The weights looked like these: http://www.presentationzen.com/.a/6a00d83451b64669e201156eb4...
One extra weight slab was "stuck" to the group that was supposed to get lifted. It was stuck because the weights at the gym were grimy from many years of use without being cleaned. The extra slab, when it reached the top, finally detached and slid down maybe 20-30 inches, and made a sound that everyone in the gym heard, but right next to my ear. A few people even made angry faces at me for being a noisy lifter.
Ever since then, to this day, I have had tinnitus in that ear, and many sounds come in like "static", for lack of a better explanation.
All I can say is be careful with those weights if they get sticky, and if they are near your ear...
When I was a teen I dismantled a shotgun cartridge and removed the shot and paper charge (lots of tiny paper discs). I stuffed them down the thick end of a car telescopic antenna cut to about 4” with the end folded over. I threw in a couple of pieces of lead shot, tamped it down with a piece of paper, stuck the tube under a rock and set up a paper target 6” away. I was optimistic.
Then, with a friend, held a lighter under the closed end. Fortunately I was to the side. Predictably it fired out the back... it was very loud.
Possibly the stupidest thing I’ve ever done. It could have gone wrong is so many way. The adolescent brain is a strange thing.
The ringing lasted a few years but went away.
I was rather stupid and always tried to get right up to the PA speakers at the front. I did not wear hearing protection. Many times I left shows with ringing for hours and that feeling like there is cotton stuffed in your ears for days. Not a handle of times - dozens of times.
By my mid 20s it appeared I had tinnitus around the 8k area, which really freaked me out and immediately caused me to change my habits. Also around this time I got into headphone audio in a big way. I got an SPL meter and made sure to never go above 85dBs for extended listening sessions.
By my mid 30s the tinnitus had dissipated considerably. Now it's effectively gone, at least that I can tell (ie. not aware if there is psychological compensation happening). My hearing is great too, right ear at 17.5 kHz, left ear at 16.9.
In the past year I've had worsening tinnitus. Although now (and for the last ~30 concerts) I've worn ear plugs most of the time (and recently bought molded ear plugs), the tinnitus still gives me great anxiety when I hear it in quiet places like my bedroom at night. The permanency of it is what freaks me out the most. But your comment gives me hope that I'll one day be able to enjoy silence again.
I fully urge anyone who goes to rock and similar concerts with any frequency at all to wear hearing protection. I'm a fan of Earasers and custom-molded musicians ear plugs. Even if you don't care about your hearing now, once you do care, it'll often be too late.
At one point it got way worse for about a month, likely caused by stress. Freaked me out to the point of briefly having suicidal thoughts. Then I got used to it again.
TLDR try not to be anxious about it. Good luck :)
I commute via plane for work so it gives me something to do that’s not sitting in the hotel watching TV or drinking too much alcohol.
I recommend an app called Songkick if you want to find local gigs you might be interested in, it scans your Spotify/last.fm and notifies you when artists you’ve listened to are playing nearby.
Could you elaborate on commuting by plane? Do you go to work every day? How long does it take? Why did you decide to work that way?
I fly out from Belfast to Nottingham at around 07:00 on Tuesday morning, and I fly home to Belfast around 20:00 on Thursday evening. Tuesday and Wednesday nights are spent in hotels in Nottingham.
From locking my front door behind me in Belfast to sitting down at my desk in Nottingham it takes around 3h30m. Thursdays are killers though, I don't get in my front door until at least 21:30. So depending on meetings, on Thursdays I frequently end up being on the go from 08:00 to 21:30, which isn't too much fun.
I ended up working this way basically because the company I work for bids for almost exclusively central government projects, and I can't think of any central government agencies that aren't based in England and therefore a flight away.
I first started doing this when I was at university and doing a year-long placement, at the same company I'm currently full-time for.
I was asked if I fancied flying back and forth, and as a 20-year-old, the prospect of getting flown around; staying in nice hotels; getting £5/£10/£30 for breakfast/lunch/dinner every day; and extra pay due to having to fly every week was quite attractive.
Currently 22-years-old and the constant flying got old pretty quickly, but I like where work and I like working on government projects that affect millions of UK citizens' lives.
A while later, I was watching a Scrubs episode where one of the characters ruptured an ear drum. That sound closely matched what I remembered hearing, so I've worn hearing protection to every concert since. Even had people make fun of me for it, but as soon as I say "probably ruptured an eardrum at a concert," they stop laughing.
I have tinnitus from a different cause, though. When I was very small, 5 or 6 years old, one of my mother's boyfriends would haul me around by my ears. I remember that my ear started ringing one day, and it never stopped.
