Audiologists raise concern over headphone use in young people
-
The problem is not the hypothesis, the problem is that it isn't really presented as a hypothesis. Reporting on the results before doing the experiment isn't the way to go.
Our theories of how the world works are necessarily incomplete, and experiments turn up things that overturn scientific understanding often enough. The way this is set up matches a common pattern of vilifying tech without seeing whether it's deserved or not. Maybe not wearing a noise cancellation headset would, in fact, help this patient, but until that's tested and found out to be true, reporting on it is just spreading FUD.
her audiologist believes
(emphasis mine). Belief is colloquial speech for working hypothesis. Her prescription will have been along the lines of "ease on those headphones, go to a forest or park and just listen, use them only if you really feel them to be necessary, try to expose yourself".
"Nothing can ever be acted upon unless we have a meta-study examining fifty double-blind studies" is pseudoscepticism.
-
This post did not contain any content.
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.
Me, wearing my noise-cancelling headphones for 10+ hours a day ....
-
Sure, but it's still pretty irresponsible of the BBC to publish what is effectively educated guesses as something to be concerned about.
This belongs in an academic article. Not a news one.
No it’s not. Experts in their field are seeing a strong correlation in behaviors that could harm your health. It’s the perfect place for an audiologist to speak to this issue.
-
Exactly.
This is not the same thing, as the other comment explains.
-
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.
Me, wearing my noise-cancelling headphones for 10+ hours a day ....
I have my noise cancelling airpods pro, but never use ANC because it has that white noise sound I don't like. It's basically blasting more noise in your earhole to drown out/cancel out the noise around you.
-
No it’s not. Experts in their field are seeing a strong correlation in behaviors that could harm your health. It’s the perfect place for an audiologist to speak to this issue.
And they also have a theoretical basis for their hypothesis. You don't have to have 100% experimental proof about something to take initial action, especially to avoid harm.
-
I have my noise cancelling airpods pro, but never use ANC because it has that white noise sound I don't like. It's basically blasting more noise in your earhole to drown out/cancel out the noise around you.
Yeah, ANC quality can vary a lot and generally it's even worse for earbuds.
I have a pair of Bose QC Ultra headphones which have amazing ANC.
A few month back there was a constuction site across the street. At one point I felt my desk vibrating, so I took of my headphones ... only then did I realised they were using a jackhammer.
-
This post did not contain any content.
As the world become more and more noisy. And people become more a more shitty with regards of doing noise without care about how it affects others. ANC become a necessity for some people.
-
'Words sound like gibberish'
What? This article is confusing as hell.
I use mine a lot, but I don't have problems telling where sounds are coming from or understanding what is being said.
Tbh this just sounds like ADHD or something.
Tbh this just sounds like ADHD or something.
It's APD (Auditory Processing Disorder). That's explained in the article.
-
No it’s not. Experts in their field are seeing a strong correlation in behaviors that could harm your health. It’s the perfect place for an audiologist to speak to this issue.
We also had an expert who started the vacines cause autism trying to peddle a new replacement for the MMR vaccine. (This is my opinion based on the research done Here )Just because "an expert" says something, doesn't mean it's true. And blindly listening to them can cause harm as well.
This is a fallacy called Argument of authority
No, it's completely irresponsible to say something not peer reviewed and actually studied.
-
And they also have a theoretical basis for their hypothesis. You don't have to have 100% experimental proof about something to take initial action, especially to avoid harm.
Because that worked so well for
Dr.Wakefield -
We also had an expert who started the vacines cause autism trying to peddle a new replacement for the MMR vaccine. (This is my opinion based on the research done Here )Just because "an expert" says something, doesn't mean it's true. And blindly listening to them can cause harm as well.
This is a fallacy called Argument of authority
No, it's completely irresponsible to say something not peer reviewed and actually studied.
There was never even a shred of proper science behind the autism causes vaccines thing, and it was a very very very very minority opinion.
Does gravity exist on Alpha Centrauri? Ask any physicist, they're going to say "yes". You're then going to stand there, saying "we have not actually made the necessary experiments on Alpha Centauri itself, we do not have conclusive evidence, all those people are peddling pseudoscience". Never mind that all that we know about physics leads us to the extrapolation that, yes, gravity exists there and we have no reason to think why there isn't gravity there. Could that extrapolation be wrong? Yes. But it's also a silly thing to insist onto working into the plans of a colonialisation spaceship. All you're achieving with that is having it never be built, bogging shit down in unsubstantiated scepticism.
