well i lost my paper so i can't quote from it but i remember the question. it DOESN"T restore normal hearing... it restores something that resembles hearing... basically it bypasses the ear completely and sends electrical impulses into the audiotory nerves which the brain then registers as sound. it doesn't restore normal hearing at all... thats why deaf people have that speech impairmant... they can't hear certain tones, pitches and sounds, but they can hear enough to make out whats going on. i would definately go with the electrical impulses one... i've done this twice, once in senior science and once more indepth in biology and both times its been re-enforced that it doesn't restore normal hearing, but patients regain some sense of hearing.
hope that helps (i'm certain that its teh electrical impulses one)
but it says at the top " a person was found to have severe damage to structure in the cochlea" why can he benifit cos it could make him able to hear again however answer d describe how the implant works to allow the person to be able to listen again i think the logical anwser is indeed C
well like i said i dun have the paper here... i can remember umming over it. it was badly worded but i'm taking NORMAL as a key word and it simply doesn't return NORMAL hearing to the person! i dunno what they'll mark as right but i wouldn't say that it returns normal hearing because its been stressed in both classes that the hearing is poor and not at all "normal", even if they can hear again. u'll just have to wait and see but for now i'm not dwelling on it... all i know is it doesn't return normal hearing... nor does the impulses correctly fit into the question literacy wise. who knows what they'll think is right.