I have two tones in one ear, and I think three in the other. 37 years later and it's as bad as it ever was, sadly. I have learned to just tune it out, but I can still hear it if I choose to - annoyingly, when I choose to hear it, I have to wait until I forget about it.
edit: Forgot to note, the ringing is very, very high pitched. Remember what CRT televisions would sound like when you turned them on? Higher pitched than that.
Please folks, use protection. I like Etymotic earplugs, but to be honest i'm not even sure if they're "heavy enough", but my pain threshold is pretty low i think. In any case since i've been consistently using ear protection i've almost never had the ringing thing after concerts, which makes me rather glad.
If it's not something everyone does, and if you mention you do it for safety, the reaction is often rather negative. I think people don't like the idea that they might have been doing something very unsafe this whole time.
What? Who does that? Whenever I see someone wear earplugs I think "good for them" (and occasionally "shit I forgot to bring mine").
I saw loads of people wear them at the psy festival I was last summer (and wore them myself, too). And the music wasn't even that loud.
While I can hear the music just fine, it does, however, reduce that feeling of "sound presence" during a live show or set. The space feels "emptier" too, like, a huge crowd of people jumping to sonic vibrations (even stronger if it's in a darkened club with just a few bright white lights and smoke), it's pretty weird behaviour if you consider it. But the sound sort of blankets and normalizes this, at least, that's my feeling when that veil falls away when I put in the plugs.
I kind of wonder about the custom-mold plugs. I don't use the cheap yellow foam ones, but reusable ones about €20 I got at a hearing-aid store (asked for ones suitable for concerts/festivals), which I'm fairly pleased with.
Does the "presence" effect get better with the custom-molded ones? Because afaik they're about €300 or so. If they don't restore that "presence" compared to the €20 earplugs, but just some better quality (which is nice, but is it 300 euros nice?) I'm not sure if it's worth it. But if they do and they are also much more comfortable, it might be a nice present for myself :)
what in the f*?
"The Cinderella effect is well substantiated in crime data. Children growing up in step families are about 40 times as likely to be abused and 140 times as likely to be murdered as children growing up with both natural parents (murder still being a low probability)."
I'm really sorry you had to go through that. I was also physically abused by my bio mom up till about 9-10 years old (but she in turn was abused until she was 18, so she arguably reduced the snowball effect). All we can do is try to not repeat the same mistakes for our next generations. The problem is, I have temper issues to this day...
If you haven't already, go get an an audiogram. It's cheap (<$100) and will give you a baseline on how your hearing is.
I used http://www.szynalski.com/tone-generator/ to quickly profile my hearing and found significant loss around 4.0kHz. I have ridden a motorcycle most of my life and it is much worse in the ear that is on the same side as the exhaust.
I am not sure what a spectrogram looks like for a motorcycle but I would have assumed that most of the energy is in the lower end of the spectrum, given the steady cruising RPS is around 40Hz-70Hz. But, your comment seems to suggest that there is not a direct correlation between the frequency of the noise exposure and the hearing loss frequencies.
While I can clearly hear my (loud piped) Ducati at 120kmh (~70mph) - on my Honda VFR800 with stock piped the engine noise is completely overshadowed by wind noise.
As a hint about how loud that wind noise gets, up around 130-140kmh, if I've got my noise cancelling earbuds in, they start clipping. I've heard them do that a handful of times in non motorcycle riding instances, always in reaction to sounds loud enough that people around look around and cover their ears.
(These days I _always_ ride with earplugs or noise cancelling earbuds in. Even on my "quiet" bikes. Gotta save that hearing damage up for loud concerts... )
I'm completely convinced that they make me safer on long rides, because you arrive significantly less tired - works great on planes too, I won't fly without earplugs any more.
Turns out that I had inadvertently replicated a classic high-school "constructive/destructive interference" demonstration. Driving the pair of speakers on my desk at that frequency put the position of my head in one of the destructive-interference "nulls" where the effective volume approaches zero.
So if anyone else is playing around with it, be sure to use headphones instead of stereo speakers!
Any perspective on what the deal with that would be? I haven't ever used an ototoxic medicine or anything
Here is what is funny though, the wavelength at which my hearing "kazoos" is the wavelength at which my young son cries. So while he was a baby, and even sometimes now as a toddler, if he's upset and I'm holding him, it's gotta be my right shoulder, otherwise my left ear bugs. It's a strange feeling too, a mixture of pain and grinding and broken audio that really sets me on edge.
Not sure the complete silence helped with healing, but the science behind the decision to have us do that was that the little hairs in the ear heals faster if it’s not stimulated.
To this day I still think about not exposing myself to too much sound after I have heard some high noice, like someone dropping a metal weight in the gym.
I'm left handed in most things but right eye dominant.
Dad had significant hearing loss from his time in the infantry during the war.
