|
Home > Archive > Hearing loss support > August 2005 > Acute Disappointment with National Hearing Aid Dispenser
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Acute Disappointment with National Hearing Aid Dispenser
|
|
| niero@pnc.com.au 2005-08-04, 8:56 am |
| Hi recently had two new hearing aids fitted (Oticon Tego for which I
paid $5250. The first fitting I was asked to listen to the dispenser's
quite loud and sonorous voice to judge whether the aids were working
correctly. Because I could hear his voice quite clearly (I could hear
it clearly without the aid) I thought the aids were working correctly.
When I got home I found that I had to turn the TV up a lot louder than
I normally do with an aid. I put in my old aids and found I could hear
a lot clearer with them than the new ones. I took them back two weeks
later and he sent them off the the factory to have them checked out and
a volume control put on. When I returned to pick them up I took with
me a small radio to listen to. I told him that I felt it was not good
that he did not have any noise reference for me to listen to. I told
him that listening to his voice was not helpful to me as I needed soft
noises as a reference. He made an excuse that he used to have a radio
but no longer had one. Using the small radio that I brought in, and my
old aids I was able to tell him how loud to set the volume. In actual
fact the aids are good but again he failed to fix the second setting
which is supposed to be good for narrowing directionality in noise. I
only discovered this when I got home. I felt he pushed me into a 15
minute appointment without giving me the time to make sure that all the
settings were working correctly. The telicoil is not working either.
I will have to make another appointment to get this fixed. I wonder do
other people have this problem that the dispenser does not give any
sound reference apart from their voice?? In the case of a man with a
loud clear voice is is very hard to work out if the aids will pick up
soft sounds. I felt very annoyed about this. is . One good thing
the fitting was excellent - they fit perfectly.
| |
| Bill & Debbie 2005-08-04, 8:56 am |
| I would also be disappointed with such treatment. My dispenser sets aside
about an hour. We talk, watch TV and walk around outside as part of the
check out. You may wish to find someone else.
Bill
<niero@pnc.com.au> wrote in message
news:1123157361.921750.214520@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Hi recently had two new hearing aids fitted (Oticon Tego for which I
> paid $5250. The first fitting I was asked to listen to the dispenser's
> quite loud and sonorous voice to judge whether the aids were working
> correctly. Because I could hear his voice quite clearly (I could hear
> it clearly without the aid) I thought the aids were working correctly.
> When I got home I found that I had to turn the TV up a lot louder than
> I normally do with an aid. I put in my old aids and found I could hear
> a lot clearer with them than the new ones. I took them back two weeks
> later and he sent them off the the factory to have them checked out and
> a volume control put on. When I returned to pick them up I took with
> me a small radio to listen to. I told him that I felt it was not good
> that he did not have any noise reference for me to listen to. I told
> him that listening to his voice was not helpful to me as I needed soft
> noises as a reference. He made an excuse that he used to have a radio
> but no longer had one. Using the small radio that I brought in, and my
> old aids I was able to tell him how loud to set the volume. In actual
> fact the aids are good but again he failed to fix the second setting
> which is supposed to be good for narrowing directionality in noise. I
> only discovered this when I got home. I felt he pushed me into a 15
> minute appointment without giving me the time to make sure that all the
> settings were working correctly. The telicoil is not working either.
> I will have to make another appointment to get this fixed. I wonder do
> other people have this problem that the dispenser does not give any
> sound reference apart from their voice?? In the case of a man with a
> loud clear voice is is very hard to work out if the aids will pick up
> soft sounds. I felt very annoyed about this. is . One good thing
> the fitting was excellent - they fit perfectly.
>
| |
|
| Part, but not necessarily all, of the problem is that you saw a
dispenser rather than an audiologist. As you are, apparently, an
experienced aid user, I will dispense with the usual stuff about not
expecting too much and steep learning curves.
Also you do not indicate the nature of your hearing loss.
My advice would be to talk to hearing groups/doctors/strangers wearing
hearing aids (we like to help) and track down a good audiologist in
your area (I travelled 200 miles to get to my first one and it was
worth it).
If you find someone you will have another problem getting him to help
with an aid fitted by someone else. But it should be possible to work
around this - pay him on a time basis.
I once visited a dispenser belonging to the mob who target Australian
pensioners and, having previously dealt with an audiologist, I was
amazed - pretty much the same treatment as you experienced.
Not good enough. In fact verging on a racket.
| |
| David 2005-08-04, 10:52 pm |
| On Thu, 4 Aug 2005 12:09:21 UTC, niero@pnc.com.au wrote:
> Hi recently had two new hearing aids fitted (Oticon Tego for which I
> paid $5250. The first fitting I was asked to listen to the dispenser's
> quite loud and sonorous voice to judge whether the aids were working
> correctly. Because I could hear his voice quite clearly (I could hear
> it clearly without the aid) I thought the aids were working correctly.
> When I got home I found that I had to turn the TV up a lot louder than
> I normally do with an aid. I put in my old aids and found I could hear
> a lot clearer with them than the new ones. I took them back two weeks
> later and he sent them off the the factory to have them checked out and
> a volume control put on. When I returned to pick them up I took with
> me a small radio to listen to. I told him that I felt it was not good
> that he did not have any noise reference for me to listen to. I told
> him that listening to his voice was not helpful to me as I needed soft
> noises as a reference. He made an excuse that he used to have a radio
> but no longer had one. Using the small radio that I brought in, and my
> old aids I was able to tell him how loud to set the volume. In actual
> fact the aids are good but again he failed to fix the second setting
> which is supposed to be good for narrowing directionality in noise. I
> only discovered this when I got home. I felt he pushed me into a 15
> minute appointment without giving me the time to make sure that all the
> settings were working correctly. The telicoil is not working either.
> I will have to make another appointment to get this fixed. I wonder do
> other people have this problem that the dispenser does not give any
> sound reference apart from their voice?? In the case of a man with a
> loud clear voice is is very hard to work out if the aids will pick up
> soft sounds. I felt very annoyed about this. is . One good thing
> the fitting was excellent - they fit perfectly.
Hello,
Scold the firm that sold you those and find one that will work with
you. A good fitting will not happen in one sitting. Getting the
most out of expensive aids also takes time. As others have said,
either work with an audiologist that will take time with you or find
one that will work with you and adjust the aids every time you want
to come in.
I have had my first aids now for about five years. They are about
$2500 a pair Rexton digitals. That included 1 year loss insurance and
a couple years repair. I'm now buying the repair at $100 each for
a year at a time. My audiologist had always made time to adjust the
aids and recommended that I return once a every week or two for the
first three months. That gave me time to understand what worked and
when they didn't. We've adjusted them as needed. Recently I had
to ask for a retesting without the aids because they don't sound
right. They confirmed a slight loss of a band in one ear. I'm
in my 40s so they want to keep me happy. They admit that the older
people they treat don't always take the time to return or find
what can be made better.
Do youself a favor and ask for better service. Your ears will
greatly appreciate it. Don't stop until you are hearing all those
things that you long ago forgot even made noise.
David
| |
| Kerry Wannamaker 2005-08-05, 11:53 am |
| This problem poses a question I've had in the past but was afraid to
ask:
If I get a hearing aid from a dispenser and I find I don't like the
results and I don't like the dispenser, can't I go to an audiologist
who deals with that particular brand and get re-fitted or get it tuned
properly? I understand one has to pay for such services, but it's
better than throwing a $5,000 set of aids in the drawer, never to be
seen again. If they are BTEs it would be even easier, I would think.
On 4 Aug 2005 05:09:21 -0700, niero@pnc.com.au wrote:
>Hi recently had two new hearing aids fitted (Oticon Tego for which I
>paid $5250. The first fitting I was asked to listen to the dispenser's
>quite loud and sonorous voice to judge whether the aids were working
>correctly. Because I could hear his voice quite clearly (I could hear
>it clearly without the aid) I thought the aids were working correctly.
