Went to a Birthday Party Tonight — Hoping for the Best!

What's the perception-update model? That the auditory system doesn't update itself, and so it never realized that the noise is no longer there? Or something else? You wouldn't have a citation re this theory, would you?

 

Yes, it's about finding where your sweet spot lies I guess. I believe too little sound exposure cannot be a good thing either. Gotta keep your senses stimulated. I think it's a similar to the horses that lived and worked in the coal mines in olden days. After a while, they went blind because they lived in darkness all the time.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6277469/

Stumbled upon this yesterday. It's a difficult read and I don't understand all of it. Made me a bit sad to realise we're still a long way off, maybe.

 

That's what I make of it. That the auditory system only logs the changes in sound environment and compares them to what went on just before that. That's how the tinnitus percept is maintained.
Makes me wonder if anyone who has had a near-death experience got rid of tinnitus? Not trying to give bad advice here though

 

@Bill Bauer I am Parisian. La Sorbonne is specialized in letters, art, and human science. So uh...
Edit : They did a rebrand of La Sorbonne into Sorbonne University which is the old la Sorbonne mix with UPMC (Jussieu) just to make it look bigger lolz. So what I am saying is not true since last year when they "merged" (but they are still separate campus)

Oh and I am a scientist myself, studied at Jussieu, I know people less smarter than me that presented "their research" (their team research really), that doesn't mean that much.

Please stop waving around your so called scientific background, that might work with non scientific people but not with me. And stop being so arrogant please. We already have at least one other person like that here we don't need more lol.

Anyway there is data here, data that shows some people are affected by sound, and some are not at all. But anyway that data is biased because people that don't react to sound will not tell about it. I have been to multiple parties/concerts and didn't create a post to say I am fine. But if I had gotten worse I would probably have created a post to try and find some comfort, or get it out my chest.

So it's in fact not scientific at all to base your opinion on these stories.
It's also even more biased by the fact that well, tinnitus is so random.
Some people got it for no reason, some people from stress, some from medicine, some from sounds exposure...
Some have a tonal sound, some have a changing sound, some have tinnitus that react to white noise etc... And everyone react differently.

 

Thanks!

An interesting idea. It's consistent with how some other sensory systems work, in broad strokes at least. However, it looks like the model is extremely speculative at present: none of their propositions - how the auditory system works, whether N1 is the marker of this system, or whether tinnitus results from problems with this system - have been established. Still a valuable paper; may stimulate some subsequent studies. But I'd say this one is pretty far on the speculative side.

 

LoL! We can get rid of tinnitus and hiccups at the same time!

 

I found it interesting how it pointed out some weaknesses in other well-established theories such as Rauschecker's. Also, according to Salvi the average time from sensory damage to the onset of tinnitus is ~7 days. That doesn't match most people's experiences in the forum, including my own.

 

Do they mean onset of *chronic* symptoms?

 

Excerpt:
Most current tinnitus models posit underlying neurophysiological changes to explain its emergence. It is difficult to reconcile this hypothesis with the rapid onset and offset of the tinnitus percept. Spontaneous hyperactivity in the cochlear takes ~7 days after sound exposure to occur.

I may have misinterpreted this one. It says spontaneous hyperactivity in the cochlea, which may not be the same as tinnitus.

 

The posting king has logged in

 

Bartoli,
Shows in your subtitle your tinnitus worsened in 2019. You have had it since 2009 and you seem pretty knowledgeable about it.

Can you tell us what you believe to be the core of your tinnitus increase?

 

I believe it was a firecracker exploding near me. You can read about it in my introductory post if you like. Also, I don't think I'm all that knowledgeable. It's just that I read up about tinnitus a lot before finally deciding to join this forum. I'm often struggling with the louder sound since February. Some people say they forget about their tinnitus until someone mentions it, which is why they stay off the forums, but I find it helps me.

 

Yeah, I think that's the distinction they're making. And I think they (or some) at least, would suggest that the spontaneous hyperactivity is where the chronic version starts to take hold.

