What To Do?
Jul 14th 2014, 7:28 pm
#31
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2008
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 10,678
Re: What To Do?
To elaborate a little more, when someone with hyperacusis goes to a TRT therapist, the patient is told that over the next 18 months what they are going to try to do with "pink noise" is raise the loudness discomfort level and this should indicate that a new neurological connection is being formed in the brain.
On hearing disorder web sites, people were very pleased when their loudness discomfort level was higher than the previous visit. Although I didn't believe the crap about forming a new neurological connection, I thought that must be a clue to curing hyperacusis and even assumed that if I could figure out a way to raise it to normal (nobody had ever figured out how to do that before) and when I figured out how to raise it to normal and lock it in, I was a little surprised that hyperacusis was still there.
On hearing disorder web sites, people were very pleased when their loudness discomfort level was higher than the previous visit. Although I didn't believe the crap about forming a new neurological connection, I thought that must be a clue to curing hyperacusis and even assumed that if I could figure out a way to raise it to normal (nobody had ever figured out how to do that before) and when I figured out how to raise it to normal and lock it in, I was a little surprised that hyperacusis was still there.
Jul 14th 2014, 7:30 pm
#32
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2008
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 10,678
Jul 14th 2014, 9:48 pm
#33
BE Site Lead
Joined: Aug 2004
Location: MA, USA
Posts: 92,170
Re: What To Do?
One issue with cold calling a uni could well be a blanket university policy to ignore outside research info/ideas.
Simply because they don't want to get involved in a IP dispute, nor do they want to use any info as a form of research and not be able to sell the IP later on because of tainted IP ownership because it did not come from them originally.
I know that to be the case at at least one university and at a few research/design companies.
It all goes straight in the bin, unopened, unread.
If you want someone to do the research on this, then ideally you need to own the patent so that it's covered and turn over the IP ownership to the institute if that is what you want to do, or it'll more than likely be ignored.
Simply because they don't want to get involved in a IP dispute, nor do they want to use any info as a form of research and not be able to sell the IP later on because of tainted IP ownership because it did not come from them originally.
I know that to be the case at at least one university and at a few research/design companies.
It all goes straight in the bin, unopened, unread.
If you want someone to do the research on this, then ideally you need to own the patent so that it's covered and turn over the IP ownership to the institute if that is what you want to do, or it'll more than likely be ignored.
Jul 15th 2014, 12:13 am
#34
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2008
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 10,678
Re: What To Do?
One issue with cold calling a uni could well be a blanket university policy to ignore outside research info/ideas.
Simply because they don't want to get involved in a IP dispute, nor do they want to use any info as a form of research and not be able to sell the IP later on because of tainted IP ownership because it did not come from them originally.
I know that to be the case at at least one university and at a few research/design companies.
It all goes straight in the bin, unopened, unread.
If you want someone to do the research on this, then ideally you need to own the patent so that it's covered and turn over the IP ownership to the institute if that is what you want to do, or it'll more than likely be ignored.
Simply because they don't want to get involved in a IP dispute, nor do they want to use any info as a form of research and not be able to sell the IP later on because of tainted IP ownership because it did not come from them originally.
I know that to be the case at at least one university and at a few research/design companies.
It all goes straight in the bin, unopened, unread.
If you want someone to do the research on this, then ideally you need to own the patent so that it's covered and turn over the IP ownership to the institute if that is what you want to do, or it'll more than likely be ignored.
Maybe I understand.
"Stem Cell" is the code word for getting easy grants and they really don't even have to understand what they are asking for just like "cloud computing" is currently the code word for easy money from venture capitalist.However on the other hand, they are going to have to understand everything completely and fully believe in it because the concept is so far fetched, it makes just about everything else seem logical.
I can hand them the document but they want real proof and/or protection. I can give them real proof but I'm not going to give them protection.
I talked about raising the loudness discomfort level to normal many times since it is the easiest to understand, it's very plausible that someone could figure out how to do it, it is very easy to accomplish (in fact I could go to a hearing disorder forum and tell them what to do and anyone with a half of a brain could do it as long as they don't have acoustic shock disorder), it only requires headphones, and since any of these procedures are not a one day procedure, any of these procedures can be terminated easily if not carried to completion and the test subject will not be any worse off then before the procedure was attempted.