>When I got home I found that I had to turn the TV up a lot louder than
>I normally do with an aid. I put in my old aids and found I could hear
>a lot clearer with them than the new ones. I took them back two weeks
>later and he sent them off the the factory to have them checked out and
>a volume control put on. When I returned to pick them up I took with
>me a small radio to listen to. I told him that I felt it was not good
>that he did not have any noise reference for me to listen to. I told
>him that listening to his voice was not helpful to me as I needed soft
>noises as a reference. He made an excuse that he used to have a radio
>but no longer had one. Using the small radio that I brought in, and my
>old aids I was able to tell him how loud to set the volume. In actual
>fact the aids are good but again he failed to fix the second setting
>which is supposed to be good for narrowing directionality in noise. I
>only discovered this when I got home. I felt he pushed me into a 15
>minute appointment without giving me the time to make sure that all the
>settings were working correctly. The telicoil is not working either.
>I will have to make another appointment to get this fixed. I wonder do
>other people have this problem that the dispenser does not give any
>sound reference apart from their voice?? In the case of a man with a
>loud clear voice is is very hard to work out if the aids will pick up
>soft sounds. I felt very annoyed about this. is . One good thing
>the fitting was excellent - they fit perfectly.
| |
| erration@yahoo.com 2005-08-05, 11:53 am |
| Re: Changing fitters in midstream.
Many have done that but of course the way this sweetheart industry is
configured you will have already prepaid a few thousand for services
that you must write off to "experience."
In addition many (not all) have found that busy fitters who didn't make
the big bucks from the sale will sometimes turn down requests for
service only (or don't give their best service).
It should be clear to us by now that retailers make lousy audiologists
and audiologists are lousy choices as retailers. In my view unbundling
hardware from services would improve the industry greatly.
You should be able to pay out as much of that $2000 for services as you
want and need and you should be able to select who pay it to at any
point in the process. If this were done poor fitters would fail and
good fitters would prosper.
Of course you will find this prospect terrifies poor fitters.
| |
|
| If you can locate a good audiologist and put the problem to him there
is a reasonable chance that you can work something out. But you should
expect to pay on a time basis - at a similar rate to what a lawyer
might charge.
And, considering what is at stake, I can assure you that it is money
well spent.
| |
| Kerry Wannamaker 2005-08-06, 5:52 pm |
| Yeah, I know it would cost $$> I wasn't thinking of having the new
Audi provide services the other audi was supposed to provide.
I guess the best approach would be to pester the bad audi until you
are sure he lost money on you case and then try to find a good Audi.
That way you can at least consider that you've "punished the bad Audi.
Would that be considered a lose-lose situation ;-)
On 5 Aug 2005 08:49:46 -0700, erration@yahoo.com wrote:
>Re: Changing fitters in midstream.
>
>Many have done that but of course the way this sweetheart industry is
>configured you will have already prepaid a few thousand for services
>that you must write off to "experience."
>
>In addition many (not all) have found that busy fitters who didn't make
>the big bucks from the sale will sometimes turn down requests for
>service only (or don't give their best service).
>
>It should be clear to us by now that retailers make lousy audiologists
>and audiologists are lousy choices as retailers. In my view unbundling
>hardware from services would improve the industry greatly.
>
>You should be able to pay out as much of that $2000 for services as you
>want and need and you should be able to select who pay it to at any
>point in the process. If this were done poor fitters would fail and
>good fitters would prosper.
>
>Of course you will find this prospect terrifies poor fitters.
| |
|
| On 4 Aug 2005 05:09:21 -0700, niero@pnc.com.au wrote:
>Hi recently had two new hearing aids fitted (Oticon Tego for which I
>paid $5250......
Can you not return the aids and go elsewhere?
Mike
| |
| niero@pnc.com.au 2005-08-07, 9:02 am |
| The aids themselves are quite good - I had to bring my own radio and
pressure the audi to let me use it as a reference whereas he should
have supplied this I believe. He only channel that I have is working
quite well. I should have another channel but this is not working - I
will have to go back. What I am mad about is his sheer laziness in not
trying to give me the optimum chance of hearing at my best. If he
thinks his voice is the best reference he is totally wrong because he
speaks so loudly. I don't get a chance to test soft sounds or different
tones of sounds. I still don't know if they are working at their best.
They are a good fit however and in comparision to my old aids not too
bad at all. Yes because they are a good aid I don't want to take them
back. regards Judy
| |
| Michael Loiben 2005-08-07, 6:00 pm |
| Return the hearing aids during the trial period.
Most states have a mandatory trial period for hearing aid in which you can
return the HE's and get a refund for all except a reasonable service fee.
You should have been informed about the trial period when you ordered your
HE's. My audiologist gave me a booklet concerning the trial period.
For information contact your Attorney General Office.
<niero@pnc.com.au> wrote in message
news:1123157361.921750.214520@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Hi recently had two new hearing aids fitted (Oticon Tego for which I
> paid $5250. The first fitting I was asked to listen to the dispenser's
> quite loud and sonorous voice to judge whether the aids were working
> correctly. Because I could hear his voice quite clearly (I could hear
> it clearly without the aid) I thought the aids were working correctly.
> When I got home I found that I had to turn the TV up a lot louder than
> I normally do with an aid. I put in my old aids and found I could hear
> a lot clearer with them than the new ones. I took them back two weeks
> later and he sent them off the the factory to have them checked out and
> a volume control put on. When I returned to pick them up I took with
> me a small radio to listen to. I told him that I felt it was not good
> that he did not have any noise reference for me to listen to. I told
> him that listening to his voice was not helpful to me as I needed soft
> noises as a reference. He made an excuse that he used to have a radio
> but no longer had one. Using the small radio that I brought in, and my
> old aids I was able to tell him how loud to set the volume. In actual
> fact the aids are good but again he failed to fix the second setting
> which is supposed to be good for narrowing directionality in noise. I
> only discovered this when I got home. I felt he pushed me into a 15
> minute appointment without giving me the time to make sure that all the
> settings were working correctly. The telicoil is not working either.
> I will have to make another appointment to get this fixed. I wonder do
> other people have this problem that the dispenser does not give any
> sound reference apart from their voice?? In the case of a man with a
> loud clear voice is is very hard to work out if the aids will pick up
> soft sounds. I felt very annoyed about this. is . One good thing
> the fitting was excellent - they fit perfectly.
>
| |
|
| This extract from a link recently listed by Steve may be of interest:
Why do hearing aids cost so much?
The reasons hearing aids cost so much are:
1.
They are sold in relatively low volume (i.e. approximately 1.7
million hearing aids for some 30 million hearing impaired) are sold per
year, as compared to several million stereos.
2.
The amount of time and money spent by manufacturers on research
and development is considerable. One manufacturer claims to have spent
over twenty million dollars developing a single model.
3.
The amount of time spent by an audiologist with a patient is very
significant. Data indicate that an average of five direct contact hours
is spent during the first year a patient receives hearing aids. This
time is critical for new users, particularly to assist during the
acclimatization process. Mail order or budget clubs can afford to sell
hearing aids at lower prices because the electronic components often
are inexpensive and the hearing aids themselves are often placed on the
user with minimal (or in the case of mail order) no instructions or
fine tuning adjustments. Furthermore, the patient may be charged for
every return visit, including minor tubing change and adjustments.
Thus, in the long run the patient is likely to pay as much or even
more. Additionally, the minimum amount of training required for a
dispensing audiologist is a Masters degree while mail order or discount
centers are often staffed by sales people having minimal technical
training. Audiologists, like consumers, are concerned about keeping the
cost of hearing aids affordable. The reality is, communication is one
of the most important skills humans have. So if wearing hearing aids
allows you to resume normal activities and communicate with loved ones,
the cost becomes a lot more justifiable.