 

Let me see if I got this right. If I were to say that I am a recipient of the Nobel Prize in my discipline (just to be clear, I am not actually saying that, but in order to get a sense of the validity of many claims, it often helps to look at the extreme cases) to support my claim that I am a "good scientist", you would dismiss it as an anecdote. You are right - this gets to the bottom of the reason for our disagreement in this thread. Thank you for this clarification.

 

Is this supposed to be a personal attack?

Also, are you saying that anyone who applies math to their daily lives has a broken brain? What you quoted happens to be an example that I use in one of the classes that I used to teach. We are encouraged to use examples that are relevant to the students' lives.

Do you have any other insightful comments that provide more information about you than they do about me?

 

Given the positive post I left everyone with last night, I should provide an update and say that today has been pretty brutal. All three of my noise sources have been elevated today, and tonight in particular became pretty difficult to work through. I've resorted to taking a bath, which has helped bring it down a notch.

I've experienced two-day delayed spikes before, and wondered if it might happen this time as well. When yesterday was so good, I decided I had licked it...but maybe not.

Or, maybe this is just a random spike. Who knows.

Anyway, tomorrow will likely be better; but thought I'd let people know I'm not quite out of the woods yet.

 

Bill, I can't believe you got hooked on this bait. It doesn't matter. You shouldn't be a scientist to have your say.

I must say this though, and don't take this wrong, but during the months that I read on here I've seen many of your posts trying to help people. You're a knowledgeable guy on the subject who has adopted a somewhat outsider approach of extreme low-risk behaviour around noise.
I'm glad you found your sweet spot and that this works for you. I just feel that you sometimes fail to acknowledge that for other sufferers, adopting a similar lifestyle would make them worse instead of better.

I know for me, it's not doable. I'm not advocating the opposite in any way though! However, if another sufferer asks for honest advice, you sometimes come down upon them whenever they choose to walk a different path, taking them out with horror stories and just generally upping the anxiety.

Again, not picking a fight here, but it's something I wanted to let you know. It can be very daunting and can make a sufferer's anxiety go up even more. I feel that if you would just change your tone to be more compassionate and less judgmental, you wouldn't be met with some of the adversity that sometimes ensues. To conclude : This is not something that I see in the majority of your posts. I'm expressing my opinion, and I know for me, reading some of your advice wasn't a good thing at the time. I hope you don't get cross reading this. It's not my intention to make you feel bad. Everyone has the right to their opinion and I believe you can still express yours in an honest fashion, without scaring newer sufferers or people already in a dark place.

Cheers

 

Great post by Bartoli. I like Matt and Gabriel's posts as well.
A shout out to Bill Bauer with a bit of a twist. The tone of your posts doesn't bother me really. That is from a guy...me who likes to say it like it is. I have no doubt Bill is a good guy. In fact, I believe...really my nature, out in society all of us would get along really well. A bit of the scourge of the internet really.

There are some other dynamics. Guys who tend to be a bit outspoken and I am in this group of practitioners, on the internet, they tend to get picked on a bit which isn't really fair but the way it is.

A word about who is right in this, if such a concept even exists. I am the Goldilock guy. I tend to believe that extreme is never good on either side of the sound spectrum. What is normal sound exposure? What is normal sound exposure for a healthy person? What is normal sound exposure for someone with damaged hearing? This is difficult to define.

Should a person with an injured knee train as hard for running race as one with a healthy knee? Maybe not, to Bill's point.

A word about my Goldilock's camp. Perhaps we can rule out one increment of sound exposure that is bad. Yes, people with tinnitus will continue to go to concerts even with hearing protection but most of us believe, this isn't the best scenario with risk of making hearing and/or tinnitus worse...though an argument can be made that with prudence, sound abatement can be managed with hearing protection. Most of us don't want to go there and we give up this activity which for most of us is OK. I love music btw and listen to it through headphones everyday.

