6 ms·

Flexible device could treat hearing loss without batteries

65 points by clouddrover 5y ago

jmcguckin 5y ago
An ear trumpet?
julianlam 5y ago
This research is interesting (albeit preliminary), as hearing aid technology is a hammer-style solution to a problem. Say you've been born with hearing loss, or have developed it over time due to loud noises, etc. The solution being sound AMPLIFICATION, no matter how selective and attuned to the hearing loss, is at best a band-aid solution. I am a parent of a child with hearing loss, so my understanding of hearing aids is secondary at best. I'd defer to others more knowledgeable than I on the matter. That being said, I love reading about innovative research like this.
- jonathanlb 5y ago
  I'm curious what alternative you suggest to amplification. What, in your opinion, is a better non-bandaid solution?
  - marvin 5y ago
    It’s obviously not feasible, or we would be doing it, but healing the damage that has happened would be the ideal solution.
  - adrianN 5y ago
    We understand hearing well enough to attach devices directly to the relevant nerves and make the brain believe that the signals are coming from the ears. Unfortunately these devices are still really bad compared to natural hearing (or even hearing with hearing aids).
  - Joakal 5y ago
    Hearing aids are designed to increase sound where the person can't hear as well. Sounds are faint? Hearing aid is a good choice. No therapy needed. Downsides is it that it amplifies noise too, requires batteries, maintenance. Cochlear implant are designed with electrical signals directly to nerves but needs therapy to understand. Its akin to a legless person learning to walk again with new metal legs. Has similar issues as above with noise, etc, but the nerves are stimulated directly which allows more accurate hearing but not 100%. A major downside is that you lose 100% natural hearing in that ear as the nerve stimulation wires go inside the cochlear, effectively blocking any sound from going in. So imagine you lose a foot, and they offer you a metal leg to walk again and that requires therapy. Its a tough choice for some: some natural hearing or accurate but stimulated hearing. Then the ear implant. Or really a natural cochlear implant is akin to attaching a new human leg to a legless person. Still, there's therapy needed. However, the cochlear is around the skull. So it's not as simple as taking it out and reattaching it. A lot of research is being done with promising results. Later, the bionic cochlear, a complete electrical replacement of cochlear where you hear as well as a dog, but that's a dream.
  - julianlam 5y ago
    The underlying issue is that either the hair cells stopped working, or the auditory nerve is damaged in some way. The ideal solution would be to repair the hair cells or replace them with a drop-in solution that restores their function. Likewise with the auditory nerve. Of course, these are pie-in-the-sky ideas currently. Sound amplification essentially symptomatically resolves the problem by playing the appropriate frequencies louder, but in the case of hearing loss due to damage, amplification would just exacerbate the problem, unless I am fundamentally misunderstanding something. In layman's terms, it would be like temporarily losing your hearing by going to a rock concert, and then raising the volume of everything around you to rock concert level, so you can continue to hear things.
taneq 5y ago
Sounds interesting, I wonder how they plan to integrate it with the cochlear nerves?
- rolleiflex 5y ago
  The nerve encoding for the auditory nerve has been decoded in 1970s. We now have devices that are able to directly tap into the auditory nerve, called cochlear implants. I presume the procedure would be similar to that.
  - prox 5y ago
    What style encoding does it use?
    - taneq 5y ago
      AAC, naturally. :P (Seriously though, I’d we actually do understand any nerve “protocols” beyond ‘Tony current make nerve fire’ I’ve not heard of it and would be interested!)
senectus1 5y ago
My FiL has to wear hearing aids that require button batteries be replaced every couple of days. Its expensive and as annoying as hell. I wear Bluetooth bone conduction headsets all day every day. I barely notice they're there and the battery lasts all day. Why cant they just adapt this tech?
- WrtCdEvrydy 5y ago
  Because a hearing aid is a "medical product" therefore it gets the medical pricing.
  - ekianjo 5y ago
    You have to thank the FDA and related mafia for that
    - mwachs 5y ago
      Not for long. Hearing devices will no longer be under the FDA’s purview.
    - zwirbl 5y ago
      a market for hearing aids and implants not at all regulated by FDA/MDR, what could possibly go wrong? /s Easing regulations for non-implant devices could really shake up the market in a good way, implantables OTOH should always be regulated as medical devices. But certifications with TÜV or similar are really getting out of hand with the new medical device regulation. The amount of paperwork for even pretty simple devices like a remote control is extraordinary. Source: I work for $company in that specific sector
      - ekianjo 5y ago
        > what could possibly go wrong? /s I wish we had FDA approved computers so that we would have stayed in the glorious 8 bits era for another century.
  - jonathanlb 5y ago
WesleyJohnson 5y ago
Interesting this showed up on HN today; my wife was just diagnosed with mild hearing loss. I was surprised to learn the aesthetics and tech of hearing aids hasn't seem to change much since I was a kid. This research is really interesting.
- skybrian 5y ago
  I don’t know how long ago that was, but the DSP chips can probably do a lot more than back then, and these days you can use Bluetooth to pair with your phone.
- SeasonalEnnui 5y ago
  I’ve had hearing aids since being a baby, there has been a decent amount of progress since then. Starting with a processor box the size of a large matchbox mounted to my chest, with wires going to my ears into hard plastic ear moulds. Moving to all the electronics (including the ‘receiver’, the speaker element) going behind my ear with a tube going into an acrylic or silicone ear mould. Finally today, it’s Receiver-in-Canal where the electronics are still behind the ear (but much smaller and direct Bluetooth connectivity) and the receiver moved to inside my ear canal inside a tiny plastic tip, making it nearly invisible (invisibility is both good, and bad. It can be useful for people to know you’re deaf with a quick glance at your ears.) There has also been a shift from analog to digital along the way. Interestingly there’s a product called Phonak Lyric that uses analog but in a new way (a product that sits right next to your eardrum for months at a time). I’ve heard good things about it for mild hearing loss.
  - julianlam 5y ago
    > Finally today, it’s Receiver-in-Canal Really? This wasn't an option for my child, although I imagine that's because he's growing, and he needs new ear molds every other month :)
vegardx 5y ago
Every time there's an article about hearing aids I have to plug Live Listen from Apple. Paired with either Airpods or proper Bluetooth-enabled hearing aids they really help in noisy environments, such as a dinner party or a cafe.
- julianlam 5y ago
  Is Live Listen like the Sound Amplifier[0] for Android devices? I read on HN awhile back that you can even upload audiograms so your AirPods can function like hearing aids. That sounds really interesting to me. [0] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.accessibility.soundamplifier https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.and...
  - vegardx 5y ago
    Not sure, but it looks similar. One thing that Live Listen does very well is latency, which is quite important for speech in person.

