A January 11 Wall Street Journal opinion article by Temma Ehrenfeld titled “How Trump Can Help Millions Hear” is extremely critical of the hearing care field and says President-elect Trump and his transition team’s free-market reforms should include making “hearing aids as easy to purchase as glasses.” Citing the PCAST report, the article notes the $2300 ($4600/pair) cost of hearing aids, compares them with cell phones and glasses, and takes aim at audiologists and bundled pricing. However, the author also notes that consumers can currently purchase hearing aids online or at retailers without bundled pricing for a fraction of this price. Ehrenfeld concludes with “In addition to instructing his FDA chief to approve an over-the-counter device, Mr. Trump should take further steps to make the hearing-aid market more transparent and undo the bundle. Consumers need simple standard terms for features and capabilities, as well as an open-platform approach that allows anyone to program an aid. These moves would be an easy way to improve the lives of millions of people.”
We are a dutch Company and we have started in 2014 with our website http://www.oogvoororen.nl because we believe in transparancy, fair prices, clear terms and self control of the customers to choose in services and products. We believe also ininternet technology and remote fitting and remote fine tuning. Therefore we are developping software for making it possible. We completely understandi this article and the wishes of the end-users. CEO Herman Langstraat
Congratulations Roy! Getting a letter published in WSJ is a great honor!
Bob Tysoe at HHMC
on January 19, 2017 at 5:36 pm
When uninformed scribes weigh in on matters that are not their area of expertise, we can expect the nonsense in evidence by this WSJ author. The lay public are uneducated about how to self diagnose, and self treat, and will spend their money unwisely. Eventually everyone will know what Tom Tedeschi, AuD, from Amplifon knows as a result of his consumer based research, the average person with hearing loss does not self treat well, (not to mention self diagnose in the presence of the limitations of use that the FDA will require) and prefers to delegate their hearing care to professionals such as you. I applaud your courage in writing the letter to WSJ. Let’s keep bundling audiology’s prices, because to delete it, will mean chaotic care, chaotic outcomes, and a disillusioned, disappointed public.
Respectfully,
Bob Tysoe, at Hearing Healthcare Marketing, Portland OR C503 863 9250
Mike P
on January 29, 2017 at 9:30 am
The cited article cited by Tom Tedeschi, AuD, from Amplifon has many design flaws. For instance, the control group subjects knew the purchase price of the inexpensive (less than $500 for a pair) hearing aids. However, when offered hearing aid fitted by a professional there was no price cited. Of course anyone would be satisfied with a no cost fitted hearing aid! The study was biased towards the sale of hearing aids through the audiologist sales channel.
Over the past 40 years, percentage of the population which can benefit and actually uses hearing aids has not changed in a statistically significant way. In contrast, the usage of vision correction (eyeglasses, lasik, contacts, etc) has increased dramatically. The current hearing aid distribution system has not served the hard of hearing US population. It is time to try a new distribution system.
Karl
on January 13, 2017 at 6:02 pm
An email from Roy Sullivan, PhD:
Within nanoseconds of reading yesterday’s WSJ liberal op-ed screed on PSAPs, I fired off this letter to the WSJ editor… Snowball’s chance in Hell for publication but I feel better:
Re: “How Trump Can Help Millions Hear” by Temma Ehrenfeld; WSJ 1/12/17
“A hearing aid is one-third product and two-thirds process.” (Sullivan, 2016)
This is a fact consistently misunderstood by well-intentioned consumer advocates, indicting cost as the sole barrier to hearing aid acceptance. According to NIH data, the hearing aid usage rate for U.S. adults with self-admitted hearing impairment is less than one-third. In Japan, with its unique cultural biases toward handicapping conditions, the hearing aid uptake rate is only 14%. The highest hearing aid usage rates are found in Norway (43%) and Switzerland (39%). Paradoxically, in these two countries, averaging 41% hearing aid use, HEARING AIDS ARE PROVIDED FREE without means tests to ALL residents.
If free-market hearing aid acceptance were simply a matter of cost, what accounts for the non-accepting 59% of hearing-impaired Norwegians and Swiss?
Over-the counter Personal Sound Amplification Products (PSAPs) can serve as convenient entry point for those experiencing hearing loss. Unfortunately, the not uncommon subsequent negative experience can bias the individual against seeking future professional counsel and treatment for a remediable sensory impairment.
