Very Loud Fire Alarm. Feel Like I'm Back to Square One.


So all concerts goers eventually meet a point where they "don't recover from the acoustic injury"?

hB9BB0240.jpg
 
So all concerts goers eventually meet a point where they "don't recover from the acoustic injury"?

I don't think this is implied by this quote. I think it only says that the ears have a "budget" and the fact that your T went away after a concert doesn't mean that you're resistant to concerts - it only means that you spent a portion of your budget but you're blessed to still have some left over.

If you're lucky enough to born with a "big budget" you can go to concerts all your life and never end up with permanent T.
 
Where is the scientific evidence by the way Contrast? Is it the "We don't know why" or the "We don't have a clue"? I have read different theories from other specialists (Dr Peignard for example, please find it below). They are just theories, not evidence.

il faut savoir qu'il est impossible que la lésion initiale s'aggrave si l'acouphène n'est pas lié à une maladie évolutive…L'acouphène chronique est une réponse à une lésion cicatricielle des voies nerveuses auditives, et une cicatrice ne s'étend pas. [1] Par contre les sensations, la perception que l'on a vis-à-vis de l'acouphène peut évoluer. Inquiétude, anxiété exacerbe cette sensation.

Google translation:
You should know that it is impossible for the initial lesion to get worse if the tinnitus is not linked to an active disease ... Chronic tinnitus is a response to a cicatricial lesion of the auditory nerve pathways, and a scar is not do not stretch. [1] On the other hand, the sensations, the perception which has vis-à-vis the tinnitus can evolve. Anxiety, anxiety exacerbates this sensation.

It is at the opposite of Liberman's views. But I don't think it is true either. For I know tinnitus can get worse, even if not caused by a chronic disease. But I believe the truth is in between.
If Liberman's statements were true, why do some noise induced Hs and Ts fade with time?
 
Last edited:
Where is the scientific evidence by the way Contrast? Is it the "We don't know why" or the "We don't have a clue"?
The target audience are the people who don't have a medical background. It is likely that his opinion is based on his observations in his own practice, or it is based on a published study. Just because the mechanism of why this is happening hasn't been established, doesn't mean it is ok to ignore the empirical evidence (that this forum is full of, and that the doctor is using to make those statements).
He is a professor of otology (a branch of medicine studying the ear) at Harvard Medical School. I doubt he would be just making stuff up when talking to a journalist. What he describes must be based on published empirical findings.

By the way, he also says
Exposure to noise — noise that was formerly considered non-damaging — causes massive degeneration of the cochlear nerve that progresses over time.

all concerts goers eventually meet a point where they "don't recover from the acoustic injury"?
"You can have identical exposure and get absolutely huge differences in the amount of damage," he says. "Tough" ears can withstand plenty of noise, while "tender" ears can withstand surprisingly little. The problem is that it's impossible to tell, until it's too late, who's at risk.
So Eventually All concert goes (even the ones with tough ears) are going to have problems.

The fact that someone got T increases the probability that one has had "weak ears" all along (and had used up their "budget"). More exposure will hurt them. Another way of saying the same thing is that this person's ears have been compromised.
If Liberman's statements were true, why do some noise induced Hs and Ts fade with time?
The ability to recover from acoustic injury drops with increased exposure.
So to answer your question, many of us work to ensure that we limit any new exposure. Lieberman is talking about what happens to the ear. He never talked about the neurons that actually generate tinnitus. Those neurons are subject to plasticity.
 
More useful quotes from that buzzfeed article
Recognition of the dangers of noise — which are often mischaracterized and more far-reaching than previously assumed — is "dawning a little bit but doesn't go beyond the research community so far," says Jos Eggermont, a professor at the University of Calgary in Alberta, Canada. He was stunned when his research showed that exposure to low-level noise, in amounts not generally considered harmful, caused extensive damage in the auditory cortex.
My not-yet husband emailed me because I was getting better and he was getting worse. He wanted to know my strategy. Time and silence, I told him.
Regarding a person who had committed suicide as a result of T and H:
A concert he couldn't resist. His audiologist told him earplugs were enough. They weren't. "I want to emphasize that this is entirely my own fault," Hectors wrote. "I have never been aware of the dangers."
...
The final, fatal dose of noise came during a friend's bachelor party; he wore earplugs during dinner and fled after a brief stop at the karaoke bar. His ears burned with a white-hot pain.
 
The fact that someone got T increases the probability that one has had "weak ears" all along (and had used up their "budget"). More exposure will hurt them. Another way of saying the same thing is that this person's ears have been compromised.

This is your interpretation, I have read nothing of the like in the article. He does not make a distinction between people who have T and people who do not. Maybe my understanding of the English is bad, but "The ability to recover from acoustic injury drops with increased exposure" means that when you have an acoustic injury (inducing tinnitus or not), if you keep exposing (regularly?) to the noise that gave you an injury (in most cases: around 100 dB for several hours), you will be less likely to recover from it each time (which is not a big surprise). That does not mean that 80 or 90dB noises suddenly become a big threat.