The guy who fired his weapon got a fine and was eventually kicked out though...
(I can see your username but I don't want to assume.)
 Earmuffs over earplugs. Conscripts normal hearing only had to wear earplugs.
The hearing loss dissipates after a day, even in normal conditions. I'm sure that it's bad for you long term, but short term your ears tend to fix themselves up pretty quick.
Makes me cringe to think I was only 7 or 8 years old.
Shortly after that, a retired cop saw us throwing rifle bullets down cement stairs with rocks taped to the primers, trying to set them off. He very calmly and sternly told us how dangerous that was.
It is amazing that any boys survive to adulthood. I don't think I could have kids, knowing what I got up to.
A kid that does stupid things has probably not had the 5 minutes spent with him, telling him the possible hazards.
Kids (and adults) also do stupid things because they know the hazards but feel like they are smart enough to overcome those hazards. Doing hazardous things that are known to be hazardous is no more likely at 8 than at 18. In fact it's less likely at 8. We get braver and do stupider things ("Hold my beer for a minute and watch this") as we get older.
Not that we couldn't get access to "ammo" at all here in Australia in the 70's, but my sources were mostly nail gun cartridges (stolen from building sites) and shotgun blanks used for the local sailing club's starting cannon. We'd also steal those explosive things rail workers put on tracks to warn of inbound trains.
One thing living in a country with somewhat stricter control on guns and ammunition (at least for us "city boys") - it meant we learned how to make our own explosives. We'd steal pretty much any sodium ad potassium nitrate the chemistry labs had for making gunpower - and there was significant "liberation" of nitric and sulfuric acid from the school chemistry labs too, and we had more or less success in producing home made gun cotton, tnt, and nitroglycerine. It eventually led to careers in chemistry for two of my high school co-conspirators from the time.
Just a few days ago I wrote a comment  about a boy who used to live a few kilometers from my house when we were children and lost half of his hand doing experiments in his parents basement.
I think fire and exothermic reactions in general are much too interesting for children to not find a way to experiment with them at one time or another, but parents should take care that children don't do it alone and that they do it in a safe way.
Dad was called out to mop up after a young lad found an unexploded mortar shell and put it in a bench vice and whacked a nail into the firing pin. He has several more harrowing tales along those lines.
Gosh what fun old days those were. This was the era of the Cold War, at school we would have a bomb scare nearly weekly, Rheindahlen E mess was bombed, troops were shot at by quite a variety of nasty people and other fun and games. Mind you, a CSM pinched a Saracen or Saladin and tried to run down a bloke who was playing away with his wife. He drove it over the other bloke's car first. Shandy was involved.
On the bright side, I have friends from afar that I'm in touch with today - 40 odd years later.
Collecting the rounds was like a sport. The one with the biggest collection was the winner. Sometimes we found elements from ammunition belts too. They were rare and because of their small size and dark color much more difficult to find than the larger untarnished brass colored cartridges. One of the boys from my town had the perseverance to collect enough elements to assemble a belt that he could wear over his shoulder. He looked like John Rambo.
All of this wasn‘t a local phenomenon either. Much later I learned the story of a boy from a different area whose house was searched for pirated home computer games. Police didn‘t find any pirate copies but they found the blanks he had collected. Strict as the gun laws are he got a young offender sentence for unauthorized possession of a firearm (unerlaubter Waffenbesitz).
And this was all only about thrown away blanks from NATO maneuvers. When it comes to all the weapons that “disappeared” basically over night at the end of World War II, I know there is another trove of stories, but these are for someone from another generation to tell.
You might have heard about the BBC serial The Machine-Gunners, which tells a related story from the British perspective. It was very popular with us kids in Germany at that end of the Eighties. The opening theme Colonel Bogey March is now stuck in my head..
It's almost as though play, of the sort which could end your life, is a natural part of growing up (perhaps especially for boys). Then again, I don't really remember doing any very stupid things as an adolescent, probably due to spending more time in nature, trying not to die by falling, drowning, hypothermia, or impalement.
One summer when I was 8 or 9, I used a nail to scrape out the inside of a model rocket engine or two ("D" if I remember correctly) from my older brothers model kit into a pile on the concrete garage floor, then used a broken cord (literally a wall plug, a couple feet of cord, and two exposed ends) to ignite it by hand using the electric spark from the live leads.
After fleeing the garage in terror and slight pain (lucky not to have either electrocuted myself or burnt the detached structure down), I hung out doing nothing for a few hours and acted like nothing had happened. It was little use, though. Upon arriving home, my mother immediately know something was up. Not only was my face a little singed, I had burnt my eyebrows off.
Funnily enough, I'm fairly to heavily conservative when it comes to dangerous activity as an adult. I don't even drive all that fast usually.