I have enjoyed more than 50 years practice as a dispensing audiologist with sixteen years of higher education including a Ph.D. My fees exceed significantly the average hearing aid costs cited in this article. Yet, according to Healthgrades.com, I am the highest consumer-rated audiologist in the State of New York with more than 1000 adult patients who have been with me for up to forty years of practice. The reason for my success rests in these patients’ recognition of the ongoing, long-term professional care component that I apply on their behalf.
“Value-added is a perception, not an assertion.” (Sullivan, 2016)
We are a dutch Company and we have started in 2014 with our website http://www.oogvoororen.nl because we believe in transparancy, fair prices, clear terms and self control of the customers to choose in services and products. We believe also ininternet technology and remote fitting and remote fine tuning. Therefore we are developping software for making it possible. We completely understandi this article and the wishes of the end-users. CEO Herman Langstraat
It was a very cold day in Hell when this was published in the WSJ:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/hearing-aids-and-good-hearing-not-the-same-1484870762
Congratulations Roy! Getting a letter published in WSJ is a great honor!
When uninformed scribes weigh in on matters that are not their area of expertise, we can expect the nonsense in evidence by this WSJ author. The lay public are uneducated about how to self diagnose, and self treat, and will spend their money unwisely. Eventually everyone will know what Tom Tedeschi, AuD, from Amplifon knows as a result of his consumer based research, the average person with hearing loss does not self treat well, (not to mention self diagnose in the presence of the limitations of use that the FDA will require) and prefers to delegate their hearing care to professionals such as you. I applaud your courage in writing the letter to WSJ. Let’s keep bundling audiology’s prices, because to delete it, will mean chaotic care, chaotic outcomes, and a disillusioned, disappointed public.
Respectfully,
Bob Tysoe, at Hearing Healthcare Marketing, Portland OR C503 863 9250
The cited article cited by Tom Tedeschi, AuD, from Amplifon has many design flaws. For instance, the control group subjects knew the purchase price of the inexpensive (less than $500 for a pair) hearing aids. However, when offered hearing aid fitted by a professional there was no price cited. Of course anyone would be satisfied with a no cost fitted hearing aid! The study was biased towards the sale of hearing aids through the audiologist sales channel.
Over the past 40 years, percentage of the population which can benefit and actually uses hearing aids has not changed in a statistically significant way. In contrast, the usage of vision correction (eyeglasses, lasik, contacts, etc) has increased dramatically. The current hearing aid distribution system has not served the hard of hearing US population. It is time to try a new distribution system.
An email from Roy Sullivan, PhD:
Within nanoseconds of reading yesterday’s WSJ liberal op-ed screed on PSAPs, I fired off this letter to the WSJ editor… Snowball’s chance in Hell for publication but I feel better:
Re: “How Trump Can Help Millions Hear” by Temma Ehrenfeld; WSJ 1/12/17
“A hearing aid is one-third product and two-thirds process.” (Sullivan, 2016)
This is a fact consistently misunderstood by well-intentioned consumer advocates, indicting cost as the sole barrier to hearing aid acceptance. According to NIH data, the hearing aid usage rate for U.S. adults with self-admitted hearing impairment is less than one-third. In Japan, with its unique cultural biases toward handicapping conditions, the hearing aid uptake rate is only 14%. The highest hearing aid usage rates are found in Norway (43%) and Switzerland (39%). Paradoxically, in these two countries, averaging 41% hearing aid use, HEARING AIDS ARE PROVIDED FREE without means tests to ALL residents.
If free-market hearing aid acceptance were simply a matter of cost, what accounts for the non-accepting 59% of hearing-impaired Norwegians and Swiss?
Over-the counter Personal Sound Amplification Products (PSAPs) can serve as convenient entry point for those experiencing hearing loss. Unfortunately, the not uncommon subsequent negative experience can bias the individual against seeking future professional counsel and treatment for a remediable sensory impairment.
I have enjoyed more than 50 years practice as a dispensing audiologist with sixteen years of higher education including a Ph.D. My fees exceed significantly the average hearing aid costs cited in this article. Yet, according to Healthgrades.com, I am the highest consumer-rated audiologist in the State of New York with more than 1000 adult patients who have been with me for up to forty years of practice. The reason for my success rests in these patients’ recognition of the ongoing, long-term professional care component that I apply on their behalf.
“Value-added is a perception, not an assertion.” (Sullivan, 2016)
Roy F. Sullivan, PhD, CCC-A