I have already expressed scepticism about the 'five contact hours' for
a first aid. I am into my third and I woul not yet have totted up five
contact hours. But it is, or should be, a time-consujming business. If
it is not t hen you are not being looked after properly.
| |
|
|
|
| In article <1123464675.601479.34420@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
"Ken" <kkerrison@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> 1.
>
> They are sold in relatively low volume (i.e. approximately 1.7
> million hearing aids for some 30 million hearing impaired) are sold per
> year, as compared to several million stereos.
Maybe more hearing impaired would buy them if they didn't cost so much!
--
Web site: http://www.slywy.com/
Message board: http://www.slywy.com/phpBB2/
Journal: http://slywy.diaryland.com/
| |
|
| In article <1123464675.601479.34420@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
"Ken" <kkerrison@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> 3.
>
> The amount of time spent by an audiologist with a patient is very
> significant. Data indicate that an average of five direct contact hours
> is spent during the first year a patient receives hearing aids.
"Very significant" compared to what?
--
Web site: http://www.slywy.com/
Message board: http://www.slywy.com/phpBB2/
Journal: http://slywy.diaryland.com/
| |
|
| On 7 Aug 2005 05:19:52 -0700, niero@pnc.com.au wrote:
>....
> They are a good fit however and in comparision to my old aids not too
>bad at all. Yes because they are a good aid I don't want to take them
>back. regards Judy
You can get the same aids elsewhere. The most important part of the
aid is the person who adjusts them.
Mike
| |
|
| On Mon, 08 Aug 2005 11:01:59 GMT, Diane
<delenn@nospamatmindspring.com> wrote:
>In article <1123464675.601479.34420@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> "Ken" <kkerrison@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>Maybe more hearing impaired would buy them if they didn't cost so much!
And more aids would be sitting in a drawer. Designing and fitting an
aid are not simple things if you want results.
Mike
| |
|
| On Mon, 08 Aug 2005 11:04:10 GMT, Diane
<delenn@nospamatmindspring.com> wrote:
>In article <1123464675.601479.34420@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> "Ken" <kkerrison@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>"Very significant" compared to what?
Compared to what you pay and the time you spend when you visit your
doctor.
Mike
| |
|
| In article <im9jf19upq2i0qfnohajjos5167f1antu7@4ax.com>,
Mike <alf500@comcast.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 08 Aug 2005 11:01:59 GMT, Diane
> <delenn@nospamatmindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
> And more aids would be sitting in a drawer. Designing and fitting an
> aid are not simple things if you want results.
I understand that, although I think it's somewhat inflated (compared to
other specialists). The point is still that every time someone quotes
how so many need hearing aids who don't have them (the ratio here is
about 15:1), they have to realise that most simply can't afford them. A
stereo costs a few hundred dollars, more if really high end. But 30
million people may not be able to cough up thousands of dollars. It's
apples to oranges.
--
Web site: http://www.slywy.com/
Message board: http://www.slywy.com/phpBB2/
Journal: http://slywy.diaryland.com/
| |
| G. M. Alf 2005-08-11, 11:57 am |
| On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 11:33:30 GMT, Diane
<delenn@nospamatmindspring.com> wrote:
>
>I understand that, although I think it's somewhat inflated (compared to
>other specialists).
You mean like contact lenses and drugs? Last time I checked the price
of a Flovent inhaler it was $137 and lasts for about a month.
>The point is still that every time someone quotes
>how so many need hearing aids who don't have them (the ratio here is
>about 15:1), they have to realise that most simply can't afford them. A
>stereo costs a few hundred dollars, more if really high end.
Same price as an inexpensive hearing aid, yet many of those people who
can't afford hearing aids will have stereos. A high end sound system
can easily cost tens of thousands of dollars and sometimes above
$100,000.
>But 30 million people may not be able to cough up thousands of dollars. It's
>apples to oranges.
They don't need to spend thousands of dollars. An inexpensive aid
properly fit can still be very effective.
I think in most situations it is a case of priorities.
Mike
| |
|
| On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 09:54:31 -0700, G. M. Alf
<totalhearing@comcast.net> wrote:
>On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 11:33:30 GMT, Diane
><delenn@nospamatmindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>You mean like contact lenses and drugs? Last time I checked the price
>of a Flovent inhaler it was $137 and lasts for about a month.
>
>
>Same price as an inexpensive hearing aid, yet many of those people who
>can't afford hearing aids will have stereos. A high end sound system
>can easily cost tens of thousands of dollars and sometimes above
>$100,000.
$100,000 for a sound system?
I'm afraid you have just lost all credibility in my opinion.
>
>
>They don't need to spend thousands of dollars. An inexpensive aid
>properly fit can still be very effective.
>
>I think in most situations it is a case of priorities.
>
>Mike
| |
| G. M. Alf 2005-08-11, 10:53 pm |
| On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 14:49:04 -0500, JimL <me@privacy.net> wrote:
> $100,000 for a sound system?
>
> I'm afraid you have just lost all credibility in my opinion.
You've really got to shop somewhere other than Walmart. Since I am
such a great guy I did some shopping for you:
Lets start with a Goldmund Eidos 38D CD/DVD player, a drop in the
bucket at $24,090.00.
Next, a Mimesis 20M Millennium D/A converter for connecting those
extra devices we wont add on at the moment; $37,400.00.
We should also will need a Mimesis 22M analog preamp; $37,400.00 +
$3,950.00 for the digital input option.
We are going to skimp a bit here and go for the Mimesis 29M stereo
power amp, 500W/channel; $20,350.00 + $2,190.00 for the digital input
option.
Lets see what we are up to so far: $125,380.00
Not too bad but we still need speakers.
We'll go for the Epilogue speaker system. There are three sections to
the system:
Epilogue 1 Satellite System, handles the high end, $24,200.00/pair.
Epilogue 2 Bass Speaker, handles the middle section of the system:
$39,600.00/2 pair.
Epilogue 3 Subwoofer System, with built in 500 W amp and active
crossover; $41,800.00.
This comes to a total of $230,980.00 for what is basically a 2 channel
CD player. We can still add a tuner and other such components.
How does that compare to high end hearing aid prices?
http://www.goldmundusa.com/productultimateline2.html
You were saying something about credibility?
Mike
| |
|
|
| Diane 2005-08-11, 10:53 pm |
| In article <kavmf1holnfebh735eqvshgs198pqphacd@4ax.com>,
G. M. Alf <totalhearing@comcast.net> wrote:
> They don't need to spend thousands of dollars. An inexpensive aid
> properly fit can still be very effective.
I dunno. I don't see too many hearing aids selling for $350 (what I paid
for my stereo).
--
Web site: http://www.slywy.com/
Message board: http://www.slywy.com/phpBB2/
Journal: http://slywy.diaryland.com/
| |
| Michael Loiben 2005-08-11, 10:53 pm |
| As a former audiophile I can tell you that all of my expensive equipment is
worthless to me. As well as my large CD & LP collection. Yes you can spend
$100,000 on a sound system, but to me at this time it would not sound better
than a $1,000 system.
My $3,000 GN Resounds are worth every penny. The key is a good hearing aid
and a GREAT audiologist. Great audiologists are difficult to find, but it
is worth the effort and expense. People on this newsgroup complain about
the price of HE's which usually includes a good deal of service. It is the
service that makes the difference. My audiologist will spend whatever time
is necessary for me to be satisfied with my HE's, of course I expect to pay
for the service of a top professional, as I would for my doctors, lawyer and
accountant. My audiologist works exclusively with a Neurotologist practice
and is on a Cochlear Implant Team.