In other words, they would have an easy way of looking at how the ear works with all the strange things that happen with very easy tests over several days and then could pat themselves on the back as being geniuses, write in medical journals about their observations, and if works for one test subject and they are willing to spend a little effort on more test subjects, they would have indisputable evidence that the loudness discomfort level can be raised to normal without actually locking it, have the proof that something very scientifically important has happened, and now they don't even have to understand the full concept to get the money rolling in.
So it is not a "shot in the dark" where they could be financially hurt since they could do the above for less than what it would cost for a full scholarship for a year.
So if they are not interested, I'd probably put that information on a hearing disorder forum and tell them not to bring it to conclusion but just record what they observe. When 100 individual people have done the research that the medial community should have done, there will be a lot of eggs on the medical profession faces.
Last edited by Michael; Jul 15th 2014 at 12:19 am.
Jul 15th 2014, 12:17 am
#35
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 41,518
Re: What To Do?
One issue with cold calling a uni could well be a blanket university policy to ignore outside research info/ideas.
Simply because they don't want to get involved in a IP dispute, nor do they want to use any info as a form of research and not be able to sell the IP later on because of tainted IP ownership because it did not come from them originally.
I know that to be the case at at least one university and at a few research/design companies.
It all goes straight in the bin, unopened, unread.
If you want someone to do the research on this, then ideally you need to own the patent so that it's covered and turn over the IP ownership to the institute if that is what you want to do, or it'll more than likely be ignored.
Simply because they don't want to get involved in a IP dispute, nor do they want to use any info as a form of research and not be able to sell the IP later on because of tainted IP ownership because it did not come from them originally.
I know that to be the case at at least one university and at a few research/design companies.
It all goes straight in the bin, unopened, unread.
If you want someone to do the research on this, then ideally you need to own the patent so that it's covered and turn over the IP ownership to the institute if that is what you want to do, or it'll more than likely be ignored.
Jul 15th 2014, 12:19 am
#36
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 41,518
Re: What To Do?
I'm sure that everyone would like to be handed something on a silver platter, I mean a gold platter, no I really mean a sold gold armored Brinks truck. If they are not interested, it's their loss. However how to you explain stem cell research since everybody is discussing it and there is no guarantee that the university will get or even discover any patents?
Maybe I understand. "Stem Cell" is the code word for getting easy grants and they really don't even have to understand what they are asking for just like "cloud computing" is currently the code word for easy money from venture capitalist.
However on the other hand, they are going to have to understand everything completely and fully believe in it because the concept is so far fetched, it makes just about everything else seem logical.
I can hand them the document but they want real proof and/or protection. I can give them real proof but I'm not going to give them protection.
I talked about raising the loudness discomfort level to normal many times since it is the easiest to understand, it's very plausible that someone could figure out how to do it, it is very easy to accomplish (in fact I could go to a hearing disorder forum and tell them what to do and anyone with a half of a brain could do it as long as they don't have acoustic shock disorder), it only requires headphones, and since any of these procedures are not a one day procedure, any of these procedures can be terminated easily if not carried to completion and the test subject will not be any worse off then before the procedure was attempted.
In other words, they would have an easy way of looking at how the ear works with all the strange things that happen with very easy tests over several days and then could pat themselves on the back as being geniuses, write in medical journals about their observations, and if works for one test subject and they are willing to spend a little effort on more test subjects, they would have indisputable evidence that the loudness discomfort level can be raised to normal without actually locking it, have the proof that something very scientifically important has happened, and now they don't even have to understand the full concept to get the money rolling in.
So it is not a "shot in the dark" where they could be financially hurt since they could do the above for less than what it would cost for a full scholarship for a year.
Maybe I understand.
"Stem Cell" is the code word for getting easy grants and they really don't even have to understand what they are asking for just like "cloud computing" is currently the code word for easy money from venture capitalist.However on the other hand, they are going to have to understand everything completely and fully believe in it because the concept is so far fetched, it makes just about everything else seem logical.
I can hand them the document but they want real proof and/or protection. I can give them real proof but I'm not going to give them protection.
