主题：愚公你到底看没看过美国口吃协会关于口吃矫正器使用的调查文章?
作者: 自然
本帖发表在社区争鸣论坛
自然说：美国口吃协会的网上有文章说,包括思比仪在内的口吃矫正器,口吃者选用并报告有效的不到10%.
愚公回复：
我也看到了一些思比易的相关资料和报导。包括你所说的美国口吃协会对思比易使用效果的调查结果，都高于你所说的１０％。 退一步说，我们采用你所说的不到１０％的数字。
自然说：愚公你能看懂美国口吃协会对思比易使用效果的调查结果，都高于你所说的１０％。你说这话可得负责任,把你看到的文章用另一个帖子公布出来,高于10%高在哪了?
愚公回复：
请自然和对此问题感兴趣的朋友登录真实口吃者论坛的华山论剑栏目的＜思比易临床有效性资料汇总＞一帖。你怀疑这些资料的真实性吗？ 根据是什么？
以上是我与愚公的对话,愚公的回帖中故意遗漏问题,请愚公在论坛帖出他看到的在美国口吃协会网站上看到的美国口吃研究者对口吃矫正器使用效果的调查文章
发表时间：2007-3-20 23:39:14 IP：已记录
愚公跟帖:
Ａ。请自然和对此问题感兴趣的朋友登录真实口吃者论坛的华山论剑栏目的＜思比易临床有效性资料汇总＞一帖。你怀疑这些资料的真实性吗？ 根据是什么？ 请回答。
Ｂ。应自然的要求，我把ＮＣＥ的一个帖子转贴到这里。我再重复一遍，这是自然要求我作的，而不是我故意炒作思比易。
主题：美国口吃协会对思比易的态度
作者: nce
本帖转自社区争鸣论坛
下面转述美国口吃协会对思比易的看法，原文过长，恕不全文翻译。
中心意思是：思比易的效果因人而异，有些人很有效，有些人无效。况且，每个口吃者对于“成功”的定义不同，要确切统计有效率是一件困难的事。美国口吃协会不会公开支持任何一种单一的治疗方案。 并且对任何一种声称有效的方法持谨慎的态度，无论是传统疗法还是矫正仪器。（还有一句很重要的话：）要真正克服或有效的控制口吃，勤奋和努力是最主要的因素。
下面谈谈我个人的看法：我在去年曾试戴过一阵思比易，确实有一些帮助，但并未达到我满意的程度，所以没有买。在思比易的国际论坛上，用户的反应也是褒贬不一。所以家境好的朋友不妨尝试一下。也希望思比易厂家能适当延长试用期，让用户能更放心的购买，因为我也看到和听说过一些随着时间的推移思比易的效果下降变得无效的情况。
The National Stuttering Association's Position on the Speech Easy and other assistive devices
Dear NSA?/H4>
"I recently heard about the SpeechEasy 'anti-stuttering' device. Should I buy one?"
The SpeechEasy device, available from Janus Development (
www.speecheasy.com), has received widespread publicity during the past few years. The NSA knows that many people who stutter and their family members have questions about the device, and we are eager to provide information about this device. A major of mission of the NSA is to help people find the treatment approach or solution that is right for them.
How assistive devices work
The SpeechEasy is, in essence, a digital hearing aid that provides Delayed Auditory Altered Feedback (DAF), as well as Frequency Altered Feedback (FAF). It has long been known that many, though not all, people who stutter experience increases in their speech fluency when speaking under DAF and FAF. The specific reason for this increased fluency is not at all clear. Still, numerous devices to help people speak more fluently have been developed over the past 50-60 years. These include the Edinburgh Masker, the Fluency Master, and others. The SpeechEasy builds upon prior efforts by offering DAF and FAF in a miniaturized package.
Experience to date
Researchers, clinicians, and members of the stuttering community appear to be divided regarding the use of the SpeechEasy. Some people are strong advocates of the device, while others are strong opponents. Unfortunately, at present, there are no published, independent studies that show what percentage of the population of people who stutter are likely to benefit from the SpeechEasy. To be sure, many people have received varying degrees of benefit from the device; however, it is impossible to say who will benefit and who will not. Here at the NSA, we have heard from many members who have tried the SpeechEasy. Like all things, though, there are some who have found success and some who have not. It is important to recognize that different people have different definitions of "success." For example, some individuals might experience considerably increased fluency in most speaking situations, while others may only use it in very specific contexts. Still others receive very little benefit from the device.
Indeed, in a recent survey of NSA members, 125 of 701 respondents reported using a feedback or speech pacer device such as DAF, masker, Fluency Master, Pacemaster, etc. Of those, 38% reported that their experience with the device was not at all successful; 44% said their experience was somewhat successful; and 18% reported their experience was very successful. Thus, different people have different experiences. It is important to note that this survey was conducted before use of the SpeechEasy was widespread, so these results do not relate directly to the SpeechEasy. One might guess that these findings could be similar to the experiences of individuals who use the Speech Easy device, though only further research will provide the information we need.