Middle sound exposure: That is pretty much where I am at and what my Audiologist suggests for my level of hearing wellness, tinnitus and hyperacusis. She believes moderate sound exposure is best. She...Dr. in Audiology whose mother was also an Audiologist also doesn't believe in the headphone boogieman portrayed on here by Michael, likely Bill and others. Doesn't believe it. She believes like I, headphones are merely a sound source. Its the sound level 'and duration' of that sound level that matter. Not too loud, but she believes sound deprivation is bad for hearing. If you think what tinnitus is...or what many believe it is...it is the brain's recruitment of neurons in the brain stem because it no longer gets satiated with high frequency input from the cochlea. This suggests, that deprivation is bad. Because a damaged cochlea deprives the brain of signal. This btw, is analogous to amblyopia in people and in animals. Cut off the signal and the brain dies in this area.

Limited sound exposure: This is the Bill Bauer and Michael Leigh camp. A few aspects of this camp worth examining. Is less life better than more life? Or...is a self induced limited life more conducive to anxiety and unwell brain chemistry because of greater introspection and self immersion? Too much life may wear a person down, but too little life is likely a life less fulfilled and one that is more challenging to mental health which many believe can be a contributor to preoccupation with tinnitus. I don't want to live a lessor life. Nor do I want to live life at a ferocious pace. I like Goldilocks. I bike and swim virtually everyday. Have interaction with friends and family...meeting a buddy for breakfast bike ride in a few minutes where I will be eating at a roadside café with loud trucks going by once in a while. Living life which I enjoy and always have. Later I will go swimming. I am a fitness nut and like to be in the sun and wind. Fuck tinnitus. I will also listen to music through my headphones. Not ear buds...I don't listen to earbuds anymore...or ride with music on the bike...but rather open back headphones at home. Not on loud volume. My hyperacusis which has reduced this past year, has turned up the gain in my brain because of an increment of hearing loss so I don't like loud volume anyway. I listen to my TV on very low volume for example because I can hear it. To Bill and Michael's point, should a person with broken hearing listen to moderate sound levels?...certainly not loud levels perhaps we can all agree on. This is a slippery slope. Its like the bike rider...me...that has some tendinitis in their knee from overuse...overtraining on the bike. Should that rider continue to train rigorously? This is often hard to figure out. Where is Goldilocks? Hard to know precisely. Overtraining with frayed tendons isn't good. Rest can help. So a person, likely has to choose their own comfort level based upon amount of damage.

To me, the road to the truth I often speak of...what is truth?...is there a universal truth?...is rocky as hell, people will debate and disagree but will try to summarize for me:

- Loud is bad
- Deprivation is bad
- Moderate is best...caveated...a person with badly damaged hearing has to step carefully toward getting back to moderate listening levels. If you think about, there is no other way to have 'normal' hearing other than to have 'normal' sound exposure. Too much or too little sound is bad for the hearing apparatus.

My thoughts and want to say in earnest I appreciate the sometimes difficult road to the truth, if a universal truth exists at all. Cheers to 'all' that make this possible. Fuck tinnitus and fuck all the rancor on here as we are all brothers and sisters trying to find our way.

 

Excellent post man

 

I think this is a fantastic comment. I wish I could have such a balanced tone in all of my posts.

Sadly, my intuition is that Bill *needs* to retain this tone, for himself. It's a part of him. It's a part of his coping mechanism. It's a part of how he manages in a life that he finds dangerous and anxiety-provoking at most turns.

I understand this. But I also agree completely with Bartoli that this just isn't good for a majority of readers. And so while I'm not a balanced enough a writer to get my message across as gently as Bartoli did, I do wish Bill would heed some of his advice. Fear-mongering is rarely the best way; even if/when it's appropriate.

 

What discipline do you study Gabriel?

 

No, I have been acknowledging it. Many people will end up not having any problems, even after going to concerts with no protection. There is only one way to find out whether you happen to belong to that group. If one thinks that the risk of a lifetime of suffering is worth the hours of fun, then of course they should take the risk.

It's ok to be scared to participate in dangerous activities that have a potential to result in a lifetime of torture.

It is all good. In fact, thank you for your kind words.