In my case, it also went away completely after two years, only to come back after another five. I'm stuck with it since :/
For me it goes to show that humans are more fragile than we often like to think.
I'm sorry for your loss and I hope you can find a way to handle it.
It must have been really effective ear protection, but they didn't look so big. And never mind the sound, the whole head / body is going to be rattled by the vibrations. You wonder ...
I looked up the data. 190db peak for this type (H steel piles)
Also: earplugs, earplugs, earplugs. I keep foam earplugs on me at all times. I have some in my fifth pants pocket, I keep some in a pill container on my keyring, some in my backpack, in my car, etc. I cut them in half; the half size fits easier and takes up less space, and the slightly lower sound attenuation is actually more useful for me in most circumstances.
I go through a lot of ear plugs this way, and a few years ago I realized that some of them degrade over time such that they become roughly half as effective. The closed cell foam seems to wear out somehow. I started wearing these degraded plugs more and more often, to the point that I now wear them most of the time. Always when I'm out of the house, and most of the time at home as well. They can be cleaned by soaking in alcohol. Alcohol works well on ears too, but most people's ears need no or very sparse cleaning.
I've worn these low-performance earplugs nearly non-stop for years now and my hearing has recovered some of the sensitivity of my youth. When I started leaving them in all the time I was a bit like an elderly person, asking people to repeat themselves frequently. This went away as my sensitivity improved, and after maybe six months my plugged hearing was as good as my formerly unplugged hearing.
Now I kinda feel naked without them. If I'm doing something loud, like working on a table saw, I'll put in fresh ear plugs, or wear extra protection like muffs.
You could expose yourself to 8 hours a day of a lawnmower at 90 dB and 90% of the population would be fine.
Someone tried to kill me once by clubbing me repeatedly around the head; the only lasting damage was acutely tinnitus, mid-frequency hearing loss and hyperacusis. There used to be days that I was reduced to tears by noises being too loud, being unable to hear, and being disorientated by the screaming shrieking of the tinnitus in my ears. Now I wear earplugs whenever I’m going to be exposed to any noise above “quiet room” levels and it does the world of good. I’ve persuaded several friends to wear earplugs at gigs etc. First time they are sceptical that they won’t be able to hear. Then they realise that not only can they hear but in fact it sounds BETTER and they don’t suffer acoustic trauma the day after - which peoplempften confuse for a hangover.
Look after your ears!
For actual rock concerts, I have molded musicians ear plugs which make the music sound just incredible, and I have no discomfort afterwards. I also highly recommend those.
But I wouldn't wear them outside those times.
The guy above wears them 24/7
Also note that my "all-day" earplugs are these certain ones that have lost a lot of their effectiveness due to aging or something. I go through enough earplugs that I end up with a lot of these. I'm guessing I get about 10-15 dB out of them, and my ears/brain have adapted to this level of attenuation so well that my "plugged" hearing is functionally as good as other people's unimpeded hearing. For example, I listen to music and TV at the same levels as everyone else, and I'm not asking people to repeat themselves any more than anyone else.
The habit of keeping them in at all times during waking hours just ensures they're in place when I need them, like when I drop a dish, or a sticky weight falls on a weight stack at 24-hour fitness, as in the top post in this thread. Shit like that happens all the time to me, and I got really sick of saying, "damn I should have had earplugs in."
EDIT: Also, cut them in half. Much more usable for me, they're almost as effective, and hardly noticeable. Very rarely does someone notice that I have them in.
Also, that list is kind of goofy. A snowmobile is louder than a lawn mower? A chainsaw is louder than a lawn mower? And 15 minutes per day of a loud rock concert is "safe"? You've got to be kidding me.
> "you are missing out on unimpeded hearing"
As I said, my plugged hearing is now as good as my formerly unplugged hearing. The only thing I'm "missing" is a couple kHz at the very top, above about 18kHz. I don't miss that, really. And if I want super-human hearing (like when I'm reviewing audio equipment), guess what? I just take them out!
"fear of hearing loss"
I started because of actual hearing loss, due entirely to "everyday" events; occasional concerts (jazz mostly), some woodworking and yardwork, screaming kids, etc. I developed a bit of notching at treble frequencies and I lost a lost of top end. According to a hearing test last year, I have managed to reverse most of this. I'd bet money you've incurred at least the same amount of loss.
> "Normal level sounds don’t degrade hearing as far as I know..."
It entirely depends on your definition of "normal". The NIOSH limit for exposure to 85 dB is 8 hours. 85 dB is not that loud; it's driving in traffic with the window down. Drive a crappy car in the city with the windows all the way down and it's closer to 100. Ask a farmer or trucker how much of that "normal" level is safe.
