Here's the thing. Don't all three devices go through three different body locations to apply the stimulation? That could be a factor for why UoM seemed to work better than Lenire (plus the Bluetooth vs. wired). To assume that all three are interchangeable seems like a mistake.
Didn't they take Lim on board around the time they were launching? I suppose that means none of Lim's research has found its way into the current version of Lenire?
From the Vimeo presentation I got the sense that the reprogramming at half-way was Lim's idea. Not having access to it anymore I can't verify but it sure seemed like he was taking credit for that idea--which hasn't fared well in the field.
That is my understanding. They were pretty much ready to release when Neuromod brought on Lim. He mostly did presentations at various hearing/audiology events. I know Neuromod used some of Lim's earlier research to develop their device, but he wasn't involved at all. Maybe in Lenire 2.0. Of course I have 1.0 and it is pretty much a 2500 dollar paper weight.
That is true. Neuromod uses the tongue, Minnesota uses the ear (though Lim in his research mentions the tongue as a good pathway as well), and Michigan uses the jaw and neck based on where you can modulate your tinnitus.
Yes, at least from a number of anecdotal reports here.
Is that the infamous presentation that nearly no one has seen and was taken off the internet soon after?
The presentation is here.
Might be a good thing if it was very similar anyways??
Not every cause of tinnitus is cochlear. You can have conductive problems (middle ear), TMJ, neck injury, etc. While many of these are treatable, they can take a long time (years) and some aren't. Effective bimodal stimulation is definitely still needed.
They're definitely needed, especially in the case of non-cochlear causes. I'm just upset with the time it has taken to get these devices developed. I understand they want them to be efficacious, but it seems like progress has taken forever.
The system Susan Shore is investigating is interesting. It seems that there is no real progress with it, if anyone asks about it (like people on here have) there seems to be vague information released and that there is no knowledge around whether it will be actually released or whether it will be proven to function effectively.
So, from what I've gathered, University of Minnesota's device stalled because Lim is working with Lenire.
I believe they are currently in their second trial and estimate it to be complete by early fall. It's likely that COVID-19 may impact this plan. There does not appear to be a timeframe for commercialization at this point. Providing it produces some positive effect on tinnitus, it would have been a great device to help us through until regenerative medicine is accessible.
Physical therapy and splinting has helped a lot of people with those issues.
Don't forget that Susan Shore set the tinnitus onset criteria in her Phase 2 trial to preferably <1 year. There are huge problems with this.
This is a common issue, and while I understand and agree that this doesn't inspire confidence in chronic sufferers, you need to be able to walk before you can crawl. Finding a way to help acute patients is most likely the first step to helping chronic.
I'm not so sure about that. Is the implication that acute and chronic are two separate conditions? Another issue is that even the medical community don't seem able to agree on when acute tinnitus becomes chronic.
Yeah @WillBeNimble is correct with his point, although I am again thinking that there is absolutely minimal confidence with this device.
I'm not sure what the point is though. Is it that we have to learn to crawl before we can walk, or is the "common issue" something to do with how Phase 2 trials are conducted?
So Susan Shore's device isn't going to work for anybody who has had tinnitus for over 1 year!?!?!
Who knows?
Member
