Slashdot Mirror
Hearing Aid Business Under Pressure From Consumer Electronics
HughPickens.com writes: There's good news for aging Americans who may have damaged their hearing by attending one too many rock concerts when they were young. Andrew Pollack writes at the NYT that the consumer electronics industry is encroaching on the hearing aid business, offering products that are far less expensive and available without the involvement of audiologists or other professionals. The new devices are forcing a re-examination of the entire system for providing hearing aids, which critics say is too costly and cumbersome, hindering access to devices vital for the growing legions of older Americans. "The audiology profession is obviously scared, for good reason, right now," says Abram Bailey.
Hearing aids cost an average of nearly $2,400 each, or close to $5,000 a pair, according to a White House advisory group, and Medicare does not pay for them, nor do most insurers. By contrast, the consumer devices are not regulated and sell for a few hundred dollars apiece, at most. Hearing aid manufacturers say that diagnosing and treating hearing loss is too complex for consumers to do using consumer devices, without the aid of a professional. But sound amplifiers have been around for years and they are growing in sophistication, taking advantage of signal processing chips developed for phones, Bluetooth headsets and computers. The devices include the Smart Listening System from Soundhawk, which sells at $400 for a single ear; the Bean from Etymotic Research, at $300; the CS50+ from Sound World Solutions at $350; and the Crystal Ear from NeutronicEar, at $545. "To me it was a reasonable investment to experiment with," says Ira Dolich, 81, who bought the Soundhawk device, which he can adjust by himself using his smartphone. "I've been pretty pleased with it," he said.
Hearing aids cost an average of nearly $2,400 each, or close to $5,000 a pair, according to a White House advisory group, and Medicare does not pay for them, nor do most insurers. By contrast, the consumer devices are not regulated and sell for a few hundred dollars apiece, at most. Hearing aid manufacturers say that diagnosing and treating hearing loss is too complex for consumers to do using consumer devices, without the aid of a professional. But sound amplifiers have been around for years and they are growing in sophistication, taking advantage of signal processing chips developed for phones, Bluetooth headsets and computers. The devices include the Smart Listening System from Soundhawk, which sells at $400 for a single ear; the Bean from Etymotic Research, at $300; the CS50+ from Sound World Solutions at $350; and the Crystal Ear from NeutronicEar, at $545. "To me it was a reasonable investment to experiment with," says Ira Dolich, 81, who bought the Soundhawk device, which he can adjust by himself using his smartphone. "I've been pretty pleased with it," he said.
Congress will be banning cheap hearing devices. That's the American way.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
But wait... these are being used as medical devices! You can't make them better and cheaper over time, the government regulators say so!!!
The party of stupid and the party of evil get together and do something both stupid and evil, then call it bipartisan.
Analog is still better. Lots of older people complain the digital hearing aids suck even after tweaking and all that. I have had my (fir/1)st digital bone conduction hearing aid since last summer. I hate it. :(
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
A lot of the "consumer devices" nowadays have very poor audio quality.
So what? If you can pay $200 for a hearing test, $200 for a consumer aid, and have a bad consumer aid that works for $400 instead of NOT BEING ABLE TO PAY FOR a high-quality hearing aid, it's still a net win for you and for society as a whole.
I believe this is because diagnosis is important.
Just stuffing an amplifier in your ear is problematic.
Conductive hearing loss can (and should be) medically or surgically corrected, where possible, rather than just amplifying the input noises.
Sensorineural hearing loss are cause by problems in the cochlea and inner ear. This type of hearing loss can result in "band pass" loss, and in the most profound cases, is treatable with implants, if there is still functional cochlear structure. You don't want to treat it with amplification, since you don't want to amplify the bands in which there is no loss, since you'll cause damage there. Tinnitus generally falls into this bucket as well (your *really* do not want to amplify within the bands where you have that!).
Mixed hearing loss is a combination of the first two; it's typically cause by overpressure, such as being near a load explosion or other structurally damaging event that results in both conductive and sensorineural deficits.
