We're always told T is a brain thing by the gurus, who like to describe things as subjective when in truth they mean poorly researched and shittily documented... but some signs point to how it could merely be an ear thing in its entirety. Wax changes the resonance of the eardrum, which is one of the usual suspects, together with the middle ear muscles, the tube and the veli palatini in the world of peripheral T. This week my eardrum is blocked again by wax and the T is higher but the TTTS and the H isn't. Given how often the gurus have given me sermons on how this is all just a brain thing, that the H is just a result of T because T is hearing loss and the H is just filling up for it through brain plasticity, color me orange and call me Aunt Edna if I don't find it highly suspicious that this increase in T isn't leading to an increase in TTTS/H.
Maybe wax on the eardrum having the capacity to change T should be a sign of objective T over subjective T. So what is the logic against this showerthought a halfwit welsh orangutan could have come up with, why isn't it mainstream?
Lemme guess, its a moronic logic? One of those ''brain plasticity'' jargon shrinks latch onto, capable of changing of zillions of years of hardwired genetic evolution? Or is the ear actually resonating to a brain sound? But wasn't the brain sound supposed to be not real? Why would a piece of eardrum wax affect the cochlear nerve instead of merely change the way an eardrum vibrates? Why would an eardrum, stretched by tetanic muscles surrounding it, slightly off the precise tonic tension zillions of years of evolution have designed human brains to adapt to. Funny to how tonic contraction can't be diagnosed, and how it can meld into a continuous tone if it's fast enough...
Is it a better logic, like say the eardrum is only interpreting what the brain tells it? Despite how neurotologists still haven't made their mind up on whether the stapes influences the brain or it's the other way around?
Or maybe most of you don't get changes in your T due to earwax and I'm just a moron for not having realised it was objective T sooner. Either way is fine by me, so fill up the polls, let's see how deep this mysterious earwax syndrome runs.
Maybe wax on the eardrum having the capacity to change T should be a sign of objective T over subjective T. So what is the logic against this showerthought a halfwit welsh orangutan could have come up with, why isn't it mainstream?
Lemme guess, its a moronic logic? One of those ''brain plasticity'' jargon shrinks latch onto, capable of changing of zillions of years of hardwired genetic evolution? Or is the ear actually resonating to a brain sound? But wasn't the brain sound supposed to be not real? Why would a piece of eardrum wax affect the cochlear nerve instead of merely change the way an eardrum vibrates? Why would an eardrum, stretched by tetanic muscles surrounding it, slightly off the precise tonic tension zillions of years of evolution have designed human brains to adapt to. Funny to how tonic contraction can't be diagnosed, and how it can meld into a continuous tone if it's fast enough...
Is it a better logic, like say the eardrum is only interpreting what the brain tells it? Despite how neurotologists still haven't made their mind up on whether the stapes influences the brain or it's the other way around?
Or maybe most of you don't get changes in your T due to earwax and I'm just a moron for not having realised it was objective T sooner. Either way is fine by me, so fill up the polls, let's see how deep this mysterious earwax syndrome runs.