Michael
Cogan's Syndrome
Profound Hearing Loss Left Ear
Moderate Hearing Loss Right Ear
Complete Vestibular Dysfunction
Severely Intrusive Tinnitus
"Diane" <delenn@nospamatmindspring.com> wrote in message
news:delenn-B094CE.20002611082005@news1.east.earthlink.net...
> In article <kavmf1holnfebh735eqvshgs198pqphacd@4ax.com>,
> G. M. Alf <totalhearing@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
> I dunno. I don't see too many hearing aids selling for $350 (what I paid
> for my stereo).
> --
> Web site: http://www.slywy.com/
> Message board: http://www.slywy.com/phpBB2/
> Journal: http://slywy.diaryland.com/
| |
|
| On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 01:00:25 GMT, Diane
<delenn@nospamatmindspring.com> wrote:
>In article <kavmf1holnfebh735eqvshgs198pqphacd@4ax.com>,
> G. M. Alf <totalhearing@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>I dunno. I don't see too many hearing aids selling for $350 (what I paid
>for my stereo).
Here's a pair:
http://www.healthandfitnessnews.com...ngProblems.html
Digital canal aids for $64.95/pair.
I'd like to see a pair of high end hearing aids that come anywhere
close to the $230,980.00 price of the 2 channel Goldmund CD player
system in the other message I posted.
Mike
| |
| Diane 2005-08-11, 10:53 pm |
| In article <3m1of1luamved6ucf4j1ubbpuuta7ci2pf@4ax.com>,
Mike <alf500@comcast.net> wrote:
> Here's a pair:
> http://www.healthandfitnessnews.com...ngProblems.html
>
> Digital canal aids for $64.95/pair.
>
> I'd like to see a pair of high end hearing aids that come anywhere
> close to the $230,980.00 price of the 2 channel Goldmund CD player
> system in the other message I posted.
I'd like to see the average person buy that. This is really straying
from the point, isn't it? It's not about stereos. It's about the
constantly quoted statistic that so many people who need hearing aids
don't get them, and I'm sure cost is a factor for many. A lot of people
just don't have $3,000+ to spare.
--
Web site: http://www.slywy.com/
Message board: http://www.slywy.com/phpBB2/
Journal: http://slywy.diaryland.com/
| |
|
| On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 02:32:32 GMT, Diane
<delenn@nospamatmindspring.com> wrote:
>I'd like to see the average person buy that. This is really straying
>from the point, isn't it? It's not about stereos. It's about the
>constantly quoted statistic that so many people who need hearing aids
>don't get them, and I'm sure cost is a factor for many. A lot of people
>just don't have $3,000+ to spare.
The average person couldn't afford $65?
The first point is that not all hearing aids cost $3000+ just as not
all stereos cost a quarter million $.
The second point is that hardware is only part of the cost.
Most people don't get hearing aids because they don't want them.
Mike
| |
|
| In article <6b5of15p84a2blp1cunqcc8ch5nhaod4db@4ax.com>,
Mike <alf500@comcast.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 02:32:32 GMT, Diane
> <delenn@nospamatmindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
> The average person couldn't afford $65?
People here have made the point several times that hearing aids at that
level probably wouldn't work. Most people here have mentioned figures
ranging from $3,000 to $5,000+.
--
Web site: http://www.slywy.com/
Message board: http://www.slywy.com/phpBB2/
Journal: http://slywy.diaryland.com/
| |
|
|
|
| Bear in mind that most of the $3000 to $5000 pays for the services of
the specialist who diagnoses the problem, selects a suitable aid,
configures it and follows up. While I feel the number of contact hours
quoted for audiologists (with my third set of aids and two good audies
I doubt I would have reached 5 hours total) if you compare what you
would pay for the services of any other specialist the cost is not
excessive.
On the question of whether you can afford it, I would say, again from
my own experience, that, if you are profoundly deaf a soundly-fitted
hearing aid will, simply, change your life. Most people can afford a
car which costs many times as much (and will, hardly, alter your life).
So most people can afford a hearing aid.
For those who cannot afford a car and, maybe, find it difficult to
afford a roof over their heads or food for their families then the
story may be different. In Australia and the UK the Government makes
some provision for such people.
But for the great bulk of populations in affluent societies
affordability is not a problem. Ignorance on the part of those who need
help is. And distortions in the industry (which makes you think you are
paying for a hearing aid when you are, really, paying mainly for
medical services) do not help. Nor does advertising which engenders
unrealistic expectations as to what HAs can do.
As I say, they can change your life but restoration of hearing is only
partial and it requires hard work and application to realise the
potential benefits. This idea of going to a dispenser and coming out
with 20/20 hearing is drivel.
| |
| Diane 2005-08-12, 10:51 pm |
| In article <1123896945.305428.38000@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
"Ken" <kkerrison@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> But for the great bulk of populations in affluent societies
> affordability is not a problem.
I'm not poor, but, as I said, I don't have $3,000 to spare, nor do many,
I suspect. The point is that many people could benefit from many things,
say, treatment with antidepressants by a psychiatrist (which at least
partially covered under health plans), but if they can't afford it --
even without being poor -- they can't afford it.
--
Web site: http://www.slywy.com/
Message board: http://www.slywy.com/phpBB2/
Journal: http://slywy.diaryland.com/
| |
| Diane 2005-08-12, 10:51 pm |
| In article <1123896945.305428.38000@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
"Ken" <kkerrison@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> This idea of going to a dispenser and coming out
> with 20/20 hearing is drivel.
What idea is that? No one mentioned that that I saw.
--
Web site: http://www.slywy.com/
Message board: http://www.slywy.com/phpBB2/
Journal: http://slywy.diaryland.com/
| |
|
| No. What your a saying is that, amongst the uses you see for your
income, $3,000 for hearing aids is too much. You obviously have a
computer and probably have at least one car and a home and all sorts of
other hardware and, no doubt, you spend a considerable amount on
various sorts of services.
You are not asserting that HAs cost too much. You are, simply,
describing your personal preferences as a consumer.
Consider for a moment the possibility that you are wrong - that you and
your family might benefit immeasurably if a member with severe hearing
loss had $3k or $5k spent on hearing aids rather than on a boat or a
new lawn. Or on some other relatively trivial and transitory personal
or family 'improvement'.
| |
|
| In article <1123909371.424991.175310@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"Ken" <kkerrison@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> No. What your a saying is that, amongst the uses you see for your
> income, $3,000 for hearing aids is too much. You obviously have a
> computer and probably have at least one car and a home
Well, thanks for the assumptions. No home (if you mean ownership), no
equity, and no car. Modest savings. Take public transportation.
> and all sorts of
> other hardware and, no doubt, you spend a considerable amount on
> various sorts of services.
Define "considerable amount." You mean the $100 spa massages I don't get?
Thanks for telling me what "I'm" saying. "I'm" saying exactly what I
said: Supposedly 30 million have hearing loss, and most don't have
hearing aids. "I'm" saying that I suspect cost (and lack of coverage) is
a pretty big part of why. I never even claimed that was my reason.
Thanks for playing.
--
Web site: http://www.slywy.com/
Message board: http://www.slywy.com/phpBB2/
Journal: http://slywy.diaryland.com/
| |
| erration@yahoo.com 2005-08-13, 11:52 am |
| A dialog about the importance of unbundling of hearing aids goods and
services.
"I must say though I am thankful for my Audiologist whose name is Dr.
Kaner of Brooklyn, NY. I must say the HA's cost me more than an arm an
a leg for which I didn't even have the monies to begin with. However,
the only way I received HA's in the first place was b/c I was laid off
and received a very nice severance pay. My HA's were $1,500.00 a piece
in 2001. Then I moved to the Diva Sensor HA's which was a whopping
$3,000 a HA!!! Again, by the grace of God it was paid for by my
employer...well actually it was a loan they provided me. Then do you
know that I was laid off that job. So out of the $6k I only paid $1,000
and was forgiven for the remainder of the loan!