65 points by clouddrover 5y ago

An ear trumpet?

This research is interesting (albeit preliminary), as hearing aid technology is a hammer-style solution to a problem. Say you've been born with hearing loss, or have developed it over time due to loud noises, etc. The solution being sound AMPLIFICATION, no matter how selective and attuned to the hearing loss, is at best a band-aid solution. I am a parent of a child with hearing loss, so my understanding of hearing aids is secondary at best. I'd defer to others more knowledgeable than I on the matter. That being said, I love reading about innovative research like this.

jonathanlb 5y ago
I'm curious what alternative you suggest to amplification. What, in your opinion, is a better non-bandaid solution?
- marvin 5y ago
  It’s obviously not feasible, or we would be doing it, but healing the damage that has happened would be the ideal solution.
- adrianN 5y ago
  We understand hearing well enough to attach devices directly to the relevant nerves and make the brain believe that the signals are coming from the ears. Unfortunately these devices are still really bad compared to natural hearing (or even hearing with hearing aids).
- Joakal 5y ago
  Hearing aids are designed to increase sound where the person can't hear as well. Sounds are faint? Hearing aid is a good choice. No therapy needed. Downsides is it that it amplifies noise too, requires batteries, maintenance. Cochlear implant are designed with electrical signals directly to nerves but needs therapy to understand. Its akin to a legless person learning to walk again with new metal legs. Has similar issues as above with noise, etc, but the nerves are stimulated directly which allows more accurate hearing but not 100%. A major downside is that you lose 100% natural hearing in that ear as the nerve stimulation wires go inside the cochlear, effectively blocking any sound from going in. So imagine you lose a foot, and they offer you a metal leg to walk again and that requires therapy. Its a tough choice for some: some natural hearing or accurate but stimulated hearing. Then the ear implant. Or really a natural cochlear implant is akin to attaching a new human leg to a legless person. Still, there's therapy needed. However, the cochlear is around the skull. So it's not as simple as taking it out and reattaching it. A lot of research is being done with promising results. Later, the bionic cochlear, a complete electrical replacement of cochlear where you hear as well as a dog, but that's a dream.
- julianlam 5y ago
  The underlying issue is that either the hair cells stopped working, or the auditory nerve is damaged in some way. The ideal solution would be to repair the hair cells or replace them with a drop-in solution that restores their function. Likewise with the auditory nerve. Of course, these are pie-in-the-sky ideas currently. Sound amplification essentially symptomatically resolves the problem by playing the appropriate frequencies louder, but in the case of hearing loss due to damage, amplification would just exacerbate the problem, unless I am fundamentally misunderstanding something. In layman's terms, it would be like temporarily losing your hearing by going to a rock concert, and then raising the volume of everything around you to rock concert level, so you can continue to hear things.

