Should I be skeptical about rechargeable hearing aid?

Phonaks position, if I have it right, is that some of the new features, and some planned for the future, actually require the extra power that the rechargeable batteries have.

@Psych1 - Then engineer batteries and battery life to accommodate the users who bought into your products. Don’t just drop 'em like a bad habit. Otherwise, like I did, they’ll drop Phonak.

@MDB said:

I think all scenarios have been answered before,

Yes, many many many times.

Can you point me to the thread that actually answers these questions and doesn’t just say carry an extra battery pack everywhere and live without HAs for however long they need to charge? So far I have not seen anyone answer these types of questions in good faith or address the other comments made. I have gone through this whole thread and find the level of defensiveness from the rechargeable crowd baffling.

Why is it so hard to admit rechargeables are not going to work for everyone and the fact that non-rechargeable options keep shrinking is a very real concern for some of us?

@Heather_R said:

Why is it so hard to admit rechargeables are not going to work for everyone

It isn’t hard to admit at all, and it’s done all the time. Facts do not require “good faith.” I’ll go even farther. You don’t need a good reason to take either position. Pros and cons for each, make your choice, no need to defend it. But on a practical note, take account of the time you invest in your position. Because at some point the solutions are easier and take less time than enumerating the problem.

@Dusty said:

Yes, many many many times.

What about the scenario where one has to leave in a hurry and their aids aren’t charged? I think that thread got locked before an answer to the question was posted. There were plenty of suggestions of juice boxes, chargers with built-in battery, etc. But they didn’t answer the question.

@x475aws said:

What about the scenario where one has to leave in a hurry and their aids aren’t charged?

Some might say to plan ahead, but clearly the real answer is that the problem is entirely insurmountable. Case closed, you’ve finally done it!

@Psych1 said:

require the extra power that the rechargeable batteries have.

This has been addressed multiple times, mainly by me. Assuming you mean power in the strict sense, it’s an accepted fact that zinc-air batteries’ power output has been inadequate in some circumstances. But when implant manufacturers needed more power than regular 675 batteries could put out, the battery manufacturers came up with a version of 675’s with higher power output. The same could presumably be done for 13’s and 312’s.

Rechargeable batteries have higher voltage than disposables, so I’ll mention that too. I think the inadequate-voltage hypothesis originated with Phonak including an accelerometer only in rechargeable Paradise aids, not conventional ones. A friend of mine who designs consumer electronics helped me determine that accelerometers running on zinc-air voltage are available, and they draw very, very, very little amperage.

For peace of mind I must remember not to open threads that have the word “rechargeable” in the Subject heading

@jeffrey said:

And so to dismiss rechargeables as a whole because they don’t work for your circumstances misses the point. For many, me included, they’re appropriate and welcome.

Long before I got hearing aids, I knew that many people found hearing aid batteries to be a hassle. So it’s no surprise that rechargeables are popular. But when some of us point out things that conventional batteries do better, we get an argument instead of acknowledgment.

As mentioned before, I wear hearing aids with disposable batteries. I acknowledge their advantages. I just don’t think the challenges with rechargeables are insurmountable.
I also mentioned in another post where some of us were discussing how long these “discussions” about rechargeables go on and on that my thought was that the “disposable crowd” wasn’t feeling heard.

Thank you @Heather_R

Also, I just started a thread about best late model, disposable battery options. I’d love to hear your and anyone else’s thoughts there. Because, though others may not believe it, I really do have to make a decision here.

In the backcountry it’s always going to be safer and more reliable to have HAs with batteries. I’ve also had a few scenarios with ER visits and emergency vets where I was glad I have batteries stashed everywhere and there is no way I would have thought to grab a charger (and in a few cases it wouldn’t have even been possible).

Now if I could have HA chargers in every car and scattered around the house like I do for my phone and could charge while wearing or hot swap them and I could pick up extra chargers at the gas station in the event it broke or got lost that would be pretty cool and I might change my tune

Of course in extreme cases where the HAs are entirely broken or lost we will find work arounds but why set yourself up for that scenario when you can avoid it? If you have a lifestyle that works with rechargeables that’s great but that is not the case for all of us.

@Heather_R said:

Of course in extreme cases where the HAs are entirely broken or lost we will find work arounds but why set yourself up for that scenario when you can avoid it? If you have a lifestyle that works with rechargeables that’s great but that is not the case for all of us.

In my case, my lifestyle along with my hearing will not work with rechargeables. I have zero usable hearing without HAs, so I need the instant hearing that comes with disposable batteries. Absolutely nobody at Phonak thought to consider this scenario. They only thought about those that have usable hearing and decided to drop us.