There is room for both as I stated earlier. But... and this is a big but , there is reason why the welfare of the country relies almost austensibly on one approach....conventional medicine....because the methodology implemented to save lives, including operations and drugs dispensed is 'vetted by the scientific community'. It isn't built on a whim and prayer and fairy dust but rather the scientific method.It sounds like you're 100% certain it would have to be genetics. I think that is often the case, but I could list a number of other variables that could be responsible. Things like this are rarely cut and dried. -- You might appreciate this true story:
A reporter interviews two separate POWs who went through simlilarly harrowing experiences. The reporter asks each the same question: How did you manage to survive your horrific ordeal? One answers that they put their complete trust in God to help him survive. The other one answers he had complete trust in himself to survive. What do you think? Is there much of a difference between each soldier's approach?
Or perhaps more pertinent to this board, is there much difference between somebody who assiduously follows only what science has to offer us to help us with tinnitus / hyperacusis / suicidal ideation, etc. And somebody who decides to depend on themselves, to look at what science has to offer, but also willing to go outside (sometimes seemingly WAY outside) what science has to offer? I think there's the potential for a placebo effect in each approach, but I think the latter approach gives one a MUCH greater chance of success.
By the way, its a sliding scale. In 50 years from now our current medical practices will be virtually unrecognizable including bonafide treatments for tinnitus...versus just treating it symptomatically as we presently do. Just like looking back 50 years, today's practices are so far superior to the time of the 60's....or 100 years ago when they used to bleed people thinking it would help them.
Its ok if you want play homeopathic doctor...or see one...or choose acupuncture....or chiropractic...an array of alternative approaches. Very few do little good compared to conventional medicine and vetted treatments. If the stuff you dabble in showed great efficacy, the science community would likely embrace what you suggest on a broader scale. But new things are discovered everyday but typically in the laboratory and not guys and girls fiddle farting around a health food store. Suffice to say most of the medical community feels the same way about homeopathic remedies. Not all, but the vast majority don't put much stock in it. So, you aren't just disagreeing with me, but most doctors that treat people for a living. I side with them and the rigor they use which btw is flawed too.
There is no cure for tinnitus presently. Nothing in conventional medicine or you suggest will cure it.
But, there are bonafide treatments for mental illness which is inextricably linked to acute tinnitus. All you have to read are all the accounts here. Most that suffer the most with chronic tinnitus had some degree of mental illness going in...or are in denial about it. In fact it is one of the things that separate again in my opinion those that have tinnitus and those that profoundly suffer from it. A precarious balance of mental health upon contracting tinnitus sends most over the edge.
PS. yes, I am heavy in the genetics camp. Why they breed race horses. Breeds of dogs have known dispositions. Of course if a healthy person is poisoned then of course things can change.
Proof? You take a sample of 1 million people age 15 years old and never find one that can play at the same level as this 6 year old with the same amount of practice or even twice as much.
This young lady is Mozart and almost nobody else is....