> "not based on science."
Cute. Since I'm sure you're up to date on this stuff, can you tell me why the NIOSH exposure thresholds don't use equal loudness curves to account for frequency? I'll give you a shiny science star if you figure it out.
> "and loud sounds aren’t that common..."
Um... yeah, actually they are.
> "You could expose yourself to 8 hours a day of a lawnmower at 90 dB and 90% of the population would be fine."
Great, you've convinced me! A mere 10% chance of hearing loss after a half day of moderate sound levels is totally reason enough to abandon a practice that allowed me to recover a hearing level almost as good as my 8-year-old kid's.
Seriously though, if the only data you're reading comes from occupational safety guidelines, you're going to fuck up your hearing eventually. NIOSH is a blunt instrument, meant to make it easier for industry to minimize liability for worker disability. But there's a world of benefit outside of occupation safety regs. I like hearing better. Pretty simple. Plus, there's good evidence that sub-acute noise-induced hearing loss is a significant component of age-related hearing loss. Remember that when you're eighty and pissed off that you've misplaced your hearing aids.
I was lucky enough to learn about this right after my left ear stopped working (don't get me started about Apple earbuds) and managed to recover 90 percent of my hearing due to convincing my doc to give me a 2 week steroid course. He hadn't even heard of this before, but thank God for white papers online.
While I did use magnesium and vitamin E, they were supplementary to the prednisone which regrew the damaged cells. The tinninitus community is full of regretful people who wish they knew this.
Comments like this make HN such a valuable resource for me.
Is this the case with you? What happened to you that impacted your life to this point?
No, I just really like my hearing. I resolved to always wear earplugs out of the house one day after a particularly nasty bus with squealing brakes made my ears ring. I ride my bike a lot so that just made sense. At home, I was putting in ear plugs when putting away dishes, because I want to just get that shit done, pulling handfuls out of the dishwasher and stacking them hard and fast, like you do if you're not a priss. Except the sound was making me act pretty damn prissy. I cook a lot and I'm impatient, so that just made sense too. Some other things like that caused me to just keep plugs on hand all the time.
But I realized I couldn't possibly predict all of the potentially damaging acoustic events in life. It also occurred to me that maybe the full 30+ dB earplug is overkill for most of these things, and I could use something like half of that full-time, and still be perfectly functional. I consider these "mild" earplugs similar to clothes, which I also wear most of the time even though they're not, strictly speaking, necessary.
EDIT: I also wear glasses at all times when I'm out of the house. Not for vision -- I have excellent vision -- but plano lenses for protection. I started doing this after one day in college when a fucking tree branch nearly went in my eye as I walked down the street. I just didn't see it. I think I was looking sort of downward, and then looked up just in time to catch a spear in my eye. The only thing that saved my cornea was the fact that I was wearing sunglasses. I've had several other instances of random shit flying or poking at my face, but that was the closest I've come to a serious eye injury.
Just normal fairly slender wire-framed glasses, with clear polycarbonate lenses that filter almost as much UV as sunglasses. Nothing fancy. Haven't had my eye poked out since, happy to say.
Pollution where I live is nothing like China or India, and I'm not yet thinking about using a mask when jogging or biking, but in-car pollution in heavy traffic is turning out to be much worse than previously thought , and there is some interesting evidence that fine particulates, especially metallic particles like those that are prevalent in engine exhaust, contribute to Alzheimer's risk .
1 - https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/07/170721135331.h...
2 - http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/01/brain-pollution-evide...
1 - http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/HealthyLiving/StressManagement....
2 - http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.565...
Honestly, stress and anxiety are things I don't struggle with, at least not according to my vitals. My resting heart rate is typically in the high fifties (but I recorded 47 bpm at my last checkup). I actually struggle a bit with low blood pressure, often getting light headed when I stand up. I don't have insomnia, I'm on no medication whatsoever, I've never had stomach ulcers, I have a full head of hair, and people routinely guess my age about 10 years too young.
I think you might just be struggling a bit with the idea of someone who evaluates long term risk differently than you do. You might end up on the other side of that at some point. For example, I know a guy from Cambodia who thinks you're an idiot for insisting on wearing shoes when you leave the house. He'd say you're destroying your feet's physiological function by cramming them into shoes, and that
your only problem is that you've refused to allow them to toughen up to the level they naturally would to match their environment. Now are you going to start motorbiking barefoot around town? I'm guessing not.
I get it from the other direction too. Some people think I'm stupid for allowing my kids to ride their bikes in the park without helmets. I can explain that my kids are much more enthusiastic about riding because I don't load them down with a bunch of uncomfortable safety gear. I can also explain that my kids are far more likely to get a head injury riding inside a car, and we don't wear helmets in cars do we?
