Hyperacusis Caused by Hearing Loss?

[Per]

I've had two different hearing tests since June. The first was preformed by an ENT, the last one was with an audiologist and a bit more complex. Both tests came out fine, thus meaning no hearing loss. However I also did a threshold test for my H the last time around and the audiologist clearly confirmed my condition, as I already knew of course. But if I don't have a hearing loss or a noise conflicted T, could I then have H caused by acoustic trauma? This puzzles me cause I must admit I don't trust these hearing tests more than I trust a crack user with the keys to my apartment.

If normal, young, healthy human ears can hear frequencies as low as 20Hz and as high as 20,000Hz. How can a test that only covers up to 5000hz be ample enough to discover hearing loss? The normal standard testing covers the range of 250Hz to 8,000Hz, as most sounds of speech occur in this frequency range. When I asked the audiologist if I could have a hidden hearing loss she just replied "humans don't hear that high". Well so what? If my cochlea or inner hair cells are damaged and I'm not able to physically receive the high frequency airwaves then this lack of feedback will end up as a generated phantom noise, aka T. So how do they explain the H? How does one go about putting a precise diagnose based on cause and effect? And why did the audiologist say we can't hear those high frequencies when we actually can when we are young? HOW young? HOW much? I accept that age has killed some of the sharpest hearing abilities (I'm passed 40) but if my T is not caused by acoustic trauma and/or inner ear damage, then what caused the H?! They say that more than 40% of all T victims have H, so if T&H is almost like salt & pepper, then why is the H not caused by the same thing as the T? When I asked "what do you think caused my H?" both ENT's and the audiologist replied that "it had something to do with my hearing". When I raised the exact same questions in regards to my T they all replied "it's impossible to really know". Somethings not right with that conclusion. It doesn't add up, cause the same people also said that most people with T have a hearing loss. I'm beginning to really doubt the authenticity in these explanations.

Anyone here that struggles with the same dilemma? This two headed dragon called T&H? What did your assessment say about your H? Please share and feel free to publish your own theories on this. As this forum shows we are obviously at least as capable as any medical "pro" dealing with our condition.

 

[gary]

I've had two different hearing tests since June. The first was preformed by an ENT, the last one was with an audiologist and a bit more complex. Both tests came out fine, thus meaning no hearing loss. However I also did a threshold test for my H the last time around and the audiologist clearly confirmed my condition, as I already knew of course. But if I don't have a hearing loss or a noise conflicted T, could I then have H caused by acoustic trauma? This puzzles me cause I must admit I don't trust these hearing tests more than I trust a crack user with the keys to my apartment.

If normal, young, healthy human ears can hear frequencies as low as 20Hz and as high as 20,000Hz. How can a test that only covers up to 5000hz be ample enough to discover hearing loss? The normal standard testing covers the range of 250Hz to 8,000Hz, as most sounds of speech occur in this frequency range. When I asked the audiologist if I could have a hidden hearing loss she just replied "humans don't hear that high". Well so what? If my cochlea or inner hair cells are damaged and I'm not able to physically receive the high frequency airwaves then this lack of feedback will end up as a generated phantom noise, aka T. So how do they explain the H? How does one go about putting a precise diagnose based on cause and effect? And why did the audiologist say we can't hear those high frequencies when we actually can when we are young? HOW young? HOW much? I accept that age has killed some of the sharpest hearing abilities (I'm passed 40) but if my T is not caused by acoustic trauma and/or inner ear damage, then what caused the H?! They say that more than 40% of all T victims have H, so if T&H is almost like salt & pepper, then why is the H not caused by the same thing as the T? When I asked "what do you think caused my H?" both ENT's and the audiologist replied that "it had something to do with my hearing". When I raised the exact same questions in regards to my T they all replied "it's impossible to really know". Somethings not right with that conclusion. It doesn't add up, cause the same people also said that most people with T have a hearing loss. I'm beginning to really doubt the authenticity in these explanations.

Anyone here that struggles with the same dilemma? This two headed dragon called T&H? What did your assessment say about your H? Please share and feel free to publish your own theories on this. As this forum shows we are obviously at least as capable as any medical "pro" dealing with our condition.

I do not have this problem. If I were you, I would seek yet a third opinion, to at least get answers to my questions. I had been to four Dr. before I found one that was knowledgeable regarding T and answered all my questions. Keep us posted....

 

[Per]

Thanks gary, you're right. I will pursuit my quest for answers, as a matter of fact if an ENT doesn't wanna deal with questions or if that person avoids answering it's a good sign that the diagnose type given is wrong. They don't like us cause we care about treatment types, causes and effects. They prefer passive patients that accepts their lack of knowledge straight from the bat.

 

[gary]

Thanks gary, you're right. I will pursuit my quest for answers, as a matter of fact if an ENT doesn't wanna deal with questions or if that person avoids answering it's a good sign that the diagnose type given is wrong. They don't like us cause we care about treatment types, causes and effects. They prefer passive patients that accepts their lack of knowledge straight from the bat.

You are correct Per. I told the ENT I finally found that answered all my questions, about the other Dr's & he said sadly, most dr's, have a big ego, and do not like it when the patient either asks a lot of questions, or has knowledge of their own condition. My ENT likes to have conversation with me, I tell him the latest T studies out there. I take my notes with me and ask him question about the ear I don't understand, things I read here, or on the web, and he explains them to me, then tells me to keep studying....

 

[Per]

That's interesting gary. Has your dr admitted that there could be more to T than any ENT knows and the theories most of them are following could very well be all wrong? Admitting to things like that seems extremely difficult for most of them. I'm referring to hidden hearing loss that's not detectable in most tests, somatic T, brain disorder etc. I think the really big elephant in the room is hearing loss and/or inner ear damage versus T, cause so many have the one without the other, but seems to be extremely difficult for ENT's to really admit that people can have cochlea damage and massive hearing loss without T. When I first got my T diagnose I was assessed by an ENT surgeon at a hospital, after giving me this lecture on 99% of all T cases are acoustic trauma we took the hearing test - when it turned out to be quite okay he just ended the session and said "anyways, the cause doesn't matter. If you have T you have T." When I left I had just one thing in my mind and that was to get a second assessment. The last one was better, the ENT held more doors open. He wasn't too hostile towards somatic T or other causes, but still he seemed annoyed by my knowledge and the fact that I was using the internet as a source of knowledge. I guess the guy is clueless to what great channel the web can be, knowing that most doctorate and research reports are published openly online. He also expressed his negativity towards forums, I guess he doesn't like us sharing our theories cause that puts him in a bad light. It's more important for many of them to guard their own self esteem than to find solutions no matter what the sources are.