Here is my 'reality'. When I was fit with a hearing aid in 1975 both ears were affected by progressive sensorineural hearing loss. I didn't want to have hearing aids and was embarrassed to have them. I was shocked at the cost which was $500 then! I finally agreed, then to be fit with a bicross aid that only aided one ear while it transferred sound from the other side. The aided ear was the one that tested slightly better. I wore a bicross system for over 25 years. The unaided ear suffered from 'sensory deprivation' over that time. I could hear basic sounds in that ear, but speech understanding in tests was very poor.

I took the advice to get an aid for that deprived ear and using the telecoil in it to listen to audiobooks, I evidently was able to rehab it to a certain point. When it was time to get the CI, the surgeon preferred to do the CI on the better ear. I made the decision to have it done on the ear I had been trying to rehab as I was fearful of losing what that better ear still had. The surgeon was OK with my decision.

So, basically I was without hearing for over 25 years before having the CI done. However, due to the telecoil/hearing aid rehab I was told to do, I had far better results than I might have had without it in that ear.

Now, my ''better ear' has the poorer hearing, but I find my brain has rewired itself to need both technologies to hear well. If I use only one or the other there's a big difference. But, I will say that the best technology for me between the two is the CI.

I qualify to have a second CI but do well enough that I've chosen to stay bimodal at least for now.