Re: printable link to CI comparision study

[Guest guest]

Yikes!!! PLEASE IGNORE THIS POSTING about the printable link. I just

took another look at the site on bionic ear and they have " edited "

the report to only compare the Clarion and Nucleus. It also looks

they they took out other important parts of the original UNBIASED

study done by Arizona University. I apologize for my mistake. Please

try this link for the ENTIRE report :

http://www.zachary.com/creemer/three_group_comparison1.pdf

My apologies!

> http://www.bionicear.com/printables/080561-P1_DormanWhtPaper.pdf

>

> Hi! Just found a link to a printable version of the Arizona

> University Study on

> www.bionicear.com and thought I would add that link to our site.

> This would be a great site to add to our files.

>

> (aka BunEWabbit)

[Guest guest]

Hi

>>Yikes!!! PLEASE IGNORE THIS POSTING about the printable link. I just

took another look at the site on bionic ear and they have " edited "

the report to only compare the Clarion and Nucleus. It also looks

they they took out other important parts of the original UNBIASED

study done by Arizona University. I apologize for my mistake. Please

try this link for the ENTIRE report :

http://www.zachary.com/creemer/three_group_comparison1.pdf<<

This report was not " edited " by anyone. It's the preliminary report that

the AZ group issued (it says that in the title). It says " In the near

future, results for patients fit with the Med El Tempo+ device will be

added " . Your link is the final version of the article that was presented

at the conference.

Lorie

Clarion 1.2 5/96

[Guest guest]

Dear Lorie,

Hi! Thanks for taking a few minutes to explain why the report on

the bionic ear site looked different. :-) Somehow I missed the part

where it said " preliminary report " .

:-)

> Hi

>

> >>Yikes!!! PLEASE IGNORE THIS POSTING about the printable link. I

just

> took another look at the site on bionic ear and they have " edited "

> the report to only compare the Clarion and Nucleus. It also looks

> they they took out other important parts of the original UNBIASED

> study done by Arizona University. I apologize for my mistake.

Please

> try this link for the ENTIRE report :

>

> http://www.zachary.com/creemer/three_group_comparison1.pdf<<

>

> This report was not " edited " by anyone. It's the preliminary

report that

> the AZ group issued (it says that in the title). It says " In the

near

> future, results for patients fit with the Med El Tempo+ device

will be

> added " . Your link is the final version of the article that was

presented

> at the conference.

>

> Lorie

> Clarion 1.2 5/96