-
Because that worked so well for
Dr.WakefieldNot at all the same thing. There was tons of evidence and theory that vaccines were safe, and the consequences of not using them were very high.
-
Yeah, ANC quality can vary a lot and generally it's even worse for earbuds.
I have a pair of Bose QC Ultra headphones which have amazing ANC.
A few month back there was a constuction site across the street. At one point I felt my desk vibrating, so I took of my headphones ... only then did I realised they were using a jackhammer.
Similar story here, Bose QC whilst the house next door was (basically) being demolished... I just found the headphones ate batteries faster.
I sometimes find I'm just working with the headphones on and whatever I was listening to had stopped ages ago.
by blocking everyday sounds such as cars beeping, there is a possibility the brain can "forget" to filter out the noise.
Also growing up in the quiet countryside, I can say that you do not “forget” to hear sounds like cars... it's definitely the everyday background noise that's the problem.
-
There was never even a shred of proper science behind the autism causes vaccines thing, and it was a very very very very minority opinion.
Does gravity exist on Alpha Centrauri? Ask any physicist, they're going to say "yes". You're then going to stand there, saying "we have not actually made the necessary experiments on Alpha Centauri itself, we do not have conclusive evidence, all those people are peddling pseudoscience". Never mind that all that we know about physics leads us to the extrapolation that, yes, gravity exists there and we have no reason to think why there isn't gravity there. Could that extrapolation be wrong? Yes. But it's also a silly thing to insist onto working into the plans of a colonialisation spaceship. All you're achieving with that is having it never be built, bogging shit down in unsubstantiated scepticism.
You are right there's never been any credible evidence.
But I wasn't claiming that.
I was claiming it was irresponsible to report on such an early finding in the media without proper verification and actual conclusive studies.
Almost like the BBC article here in question.
-
Not at all the same thing. There was tons of evidence and theory that vaccines were safe, and the consequences of not using them were very high.
And yet that didn't stop the ACTUAL harm it caused.
-
Tbh this just sounds like ADHD or something.
It's APD (Auditory Processing Disorder). That's explained in the article.
Guess I didn't read that far
-
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.
People are posting about wanting to run away to the woods but I think it's important to remember that cities can be quiet.
Not that we should all move to Delft, but if we built infrastructure for people instead of cars cities wouldn't be so fucking loud.
-
You are right there's never been any credible evidence.
But I wasn't claiming that.
I was claiming it was irresponsible to report on such an early finding in the media without proper verification and actual conclusive studies.
Almost like the BBC article here in question.
They're reporting on what the audiologists observe and believe to be the case, and clearly label it as such: A belief, with further study necessary. People thinking they could be affected by this might take action after reading the article, true, and the action would be -- easing off on using sound-cancelling headphones. That could, in the end, not help. What would be the harm done? Neither the science was misrepresented, it was portrayed as incomplete, "here's our educated guess", and the recommendations one can draw from that guess are quite inconceivable to cause harm themselves.
Have a look again at what the Hippocratic oath states: First, do no harm. They're keeping to that. Ease off. You can tell a patient to try dialling back on their coffee consumption before having conclusive proof that that's what's causing their jitters: Less coffee won't kill them.
-
They're reporting on what the audiologists observe and believe to be the case, and clearly label it as such: A belief, with further study necessary. People thinking they could be affected by this might take action after reading the article, true, and the action would be -- easing off on using sound-cancelling headphones. That could, in the end, not help. What would be the harm done? Neither the science was misrepresented, it was portrayed as incomplete, "here's our educated guess", and the recommendations one can draw from that guess are quite inconceivable to cause harm themselves.
Have a look again at what the Hippocratic oath states: First, do no harm. They're keeping to that. Ease off. You can tell a patient to try dialling back on their coffee consumption before having conclusive proof that that's what's causing their jitters: Less coffee won't kill them.
You say this like pilots, young and old, haven't been using ANC headphones for decades safely at this point.
And no, just because someone says something could be a risk, doesn't mean we all respond. I mean that's literally the lesson we learned from the vacines cause autism. What are you even talking about it's okay to just wildly speculate.