I talked about raising the loudness discomfort level to normal many times since it is the easiest to understand, it's very plausible that someone could figure out how to do it, it is very easy to accomplish (in fact I could go to a hearing disorder forum and tell them what to do and anyone with a half of a brain could do it as long as they don't have acoustic shock disorder), it only requires headphones, and since any of these procedures are not a one day procedure, any of these procedures can be terminated easily if not carried to completion and the test subject will not be any worse off then before the procedure was attempted.
In other words, they would have an easy way of looking at how the ear works with all the strange things that happen with very easy tests over several days and then could pat themselves on the back as being geniuses, write in medical journals about their observations, and if works for one test subject and they are willing to spend a little effort on more test subjects, they would have indisputable evidence that the loudness discomfort level can be raised to normal without actually locking it, have the proof that something very scientifically important has happened, and now they don't even have to understand the full concept to get the money rolling in.
So it is not a "shot in the dark" where they could be financially hurt since they could do the above for less than what it would cost for a full scholarship for a year.
Jul 15th 2014, 12:33 am
#37
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2008
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 10,678
Re: What To Do?
That is the same attitude I get from self proclaimed experts when I ask a very simple question. In fact they are so smart that when I describe symptoms of hyperacusis, one said I don't think that is hyperacusis but is another disorder "where a person thinks he/she hears loud sounds they have a fear of loud lounds". The medical community appears to have a "dumping grounds" when they don't understand something and that is an another illness that is "psychological".
I'm a very strong skeptic so I can understand the skepticism that many may have but I'm not expecting them to take anything at face value but just want them to keep an open mind to try to determine if I'm a snake oil salesman or if maybe just possibly there might be some truth in what I am saying.
I'm a very strong skeptic so I can understand the skepticism that many may have but I'm not expecting them to take anything at face value but just want them to keep an open mind to try to determine if I'm a snake oil salesman or if maybe just possibly there might be some truth in what I am saying.
Last edited by Michael; Jul 15th 2014 at 12:38 am.
Jul 15th 2014, 1:51 am
#38
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2008
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 10,678
Re: What To Do?
I will admit that I have a big head and believe that all problems can be solved as long as the clues are followed and analyzed no mater how small and insignificant the clues may appear to be.
This is an engineering mentality and not necessarily a medical research mentality. Medical researchers tend to discard what are perceived as small and insignificant clues.
For example, if only a very small percentage of hyperacusis test subjects report having acoustic shock disorder, then acoustic shock disorder must be another disorder. That is not necessarily true.
As another example, hyperacusis is defined by someone hearing loud sounds so the very first question is "do you hear loud sounds and what types of sounds bother you". The test subject may say yes and closing of a door may appear very loud or other objects may appear very loud. The medical researcher will likely not analyze the characteristics of those sounds in relation to other sounds and determine how they differ but an engineer may do that. The medical researcher is now stumped but the engineer may now have another clue and may ask test subjects to describe the sounds that they hear and the answer will likely be "very loud" but if the engineer is lucky, one or two will eventually describe the sound differently. A test subject may say the sound is very loud but it doesn't sound like it sounded before the disorder. The engineer may then ask, "what do you mean"? The test subject may then say "well, it's not a thump like I normally heard". The engineer will then likely ask, "can you describe the sound a little more"? The test subject may then say "it has sort of a ring to it".
Even though only one or two out of 100 test subjects gave the engineer detailed information, it is not necessarily unimportant and in fact may be extremely important. Since the engineer may have already analyzed the sounds that bother test subjects he may already be expecting those answers but even if he didn't, the answers will likely tell him a lot.
A test subject may be able to walk past a pile driver which is a very loud momentary sound but the sound may not bother the test subject but if someone puts a cup down on a table which is a fairly soft momentary sound, the test subject's brain may be severely jolted. Everything I described are very small but very important clues.
This is an engineering mentality and not necessarily a medical research mentality. Medical researchers tend to discard what are perceived as small and insignificant clues.
For example, if only a very small percentage of hyperacusis test subjects report having acoustic shock disorder, then acoustic shock disorder must be another disorder. That is not necessarily true.