Anyway, I truely cannot see the fuss regarding audiologist. My
audiologist is great. I do wish that he had some time of program to
finance the purchase of the hearing aids though. Because if you do not
have the monies up front, you don't get them. I must say though he was
willing to finance them for me where "my" credit card would be charged
a specific amount on a monthly basis, but fortunately for me, we did
not have to take that avenue. "
REPLY:
Your $3000 Senso Divas cost your dealer about $1235 each. So you gave
Dr. Kaner $3530 for his gross markup.
Ed could tell you better what a typical markup is for high end
electronics but discount distribution channels might (if they were
available) might sell you the same devices for about $1800 each. This
means you paid $2400 in advance for services alone (and for the first
year alone!).
How many hours did those services take? What is the effective hourly
rate you have ended up paying Dr. Kaner?
The fact that your are satisfied with the results is certainly
positive.
And the fact that someone else (indirectly your fellow New Yorkers)
ended up footing most of the bill certainly made it less painful for
you. But I'm sure they would thank you if next time you were more
careful with their money.
But the truth is you probably had little option but to accept Dr.
Kaner's terms. You did not have the option the buy the instruments
unbundled through a good retail source and then pay for Dr. Kaner's
services (at say $80 -$100/visit) only as you need them. So no one can
blame you for the route you took.
But the "fuss" you fail to understand is justified:
1. The fact that reasonable unbundled hardware and service options are
withheld from HOH customers caused you to waste maybe $2000 of
somebody's money. Next time it may be your own money.
2. The fact that you obtained good service from Dr. Kaner is great. You
were fortunate. But far too many don't get good service at all and to
make matters worse they already paid in advance (in your case $2400?)
for service. Other audies are often not interested in non-sales service
so they are often up the creek without a paddle to say the very least.
Anyone who fails to see this as a problem hasn't really looked at it or
perhaps doesn't want to.
REPLY:
said it before and I'll say it again: Slowly but surely, the forces of
American enterprise will break down the artificial Government
restraints to fair and open markets for hearing aids.
AH, Genesis, and others on the Internet represent but a small fraction
of the avalanche that is coming. Soon WalMart, Sams and the big drug
chains will join the highly sucessful Costco hearing aid operation.
Several national chain dispensers are growing like mad. Soon Audi's
will be selling what's called derivative product....just like other
industries, such as bedding and TV's. Derivative Products are
substantially identical to standard product sold by mass merchants but
have a couple of exclusive bells and whistles to differentiate them.
(Note: Costco is already the second largest purveyor of hearing aids
just below the USA Veterans Administration)
Just like the eye glass industry, today you have a choice. That is a
choice of dispensers. You can obtain standard mass produced glasses at
any big drug store....or you can go to the mass merchants,like Costco,
or the chain optometrists or buy on the internet or go to an MD.
Audi's will be busier then ever because this movement will broaden the
market and because of the huge number of boomers entering the age group
that needs HA's. They will continue to service those hoh with
severe/profound loss, those with special problems, those elderly that
are not up to date, children, and the upper middle class that want hand
holding services.
The Genie is already out of the bottle. Ed
REPLY
If you think about it when Costco adds a little hearing room to a large
store the incremental increase in overhead is very small. The resident
audie(s) handle a lot of customers so they probably don't plan to spend
much time on each one and their prices show they don't charge the
customers a lot in advance for the services. So Costco while providing
service, in a way has begun to approach the status functionally and
economically of an unbundled retail outlet.
What's still missing is the independent audie who is very highly
equipped and truly a master fitter, and who specializes in making a
business in added-value after-market services for Costco customers. As
Ed implies as things progress we may see that.
If these after-market super-fitters were available, a user who
wanted/needed to achieve the very best performance would pay the expert
to provide the extra work without forfeiting a huge bundle in pre-paid
services. And those who are a simple fit would just need the initial
Costco service.
The availability of such after-market services would eventually allow
Costco/Walmart/etc. to reduce services to a minimum and prices could go
lower.
As Ed says the Genie may already be out of the bottle.
REPLY
(Point was advanced that Audies deserve to charge what the market will
bear because of their education.)
REPLY
But why would you say that retailing hearing aids is a good use of your
talent?
Looking at extremes help illustrate the point:
Suppose the guy detailing your car asked for $500. When you objected he
might say:
"Hey after graduation from college I spent 4 years getting this law
degree. I only do one car a day. I work 200 days a year. I'm in debt up
to my ears from tuition loans. And you begrudge me $100,000/year?"
You might say "I have no problem paying you $500 for doing well what
you're really trained to do. But I won't pay you legal practitioner
rates for cleaning my car - even if it does take you all day."
But if enough people paid him well for his car cleaning he may never
rise to his calling. Paying him just as well for the wrong thing was
bad for the customer and bad for the professional. Whenever he did
practice law how well would you think he would perform?
If you never sold a hearing aid but prescribed them and then worked
with the user, then you would be focusing on audiology not margins. You
would build your practice like a MD does and strive to maintain a full
waiting room. You would work your tail off. Because of your reputation
retailers would refer patients to you. Because of your reputation,
non-performing audies would lose clients to you.
You would bill your clients for your time and let them decide how much
of your time the want to buy just as they do now with MDs - balancing
what they would like with what they can afford. If MDs can make money
this way, you can make money this way.
Now healthy incentives, and the normal checks and balances would be in
play.
Given arrangements like this, costs may be lower for some users but
higher for others. But users would be in control of their own treatment
and audies would be rewarded for performance. Lazy, non-performing
audies would fail (as I'm sure you would want them to.)
It would be hard to claim that an arrangement like this would make
things less expensive for users. They would pay less for the hardware
but then pay for the professional help they need. It may end up costing
more for some of us. It would however make things a whole lot more cost
effective and that's what's missing.
| |
|
|
I like the way you talk.
On 13 Aug 2005 08:27:46 -0700, erration@yahoo.com wrote:
>A dialog about the importance of unbundling of hearing aids goods and
>services.
>
>"I must say though I am thankful for my Audiologist whose name is Dr.
>Kaner of Brooklyn, NY. I must say the HA's cost me more than an arm an
>a leg for which I didn't even have the monies to begin with. However,
>the only way I received HA's in the first place was b/c I was laid off
>and received a very nice severance pay. My HA's were $1,500.00 a piece
>in 2001. Then I moved to the Diva Sensor HA's which was a whopping
>$3,000 a HA!!! Again, by the grace of God it was paid for by my
>employer...well actually it was a loan they provided me. Then do you
>know that I was laid off that job. So out of the $6k I only paid $1,000
>and was forgiven for the remainder of the loan!
>
>Anyway, I truely cannot see the fuss regarding audiologist. My
>audiologist is great. I do wish that he had some time of program to
>finance the purchase of the hearing aids though. Because if you do not
>have the monies up front, you don't get them. I must say though he was
>willing to finance them for me where "my" credit card would be charged
>a specific amount on a monthly basis, but fortunately for me, we did
>not have to take that avenue. "
>
>REPLY:
>
>Your $3000 Senso Divas cost your dealer about $1235 each. So you gave
>Dr. Kaner $3530 for his gross markup.
>
>Ed could tell you better what a typical markup is for high end
>electronics but discount distribution channels might (if they were
>available) might sell you the same devices for about $1800 each. This
>means you paid $2400 in advance for services alone (and for the first
>year alone!).
>
>How many hours did those services take? What is the effective hourly
>rate you have ended up paying Dr. Kaner?