Exposure to noise — noise that was formerly considered non-damaging — causes massive degeneration of the cochlear nerve that progresses over time.

"formerly considered non-damaging"... by the scientific community, no? It refers to "we now know.." just above. To me it does not mean that non-damaging noise suddenly becomes damaging for hurt ears, but that some noise levels that were formerly considered safe actually lead to damage. Or were you refering to the last part of the sentence?

This is my understanding as a French speaker, let me know if I miss the point.

Regarding a person who had committed suicide as a result of T and H

We agree on this, concerts can be ridiculously loud, and it is non stop for a few hours. I think they are dangerous for everyone, even with plugs (which are easily instered in an incorrect manner by the way). And obviously more dangerous if you expose to them regularly.
 
He does not make a distinction between people who have T and people who do not.
The article says that people with weak ears are easier to hurt. It also says that the more one gets hurt, the easier it is to get hurt. There are two sets of people, the ones with weak ears and the ones with strong ears. There are also two groups of people - the ones with T and the ones with no T. Think about it - in the group with T, will there be a higher fraction of people with weak ears compared with the group with strong ears? In other words, you have to agree that Given someone has T, the probability they have weak ears is higher compared to the probability of weak ears given the person belongs to the group with no T. So finding out that you have T has to increase the probability that you assign to having weak ears. Also the fact that you have T, means you have hurt your ears. That means that you have a higher chance to hurt your ears than a person who has no T. A shorter way of saying the same thing is that your ears have been compromised. Note that the compromise might have happened when you were born as a person with weak ears. Getting T is a signal sent to you by your body that it makes sense for you to adjust the probability that your ears will be hurt if exposed to more noise (even the noise that in the past you had assumed was safe).
The ability to recover from acoustic injury drops with increased exposure" means that when you have an acoustic injury (inducing tinnitus or not), if you keep exposing (regularly?) to the noise that gave you an injury (in most cases: around 100 dB for several hours), you will be less likely to recover from it each time (which is not a big surprise). That does not mean that 80 or 90dB noises suddenly become a big threat.
Looks like you might not have read the other quotes that I posted (that I found in the same article)
He was stunned when his research showed that exposure to low-level noise, in amounts not generally considered harmful, caused extensive damage in the auditory cortex.
Also
Exposure to noise — noise that was formerly considered non-damaging — causes massive degeneration of the cochlear nerve that progresses over time.
Hopefully you will agree that the above is likely referring to noise in the 80-90dB range.
"formerly considered non-damaging"... by the scientific community, no? It refers to "we now know.." just above. To me it does not mean that non-damaging noise suddenly becomes damaging for hurt ears, but that some noise levels that were formerly considered safe actually lead to damage. Or were you refering to the last part of the sentence?
Earlier in the article they say
Recognition of the dangers of noise — which are often mischaracterized and more far-reaching than previously assumed — is "dawning a little bit but doesn't go beyond the research community so far," says Jos Eggermont, a professor at the University of Calgary in Alberta, Canada.
So what the general public is currently being told is non-damaging noise (e.g. 80-90dB) is what later in the article they refer to as "formerly non-damaging noise". The non-damaging noise didn't suddenly become damaging. It was damaging all along - and they are slowly beginning to realize that.
oncerts can be ridiculously loud, and it is non stop for a few hours. I think they are dangerous for everyone, even with plugs (which are easily instered in an incorrect manner by the way). And obviously more dangerous if you expose to them regularly.
Makes sense.
 
Hopefully you will agree that the above is likely referring to noise in the 80-90dB range.

Why would I? You make a lot of assumptions to understand what you want to understand.

Also the fact that you have T, means you have hurt your ears. That means that you have a higher chance to hurt your ears than a person who has no T.

Nope. A "person who has" no T can be more hurt than you. I know several people who hurt their ears a lot and have a bad hearing without T (whereas I have T but a very good hearing). T is not an automatic thing. And having T does not mean you have hurt your ears either (in a lot of cases yes, but not necessarily).
 
Why would I? You make a lot of assumptions to understand what you want to understand.
What the public believes is unsafe noise is over 100dB, and 80-90 dB is just below that. Are you saying those professors were talking about 98-99dB range of noise?
A "person who has" no T can be more hurt than you.
True. Anything can happen. But I was talking about the probabilities. The PROBABILITY that they are hurt is Less than the probability that I am hurt.

If a bunch of people listens to the same noise and then some of them get T, the probability that those who got T have weak ears is higher than the probability that the person who didn't get T has weak ears.
 