As another example, hyperacusis is defined by someone hearing loud sounds so the very first question is "do you hear loud sounds and what types of sounds bother you". The test subject may say yes and closing of a door may appear very loud or other objects may appear very loud. The medical researcher will likely not analyze the characteristics of those sounds in relation to other sounds and determine how they differ but an engineer may do that. The medical researcher is now stumped but the engineer may now have another clue and may ask test subjects to describe the sounds that they hear and the answer will likely be "very loud" but if the engineer is lucky, one or two will eventually describe the sound differently. A test subject may say the sound is very loud but it doesn't sound like it sounded before the disorder. The engineer may then ask, "what do you mean"? The test subject may then say "well, it's not a thump like I normally heard". The engineer will then likely ask, "can you describe the sound a little more"? The test subject may then say "it has sort of a ring to it".
Even though only one or two out of 100 test subjects gave the engineer detailed information, it is not necessarily unimportant and in fact may be extremely important. Since the engineer may have already analyzed the sounds that bother test subjects he may already be expecting those answers but even if he didn't, the answers will likely tell him a lot.
A test subject may be able to walk past a pile driver which is a very loud momentary sound but the sound may not bother the test subject but if someone puts a cup down on a table which is a fairly soft momentary sound, the test subject's brain may be severely jolted. Everything I described are very small but very important clues.
Jul 15th 2014, 2:00 am
#39
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 41,518
Re: What To Do?
That is the same attitude I get from self proclaimed experts when I ask a very simple question. In fact they are so smart that when I describe symptoms of hyperacusis, one said I don't think that is hyperacusis but is another disorder "where a person thinks he/she hears loud sounds they have a fear of loud lounds". The medical community appears to have a "dumping grounds" when they don't understand something and that is an another illness that is "psychological".
I'm a very strong skeptic so I can understand the skepticism that many may have but I'm not expecting them to take anything at face value but just want them to keep an open mind to try to determine if I'm a snake oil salesman or if maybe just possibly there might be some truth in what I am saying.
I'm a very strong skeptic so I can understand the skepticism that many may have but I'm not expecting them to take anything at face value but just want them to keep an open mind to try to determine if I'm a snake oil salesman or if maybe just possibly there might be some truth in what I am saying.
Look after yourself first and foremost.
Jul 15th 2014, 2:02 am
#40
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2008
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 10,678
Re: What To Do?
Concerning small clues. Before the individual's loudness discomfort level (LDL) was raised, it was tested and a very small clue was seen. At the time, it didn't seem to be important but it was recorded. At 750 Hz, the person's LDL was 66 DB for the left ear and 72 DB for the right ear.
Later that difference became very important to understanding how the ear was likely working.
Later that difference became very important to understanding how the ear was likely working.
Jul 15th 2014, 2:05 am
#41
BE Site Lead
Joined: Aug 2004
Location: MA, USA
Posts: 92,170
Re: What To Do?
I'm sure that everyone would like to be handed something on a silver platter, I mean a gold platter, no I really mean a sold gold armored Brinks truck. If they are not interested, it's their loss. However how to you explain stem cell research since everybody is discussing it and there is no guarantee that the university will get or even discover any patents?
Simple policy.
Don't need a rant in return.
Jul 15th 2014, 2:13 am
#42
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2008
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 10,678
Jul 15th 2014, 2:55 am
#43
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2008
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 10,678
Re: What To Do?
I'm caught between a rock and a hard place. If this was solely an engineering issue, I wouldn't have problems finding someone who understood it and carry it foreword. Even though it is not solely an engineering issue, there is an engineer that I could talk to and she'd understand it but she can't help me carry it forward.
I've debated what to do for many months before I sent the document to a university. I'd considered dropping the whole issue since I don't have anything to personally gain and I'd likely be ridiculed. I also considered posting the document on the internet as public domain as anonymous and let the chips fall where they may.
Either of those would have been the easiest and if this effort is not successful, I'll likely drop it.
I've given up even mentioning it to the medical profession long ago but have had a small discussion with my dentist over 6 months ago and she said, "you're going to publish the information, aren't you"?
Jul 15th 2014, 9:55 pm
#44
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2008
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 10,678
Re: What To Do?
The following is an example of when someone does not keep an open mind that something really is possible. I would also have been very skeptical if someone approached me and said this was possible but it would have interested me since it is an engineering concept and I can understand most engineering concepts when enough detail is presented. I wouldn't have expected the person approaching me to have it already designed and built but I would expect that he could explain the concept in fine detail no mater how outlandish it may sound on the surface.
http://britishexpats.com/forum/trail.../#post11334708
http://britishexpats.com/forum/trail.../#post11334708