>
>The fact that your are satisfied with the results is certainly
>positive.
>
>And the fact that someone else (indirectly your fellow New Yorkers)
>ended up footing most of the bill certainly made it less painful for
>you. But I'm sure they would thank you if next time you were more
>careful with their money.
>
>But the truth is you probably had little option but to accept Dr.
>Kaner's terms. You did not have the option the buy the instruments
>unbundled through a good retail source and then pay for Dr. Kaner's
>services (at say $80 -$100/visit) only as you need them. So no one can
>blame you for the route you took.
>
>But the "fuss" you fail to understand is justified:
>
>1. The fact that reasonable unbundled hardware and service options are
>withheld from HOH customers caused you to waste maybe $2000 of
>somebody's money. Next time it may be your own money.
>
>2. The fact that you obtained good service from Dr. Kaner is great. You
>were fortunate. But far too many don't get good service at all and to
>make matters worse they already paid in advance (in your case $2400?)
>for service. Other audies are often not interested in non-sales service
>so they are often up the creek without a paddle to say the very least.
>
>Anyone who fails to see this as a problem hasn't really looked at it or
>perhaps doesn't want to.
>
>REPLY:
>
> said it before and I'll say it again: Slowly but surely, the forces of
>American enterprise will break down the artificial Government
>restraints to fair and open markets for hearing aids.
>
>AH, Genesis, and others on the Internet represent but a small fraction
>of the avalanche that is coming. Soon WalMart, Sams and the big drug
>chains will join the highly sucessful Costco hearing aid operation.
>Several national chain dispensers are growing like mad. Soon Audi's
>will be selling what's called derivative product....just like other
>industries, such as bedding and TV's. Derivative Products are
>substantially identical to standard product sold by mass merchants but
>have a couple of exclusive bells and whistles to differentiate them.
>(Note: Costco is already the second largest purveyor of hearing aids
>just below the USA Veterans Administration)
>
>Just like the eye glass industry, today you have a choice. That is a
>choice of dispensers. You can obtain standard mass produced glasses at
>any big drug store....or you can go to the mass merchants,like Costco,
>or the chain optometrists or buy on the internet or go to an MD.
>
>Audi's will be busier then ever because this movement will broaden the
>market and because of the huge number of boomers entering the age group
>that needs HA's. They will continue to service those hoh with
>severe/profound loss, those with special problems, those elderly that
>are not up to date, children, and the upper middle class that want hand
>holding services.
>
>The Genie is already out of the bottle. Ed
>
>REPLY
>
>If you think about it when Costco adds a little hearing room to a large
>store the incremental increase in overhead is very small. The resident
>audie(s) handle a lot of customers so they probably don't plan to spend
>much time on each one and their prices show they don't charge the
>customers a lot in advance for the services. So Costco while providing
>service, in a way has begun to approach the status functionally and
>economically of an unbundled retail outlet.
>
>What's still missing is the independent audie who is very highly
>equipped and truly a master fitter, and who specializes in making a
>business in added-value after-market services for Costco customers. As
>Ed implies as things progress we may see that.
>
>If these after-market super-fitters were available, a user who
>wanted/needed to achieve the very best performance would pay the expert
>to provide the extra work without forfeiting a huge bundle in pre-paid
>services. And those who are a simple fit would just need the initial
>Costco service.
>
>The availability of such after-market services would eventually allow
>Costco/Walmart/etc. to reduce services to a minimum and prices could go
>lower.
>
>As Ed says the Genie may already be out of the bottle.
>
>REPLY
>
>(Point was advanced that Audies deserve to charge what the market will
>bear because of their education.)
>
>REPLY
>
>But why would you say that retailing hearing aids is a good use of your
>talent?
>
>Looking at extremes help illustrate the point:
>Suppose the guy detailing your car asked for $500. When you objected he
>might say:
>"Hey after graduation from college I spent 4 years getting this law
>degree. I only do one car a day. I work 200 days a year. I'm in debt up
>to my ears from tuition loans. And you begrudge me $100,000/year?"
>
>You might say "I have no problem paying you $500 for doing well what
>you're really trained to do. But I won't pay you legal practitioner
>rates for cleaning my car - even if it does take you all day."
>
>But if enough people paid him well for his car cleaning he may never
>rise to his calling. Paying him just as well for the wrong thing was
>bad for the customer and bad for the professional. Whenever he did
>practice law how well would you think he would perform?
>
>If you never sold a hearing aid but prescribed them and then worked
>with the user, then you would be focusing on audiology not margins. You
>would build your practice like a MD does and strive to maintain a full
>waiting room. You would work your tail off. Because of your reputation
>retailers would refer patients to you. Because of your reputation,
>non-performing audies would lose clients to you.
>
>You would bill your clients for your time and let them decide how much
>of your time the want to buy just as they do now with MDs - balancing
>what they would like with what they can afford. If MDs can make money
>this way, you can make money this way.
>
>Now healthy incentives, and the normal checks and balances would be in
>play.
>
>Given arrangements like this, costs may be lower for some users but
>higher for others. But users would be in control of their own treatment
>and audies would be rewarded for performance. Lazy, non-performing
>audies would fail (as I'm sure you would want them to.)
>
>It would be hard to claim that an arrangement like this would make
>things less expensive for users. They would pay less for the hardware
>but then pay for the professional help they need. It may end up costing
>more for some of us. It would however make things a whole lot more cost
>effective and that's what's missing.
| |
|
| On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 10:44:49 GMT, Diane
<delenn@nospamatmindspring.com> wrote:
>In article <1123909371.424991.175310@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> "Ken" <kkerrison@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>Well, thanks for the assumptions. No home (if you mean ownership), no
>equity, and no car. Modest savings. Take public transportation.
>
>
>Define "considerable amount." You mean the $100 spa massages I don't get?
>
>Thanks for telling me what "I'm" saying. "I'm" saying exactly what I
>said: Supposedly 30 million have hearing loss, and most don't have
>hearing aids. "I'm" saying that I suspect cost (and lack of coverage) is
>a pretty big part of why. I never even claimed that was my reason.
>
>Thanks for playing.
Just in case you are wondering, Diane, you have a firm grasp on
reality. Which is more than I can say for the 'others' who monopolize
this group.
| |
|
| On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 10:36:29 GMT, Diane
<delenn@nospamatmindspring.com> wrote:
>In article <6b5of15p84a2blp1cunqcc8ch5nhaod4db@4ax.com>,
> Mike <alf500@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>Have you asked "most people"?
I have asked several thousand. There are a few who actually are
obsessed with hearing aids and look forward to their next new set, but
they are in the minority.
Mike
| |
|
| On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 10:36:07 GMT, Diane
<delenn@nospamatmindspring.com> wrote:
>People here have made the point several times that hearing aids at that
>level probably wouldn't work. Most people here have mentioned figures
>ranging from $3,000 to $5,000+.
I see you haven't done any shopping yourself. Siemens makes a very
nice affordable aid called the Infinity Pro. It is digital and has a
directional mic system, sells for around $900 each. It's not top of
the line but works well for a lot of people.
The $64.95/pair or $54.95/pair (original system) has a 30 day return
policy and for $9.95 extra you get a lifetime damage replacement
warranty. IF they worked for you (can't tell till you try) they'd be
a very good deal. Chances are they wont but you wouldn't be out
anything other than the shipping.
Mike
| |
|
| On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 11:08:03 -0500, JimL <me@privacy.net> wrote:
> Just in case you are wondering, Diane, you have a firm grasp on
>reality. Which is more than I can say for the 'others' who monopolize
>this group.
Ken has a firm grasp on reality and states it very well. I think
Diane will do ok once she stops complaining and actually does some
shopping for herself.
By the way, when are you going to order that Goldmund system?