taneq 5y ago

Sounds interesting, I wonder how they plan to integrate it with the cochlear nerves?

rolleiflex 5y ago
The nerve encoding for the auditory nerve has been decoded in 1970s. We now have devices that are able to directly tap into the auditory nerve, called cochlear implants. I presume the procedure would be similar to that.
- prox 5y ago
  What style encoding does it use?
  - taneq 5y ago
    AAC, naturally. :P (Seriously though, I’d we actually do understand any nerve “protocols” beyond ‘Tony current make nerve fire’ I’ve not heard of it and would be interested!)

senectus1 5y ago

My FiL has to wear hearing aids that require button batteries be replaced every couple of days. Its expensive and as annoying as hell. I wear Bluetooth bone conduction headsets all day every day. I barely notice they're there and the battery lasts all day. Why cant they just adapt this tech?

WrtCdEvrydy 5y ago
Because a hearing aid is a "medical product" therefore it gets the medical pricing.
- ekianjo 5y ago
  You have to thank the FDA and related mafia for that
  - mwachs 5y ago
    Not for long. Hearing devices will no longer be under the FDA’s purview.
  - zwirbl 5y ago
    a market for hearing aids and implants not at all regulated by FDA/MDR, what could possibly go wrong? /s Easing regulations for non-implant devices could really shake up the market in a good way, implantables OTOH should always be regulated as medical devices. But certifications with TÜV or similar are really getting out of hand with the new medical device regulation. The amount of paperwork for even pretty simple devices like a remote control is extraordinary. Source: I work for $company in that specific sector
    - ekianjo 5y ago
      > what could possibly go wrong? /s I wish we had FDA approved computers so that we would have stayed in the glorious 8 bits era for another century.
- jonathanlb 5y ago

WesleyJohnson 5y ago

Interesting this showed up on HN today; my wife was just diagnosed with mild hearing loss. I was surprised to learn the aesthetics and tech of hearing aids hasn't seem to change much since I was a kid. This research is really interesting.

skybrian 5y ago
I don’t know how long ago that was, but the DSP chips can probably do a lot more than back then, and these days you can use Bluetooth to pair with your phone.
SeasonalEnnui 5y ago
I’ve had hearing aids since being a baby, there has been a decent amount of progress since then. Starting with a processor box the size of a large matchbox mounted to my chest, with wires going to my ears into hard plastic ear moulds. Moving to all the electronics (including the ‘receiver’, the speaker element) going behind my ear with a tube going into an acrylic or silicone ear mould. Finally today, it’s Receiver-in-Canal where the electronics are still behind the ear (but much smaller and direct Bluetooth connectivity) and the receiver moved to inside my ear canal inside a tiny plastic tip, making it nearly invisible (invisibility is both good, and bad. It can be useful for people to know you’re deaf with a quick glance at your ears.) There has also been a shift from analog to digital along the way. Interestingly there’s a product called Phonak Lyric that uses analog but in a new way (a product that sits right next to your eardrum for months at a time). I’ve heard good things about it for mild hearing loss.
- julianlam 5y ago
  > Finally today, it’s Receiver-in-Canal Really? This wasn't an option for my child, although I imagine that's because he's growing, and he needs new ear molds every other month :)

vegardx 5y ago

Every time there's an article about hearing aids I have to plug Live Listen from Apple. Paired with either Airpods or proper Bluetooth-enabled hearing aids they really help in noisy environments, such as a dinner party or a cafe.

julianlam 5y ago
Is Live Listen like the Sound Amplifier[0] for Android devices? I read on HN awhile back that you can even upload audiograms so your AirPods can function like hearing aids. That sounds really interesting to me. [0] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.accessibility.soundamplifier https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.and...
- vegardx 5y ago
  Not sure, but it looks similar. One thing that Live Listen does very well is latency, which is quite important for speech in person.