Science Heals a Deaf Baby

It was said that Jesus healed the deaf, but we have no evidence of that. His followers today still claim they have miraculous powers.

But we all know that if you really want a miracle, you have to turn to science.

Here’s a video of a formerly deaf baby hearing for the first time (or shortly thereafter):

YouTube Preview Image

It was done with a Cochlear implant:

cochlear implant (CI) is a surgically implanted electronic device that provides a sense of sound to a person who is profoundly deaf or severely hard of hearing. The cochlear implant is often referred to as a bionic ear.

This entry was posted in Miracles, Science, Videos. Bookmark the permalink.

32 Responses to Science Heals a Deaf Baby

  1. Neil says:

    Don’t worry, the religious nuts will take credit for this as well.

    Nothing grates me more than hearing jackasses claim “prayer pulled us through” when it is science doing the heavy lifting.

  2. Wings says:

    Love this, the kids is so amazed and happy. Take science any day, thank you very much!

  3. LRA says:

    *heart melting*

    :D

    • Mark Mukasa says:

      I know, it was so cute! The baby looked so surprised but happy. Wow, that was just amazing. I loved this. Best Unreasonable Faith entry ever.

  4. DDM says:

    Didn’t this also save Rush Limbaugh’s hearing? Sadly, science is neutral to who it heals, unlike god.

    • Revyloution says:

      I was going to write the same thing! I just learned that Limbaugh was deaf on NPR last Friday.

      Explains quite a bit about him really.

  5. Uzza says:

    This is all full of warm fuzzies all right, but it’s not the whole story, and it’s obvious that few people understand what is going on here as shown by remarks like “formerly deaf”. Great as this is, the kid is atill deaf. Everyone assumes that now he can hear, so that means he can hear normally, will gain language in the normal way, and have no problems.

    It doesn’t work like that.

    OK, kid can “hear environmental sounds”, big deal. Now he can hear a train coming, and won’t get run over. There’s a huge gap between that and being able to understand speech.
    People who think they can simulate deafness by putting fingers in their ears are missing the point. If you want to know what it’s like to be deaf, travel to Kyrgyzstan. Everyone there speaks Kyrgyz, and you’ll be able to hear them speaking, but your ability to hear won’t do you a damn bit of good because you won’t understand a thing anyone says. You’ll be in the same position as a hearing impaired person who has problems with English, effectively deaf. That’s the problem that cochlear implants have to overcome, not just making it possible to hear sounds.

    Hearing is not a simple plus or minus issue. It’s not the case that he was ‘deaf’, then he got this magic pill of a CI to ‘fix’ it, and now he is not-deaf, just like normal people.
    Cochlear implants don’t cure deafness. What they do is stimulate the auditory nerve, which sends signals to the brain, that the kid may or may not be able to interpret in a way analogous to language. If he’s lucky, with a huge investment in years of speech therapy, he may learn speech, but then again he may not. Only around 50% of implantees are what they call “successful”. You never hear much about the other 50%, the “failures”, who reach adulthood, throw away their CI, and learn sign language, often very bitter over the whole experience.

    So, of all these kids with CIs …. half can speak English with varying degrees of accent. The other half wasted their whole childhood on intensive therapy that did them no good, and end up with little or no language skills and the accompanying lag in cognitive development. Effectively you’ve made them retarded.

    In a perfect scenario, the kid’s parents would be fluent signers, the kid would grow up normally and gain language in the usual way, plus, he would get lucky with the CI and also learn to speak. He would become a happy, well-adjusted bilingual.
    If he was unlucky in this case and the CI didn’t work, he would still grow up with normal language and cognitive development, just with poor English.

    More commonly, the parents are oblivious to signed language, don’t learn it, and never sign, forcing the kid into an oral-only environment, or worse, follow the advice of ignorant and biased audiology professionals and actively prohibit the kid from signing, which makes cognitive development pretty much a crap shoot. So what happens to this little guy in the video? It’s hard to say, but it’s too early for a lot of celebration.

    • LRA says:

      Perhaps this will shed some more light on the controversy:

      ttp://www.drury.edu/multinl/story.cfm?ID=2442&NLID=166

      I think, though, that the point of the post is that science investigates and provides solutions to medical problems that clearly prayer does not. Indeed, what is “normal” and what is a disorder/disease is controversial, and I would not want to disrespect the deaf community by arguing against their convictions, especially as I am not deaf myself and have no right to interfere in the community that the deaf have established.

