The University of Southampton

Author: Ayush Gurung

Cochlear Implants: Key to an Improved Quality of Life for the Deaf Community?

Posted on by

Hearing – a natural ability we possess and one of the five senses crucial to human experience. Yet, it is often overlooked. Hearing loss is an invisible disability affecting 1-in-6 adults in the UK. This sparked my curiosity about how hearing loss, whether congenital or acquired, impacts quality of life. Especially in terms of its social aspects. This article published in May 2022 states that factors such as “differences in cognitive abilities and age-related changes may exacerbate the problem”.

What Are Cochlear Implants?

A cochlear implant is a small yet complex electronic device designed to provide a sense of sound to individuals who are profoundly deaf or severely hard of hearing. It consists of an external component placed behind the ear and a second component surgically implanted under the skin.

How Do They Work?

As shown by the diagram above, cochlear implants consist of a microphone which captures sound from the surroundings. Detected sounds are sorted and organised by a speech processor. A transmitter and receiver/stimulator then receives signals from the speech processor and transforms them into electrical impulses. These impulses are gathered by an electrode array and transmitted to various sections of the auditory nerve and finally to the brain which recognises the electrical impulses as sound.

This insightful video by Yale Medicine briefly explains how cochlear implants work and that, in effect, they bypass damaged portions of the ear to directly stimulate the cochlear nerve.

Quality of Life

During my research, I found that one aspect to consider within the deaf community is listening effort – referring to the cognitive exertion required to understand and process auditory information. If it is more challenging to hear, it must also be exhausting to communicate. While it may require some acclimating, with the use of cochlear implants, the ability to engage in social settings becomes possible. This can significantly improve quality of life for deaf individuals by reducing the need to be in a constant state of high listening effort.

Individuals with hearing loss often face challenges with employment leading to socioeconomic disparities. Statistics show that the employment rate for those with hearing loss stands at 65%, in contrast to 79% for those without any long-term health issues or disabilities. These figures reflect the situation in the UK – a well-developed country. However, differences in employment rates may be greater in less-developed countries with limited access to healthcare facilities and lack of awareness about hearing loss. A study from Cambridge University found that individuals with cochlear implants reported higher levels of employment and income.

The Downside

Perspectives on deafness vary among individuals. I found this article particularly captivating as it delves into how some may embrace deafness as a cultural identity. The deaf community have developed their own mode of communication over centuries through sign language. To them it is not simply a means of communication but also a part of belonging to a community.

The widespread use of cochlear implants raises concerns within this community about the potential loss of their language and culture. In fact some deaf parents go as far as to request pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) to ensure their children will be born deaf, and thus take part in their culture and lifestyle.

Conclusion

Cochlear implants overall represent a remarkable advancement in technology for individuals with hearing loss. While they may not be a cure-all, they have the potential to enhance quality of life by restoring access to sound and facilitating better communication. However, it is crucial to recognise that the decision to pursue cochlear implants is deeply personal and not every deaf individual may choose to use one.

AI Bionic Arms Exist: An Innovative Piece of Prosthetic Tech by Atom Limbs

Posted on by

Background on Atom Limbs and Prosthetics

This is the first artificial human arm created by Atom Limbs called the ‘Atom Touch’.

Atom Limbs is a company whose goal is to build a better future for humans by building artificial prosthetics that allow amputees to regain function of lost limbs.

Prosthetics first emerged with the use of materials such as wood and metal, however current technology uses lighter and more durable materials such as carbon fiber and silicon. Despite the modern world having great advancements in technology, most prosthetic limbs have remained the same in that they give the appearance of a functioning limb but are relatively useless to the wearer.

Prosthetic toe from ancient Egypt

Ethical and Societal Considerations

Bionic products tend to be expensive which puts most devices out of reach for many disabled people, who statistics show are more likely to be on the poorer end of society. There may also be supply issues for low income countries who have limited access to specialised medical facilities. This seems to partially be why less than 1 in 5 people with arm loss do not use a prosthetic. So what is the point of making a device to improve quality of life if the intended target audience doesn’t use them?

I read this BBC News article and it appears that Atom Limbs have dwelled upon this ethical consideration positioning their bionic arm around £15,000, which – although still a lot – is considerably less than many other similar devices on the market. A more reasonable price for a high quality bionic product. This made me question myself – if I had a missing arm, would I get this bionic arm? Considering its price, my decision would come down to the prosthetics practicality and usability in everyday life. If it functions like a real arm, then it would be justifiable to spend such an amount as it is a life-long investment.

The Underlying Science

The prosthetic arm controlled by your mind | BBC News

Neural Interface

Atom Limbs primarily relies on the use of advanced sensors and machine learning algorithms to interpret signals from the brain and utilise them to move a prosthetic limb. It connects to the wearer’s residual limb with bands of sensors that measure electrical signals produced from muscle movements. Signals are then picked up by electrodes and integrated. This innovative mechanism is known as myoelectric control.

Attachment

The arm attaches via a vest and is a non-invasive procedure which means no surgery is required for it to function. It uses breathable and lightweight materials providing comfort, which I believe would encourage amputees to choose the ‘Atom Touch’ over other prosthetic arms.

Haptic Feedback

One of the challenges posed in the use of bionic arms is the grip strength used on different objects. How would a wearer be able to tell how strongly they are gripping, for example, an egg to ensure it doesn’t crack? The answer is haptic feedback – this is delivered to the user through vibrations which are produced when sensors detect interaction with the environment.

Motion

The near-full range of motion in the elbow, wrist and individual fingers allows the wearer to fully interact with the world and regain their sense of touch. For someone who has not lost a limb, this may seem like a trivial feature, however for an amputee this may be an extraordinary feeling. An amputee reporter from the BBC News operated a digital version of the bionic arm.

“The notion of learning how to control a part of the body I don’t have is almost impossible to describe.”

Paul Carter from BBC News

Neuralink – Should we be skeptical?

Posted on by

I recently read that Elon Musk has made grand advancements in his neurotechnological company ‘Neuralink’. It is a revolutionary invention especially since Neuralink have recently been successful in implanting their first brain chip in a human. He claimed that the first Neuralink product ‘telepathy’ enables control of their devices just by thinking.

However, we only have Elon Musk’s word to take for it as Neuralink are yet to make an official statement regarding the operation. Despite claiming that the patient was recovering well, there are fears from neurologists that the procedure may cause inflammation and bleeding to tissues. Although it may not be a completely untested technology, there are always risks to brain surgeries so they must be carried out with caution. So the question arises: is Neuralink advancing too fast and should they pay more attention the possible side effects of implanting?