Mike
| |
|
| Point 1: The root of the problem (dispensing hearing aids in a fair
and competative manner) is in the artificial classification of hearing
aids (HA's) as medical devices subject to all sorts of restrictive
Federal and State regulations that in effect result in an
uncompetative market and major impediments to the user.
This results in most Audie's selling only one or two brands because
the manufacturers offer major discounts for each five units ordered
each month. So most Audie's recommend the brand they make the most
money on. Fortunately there are only slight differences among the
brands as most mfg's buy the chip set from the same fabricators. So a
hoh (hard of hearing) person with moderate or semi-severe sensineaural
loss (the most common type of high frequency loss) can use almost any
of the leading brands satisfactorily.
Point 2: Modern fitting software has become so good that the first
fitting is fairly close. From that point on tweaking is all that is
necessary. (this applies to most losses). Of course there are those
unfortunate hoh that have severe/profound/limited dynamic range
problems, that calls for a truly professional Audie and lots of time.
Point 3: If HA's were sold subject to market forces the price would
probably be down substantially and volume would soar. If the Asian
mfg's were to enter the market prices could possibly be a third of
their present cost.
Point 4: If the FDA and States were out of the way, the 30 million or
so people that need aids would have a choice of buying them in a drug
store (over the counter), or buying from a discounter/dispenser, or
over the Internet, or seeking professional dispensers.
Write your Congressman......most hoh are to put it bluntly being
ripped-off. Ed
On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 11:04:04 -0500, JimL <me@privacy.net> wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> I like the way you talk.
>
>
>
>On 13 Aug 2005 08:27:46 -0700, erration@yahoo.com wrote:
>
| |
|
| I am puzzled by your post. What is the nature of your hearing loss? I
cannot imagine anyone who has been through the system seeing fitting of
hearing aids as equivalent to trying glasses in a drug store to find a
set that works.
I have been following this group for a decade or so and I still learn
of new variations in the forms deafness can take.
Hearing aids ARE medical devices - protheses.
| |
| erration@yahoo.com 2005-08-20, 8:52 am |
| Hearing aids like other devices that recreate sound are just designed
to work with human ears - all human ears. Everyone's hearing is
different yet they can use the same hearing aids adjusted to suit.
Stereos are not prothesis nor are telephones nor are iPods. Some audio
electronics have adjustments that would put the most complex DSP
hearing aid to shame. Hearing aid are just audio electronics - no
more. Declaring them to be medical devices is little more than a sham
that has created and protected a false industry.
Ed is correct. Fitter help should be offered separately from the
retail selling of audio devices. Audiologists should focus on
audiology not electronics retailing. Variations of deafness is the
business of ENTs and in some cases Audiologists (it has nothing to do
with the retailing of audio equipment such as hearing aids).
And like any audio device the owner needs to be able to make
adjustments to suit her/him not to suit a typically inept fitter
guessing what the user should hear and (as we have seen repeatedly)
flying by the seat of his pants. Fitters should be used when needed, as
needed and only if in the judgement of the user they continue to earn
their fees. Slapping a mandatory multi-thousand dollar prepayment of
doubtful fitting services on the hard of hearing is a lobby driven
travesty.
| |
|
| The only thing in your post I agree with is that audiologists should
not be in the business of selling hearing aids. Most of them would deny
that they are. But it is a fact that, if they don't sell hearing aids
then they don't eat.
But that is a different issue. Who else is going to evaluate your
deafness and recommend a hardware solution?
ENTs have a role. But some of them don't know much about hearing aids.
I had the misfortune to be diagnosed by such a one and delayed
contacting an audilogist for about five years because the ENT was
sceptical about HAs - he was wrong in my case.
One day HAs such as you describe, where you can configure them
yourself, may become available. But I repeat my earlier point about the
diversity of hearing problems.
And trying glasses in a drug store will not damage your eyes. But is it
possible for you to damage your remaining hearing with misguided
attempts to bypass expert help. Suppose, like me, you have no hearing
above, say, 1400, and you blast your head with sound to attempt to hear
a 2000 note. Your remaining hair cells would have a rough time. And, no
matter what volume you apply, you still won;t hear above 1400.
| |
| Peter Weis 2005-08-20, 8:52 am |
| Ed wrote:
> Point 1: The root of the problem (dispensing hearing aids in a fair
> and competative manner) is in the artificial classification of hearing
> aids (HA's) as medical devices subject to all sorts of restrictive
> Federal and State regulations that in effect result in an
> uncompetative market and major impediments to the user.
>
> This results in most Audie's selling only one or two brands because
> the manufacturers offer major discounts for each five units ordered
> each month. So most Audie's recommend the brand they make the most
> money on. Fortunately there are only slight differences among the
> brands as most mfg's buy the chip set from the same fabricators. So a
> hoh (hard of hearing) person with moderate or semi-severe sensineaural
> loss (the most common type of high frequency loss) can use almost any
> of the leading brands satisfactorily.
I fail see how the highly regulated market leads to audiologists
recommending the brand that allow to earn more money.
In my eyes it also happens in countries where hearing aid dispensing is
not regulated, and it also happen to goods not being classified as
medical devices.
> Point 3: If HA's were sold subject to market forces the price would
> probably be down substantially and volume would soar. If the Asian
> mfg's were to enter the market prices could possibly be a third of
> their present cost.
If you take a view over the world's hearing aid markets, this doesn't
hold. Where market forces rule freely, you see crap electronics being
sold in casings from expensive brands. So people think they are buying
multi-channel digital while they get old analog with practically no
tweaking possibilities. I have examples fom my time in the industry.
Asian manufaturers have been in hearing aids. Sony pulled out, Panasonic
is now branding western products. Rion is still there.
Chinese hearing aids are still of an appauling quality. But it might
change over the next ten years.
The main factor in hearing aid retail prices is the cost level of the
clinics. Hearing aids retailed in the US are more expensive than hearing
aids retailed in India because americans earn more money than indians
do. The american audie expects a higher wage, setting up a clinic is
more expensive, transporting a silent cabin is more expensive.
> Point 4: If the FDA and States were out of the way, the 30 million or
> so people that need aids would have a choice of buying them in a drug
> store (over the counter), or buying from a discounter/dispenser, or
> over the Internet, or seeking professional dispensers.
You could also suggest different schemes. Pay for the services and pay
for the instrument separately.
250 bucks for the hearing evaluation, 250 bucks for each fitting
session, 100 bucks for each informal intruction session and 1000 bucks
for the hearing aid.
best regards
eter
| |
| Peter Weis 2005-08-20, 8:52 am |
| erration@yahoo.com wrote:
> Hearing aids like other devices that recreate sound are just designed
> to work with human ears - all human ears.
That is quite naive. There is a rather big difference between normal and
impaired hearing.
Hearing aids do not work well with normal hearing. If you are in anyway
skilled in audio engineering, I'd be happy to challenge you with some of
the problems faced by hearing aid engineers. If you can point out better
and cheaper solutions, you have a glorious future ahead of you.
> Some audio
> electronics have adjustments that would put the most complex DSP
> hearing aid to shame.
These audio electronics are quite expensive, just as expensive as DSP
hearing aids.
best regards
Peter
| |
| Ed Meyer 2005-08-20, 10:51 pm |
| Peter and all: About glasses in a drug store. Well if you pick
out a -4 Diopter and you need a +1 diopter you will get headaches and
perhaps walk into a highway and kill yourself. It's true that if you
blast your cochlea with overload it can damage your ears.....and the
same is true of Walkman and iPods or a stereo. But, Nature being so
wise has provided mamals with nerves that register pain in most cases
of blasting.
If the market was unimpeded by gov't regs and hearing aids were sold
over-the counter don't you think the mfg would enclose warnings and
all kinds of instructions to self adjust them. Just like an auto
instruction book is filled with warnings.
