[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Fwd: Re: Hearing Loss "False Positives"

NIHL is a tough nut to crack.  Unless there is some type of acoustic trauma, e.g., firecracker, gunshot, it can takes years for the effect of noise to show up in a typical audiogram. Thus, testing teens exposed to iPods, music bands, etc. can be very misleading unless there is audiometric data that was taken prior to the noise exposure, during the noise exposure and for years after.  Both temporary and permanent threshold shifts must be monitored. Losses from noise will fluctuate over time as the temporarily damaged cells recover. However, eventually, the repeated exposure will eventually break the cells and there will be permanent loss. A year is just not enough to determine if an NIHL exists or not.

From my professional view, it is much more important to determine not so much if these teens are suffering the loss NOW, but whether they are more susceptible LATER and will incur an NIHL at an earlier age due to their teenaged exposures.

Again, JMHO

Harriet B. Jacobster, AuD
Board Certified in Audiology

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Hearing Loss "False Positives"
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 21:00:22 +0000
From: reinifrosch@xxxxxxxxxx <reinifrosch@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: reinifrosch@xxxxxxxxxx
To: AUDITORY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


In the link, it says "10 percent of the 14.9 percent figure"; admittedly, that can be interpreted in two ways. I still tend to favor mine; but even 4.9 percent would be worrying. Anecdotally, one of my grandsons did damage his outer hair cells by a loud noise, namely by that of a fire cracker. Loud music is dangerous too, I think.


Reinhart Frosch,
CH-5200 Brugg.
reinifrosch@xxxxxxxxxx .

----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----
Von: willsonj@xxxxxxxxxxx
Datum: 23.09.2010 21:01
An: <reinifrosch@xxxxxxxxxx>
Kopie: <AUDITORY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Betreff: Re: Hearing Loss "False Positives"

I think you're misreading this.  The paper says that a reasonable statistical model reveals that the method used in previous studies will find roughly 10% of children with normal hearing to have a measured hearing loss that isn't real.  You subtract that from the 14.9% figure and you get less than 5% of children with high-frequency hearing loss, and probably the majority of these are from causes other than loud noises.  

On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 7:58 AM, reinifrosch@xxxxxxxxxx<reinifrosch@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Dear Kevin,

From a non-professional: 10 percent of 14.9 percent is about 1.5 percent; that leaves 13.4 percent of teenagers with hearing loss, which is still frightening. From "Molecular Biology of the Cell", Part V, Chapter 22: "Auditory Hair Cells Have to Last a Lifetime".


Reinhart Frosch,
Dr. phil. nat.,
r. PSI and ETH Zurich,
Sommerhaldenstr. 5B,
CH-5200 Brugg.
Phone: 0041 56 441 77 72.
Mobile: 0041 79 754 30 32.
E-mail: reinifrosch@xxxxxxxxxx .

----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----
Von: kevin.austin@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Datum: 21.09.2010 23:41
An: <AUDITORY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Betreff: Hearing Loss "False Positives"

Would anyone in the professional community care to comment on this?
Begin forwarded message:
A new study from the University of Minnesota says that we're overestimating the amount of teens with hearing loss. 
Thanks in advance.