Long-term effects are unclear
One of the questions that has been raised about the SpeechEasy is how long the effects will last for those people who do experience improved fluency. Prior efforts to use DAF and FAF have resulted in only temporary gains-as people habituate to the device, the benefits in fluency tend to diminish over time. It is not clear, at this point, whether the SpeechEasy will also be affected by habituation, though research is currently underway to address this and other relevant questions. In all likelihood, some people will experience habituation and a loss of treatment effects over time, while others will find that their fluency gains that are more durable. It should be noted that these are the same sorts of issues and problems that have been identified with traditional approaches to stuttering treatment, so individuals should always be prepared to gather information and ask questions about outcomes, regardless of which approach they have selected.
Limitations of assistive devices
Fluency gains are only present with people are actually using the device. In this way, the SpeechEasy is like glasses卛t does not fix the underlying problem (stuttering or poor vision); it simply provides a way of compensating for that problem. Some of our members have found it difficult to use SpeechEasy meaningfully in some speaking situations. Because the device is only worn in one ear, the speaker hears competing signals - normal feedback in one ear and frequency-altered, delayed feedback in the other ear. Some NSA members have found this distracting, particularly in noisy environments or social settings. Thus, although some people have found that the device helps them speak more fluently, they have also found that it can be difficult to use at times. These limitations have prompted some of our members to use their devices only in certain situations, and some have stopped using them entirely.
Caution for parents
Finally, perhaps the most important question that has arisen is whether or not the SpeechEasy should be used with children. Although the SpeechEasy may prove to be a viable treatment alternative for some adults who stutter, many speech-language pathologists and people who stutter believe that we should be much more cautious about the use of such devices with children. At the NSA ,we feel that such caution is definitely warranted - we do need to be more careful about treatment provided to children who stutter. At present we simply do not have sufficient information to make an informed judgment. There are no published studies demonstrating the efficacy or safety of using the SpeechEasy with children. Therefore, the more cautious approach would be to wait to learn the results of ongoing research on the SpeechEasy before recommending its use with children.
Years of experience and research have shown that people who stutter are such a diverse population that no single remedy - be it a therapy program, an assistive device, or a medication - will work for everyone. Although we often hear of "new" treatments or miracle cures, to date, no single approach has proven to be effective for all people who stutter. Thus, the NSA fully supports research into effective treatments for stuttering. It is only through ongoing evaluation and research that people who stutter and therapists alike will be able to determine which treatment options are most viable.
Advice to consumers
At the NSA, we believe that all people who stutter should carefully consider the many treatment options that are available and make their own decisions about what is right for them. For some people, this may include devices such as the SpeechEasy; for others, it will not. One thing we do know, however, is that reducing the number of disruptions in a person's speech is only part of effective management of stuttering. Although many people who stutter can increase their fluency, through a variety of methods, many also benefit from assistance in dealing with the emotional consequences of a lifetime of stuttering. The professionals who are best qualified to help people who stutter deal with these negative consequences are speech-language pathologists, preferably board-recognized specialists in fluency disorders, working on conjunction with stuttering support groups such as the National Stuttering Association.
In should be emphasized that any approach to treatment-including speech therapy, use of an assistive device, or self-help-will have strengths and weaknesses. Individuals who stutter will always need to be motivated toward success and have confidence in the treatment process. The common denominator for all improvements in communication is that effort and hard work are needed to truly overcome and cope with stuttering.
Today, there is more help available for people who stutter than ever before, and the research currently in progress offers much hope for the future. People who stutter can benefit from educating themselves about stuttering and considering all available treatment options before making choices about what is best for their individual needs. For that reason, the NSA does not endorse any single approach to treating stuttering, and we tend to be very cautious about new claims of effective remedies, whether they be traditional speech therapy approaches, medications, or fluency enhancing devices.
We hope this information will be helpful to you, and we thank you for bringing your question to the National Stuttering Association. The NSA serves adults and children who stutter through education, advocacy, education, and support. The nonprofit organization, founded in 1977, has more than 80 local chapters nationwide. We sponsor workshops and youth programs around the country and publish a growing list of publications and booklets about stuttering for people who stutter, their families, and the clinicians who serve them.
If we can be of any further assistance, please don't hesitate to contact us at
info@WeStutter.org. You can also get information at our website,
www.WeStutter.org or by calling 1 (800) We Stutter (937-8888).