I am sorry but as an audio pro, I see nothing mysterious about a mike
feeding a adjustable amplifier into a tiny speaker. It's been done
for 50 years in the broadcast industry, the sound industry, the movie
industry, and the HiFi (now stereo) industry. Because people are vain
the aids must be small and this is a challange for the
designer....both size and limited battery power.
I have a HiPro and Noah and all the mfg's software and I do my own
programming....It's a breeze because the software is designed for
simplicity to fit the needs of non-technical people called
Audiologists and Dispensers. By the way I am unfortunately one of
the problem cases that ENT and Audies have trouble with. That is, I
have severe/profound cookie-bite with little dynamic range. However,
the vast majority of the 30 million USA hoh are simply SN high
frequency age related cases. Do a little compression/expansion and
slope work and they are happy.
It's snake oil.....smoke and mirrors......Hearing Aids are just
that,,,,,, a device that selectively amplifies sound, nothing more and
nothing less....in the hands of an idiot they could be coaxed into
causing pain and damage, just like a kitchen knife. Ed
On at, 20 Aug 2005 08:23:31 +0200, Peter Weis <p.weis@email.dk.slet>
wrote:
>Ed wrote:
>
>I fail see how the highly regulated market leads to audiologists
>recommending the brand that allow to earn more money.
>
>In my eyes it also happens in countries where hearing aid dispensing is
>not regulated, and it also happen to goods not being classified as
>medical devices.
>
>
>If you take a view over the world's hearing aid markets, this doesn't
>hold. Where market forces rule freely, you see crap electronics being
>sold in casings from expensive brands. So people think they are buying
>multi-channel digital while they get old analog with practically no
>tweaking possibilities. I have examples fom my time in the industry.
>
>Asian manufaturers have been in hearing aids. Sony pulled out, Panasonic
>is now branding western products. Rion is still there.
>Chinese hearing aids are still of an appauling quality. But it might
>change over the next ten years.
>
>The main factor in hearing aid retail prices is the cost level of the
>clinics. Hearing aids retailed in the US are more expensive than hearing
>aids retailed in India because americans earn more money than indians
>do. The american audie expects a higher wage, setting up a clinic is
>more expensive, transporting a silent cabin is more expensive.
>
>
>You could also suggest different schemes. Pay for the services and pay
>for the instrument separately.
>250 bucks for the hearing evaluation, 250 bucks for each fitting
>session, 100 bucks for each informal intruction session and 1000 bucks
>for the hearing aid.
>
>best regards
>eter
| |
|
| I said that trying glasses in a drug store could not damage your eyes
but that experimenting with your hearing could cause harm. And the
whole point is that, for the deaf, the residual hearing is that much
more precious.
True - excessive noise at frequencies you can hear will cause pain -
but maybe too late. And you may turn the volume control the wrong way
and make things worse.
Also, in the example I gave, blasting with sound at 2000 (which could
never be heard anyway - no hair cells) might, nevrtheless, cause damage
to lower frequency cells which still work (worked).
And you have, finally, introduced some of the other factors (only a few
of them) which are embodied in hearing aid technology. It is more than
selective amplification. A lot more.
And you, with your obvious knowledge of hearing and hi-fi sound, are
taking a big risk in advocating behaviour to be adopted by people
without these advantages.
(Though I find myself tempted to suggest that you pursue your own
experiements urgently while you still know everything - no - I withdraw
that - uncalled for sarcasm).
| |
| Ed Meyer 2005-08-23, 5:53 pm |
| The fact is that only a small percentage of the hoh wear hearing
aids.
Why is that? You who defend the status quo, should look into your
hearts. This artificial distributon system is designed to protect and
shield the industry from the forces of competition.....no more no
less. The false premise is that masses of people could inflict self
damage if aids were sold by non-pro's is to put it mildly so patently
phony as to be ludicrous
As a result of these restrictions in the USA, only about three
million hoh can afford hearing aids. The other 27 million or so
mostly elderly, do without.
ENT's and Audie's have a place and that place is the professional
appraisal of the patients loss. Not the retailing of electronic
amplifiers.
By the way, I am asking the FDA and the States to pass a law
restricting the sale of kitchen knives because some idiots might
damage themselves.....also stereo's and iPods because some people will
play them too loud. Come on do you actually believe that hearing
aids are anymore dangerous to their owners than knives stereo's, or
guns.
Let's classify knives, guns, stereo's, iPods as medical devices and
stop those hundreds of millions of citizens from self inflicting
serious damage. Ed
On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 08:23:31 +0200, Peter Weis <p.weis@email.dk.slet>
wrote:
>Ed wrote:
>
>I fail see how the highly regulated market leads to audiologists
>recommending the brand that allow to earn more money.
>
>In my eyes it also happens in countries where hearing aid dispensing is
>not regulated, and it also happen to goods not being classified as
>medical devices.
>
>
>If you take a view over the world's hearing aid markets, this doesn't
>hold. Where market forces rule freely, you see crap electronics being
>sold in casings from expensive brands. So people think they are buying
>multi-channel digital while they get old analog with practically no
>tweaking possibilities. I have examples fom my time in the industry.
>
>Asian manufaturers have been in hearing aids. Sony pulled out, Panasonic
>is now branding western products. Rion is still there.
>Chinese hearing aids are still of an appauling quality. But it might
>change over the next ten years.
>
>The main factor in hearing aid retail prices is the cost level of the
>clinics. Hearing aids retailed in the US are more expensive than hearing
>aids retailed in India because americans earn more money than indians
>do. The american audie expects a higher wage, setting up a clinic is
>more expensive, transporting a silent cabin is more expensive.
>
>
>You could also suggest different schemes. Pay for the services and pay
>for the instrument separately.
>250 bucks for the hearing evaluation, 250 bucks for each fitting
>session, 100 bucks for each informal intruction session and 1000 bucks
>for the hearing aid.
>
>best regards
>eter
| |
| ardway 2005-08-23, 10:56 pm |
| Gosh, what a sourpuss!
I prefer to trust people than to assume they are part of some evil
scheme to defraud me. If they do, so what? We both learn something. I
trust the audiologist I work with, she is a gem. Private practice
audiologists are worth their weight in gold to an old man like me. ENTs
are trying to find another way to operate on you, plus they know next to
nothing about hearing aids. I suspect Ed Meyer has M.D. after his name,
with an little extra FACS and member of the Otolaryngology Society as
well. He's just drumming up business for himself and his cohorts.
Seen it all before.
C. Ardway
>Ed Meyer wrote:
> The fact is that only a small percentage of the hoh wear hearing
> aids.
> Why is that? You who defend the status quo, should look into your
> hearts. This artificial distributon system is designed to protect and
> shield the industry from the forces of competition.....no more no
> less. The false premise is that masses of people could inflict self
> damage if aids were sold by non-pro's is to put it mildly so patently
> phony as to be ludicrous
>
> As a result of these restrictions in the USA, only about three
> million hoh can afford hearing aids. The other 27 million or so
> mostly elderly, do without.
>
> ENT's and Audie's have a place and that place is the professional
> appraisal of the patients loss. Not the retailing of electronic
> amplifiers.
>
> By the way, I am asking the FDA and the States to pass a law
> restricting the sale of kitchen knives because some idiots might
> damage themselves.....also stereo's and iPods because some people will
> play them too loud. Come on do you actually believe that hearing
> aids are anymore dangerous to their owners than knives stereo's, or
> guns.
>
> Let's classify knives, guns, stereo's, iPods as medical devices and
> stop those hundreds of millions of citizens from self inflicting
> serious damage. Ed
>
> On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 08:23:31 +0200, Peter Weis <p.weis@email.dk.slet>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
|
| |
|
|