|
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 Regards, -------- Original Message --------
Jeffrey, 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. On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 7:58 AM, reinifrosch@xxxxxxxxxx<reinifrosch@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
|