Audiologists raise concern over headphone use in young people
-
Could you share some examples of this type of music, please?
Aside from the obvious Aphex Twin tracks, here is an old one I always liked. It gets progressively more broken halfway through, which is is a good example of what I mean.
-
My tolerance of noise and light pollution has gone way the hell down as I have gotten older. I want to live in the woods at this point.
I feel so lucky, living in the country side where the closest road is 300m away, and the closest neighbour 250m from the house. It gets completely quiet in the summertime due to all the trees surrounding the property. It's heaven on earth in the summer!
-
I knew earphones made you lose your hearing faster but headphones causing issues too? Guess the only safe option are speakers
Next DIY project found!
-
This post did not contain any content.
Did the boomboxes-next-to-heads and the walkmans of the '80s and discmans of the '90s not count? I think a lot of game boy users also used headhpones.
I actually didn't use them that much at all, but I still have trouble hearing with background noise. Noise-cancelling headphones have actually been an amazing thing in my life because (a) it helps overstimulation and anxiety and (b) it actually helps me hear someone talking to me because it filters out the other stuff. I suspect my problems are a combination of mostly-neurological (ADHD and probably (though not officially) ASD) and maybe impacted by loud concerts and general aging-related stuff. I can still hear really high-pitched sounds and the like whereas many of my peers around my age and younger can't as well, but it's all mud to me when there's a lot of sound.
-
The cause of Sophie's APD diagnosis is unknown, but her audiologist believes the overuse of noise-cancelling headphones, which Sophie wears for up to five hours a day, could have a part to play.
Other audiologists agree, saying more research is needed into the potential effects of their prolonged use.
That looks to me like, "audiologists have no bloody clue where this issue is coming from, and are therefore throwing shit at the wall in the hope that something will stick."
it's a hypothesis worth studying.
-
it's a hypothesis worth studying.
Studying sure. But this is openly speculating to the uninformed masses. Can earphones cause cancer? Unless you can prove they don't, that is a hypothesis that could be tested. But more importantly, it's slop for clickbait bullshit so your aunt can post that to Facebook and feel superior to all the dregs giving themselves cancer by wearing earphones. It's useless.
-
Did the boomboxes-next-to-heads and the walkmans of the '80s and discmans of the '90s not count? I think a lot of game boy users also used headhpones.
I actually didn't use them that much at all, but I still have trouble hearing with background noise. Noise-cancelling headphones have actually been an amazing thing in my life because (a) it helps overstimulation and anxiety and (b) it actually helps me hear someone talking to me because it filters out the other stuff. I suspect my problems are a combination of mostly-neurological (ADHD and probably (though not officially) ASD) and maybe impacted by loud concerts and general aging-related stuff. I can still hear really high-pitched sounds and the like whereas many of my peers around my age and younger can't as well, but it's all mud to me when there's a lot of sound.
this isn't a hearing loss issue, the hypothesis is that noise-cancelling headphones specifically are causing our brains to not filter out random noises neurologically.
-
I'm not buying it that it is headphone-related. I wear headphones nearly all of the time, I've listened to music loudly for years on end, I've had to deal with loud screeches, loud noise wherever I go, lived and worked.
It is totally an environmental thing. Plus, the article had already wrapped up what the problem was and a normal hearing test came back negative.
But they haaaaaad to find a reason in the next line. Just had to.
they're not saying it's a headphones thing in general. they're saying it may be a noise-cancelling headphones thing.
-
The cause of Sophie's APD diagnosis is unknown, but her audiologist believes the overuse of noise-cancelling headphones, which Sophie wears for up to five hours a day, could have a part to play.
So fucking stupid...
Kid grew up on a quiet farm in the countryside, then she moved to London and probably 100+ student plus lectures.
It's not that noise cancelling headphones prevented her from developing normally, she developed in an environment like what we evolved to handle.
Then she got thrown into a cacophony of sound that is one of the planets largest/busiest cities...
And they act like she is the problem and not noise pollution?
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41370-024-00642-5
Noise pollution is fucking a lot of us up, and people who grew up with it are used to it, but that doesn't stop the negative consequences of it. Someone that never had to deal with it is obviously going to have what looks like a sudden onset of a condition, but the person is fine.
The environment is the problem.
She is just an example, they say this issue is on the rise in general.
