- May 16, 2021
- 75
- Tinnitus Since
- 2009
- Cause of Tinnitus
- Visual Snow Syndrome, possibly TMJD/Cervical Instability
Theoretically, if tinnitus is eliminated - so will visual snow caused by hyperactivity in auditory cortex. It seems like the brain has some degree of ability to mitigate "noise".Anyone have a clue if Dr. Shore's will work for Visual Snow Syndrome induced tinnitus? It's purely neurological since it's a neurological disorder but it seems to be somatic so I'm not sure.
I just think it's a bit complicated since in visual snow syndrome the visual pathway is also affected. From my understanding the visual (LGB) and auditory pathway (MGB) are interconnected by the (TRN) to the neocortex a.k.a the visual and auditory association cortex where information is actually processed. The thalamus acts as a gatekeeper for information. Normally this should work fine I guess but the brain simply can't handle unfiltered information or at least if a lot of it is still in its initial phase. Result would be hyperexcitability and hypermetabolism.Theoretically, if tinnitus is eliminated - so will visual snow caused by hyperactivity in auditory cortex. It seems like the brain has some degree of ability to mitigate "noise"
If all of these "theoretical treatments" will "cancel" out tinnitus, then, with time, plasticity of the brain will change (re-adapt) to what it once been in terms or not perceiving tinnitus, its capacity to mitigate certain degree of "noise" will be regained and visual snow may fade away.
To be honest, what Dr. Dirk De Ridder said is the most believable thing I've heard about tinnitus in recent years. I myself also do not think that for people with hearing loss, hearing regeneration is the solution, at least not in theory. We will most likely be able to regenerate hearing to full extend, but how should that reverse such complex things that are going on in the brain, especially since it's all built on neuroplasticity.I mean all this is hypothetical and theoretical, however, if you think about it - it makes sense. This is all highly dependent on how myriad of variables and their values that affect your brain's chemistry did get mixed in ones exact case. This is why some get very little to no tinnitus when losing a good amount of hearing, while others with slight hearing loss get an airplane in their ear. Same goes with visual snow..
I think visual snow syndrome isn't the issue, it's the bilateral high pitched retard in my brain. Yeah, I'd love to experience some silence or peace, times where it's very quiet make me actually even more sad, because I can very well imagine silence. Mine fluctuates a lot throughout the day so I don't know if there is a muscular component e.g., TMJ/D / ETD / Cervical Spine (Atlas, C1,C2,C3)I do have visual snow myself and the onset was after I got tinnitus. I'm lucky that for me my visual snow is mild and I have habituated well to it so it does not bother me at all
If I only had visual snow and no tinnitus - I would live happy lmao, but as you see that ain't the case.
It would make me happy honestly, but even if it doesn't, there is still DBS, VNS and Neuralink. There is also neuro visual rehab therapy that seemed to work for visual snow syndrome induced tinnitus.Long story short - If Dr. Shore's device does indeed work, then suppression of visual snow may be a positive side effect of this treatment.
It's funny because all other disgusting tinnitus cure scams are all "commercialized" and somehow their companies get to be unregulated, free to sell their shit (ab)using the sufferers' pain. Paid actors and fake testimonials included.As far as my own level of hope on neuromodulation, I feel the burden of proof is to show that ANY of them work in a meaningful way (including Shore's). I got excited about this on the basis of only a couple testimonials from Tinnitus Talk members. The fact one of them was treated (and claimed all but cured cured) by the Minnesota device which isn't even being developed anymore is a red-flag. Either these treatments are fool's gold or those running these R&D efforts are so inept, unmotivated, and/or underfunded that nothing will ever become of them.
Commercialization (i.e. Auricle) being used as a sign that the treatment is real means nothing as we've seen via Neuromod/Lenire.
The only thing that's going to matter in the end are end-user testimonials--real ones, not paid actors, not wishy-washy stuff, real credible testimonials.
I'd argue that the only thing that's going to matter is actually positive results on their (double-blind, sham-controlled) recent trial. Patient testimonials are useful but not reliable enough to prove efficacy.The only thing that's going to matter in the end are end-user testimonials--real ones, not paid actors, not wishy-washy stuff, real credible testimonials.
Unfortunately, as the DeSyncra device FDA approval and placebo controlled study showed, not even positive results on trials guarantee anything. Agree that this is better than a few random testimonials, of course, and the Shore study should be of higher quality. But if a critical mass of positive testimonials (thousands) started to build, I would feel reassured, because trials can be designed to be successful by engineering the patients selection, and their results be totally misleading.I'd argue that the only thing that's going to matter is actually positive results on their (double-blind, sham-controlled) recent trial. Patient testimonials are useful but not reliable enough to prove efficacy.
After the seemingly credible trial data from Neuromod turned out to be BS I'm not sure any trial data can be trusted. I want to hear from real people some unequivocal stories that the loudness of their tinnitus has gone down, not that they subjectively "feel better" or they are "managing better".I'd argue that the only thing that's going to matter is actually positive results on their (double-blind, sham-controlled) recent trial. Patient testimonials are useful but not reliable enough to prove efficacy.
But it wasn't credible data. There wasn't a control.After the seemingly credible trial data from Neuromod turned out to be BS I'm not sure any trial data can be trusted. I want to hear from real people some unequivocal stories that the loudness of their tinnitus has gone down, not that they subjectively "feel better" or they are "managing better".
How about a double-blinded sham controlled positive result that is ALSO replicated by at least one set of independent researchers...!After the seemingly credible trial data from Neuromod turned out to be BS I'm not sure any trial data can be trusted
I'll take that seriously when it's accompanied by the entrance of a trial participant into a Tinnitus Talk discussion or interview with Tinnitus Talk staffers.How about a double-blinded sham controlled positive result that is ALSO replicated by at least one set of independent researchers...!