These arguments sometimes work, but for the most part, people are pretty stuck on what they know from their own narrow experiences.
You're absolutely right about this. The risk is very low. But the stakes are extremely high. It's the insurance problem: how much are you willing to pay to prevent a rare but extremely hazardous even in the future?
To a lot of people (maybe most) wearing glasses if they don't need correction seems silly. I can't argue with that, but in my case, my sunglasses saved me from an expensive, painful surgery and possible disability. The experience made me feel that the "insurance" of wearing glasses habitually was an acceptable cost to bear if it could keep that from happening again. I'm no actuary; it really is just a feeling. And feelings are what all of us rely on most when we evaluate risk, whether we like it or not. My feeling is not likely any more valid than yours, because it's based on my values and experiences, and your's may be entirely different.
Now, its totally possible for these extra barriers to interfere with one's life. Again I think about how many kids are discouraged from riding bikes because of the oppressive safety gear. Or suppose I miss a plane because I can't find my fake glasses. When that happens it'll be time to question whether my reliance on my protective barriers is healthy. I think that's the issue your comments anticipate, and you're right about that too.
I'm not sure how you've determined that your kids are more likely to suffer head injuries in a car, but even if that were true that's a dubious line of reasoning to say the least.
I might need you to actually read my comments and do a modicum of research before I take you seriously. This is about evaluation of risk and reward. There is no black and white here.
Regarding specifics like helmets and comparative rates of head injuries, I'm sure you're capable of googling for the data. It's interesting stuff. Assuming you're actually interested.
I don't. This is, like all your other justifications, irrelevant to our point of contention and, like all your other assertions, uncited and unsupported.
>I might need you to actually read my comments and do a modicum of research before I take you seriously.
No reason to be obnoxious.
> This is about evaluation of risk and reward.
Care to explain what the reward is here?
> Regarding specifics like helmets and comparative rates of head injuries, I'm sure you're capable of googling for the data. It's interesting stuff. Assuming you're actually interested.
Again, _what_ data? You're telling me there's a data set showing people's relative risk of head injury in a car compared to the same persons risk of head injury on a bike without a helmet? You're making dubious statistical claims for the sake of argument without ever explicitly stating your actual assertion, or anyone else's.
> It's interesting stuff. Assuming you're actually interested.
Show it to me.
And stop being a prick just because someone challenges a viewpoint of yours that you posted on a public forum meant for a debate.
The answer has a lot to do with our differences in infrastructure. Dutch and Danish roads are designed and built for mixed transportation modes. American roads are car-centric, and the lack of built-in accommodation makes biking a much more dangerous affair here, and in my opinion makes helmets mandatory for American road biking.
However, you might note in my earlier comments that I took pains to state that my kids are riding in a neighborhood park. Hence my question to you, which I note you didn't take a stab at. I'll answer it for you: yes, my local pedestrian park is safer than Dutch city streets. I've spent a good amount of time in the Netherlands, enough to be comfortable letting my kids biking there without helmets there (the same as Dutch kids do), and certainly enough to be comfortable allowing them to do so here in our arguably safer neighborhood park.
Another reason not to panic can be had with a bit of research into the comparative risks of head injury in everyday activities. For example,  is a frequently cited study from Australia (where road infrastructure is very similar to the U.S.) that found un-helmetted biking to be slightly safer than riding inside a car, and further finds evidence that mandatory helmet laws increase the health burden of a population by discouraging a healthy amount of outdoor activity. This is just one example.
But you know what's really dangerous? Trampolines. Our eleven-foot trampoline is by far the most dangerous thing in my possession. My kids are far more likely to be injured on the trampoline than anywhere else. My orthopedic surgeon (yes I'm a semi-regular patient due to a snowboarding accident) has trouble even discussing it with me, barely able to hide her disgust at my justifications.
So why do it? What's the reward for letting my kids risk life and limb on their trampoline, or for not weighting them down with security gear before they can go bike in the park? I hope I don't need to spell this out for you. Maybe it can suffice to point out that both my girls are now competitive gymnasts. I have an eight-year old who can do pullups and jog half a mile. My older child can do things on the uneven bars that I consider superhuman. These are kids who are glued to computer screens for much of the day, which is a far greater health risk, but by raising them to enjoy physical activity freely and spontaneously, I have a valuable tool in my fight to keep them healthy. That's the reward.
By the same token, the relatively small price of wearing lightweight ear plugs and non-prescription glasses buys me more acute hearing, which I prize highly, and has saved me from at least one eye injury. Plus, the glasses make me look smarter :)
Now, compare these risk/reward considerations with something like, say, tobacco smoking, perhaps the most egregious example of out-of whack risk/reward insanity there is. Odd as it seems, I've had my helmet policy questioned by smokers, on one occasion by someone with a cigarette in hand. The mind fucking boggles.
Again, if you're actually interested, I encourage you to do a bit more digging yourself. Humans are notoriously bad at evaluating risk and reward at the margins, and most of us entertain at least some nonsensical beliefs and behaviors as a result. A little knowledge can go a long way in this regard.
1 - http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/00014575960...
I wish I was in the online music community before getting tinnitus. My tinnitus doesn't bother me now, but it did make me unhappy for a couple of months
You're risking ear infection, which could cause permanent loss of hearing, tinnitus, or worse.
Even if I paid no attention to hygiene, wax buildup doesn't put you at higher risk of ear infection in the absence of excess moisture, and these low-performance plugs I use don't seem to cause moisture buildup.
I'm relatively lucky, my hearing is still better than most, but it does suck.
I've decided I will never go to another club, and in bars I wear ear plugs. I have more to lose, since any additional damage will likely make my tinnitus more severe.
Seriously though, hearing is one of those things you don't think about until it's too late. Protect your ears.
Your mind is very quick to normalize the volume level anyway, no matter if you're with or without protection. Why suffer permanent damage then?
On the plus side, I find it way easier to understand people talking to me in the club when I have them in.
I can also leave shows, take them out, and hear normally immediately after. No more laying in bed that night being annoyed by minor hearing damage.
You don't even have to be self conscious about it, they're barely visible when they're in.
Most venues I don't find it to be an issue, but one I was at recently was absurdly loud. I was sat at a 90 degree to the stage, and in one ear I could hear the sound crashing off the back wall to the point vocals were difficult to make out because it just sounded so muffled. Blocking that one ear instantly made it a much better experience.
That said, clubs/shows play music way too loud, and I occasionally hear the beginning of tinnitus, so I 100% agree that people should get a pair.
Also I've noticed that I can hear the music much better with them in (when it's too loud I have a hard time distinguishing pitches—singers often sound like the Chipmunks) and some groups don't fare well when you turn down the volume a bit (they use volume to mask lack of ability).
But I've been using them too late because recently I have tinnitus in the evening before I go to sleep (I do wear the plug at night as well). Am in mid 30s.
What they feel are inaudible sound waves at a frequency that makes some tissue/bones(?) resonate. But this is as much "feeling" the music as is being punched in the face in sync with the base rhythm ;)
If the sound engineer isn't wearing ear plugs, the same logic probably applies. Noise-induced hearing loss has roughly the same effects on your hearing as earplugs, acting like a shallow lowpass filter.
* Sound engineer is wearing ear protection -> sound is tuned according to that bias (unless they are completely auditory neutral) -> you get the best sound by also wearing hearing protection
* Sound engineer is not wearing ear protection -> sound engineer probably has hearing damage due to prolonged exposure (and has a similar effect as hearing protection) -> sound is tuned according to that bias -> you do NOT have hearing damage, so you get the best sound by wearing hearing protection
The effect on the sound is the same in both cases and the correction is the same in both -- wear hearing protection. It only becomes the same sound regardless of what _you_ do in the long term, if you also get hearing loss due to prolonged exposure.
Fortunately I don't have a significant tinnitus, but was it certainly was a wake-up-call and I protect my ears much better now.
This seems like poor advice. If there is significant, realistic concern about permanent damage, I'd suggest checking immediately, rather than give it extra time...
In my opinion patients and the public should treat it as urgently as a sudden sight loss.
High dose steroids are regularly prescribed in this sort of scenario in an attempt to minimize damage, and are likely to be more effective the sooner they are given.
That's why patients wait days before presenting.
went to ER, they took a single xray, 5hours later doctor shows up and say "yeah its broken, we will put a temporary useless immobiliser worse than the one you came in with. here's the phone number of a specialist you can try calling monday". it was $4k for out of pocket btw. my top of the line insurance just said "we can't dispute anything from er visits".
Concerned my mother hadn’t improved and was being discharged, I called my sister, who happened to be a nurse upstairs at the same hospital. She came down and explained to the doctor that my mother was having a “visual disturbance”. As soon as that terminology was used, they took her for an MRI and sure enough, she had indeed had a stroke and was immediately admitted. This was after 4 hours of wasted time and an attempted discharge - simply because the doctor refused to listen and would only go by symptoms.
The doctor never apologized for his comments. While I wound up feeling justified in this case, had my sister not intervened, I would likely never have taken her to the ER again unless she was unconscious or bleeding.
It will be really nice when everyone has access to a medical AI that can assess these things instantly wherever you are.
And cost, now that insurance is playing the "we only cover ER visits that were necessary in hindsight" game.