I wish there was a way to make "Many people will end up not having any problems, even after going to concerts with no protection. There is only one way to find out whether you happen to belong to that group. If one thinks that the risk of a lifetime of suffering is worth the hours of fun, then of course they should take the risk" appear underneath all of my posts.

Congratulations on your nice passive-aggressive post, bro.

 

Yes, my field isn't Physics, Chemistry, or Biology. But I have been applying the methods developed in Physics to my area (that is being taught at a business school).

He accused me of not knowing about scientific method, and I provided evidence to the contrary. I haven't been arrogant.

Wouldn't you say that those people know how the scientific method works? That is all I had been trying to convey with my post.

 

Thanks for the reaction. The above is what upset me initially. It's not that you don't have a valid point, but the wording is a bit..strong. It sounds like a sentence. A lifetime sentence. For a sufferer coming on here looking for some support, it's very hard to read this. Many sufferers have noise induced tinnitus and already feel guilty of inflicting this upon themselves. While the initial reaction would indeed be to stay away from every moderate noise, let alone loud, the path to recovery is also to integrate sound back into your life. For those people, knowing that they can just go to a pub or a restaurant or a garden party (with protection if they must), and regain some quality of life and some sense of normality. It can change their outlook and stave off social isolation.

As for the lifetime part: I sure hope you're not right on that one. With a cure, we wouldn't be here having our little discussion. And I wouldn't mind it one bit .

Good.

 

You continue to miss the point Bill, even when it's provided with the rare grace that Bartoli was able to culture. I can't tell whether it's because you are exceptionally clever, or completely obtuse.

Bartoli didn't say it was wrong to be scared; he said it was wrong to fear-monger. Clearly those are not the same thing, so it's confusing that you would conflate them.

All Bartoli questioned was your tone, which is clearly still on display in this response to him. Yet, in the same sentence you say you are acknowledging what others say. It's this type of clear contradiction that makes me think you are either remarkably blind to your own weaknesses, or that you must be doing this on purpose. Either way, my patience has run its course. Good day.

 

Is it better to be subjected to an actual lifetime of torture, or to read something that's hard to read/is upsetting but that helps one to avoid that fate?

I agree. Many sounds are ok. Many others will never be ok.

We shouldn't assume that there is going to be a cure, until it is confirmed that we have one.

I can say the above about you.

You call it fear-mongering, I call it learning from others' mistakes, and warning others about the danger.

There is no contradiction. I think what drives the two of us to come to opposite conclusions is the cost that we assign to a lifetime of suffering. I assign an Infinite cost to that, and hopefully you can see how that justifies all of my posts. You assign a large, but finite cost to it, and I can see how that would justify your behavior and beliefs.

 

I studied physics/chemistry/biology then went into a Engineering School where I studied Materials Science which is basically physics and chemistry apply to materials, it's very wide, from nano tech and quantic physics to fluids mecha, continuum mecha etc...

I know you were just trying to justify yourself, but in the end it was just an argument of authority and sounded arrogant.

Also being "scientific" doesn't mean you can't make mistakes. I tried to demonstrate why you were wrong: because data is mixed (there is as much people getting worse as people not getting worse) and also that data is biased because people that don't get worse will not tell it (I am a good example of that).

I will add that this is not the first post of you I see where you sound cold and even rude.

 

Bro do u think highlighting your opinion that 'having protected sex' is some sort of hyper-risky behavior because of the nominal chance it might produce a child kind of provides some reasonable context to your very strident interjections and shouted dictates that you post here?

 

You're going Old Testament on me again with the "lifetime of torture", Bill.
I don't disagree warning people about the dangers is a bad idea. It's just that we're on a tinnitus forum, and I don't think a distressed sufferer is likely to subject him or herself to loud noises. It's preaching to the choir, if you will.

I say this because I've been there, reading these posts as an anonymous sufferer, and getting very anxious and overprotecting because of it. You're an observative person, and I have no doubt that your advice is based on many personal accounts of people that had a worsening because of noise exposure. I will say this and then I'll lay it to rest, but it's the gloomy fashion in which some of the advice on here is given that is somehow wrong (in my opinion).