Five NHS audiology departments have told the BBC that there has been an increase in the number of young people referred to them from GPs with hearing issues - only to find their hearing is normal when tested and it is their ability to process sound that is struggling.
APD is more common in neurodivergent people, those who have suffered from a brain injury or had a middle-ear infection as a child. However, more patients with APD are presenting outside of those categories, leaving audiologists to question if external factors, such as noise-cancelling headphones, are contributing.
-
Yeah those first couple paragraphs were just “ADHD/autistic woman behaves like an ADHD/autistic woman. Time to blame her for using accommodation equipment!” (Not actually Dx’ing her, but I recognize a lot of my own patterns here).
Like for fuck’s sake let us have our small bits of sanity. Tuning out the constant hell that is everyday life is not a sin.
they did say she was able to pay attention just fine watching lecture videos with subtitles. Also she is just an example, they said this problem is on the rise in general.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Bad title. The article examines whether specifically noise-cancelling headphones may be involved in listening issues.
-
this isn't a hearing loss issue, the hypothesis is that noise-cancelling headphones specifically are causing our brains to not filter out random noises neurologically.
True. They also mention the person's rural upbringing and then moving to the city. That mirrors my experience and my hearing issues pre-date using noise canceling headphones. I always had a rough time anywhere there were lots of people and noise, but it just wasn't super common previously (I grew up in rural Ohio and have lived in some big US cities.followed by nearly a decade in Tokyo).
-
I feel so lucky, living in the country side where the closest road is 300m away, and the closest neighbour 250m from the house. It gets completely quiet in the summertime due to all the trees surrounding the property. It's heaven on earth in the summer!
Yeah I keep trying to move to the woods but my wife wants to be around people for some reason lol
-
Studying sure. But this is openly speculating to the uninformed masses. Can earphones cause cancer? Unless you can prove they don't, that is a hypothesis that could be tested. But more importantly, it's slop for clickbait bullshit so your aunt can post that to Facebook and feel superior to all the dregs giving themselves cancer by wearing earphones. It's useless.
eh, I don't see a problem with this article specifically, and I don't think your "cancer" hyperbole is a helpful comparison. If people feel like they are suffering from a similar listening/attention issue, there's no real harm in trying to go without noise-cancelling for a while to see if the symptoms improve.
-
it's a hypothesis worth studying.
If a hypothesis is untestable, then it is a guess, and not scientific.
-
If a hypothesis is untestable, then it is a guess, and not scientific.
it's not untestable, they just haven't actually done it yet. In fact they say in the article research is needed.
-
True. They also mention the person's rural upbringing and then moving to the city. That mirrors my experience and my hearing issues pre-date using noise canceling headphones. I always had a rough time anywhere there were lots of people and noise, but it just wasn't super common previously (I grew up in rural Ohio and have lived in some big US cities.followed by nearly a decade in Tokyo).
The woman in the article is also just a single example. They mention that this condition is on the rise in general.
-
they did say she was able to pay attention just fine watching lecture videos with subtitles. Also she is just an example, they said this problem is on the rise in general.
Someone with ADHD can better focus when they get the info simultaneously as text and audio? Unbelievable! Plus it's the most over and under diagnosed disorder at the same time. Under diagnosed within women particularly. It's getting diagnosed better and more often, so it fits too.
I don't say that she has it but most neurodiverse will see lot's of checked boxes.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I am glad to see us respect our link-aggregation heritage of ignoring the article and starting heated discussions based on what we infer from the headline.
It also seems that the headline currently on the article is different and switches out clickbait tactics from misleading omission to absurd pearl-clutching: "Are noise-cancelling headphones to blame for young people's hearing problems?" If you combine them, you get something closer to actual content of the article.
-
I am glad to see us respect our link-aggregation heritage of ignoring the article and starting heated discussions based on what we infer from the headline.
It also seems that the headline currently on the article is different and switches out clickbait tactics from misleading omission to absurd pearl-clutching: "Are noise-cancelling headphones to blame for young people's hearing problems?" If you combine them, you get something closer to actual content of the article.
It also seems that the headline currently on the article is different and switches out
Both are present in the article; they don't switch out. One is the title (as you can see in the title bar of a desktop web browser) and the other is the top-level heading of the text.
Looks like Lemmy picked up the former, which makes sense considering the document structure. BBC probably should have used the same phrase in both places.