A CAPD (Central Auditory Processing Disorder) hearing loss means that the mechanical system are generally intact, but that the information processing doesn't happen within the brain. IT's like having an audio processing system, and yanking the DSP out of it.
Personally, if I had partial damage, I'm going to spend the money on the expensive hearing aides. If I have some function, there's no reason to cook it by amplifying the frequencies that are actually getting through, rather than those which are not.
And even if you amplify only the frequencies that are getting mechanically dropped -- assuming it's conductive loss from damage, scar tissue, etc. -- you should be careful of harmonics, since those frequencies can additively lead to a problem as well.
Put it another way.... say you needed an artificial arm ...would you probably wouldn't run down to the nearest street fair and buy a "Toysmith 6135 Galaxy Grabber Robot Claw", merely because it was a cheaper commercially available alternative.
The days of just an amplifier are pretty well long gone. The best ones do a number of things:
1) Multi-band compression. Compression is reducing the difference between the highest and lowest sounds, and a multi-band compressor does it different amounts for different frequency ranges. Basically an advanced kind f equalization that levels things out, which helps you hear quiet stuff but not get overwhelmed by loud stuff.
2) Frequency remapping. For hardcore cases of high frequency hearing loss those frequencies can be remapped to lower, still audible frequencies.
3) Microphone steering. The mics can steer in on conversation and reject background noise pretty effectively. This makes things much more audible in most situations for most people.
4) Device interfacing. Hearing aids can automatically work with most land lines and cellphones. It isn't via their mic, they do it via induction and so on.
In particular the first two are the ones you tend to need an audiologist for. You get someone to measure your hearing and see where you are deficient and how much, and then design compression curves to counteract that as best as possible.
That doesn't mean the devices couldn't and shouldn't be cheaper, but there's a reason for a professional to be involved.
That said, there is one health care plan that does cover hearing aids 100% that I am aware of - the VA. I know several people who have gotten their hearing aids for free through them and they've been very happy with it.
Wait a minute, are you saying that government provided health insurance actually works?!
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
When the issue is loss of hearing at a specific frequency (common for industrial damage, where a gear running at a specific frequency was heard all day long, and caused loss at that one useful frequency, and the aid re-maps around that hole, rather than running as a pure amp. But for the 80+ year old crowd, they have 2-5 years left, so amping it up improves their quality of life for most of it. Yes, it'll eventually cause full loss, but so does death.
Learn to love Alaska
I recently helped an elderly family member get tested, fitted, etc for hearing aids at an audiology office. Sure, it seems like a lot of money. But the $2,400 covers the hearing aid for three years of whatever you might happen to do to it. That breaks down to $800 per year, or less than $70 per month (per ear). That's less than a cable bill, and less than what most people - even elderly drivers - spend on gas for their cars for a month.
That said, there is one health care plan that does cover hearing aids 100% that I am aware of - the VA. I know several people who have gotten their hearing aids for free through them and they've been very happy with it.
Several health insurance plans also offer a small rebate to the customer after they purchase them. The same elderly family member I mentioned before got $500 back from these, and is eligible to do that every 3 years. While I'm not in need of them myself I believe my health insurance plan has a similar arrangement.
That difference may not play so much here in Europe where consumer electronics have a minimum two year guarantee by law. Consumer protection law that America does not prioritize because corporate profits are more important.
http://europa.eu/youreurope/ci...
On the other hand, as medical coverage here tends to be worlds better than in the US it's probably not an issue to get hearing aids here almost for free.
blindly antisocialist = antisocial
and Medicare does not pay for them, nor do most insurers.
No, why would insurance pay for something which is medically necessary or might improve the quality of a person's life. You're only paying to them to do. . . well, I'm not really sure what we're paying insurance companies to do. They never want to pay for anything, always making you pay and pay and pay, then pay some more.
Insurance companies. We're like the mafia, only legal.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower