- May 27, 2020
- 556
- Tinnitus Since
- 2007
- Cause of Tinnitus
- Loud music/headphones/concerts - Hyperacusis from motorbike
This post is something I have been giving a lot of thought to as of late following many conversations with @serendipity1996, who has been a great sounding board for some of my own theories, and was finally prompted by @FGG asking a fairly common question I see people with this condition ask: can you describe your pain?
This post is also a lean-in to another post I'm drafting about why I think FX-322 may help many of us here, and I should be posting that in the next few days.
The aim of this post is to simply start a conversation about the current dichotomy between pain and loudness hyperacusis.
Disclaimers: this post is not going to be very technical nature, and is limited mostly to determining the difference, if any, between loudness and pain hyperacusis. A lot of what I'm about to write is personal and anecdotal and mainly just me thinking out loud, but I hope it encourages a conversation about the language we use when it comes to hyperacusis.
With that out of the way, I think we should consider the possibility, particularly in the absence of any empirical evidence comparing patients with loudness and pain hyperacusis (until last month), that pain and loudness hyperacusis should be considered together as a spectrum rather than individual subtypes, while other subtypes, such as fear or annoyance hyperacusis, should be considered as symptoms of hyperacusis rather than subtypes of their own.
I start by sharing the definitions of all four, as found on hyperacusisresearch.org:
Here is where I take issue with this definition. On a personal note, my life was very loud before hyperacusis. I went to rock concerts, listened to music through speakers, wore headphones often, commuted every day on loud trains, went to sports events etc. My life was generally very loud and I never had a problem with it. However, since I developed hyperacusis, I experience pain and/or discomfort from much quieter sounds, a physiological response which often leads to an emotional response as well (fear/annoyance) - hence why I believe these two latter subtypes are symptoms, not their own conditions, but I digress.
My main point is this: given that I, like many others, had no issue in dealing with loud sounds before we had hyperacusis, why should we suddenly have an issue with other things suddenly sounding louder than normal?
"Oh well, you must have pain hyperacusis, not loudness hyperacusis then".
Not so fast. You're right, I do have pain hyperacusis, but that doesn't counter my argument, which is: is loudness hyperacusis pathologically different from pain hyperacusis?
This may sound like a crazy suggestion to make, but I think it is worth one considering, and I urge people who consider themselves as having loudness hyperacusis to ask themselves this question: do sounds sound louder, or do they feel louder? Personally speaking, I know that the answer to this question is the latter. There are sounds, such as water faucets or squeaky door handles, that cause me to grimace in pain, but the discomfort typically ends as soon as the sound is over. I may also sometimes experience delayed/prolonged jaw/ear pain/headaches as a result of these sounds, but there is some strong evidence to suggest that this could be related to a middle-ear pathology stemming from an overactive auditory system, in response to pain hyperacusis (which has its own pathology). But the point is this: I know that, objectively speaking, the sound isn't any louder than it was before. It's just causing me an uncomfortable physiological reaction.
At this point, I would like to note Charles Liberman's definition of annoyance hyperacusis in an interview he recently gave:
"I believe that pain hyperacusis, which can be very long-lasting, is fundamentally different from annoyance hyperacusis, where the discomfort ends when the stimulus ends, and it will be difficult to distinguish these two types of hyperacusis in an animal model"
What I find interesting is that Liberman's definition of annoyance hyperacusis clearly digresses from the one found on the hyperacusisresearch website. One describes an emotional reaction, while Liberman describes a physiological reaction. While I fully respect Liberman and his work, I do wonder if what he describes as annoyance hyperacusis is what actually many on here experience as loudness hyperacusis: discomfort from sound which ends when the stimulus ends.
"But isn't that the same, or a type of pain hyperacusis?"
It may well be, and if you look at Liberman's quote again, he leaves behind another clue: "pain hyperacusis ... can be very long-lasting". In other words, there is a suggestion that although pain hyperacusis can be long lasting, it doesn't have to be, meaning it can be very brief, just like loudness hyperacusis - or what Charles Liberman describes as "annoyance hyperacusis". In fact, given Liberman said this at interview, it wouldn't surprise me if he misspoke and meant loudness hyperacusis as opposed to annoyance hyperacusis.
On this note, I would like to share an anecdotal story. I said earlier in this post that my life was always loud pre-hyperacusis and I never had an issue with things being loud. This is not entirely true, as I can recall two abnormally loud events that caused me physical discomfort. One was an airshow, where I experienced real pain from fighter jet engines hovering over at a low altitude, and another was a rock concert where the audio engineer was clearly breaking the law. I recall my late father getting out his dB meter at said rock concert and it was showing peaks above 120dB - which we know is the threshold for pain for people with normal ears - and us both saying that it was unbearably loud (as opposed to painful), which funnily enough, is what most people say when they describe their loudness hyperacusis. But on reflection, it wasn't unbearably loud: it was outright uncomfortable and painful.
In other words, under the terms defined for pain hyperacusis, one could argue that everyone and anyone has pain hyperacusis, just at different thresholds (for most at 120dB SPL).
The interesting thing is that on both occasions, as soon as I left the airshow/rock concert, the pain/discomfort ended, in line with what Liberman would call annoyance hyperacusis (but which I believe most people experience as "loudness" hyperacusis). And yet under the current terminology, this would actually fall under "pain" hyperacusis.
So the waters are muddied. Interestingly, a paper only recently just came out to suggest that this indeed may be the case. The conclusion of the study reads as follows:
"Although this study provides little evidence that loudness and pain hyperacusis are pathophysiologically distinct conditions, our findings indicate that a pain-predominant phenotype may be a meaningful prognostic marker in patients with hyperacusis."
I for one agree with this conclusion. I do think loudness and pain hyperacusis may well indeed be the same thing and have simply been used to make distinctions between severity of pain and how long-lasting that pain is.
How this revelation would fit into our current models of hyperacusis remains to be seen. If true, the challenge here would be to develop or identify a model that demonstrates both conditions as having the same pathology. We may already have that with the ATP leakage type II afferent model or the increased pre-synaptic ribbon model, but until now, the former has been confined to explaining pain hyperacusis only and loudness hyperacusis, under its current definition, has been disregarded as being a potential symptom of this pathology entirely.
One model that has been used in favour of loudness hyperacusis is the central gain model which, at least to my understanding, is supported by showing changes in ABR (auditory brainstem response) wave ratios, but it is unclear to me as to whether ABR wave ratio changes can be true indicators of loudness hyperacusis.
There was one study that showed a correlation between reduced LDLs and greater amplitude of ABR Wave V in tinnitus patients (presumably in response to a reduced Wave I coming from the cochlea), suggesting then that neural gain had increased in the midbrain to compensate for reduce output from the cochlea. The study goes on to say that "ABR wave and the perceived loudness of sounds are increased in such patients". I think this is a brilliant piece of research, but the issue I have, for reasons I think I have now made clear, is that they have conflated and/or equated a reduced LDL to an "increase in perceived loudness", and I must question as to whether these two things are, objectively speaking, one and the same thing, as I would argue that the former deals with discomfort/pain, while the latter deals with perception of volume.
Looking forward to everyone else's thoughts on this!
This post is also a lean-in to another post I'm drafting about why I think FX-322 may help many of us here, and I should be posting that in the next few days.
The aim of this post is to simply start a conversation about the current dichotomy between pain and loudness hyperacusis.
Disclaimers: this post is not going to be very technical nature, and is limited mostly to determining the difference, if any, between loudness and pain hyperacusis. A lot of what I'm about to write is personal and anecdotal and mainly just me thinking out loud, but I hope it encourages a conversation about the language we use when it comes to hyperacusis.
With that out of the way, I think we should consider the possibility, particularly in the absence of any empirical evidence comparing patients with loudness and pain hyperacusis (until last month), that pain and loudness hyperacusis should be considered together as a spectrum rather than individual subtypes, while other subtypes, such as fear or annoyance hyperacusis, should be considered as symptoms of hyperacusis rather than subtypes of their own.
I start by sharing the definitions of all four, as found on hyperacusisresearch.org:
- Loudness hyperacusis is when moderately intense sounds are judged to be very loud compared with what a person with normal hearing would perceive.
- Annoyance hyperacusis is a negative emotional reaction to sounds.
- Fear hyperacusis is an aversive response to sounds that results in an anticipatory response and avoidance behavior.
- Pain hyperacusis is when a person experiences pain at much lower sound levels than listeners with normal hearing (typically around 120 dB SPL)
Here is where I take issue with this definition. On a personal note, my life was very loud before hyperacusis. I went to rock concerts, listened to music through speakers, wore headphones often, commuted every day on loud trains, went to sports events etc. My life was generally very loud and I never had a problem with it. However, since I developed hyperacusis, I experience pain and/or discomfort from much quieter sounds, a physiological response which often leads to an emotional response as well (fear/annoyance) - hence why I believe these two latter subtypes are symptoms, not their own conditions, but I digress.
My main point is this: given that I, like many others, had no issue in dealing with loud sounds before we had hyperacusis, why should we suddenly have an issue with other things suddenly sounding louder than normal?
"Oh well, you must have pain hyperacusis, not loudness hyperacusis then".
Not so fast. You're right, I do have pain hyperacusis, but that doesn't counter my argument, which is: is loudness hyperacusis pathologically different from pain hyperacusis?
