money, that's their prerogative. The more serious issue, IMHO, is one of TRUST. For Neuromod to say the odds are X and the odds we see in the field are much lower, it calls into question their honesty. If they didn't overpromise and said you've got a 1/10 or 1/20 shot of significant improvement then that issue wouldn't be there, but then the level of excitement (and investor interest) wouldn't be as high.Define "ineffective." If it shows a few have benefited... then it isn't ineffective, however... it doesn't mean it's not an unfinished or "raw" device.
I could see a recall if the devices begin to spontaneously start on fire... but otherwise... I doubt it.