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.
There’s a marked difference between using headphones to cancel out deafening noises while you’re working, and using them all the time to get rid of everyday noise. There’s also a clear difference in age, once you’re a pilot and start wearing those things you’re fully grown, while the affected here are quite younger, having used those headphones extensively while their brains are still way more plastic.
“Noise-cancelling is dangerous in general” is something you read into the article. It’s not actually there. What it’s saying is “young people should watch their use of noise-cancelling headphones as the auditory system needs exposure to noise to properly develop”. That’s it. It’s a “young people, have an eye on this” thing, not “burn your headphones”.
What are you even talking about it’s okay to just wildly speculate.
I said no such thing. Here’s a wild speculation: You have noise-cancelling headphones and somehow interpret the article as a personal attack. Ok that wasn’t wild it has actually some basis. This is wild: You’re an alien from Alpha Cenauri trying to sow misinformation about the existence of zero-gravity space in your solar system. I’m Schizotypal, dare me, I can go on all day like that if you want to.
Fun fact. In North America you can get your pilots license at 16 in Canada and I believe the US, and yet there’s been nothing reported there? So nope still don’t buy it.
And where do you think ANC tech was developed? Bose literally made their name in aviation headsets.
“Noise-cancelling is dangerous in general” is something you read into the article. It’s not actually there. What it’s saying is “young people should watch their use of noise-cancelling headphones as the auditory system needs exposure to noise to properly develop”. That’s it. It’s a “young people, have an eye on this” thing, not “burn your headphones”.
Your still listening to someone just shouting into a microphone. Why should I take them seriously?
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.
There’s a marked difference between using headphones to cancel out deafening noises while you’re working, and using them all the time to get rid of everyday noise. There’s also a clear difference in age, once you’re a pilot and start wearing those things you’re fully grown, while the affected here are quite younger, having used those headphones extensively while their brains are still way more plastic.
“Noise-cancelling is dangerous in general” is something you read into the article. It’s not actually there. What it’s saying is “young people should watch their use of noise-cancelling headphones as the auditory system needs exposure to noise to properly develop”. That’s it. It’s a “young people, have an eye on this” thing, not “burn your headphones”.
I said no such thing. Here’s a wild speculation: You have noise-cancelling headphones and somehow interpret the article as a personal attack. Ok that wasn’t wild it has actually some basis. This is wild: You’re an alien from Alpha Cenauri trying to sow misinformation about the existence of zero-gravity space in your solar system. I’m Schizotypal, dare me, I can go on all day like that if you want to.
Fun fact. In North America you can get your pilots license at 16 in Canada and I believe the US, and yet there’s been nothing reported there? So nope still don’t buy it.
And where do you think ANC tech was developed? Bose literally made their name in aviation headsets.
Your still listening to someone just shouting into a microphone. Why should I take them seriously?
Wow dude you are really something. I think you are being a troll, no one could be that daft.
Because I’m not going to listen to some random “expert” without peer reviewed literature?
Yeah, no…
Again, as numerous others have repeated… the experts are suggesting peer reviewed studies should be done. lol.
So why is that in the news then?
That’sy entire point. It doesn’t belong in news it belongs in academic settings because that’s what it’s a call for.