      • Tee says:

        Have a deaf friend (American) and she refuses to get a CI. She is against the whole idea of it. She would be upset if she saw this video I think.

        She feels deaf culture and language will die out as a result of CI and why is being deaf something to be ashamed about? She also feels she is deaf and that is who she is. There is a huge divide in the deaf community about CI about this.

        This is a good documentary about it.

        http://www.pbs.org/wnet/soundandfury/

        • Mark Mukasa says:

          Sure deaf culture might be a good thing, but is culture really a substantial thing to factor when you have the chance to give someone the chance to hear?
          No one is saying being deaf is something to be ashamed of – I know I wouldn’t be- but given the chance I’d think most people would want to use their full senses.

          • Tee says:

            I see her side of it as CI would kill off a culture and language. Her argument although one could say it is hyperbolic was if there was a movement to wipe out the language and culture of a people it would be seen as genocide.

            My original point is not everyone sees the video as a good thing. I dunno if there are deaf people reading this blog/posts but interested to see their opinion on it

            Like I said the documentary does a better job of showing both sides than I ever could.

        • arrakis says:

          We watched “The Sound and the Fury” in the special education class I had to take in college. It’s an absolutely fascinating documentary about a topic that much of the world does not know about. As a musician, I cannot fathom not being able to or not wanting to hear, but the documentary very clearly explores deaf culture and why cochlear implants are opposed by the deaf community.

          I highly recommend viewing the documentary.

        • Revyloution says:

          I never understood the culture argument from any group. Do one legged people fear that a good bionic leg will kill one legged culture? Do cancer patients fear that a cure for cancer will ruin the culture of cancer survivors?

          I hold no special place for my culture. Culture is just an extension of language. Culture is depth of communication. Once you realize that, then individual cultures no longer have special value. I want to absorb as many cultures as possible so that I may communicate easier with as many humans as possible. If my culture disappeared, I wouldn’t shed one tear.

          • elizabethdamaro says:

            It’s not really the same kind of analogy. Because language is involved. This is where you get more of a “cultural” aspect. Again, an extension of language. The deaf community has a language, so some see no reason to alter it. Although, bilingual would be ideal.

            In fact, it makes sense that all individuals learn sign regardless. And children do better being taught that even before their speech is clear. Babies are developing and adapting to language of their cultures immediately… so I can see the apprehension about this device coming from some.

            A cancer community or amputees wouldn’t really fall into the same kind of culture analogy… since, that isn’t really an extension of language or communication.

            • Mark Mukasa says:

              I think anyone who uses the culture argument is forgetting that cultures evolve and dissipate all the time. So do languages. Why would one want to keep a disability?

            • LRA says:

              Because they don’t see it as a disability. They would say that gay people used to be seen as having a “disability” and that now, we have gay communities and culture since the change to the DSM. They would equate their “disability” to that.

              I can’t say what other’s should do, but if it were my child, I would to the CI and also I would learn sign and make my household bilingual.

            • Baconsbud says:

              I would say some but not all see a disability as an advantage. Often we forget that not all disabilities cause people to miss out on life.

            • Elemenope says:

              Deaf people certainly perceive the world differently than hearing people do, and unsurprisingly this has caused a culture to form that values those differences as strengths (whether they actually are or not is another thing entirely).

              But, no culture has an intrinsic right to self-perpetuation, and specifically in this case the only way for the culture to perpetuate itself is if there continue to be more deaf people. I have no problem with a deaf adult deciding they prefer the current way they perceive the world; I do have a problem with such a decision being denied to children. Since many syndromes that cause hearing loss are genetic, this is a huge problem for the deaf community, as well as the conceptions of rights and well-being of children in the wider society.

    • Roger says:

      …in the meantime, I’m going to just enjoy looking at those expressions of joy on the baby’s face.

    • Mark Mukasa says:

      Aw man, there goes my happiness. :-(

  6. Zotz says:

    Atheist or not, effective / permanent fix or not, I welled up when I saw this little “miracle” smile to hear his mother’s voice.

    I bet the doctor did too.

  7. uzza says:

    Yeah, me too.

  8. Agentsmith says:

    You unrependant fools!!!

    Just who do you think made all these scientists so smart in the first place? God rarely intervenes directly unless he is wiping out whole cities and tribes. He is alway lurking in the shadows working his magic through people so only the faithful can spot His finger prints and truly appreciate His wonders.

    Praise the Lord Goddamnit!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>