The spike from the fire alarm went away, but I'm posting here again to see if anyone has any ideas about hotel fire alarms. I spoke with someone else the other day that told me he was in a hotel fire alarm and it was painfully loud even after he put earplugs in. I spend so many nights in hotels that this has become a new fear of mine. They like to put those things right next to the bed. I know I cannot modify or disable them, that would be illegal, but is there anything else I can do? I wish there was something I could just put over it that would dampen the sound a little if it were to go off (I'm sure it would be plenty loud enough). I'm just afraid of one going off right over my head when I'm asleep. I don't need 120 decibels to wake me up.
Hi Man. Weird world... I had a "spike" / worsening/ whatever you know in December 1st (almost 3 months ago now) because a local bar started blasting the amplifiers at 15000 dB or something, just full blast...ears started ringing real bad (after 1 year of silence) and it doesn't bother me either anymore like it did..only in silent silent or sometimes in nonsilence too but ye... we made it loool

*pats Alue's back gently, not too harsh but just pats and taps*
*and shakes his hand too, Congratulating him*
 
Hi Man. Weird world... I had a "spike" / worsening/ whatever you know in December 1st (almost 3 months ago now) because a local bar started blasting the amplifiers at 15000 dB or something, just full blast...ears started ringing real bad (after 1 year of silence) and it doesn't bother me either anymore like it did..only in silent silent or sometimes in nonsilence too but ye... we made it loool

*pats Alue's back gently, not too harsh but just pats and taps*
*and shakes his hand too, Congratulating him*

So did your spike subside again? How is your tinnitus now?
 
That sucks Eriow. How long were you exposed to those "blasting amps"?
Like a minute or so, had to gather my things & say quick byes for dem people I was with and then run straight past the amplifiers to get out of the sucky bar..

So did your spike subside again? How is your tinnitus now?
Just trying not to think about it lol (the eternal quest). It doesn't bother me much when I'm awake, but when trying to fall asleep I just try to put on some music and try to imagine it's just some computer component or a freezer making the whining noise....... but yes it has gotten better and I hope I'll get to enjoy Complete Silence again soon or some day. It's just so fucked like you start to think it's ok to do things you did not do because of hyperacusis etc.. attending bars etc, then the tinnitus comes to remind you like "uh oh don't you remember me anymore my man" and so on... So yes I guess I gotta be real careful of my ears forever and just not do some things etc but I don't mind really. It's just I had really forgotten all the ear issues for a while really.
 
Just trying not to think about it lol (the eternal quest). It doesn't bother me much when I'm awake, but when trying to fall asleep I just try to put on some music and try to imagine it's just some computer component or a freezer making the whining noise....... but yes it has gotten better and I hope I'll get to enjoy Complete Silence again soon or some day. It's just so fucked like you start to think it's ok to do things you did not do because of hyperacusis etc.. attending bars etc, then the tinnitus comes to remind you like "uh oh don't you remember me anymore my man" and so on... So yes I guess I gotta be real careful of my ears forever and just not do some things etc but I don't mind really. It's just I had really forgotten all the ear issues for a while really.

That is great news, i am happy for you:). I agree, you really can't let your guard down. I also made peace with never going to clubs, concerts and similar stuff ever again. Luckily that is not too bad for me, i can live with that.
Hope you continue to get better:)
 
May I ask you to please answer the question below @Julien87 ?
What the public believes is unsafe noise is over 100dB, and 80-90 dB is just below that. Are you saying those professors were talking about 98-99dB range of noise?

You can't use probabilities to make the leaps you made in your previous message.
What are you talking about? There is nothing wrong with the statement below
If a bunch of people listens to the same noise and then some of them get T, the probability that those who got T have weak ears is higher than the probability that the person who didn't get T has weak ears.
What else do you disagree with? If the probability that one has weak ears is revealed to be higher, then the probability that one's ears have been compromised is higher (and this compromised might have happened when one got to be born with weak ears).
 
That is great news, i am happy for you:). I agree, you really can't let your guard down. I also made peace with never going to clubs, concerts and similar stuff ever again. Luckily that is not too bad for me, i can live with that.
Hope you continue to get better:)
Dang I dunno who I'm kidding :\\\ tried to be at my own home and it just makes my head ring lots. Been staying over mama's house, this is quiet and doesn't aggravate the tinnitus etc... and lush 50 or 60 Hz cycle hum masking the tinnitus... but yes last night reminded me I still hate tinnitus and am not a winner lol

Yes and I just meant like "gatherings" in a bar...like it was that kinda situation and then some secret band started secretly blasting the 12000 decibel music from somewhere... How is your tinnitus?
 
Dang I dunno who I'm kidding :\\\ tried to be at my own home and it just makes my head ring lots. Been staying over mama's house, this is quiet and doesn't aggravate the tinnitus etc... and lush 50 or 60 Hz cycle hum masking the tinnitus... but yes last night reminded me I still hate tinnitus and am not a winner lol

Yes and I just meant like "gatherings" in a bar...like it was that kinda situation and then some secret band started secretly blasting the 12000 decibel music from somewhere... How is your tinnitus?

I would take it as a good sign that it already got better=) Mine is ok, still hoping for it to fade completely.
 

Log in or register to get the full forum benefits!

Register

Register on Tinnitus Talk for free!

Register Now