［此帖子已被 nce 在 2006-09-16 19:53:17 编辑过］
Ｃ。黄逸说: 口吃治疗仪在北美上市,得到学术界的一致认可
“HZZ-1型口吃治疗仪”是根据深度听觉延迟反馈理论（DAF）研制的新一代口吃矫正仪器(中文名称叫语通---愚公说明)，曾荣获国家发明专利（专利号ZL 92 1 14185.8），系模拟信号延迟方法用于口吃治疗的国内唯一专利，其技术含金量远远超过目前已有的口吃治疗仪器，
[COLOR="Red"]与之相似的仪器(其中应当包括思比易---愚公说明)已经在美国、加拿大等国家上市，同样得到了学术界的一致认可。[/COLOR]
自2000年以来，该仪器经过近百名口吃患者的试用，证明疗效确切，无任何副作用。
[摘自主题：[注意]复旦大学附属医院口吃治疗仪临床验证,欢迎协会会员参加]
[发表时间：2004-05-09 20:42:17 摘自上海协会论坛]
自然跟帖:
愚公转的这篇英文文章，我最早推荐给nce看的，从这篇文章根本没有nce的那个中心意思，当时nce发那个帖子的时候说这篇文章是美国口吃基金会的，当时我电话给nce指出来了,碍于面子我没有具体说nce从文章中得不出他的结论。这也给愚公后来的偏执提供了借口。
现在可以肯定的说愚公不能看懂原文，而 仅仅依据nce的主观臆测来做证据是靠不住的。
[COLOR="red"]至于黄逸说: 口吃治疗仪在北美上市,得到学术界的一致认可确实不假，[/COLOR]但是不是口吃矫正的主流方法。不争的事实是现在的口吃的大脑神经机制还没搞明白，在未来的50年内也不可能搞的很清楚，所以现在的口吃矫正班所宣传的科学概念都有虚假欺骗的成分，只是有善意和恶意之分而已。
愚公跟帖:
自然说：至于黄逸说: 口吃治疗仪在北美上市,得到学术界的一致认可确实不假，
愚公回复：
你的这句话值千金，我想其他的什么都不用说了。
自然说：愚公转的这篇英文文章，我最早推荐给nce看的，从这篇文章根本没有nce的那个中心意思，
愚公回复：
我找人把这篇文章译成中文不就成了吗？ 看看这篇文章中有没有ＮＣＥ所说的那个意思。 据我所知，ＮＣＥ是教英语的，他的英语水平应当不至于太差吧？
自然说：而（愚公） 仅仅依据nce的主观臆测来做证据是靠不住的
愚公回复：
就算我受ＮＣＥ的误导， 这篇文章能说明什么问题？ 难道就以这篇文章来判断思比易是否有效果？ 这不是开玩笑吗？
现在关于思比易的资料不算少，我们应当能从这些资料中得出自己的结论。
自然跟帖:
愚公回复：
我也看到了一些思比易的相关资料和报导。包括你所说的美国口吃协会对思比易使用效果的调查结果，都高于你所说的１０％。
愚公，我这个帖子就是要证明你是不是说瞎话了，那篇文章还没人给你翻译呢，你咋说自己看到过文章呢。
看来你的胆子跟你的岁数一样大。
愚公跟帖:
自然说：
愚公，我这个帖子就是要证明你是不是说瞎话了，那篇文章还没人给你翻译呢，你咋说自己看到过文章呢。
愚公回复：
看过别人转述的文章不算是看过吗？
自然说：至于黄逸说: 口吃治疗仪在北美上市,得到学术界的一致认可确实不假，
愚公回复：
你的这句话值千金，我想其他的什么都不用说了。
你的帖子我近日不再回复， 等我的冤案平反后我有的是时间奉陪你.
自然跟帖:
最主要还是别人转述的文章符合你的需要，你就不加批判的拿来当救命稻草。
现在又抓住黄逸的那句话不放了，这就能给你平反了？
愚公跟帖:
自然说:最主要还是别人转述的文章符合你的需要，你就不加批判的拿来当救命稻草。
愚公回复:
看了ＮＣＥ转述的一篇文章就能当我的救命稻草? 你对思比易的偏见有多深啊! 像你这样戴着有色眼镜看问题的人还能研究矫正口吃?
自然说:现在又抓住黄逸的那句话不放了，这就能给你平反了？
愚公回复:
不光是抓住黄逸的那句话不放, 而且还抓住了你说的那句话不放了.
[COLOR="red"]黄逸说: 口吃治疗仪在北美上市,得到学术界的一致认可
自然说:至于黄逸说: 口吃治疗仪在北美上市,得到学术界的一致认可确实不假，[/COLOR]
这么说, 你不同意给我平反了? 我怀疑你是变色龙投胎的吧? 你说的话还有信誉吗?
［此帖子已被 愚公 在 2007-3-23 8:07:01 编辑过］