I'll concede that saying positive results on clinical trials are "the only thing that matters" was a little unfortunate. It leaves too much room for misinterpretation (although I still agree with the spirit of it). So let me rephrase it: I think clinical trials are the most important element for proving that potential treatments are reliably effective.Unfortunately, as the DeSyncra device FDA approval and placebo controlled study showed, not even positive results on trials guarantee anything.
DeSyncra's trial compared tinnitus distress against CBT. If you think that treating tinnitus distress alone is not enough, I fully agree with you.See again DeSyncra, or positive studies with placebo controlled trials for Sertraline or Pramipexole, to mention just a few examples, that passed placebo controlled trials in studies but have had little success in real life.
The pramipexole trial only focused on tinnitus caused by presbycusis. I agree with you that the Sertraline trial seems puzzling to me, but I can't get access to the full trial study so it's hard for me to comment further.See again DeSyncra, or positive studies with placebo controlled trials for Sertraline or Pramipexole, to mention just a few examples, that passed placebo controlled trials in studies but have had little success in real life.
As @Gb3 said, there was no control on that trial.After the seemingly credible trial data from Neuromod turned out to be BS
True, but carefully setting inclusion/exclusion criteria to raise the chances of your treatment being effective is something that literally every single clinical trial will do (and they should). These criteria are available for everyone to pick apart though; while I see what you mean by saying they're misleading, they're pretty transparent. That is the greatest asset of clinical trials: all the information is there to be scrutinized. You can't do that with patient testimonials.because trials can be designed to be successful by engineering the patients selection, and their results be totally misleading.
I fully agree with this! Patient testimonials help us figure out what works and what doesn't (and for whom). All I'm saying is that I would much rather take a critical mass of positive testimonials after a successful, well-designed trial rather than followed by no trial at all. You can see the effect of putting too much weight on testimonials alone by browsing the alternative treatments section on this forum, where you could probably find a report that someone's tinnitus was helped by pretty much every single thing on this planet.But if a critical mass of positive testimonials (thousands) started to build, I would feel reassured
I agree with this, although no alternative treatment has a critical mass of thousands of testimonials, only very few. Current medicine needs placebo controlled trials, agreed, we only have to accept their limitations. A sizeable amount of testimonials can cement the trial positive results and maybe reassure patients that the treatment works beyond the trial selection criteria.[...] All I'm saying is that I would much rather take a critical mass of positive testimonials after a successful, well-designed trial rather than followed by no trial at all. You can see the effect of putting too much weight on testimonials alone by browsing the alternative treatments section on this forum, where you could probably find a report that someone's tinnitus was helped by pretty much every single thing on this planet.
Agree, independent replication is key. But with Shore device, wouldn't that involve patent infringement? Or could they do the study only for replicating results? But with what economic incentives? I don't see this working.How about a double-blinded sham controlled positive result that is ALSO replicated by at least one set of independent researchers...!
Would have knocked out Lenire (no control) and DeSyncra (probably not able to be replicated by an independent party - and unlikely that anyone would bother).
Just sent an email to a conference staff member asking if Shore's talk was recorded (and if the recordings will be made available to the general public). Will let you all know if I hear back.Shore is presenting as we speak, first one that gets a link to the summary, a livestream, press release etc gets a cookie.
Just heard back; unfortunately, they didn't record any sessions at the conference.Just sent an email to a conference staff member asking if Shore's talk was recorded (and if the recordings will be made available to the general public). Will let you all know if I hear back.
Thanks for the efforts. I do hope there is a slidedeck or presentation to share.Just heard back; unfortunately, they didn't record any sessions at the conference.
I don't think there's much to read into here. This was a small research conference, it's pretty typical for those to not be recorded.Why would this meeting would be "behind closed doors" without any recording whatsoever? I am surprised that there was no livestream...
My 6 stages of grief.Susan Shore's reply when I asked her about the content of her presentation:
"This was just a review of already published material. As stated in our group email - no new news yet."
@lolkas, there was a presentation recorded a while ago, and since it's forever on YouTube, I don't think they want to have a repeat. Search The Neural Bases and Neuroengineering of Tinnitus on YouTube. If Prof Shore is saying no new news, just presenting what is currently available in research, I take that as the protocol hasn't changed. There is a shock, and beep, and some interval between the beep and the shock.Why would this meeting would be "behind closed doors" without any recording whatsoever? I am surprised that there was no livestream...
Hey @Warchop, thanks for your reply!@lolkas, there was a presentation recorded a while ago, and since it's forever on YouTube, I don't think they want to have a repeat. Search The Neural Bases and Neuroengineering of Tinnitus on YouTube. If Prof Shore is saying no new news, just presenting what is currently available in research, I take that as the protocol hasn't changed. There is a shock, and beep, and some interval between the beep and the shock.
View attachment 50740
It would be really great to see some device that can read, in real-time, changes occurring in the auditory complex, and then pair that with bi-modal. My understanding is that the brain is undergoing some desynchronization, so the area that is overactive in the brain should quiet down, and there are tools out there that can detect these things. The technology does work, but I think the problem is that each person is different, and finding a one size fits all solution, may not be practical. If bimodal works (I believe it does), then I think the hyperactive areas of the brain should be able to be pinpointed, and then the effects of bimodal should be clearly apparent. If new tones show up, which has happened with Lenire, then that should also be seen.
View attachment 50733
Just my 2 cents.
Maybe, but I sort of suspect that hearing loss is a triggering event that creates a cascading response of confused neurons. Undoing the triggering mechanism won't necessarily undo the subsequent brain scramble.Hair cells / synapses recovered = fixed feedback to the brain = no tinnitus.