This may sound like a crazy suggestion to make, but I think it is worth one considering, and I urge people who consider themselves as having loudness hyperacusis to ask themselves this question: do sounds sound louder, or do they feel louder? Personally speaking, I know that the answer to this question is the latter. There are sounds, such as water faucets or squeaky door handles, that cause me to grimace in pain, but the discomfort typically ends as soon as the sound is over. I may also sometimes experience delayed/prolonged jaw/ear pain/headaches as a result of these sounds, but there is some strong evidence to suggest that this could be related to a middle-ear pathology stemming from an overactive auditory system, in response to pain hyperacusis (which has its own pathology). But the point is this: I know that, objectively speaking, the sound isn't any louder than it was before. It's just causing me an uncomfortable physiological reaction.
At this point, I would like to note Charles Liberman's definition of annoyance hyperacusis in an interview he recently gave:
"I believe that pain hyperacusis, which can be very long-lasting, is fundamentally different from annoyance hyperacusis, where the discomfort ends when the stimulus ends, and it will be difficult to distinguish these two types of hyperacusis in an animal model"
What I find interesting is that Liberman's definition of annoyance hyperacusis clearly digresses from the one found on the hyperacusisresearch website. One describes an emotional reaction, while Liberman describes a physiological reaction. While I fully respect Liberman and his work, I do wonder if what he describes as annoyance hyperacusis is what actually many on here experience as loudness hyperacusis: discomfort from sound which ends when the stimulus ends.
"But isn't that the same, or a type of pain hyperacusis?"
It may well be, and if you look at Liberman's quote again, he leaves behind another clue: "pain hyperacusis ... can be very long-lasting". In other words, there is a suggestion that although pain hyperacusis can be long lasting, it doesn't have to be, meaning it can be very brief, just like loudness hyperacusis - or what Charles Liberman describes as "annoyance hyperacusis". In fact, given Liberman said this at interview, it wouldn't surprise me if he misspoke and meant loudness hyperacusis as opposed to annoyance hyperacusis.
On this note, I would like to share an anecdotal story. I said earlier in this post that my life was always loud pre-hyperacusis and I never had an issue with things being loud. This is not entirely true, as I can recall two abnormally loud events that caused me physical discomfort. One was an airshow, where I experienced real pain from fighter jet engines hovering over at a low altitude, and another was a rock concert where the audio engineer was clearly breaking the law. I recall my late father getting out his dB meter at said rock concert and it was showing peaks above 120dB - which we know is the threshold for pain for people with normal ears - and us both saying that it was unbearably loud (as opposed to painful), which funnily enough, is what most people say when they describe their loudness hyperacusis. But on reflection, it wasn't unbearably loud: it was outright uncomfortable and painful.
In other words, under the terms defined for pain hyperacusis, one could argue that everyone and anyone has pain hyperacusis, just at different thresholds (for most at 120dB SPL).
The interesting thing is that on both occasions, as soon as I left the airshow/rock concert, the pain/discomfort ended, in line with what Liberman would call annoyance hyperacusis (but which I believe most people experience as "loudness" hyperacusis). And yet under the current terminology, this would actually fall under "pain" hyperacusis.
So the waters are muddied. Interestingly, a paper only recently just came out to suggest that this indeed may be the case. The conclusion of the study reads as follows:
"Although this study provides little evidence that loudness and pain hyperacusis are pathophysiologically distinct conditions, our findings indicate that a pain-predominant phenotype may be a meaningful prognostic marker in patients with hyperacusis."
I for one agree with this conclusion. I do think loudness and pain hyperacusis may well indeed be the same thing and have simply been used to make distinctions between severity of pain and how long-lasting that pain is.
How this revelation would fit into our current models of hyperacusis remains to be seen. If true, the challenge here would be to develop or identify a model that demonstrates both conditions as having the same pathology. We may already have that with the ATP leakage type II afferent model or the increased pre-synaptic ribbon model, but until now, the former has been confined to explaining pain hyperacusis only and loudness hyperacusis, under its current definition, has been disregarded as being a potential symptom of this pathology entirely.
One model that has been used in favour of loudness hyperacusis is the central gain model which, at least to my understanding, is supported by showing changes in ABR (auditory brainstem response) wave ratios, but it is unclear to me as to whether ABR wave ratio changes can be true indicators of loudness hyperacusis.
There was one study that showed a correlation between reduced LDLs and greater amplitude of ABR Wave V in tinnitus patients (presumably in response to a reduced Wave I coming from the cochlea), suggesting then that neural gain had increased in the midbrain to compensate for reduce output from the cochlea. The study goes on to say that "ABR wave and the perceived loudness of sounds are increased in such patients". I think this is a brilliant piece of research, but the issue I have, for reasons I think I have now made clear, is that they have conflated and/or equated a reduced LDL to an "increase in perceived loudness", and I must question as to whether these two things are, objectively speaking, one and the same thing, as I would argue that the former deals with discomfort/pain, while the latter deals with perception of volume.
Looking forward to everyone else's thoughts on this!