• TrackinDaKraken@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    3 hours ago

    My tinnitus is at the very upper frequency range of my ability to hear, right around 13,000 Hz (I’m 60). Fortunately, I don’t notice it except in a quiet room.

  • kernelle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    4 hours ago

    I’ve always learned it comes from damaged hair cells inside the ear, how could it be anything but physical? Very surprised it can be picked up with a microphone in an anechoic chamber though

    • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      47 minutes ago

      I have a kind of tinnitus that comes and goes based on how stressed out the tendons in my neck and jaw are, on one side, after a pretty serious physical injury.

      I can basically massage away my tinnitus a good deal of the time, its only on the side that got fucked up.

      Beyond that, I actually have exceptionally good hearing (for my age at least), and I often hear things other people don’t even notice, yay autism!

      • kernelle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        3 hours ago

        I was with you until: “[…] but it can also be heard by the examiner (eg, by placing a stethoscope over the patient’s external auditory canal).” and now I’m even more confused

    • voracitude@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      4 hours ago

      how could it be anything but physical?

      The sound? Well, ultimately sounds are just those hairs and your cochlea and eardrum and all that getting hit by vibrations in the air and sending signals to your brain which get interpreted; damage the equipment so it sends signals even when there’s no vibrations in the air hitting it, and you have your non-physical sound. Same way phantom limb syndrome works.

      However what if the damage doesn’t cause signals in the absence of sound? What if tinnitus is actually the cochlea itself (or something/s in the apparatus anyway) physically vibrating and producing that whining sound? Like a mosquito’s wings beating.

      • kernelle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Makes sense, and I’ve also read it’s very hard to study as well. Different causes with the same perceived sound sounds like a diagnostic nightmare

  • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    3 hours ago

    This is the one thing I don’t like about some doctors and scientists: they think they know everything, and in doing so they become lazy and dismissive (or they only care about money and fame). They should always be curious, and always seek to find the next truth, no matter what the general consensus is in the community. Good on De La Mata for challenging the status quo.

    • athairmor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      What the fuck are you talking about?

      It was doctors and scientists that came up with the idea and experiment that recorded the tinnitus and proved it had a physical source.

      • 4am@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 minutes ago

        It’s the same logic and immigrants are lazy and stealing all the benefits of society.

        That logic is: someone invented a stereotype and people ran with it instead of being curious and doing science

      • MagnificentSteiner@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        some doctors and scientists

        The person you are replying to very clearly did not mean all doctors and scientists.

        • athairmor@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Which is a weird thing to bring up when the topic is scientists who were curious and solved a problem.

            • 4am@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 minutes ago

              No dumbass, they’re explaining to you why it doesn’t matter if they only meant “some” scientists. Like sure, some scientists are corrupt. Some politicians are corrupt. Some priests raped kids. Not every one of them, but if you bring it up the implication is kind of that you’re suggesting that it applies to the story/topic at hand.

    • 🍉 Albert 🍉@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 hours ago

      that’s a good philosophy in general. but I’m practice, it’s hard.

      for every million “that can’t be” theories only a handful pan out. doing every “stupid” experiment is practically impossible.