For those of us at the top of the pleb pyramid it's not so bad, but for the average person, a single mistake can be ruinous.
They do seem to have some sway over the GPs though - Rather than A&E, they've refereed me to the Doctors instead. When I said it's impossible to get an appointment 111 told me to tell the Doctors they've referred me. At that point the Doctors seem to _have_ to see you the same day.
To this day I still wait until I can't move/breath/feel to go to the doctor.
edit: unfordable health care and/or bad money education is how people end up putting health to the bottom of the list.
If you really want to shock a European, tell them that American children don't have free heathcare either.
(I remember discovering this when I was about 14, on holiday in the US, when my younger brother caught pneumonia.)
Having gone to the physician with complaints many times and be told to wait to see if the issue goes away (most of them didn't) or that there's nothing to be done about it, one is quickly trained not to bother going to a physician for anything short of a major injury.
(And this behavior is from a physician who is a Ph.D at a teaching hospital, no less.)
It puts me in mind of the Cuban embassy thing...
(of course the above reasoning is pretty specific to the USA— could be different for people in more civilized places)
The other big issue I have with doctors, I don't know if they are going to prescribe me some bullshit because the real treatment is "you'll get better with time" or the real answer is "there's nothing we can do about that." Or, much worse, something that they believe will help you but is not evidence based. Before you get upset - I once had an MD refer me to a (licensed) physical therapist for craniosacral therapy (complete woo) which billed it to my insurance as something like "physical manipulations."
It's also just how I was raised, when I grew up, my parents would say "we'll see if it gets better," and it always did. When I grew up and starting visiting the doctor for things at the advice of others it didn't improve my health outcomes yet significantly increased my annoyance level.
And yes my hearing is pretty bad now. Hopefully I can get hearing aid later on.
Edit: changed ear plugs to hearing aid.
It's fine to have anti-war views (as do many in the military, btw). Not fine to take them out on a fellow community member.
"Avoid other pain relievers such as ibuprofen (Advil, Motrin IB, others) and aspirin, as these medications may increase the risk of bleeding."
Sometimes (for example if it would take hours to bring the patient to a MRI/CT machine) an educated guess as to the answer is the optimal strategy.
Wow. Did I misremember and he said Tylenol (acetaminophen)? This is bothering me now, I don't like to carry bad bits of wisdom around!
Test it out before you need it because the taste/smell makes some people puke like crazy for half an hour...
I was working from a library, and stood to start closing up for the day. As I started to close my laptop, the screen (hi, glossy MacBook Pro) directly reflected the sun behind me.
For the next 15-20 minutes a significant portion of my vision in both eyes was wavy. I could still safely drive home, thankfully, but it was a severe distraction.
While I expected it to eventually clear up, it struck home how fragile my career is. (I know it's possible to be a blind software developer, but I'm not sure I could afford to take the short-term hit, assuming my employer wouldn't pay me to spend months relearning how to live and work.)
I was of that opinion until I decided to test it out. It doesn't hold up. Clarity is the main factor, I found. A matte screen must by definition diffuse light, which causes image to become blurry - and visibly so.
A glossy screen, for all it's annoying features, is just clearer and colors have an easier time being represented accurately. And most modern glossy screens now have anti-glare as well.
And sharp reflections on glossy screens make color-sensitive work difficult. Diffuse reflections are much easier to adjust for. Can you better support your claim that glossy monitors represent colors better?
I got a matte screen for the first time in several years, and immediately had a reflection problem from window light. On a glossy screen the problem is a relatively small highlight, but on the matte screen it was a giant blob that took up a significant part of the screen. The glossy screen is usable, the matte is not.
Anti glare has improved significantly on glossy screens, too.
I've been working on glossy screens for years and never had a problem. Perhaps people need to change their work environment instead.
What do you mean by "vibrancy"? Either a monitor is calibrated to a given color space, or not. And the diffusion of an individual pixel is orders of magnitude too low to significantly affect the color of neighboring pixels.
My main worry is falling while biking or skiing, and knocking my head. But now I'm worried about eyesight, and my hands, and everything else around the modern world.
I know a dev who is paralyzed and types/codes (quite well, too) with a pen attached to his forehead, you'd find a way to adapt.
In no way is what I said meant to be "Crippling worry that affects my life". More of a rational: "this is the most likely way I get really screwed, so I bought insurance"
They are just talking about long-term disability!? I have it as well, for mostly the same reasons. I worry that if something were to happen to my hands, eyes, or brain that I wouldn't be able to provide for myself or my family.
I don't think having disability insurance is "that much worry".
That sounds like a person who is on a lookout for something to be worried about, pretty much the definition of anxiety.
On the other hand, i think disability insurance is not even a little bit crazy; Of course, know that if you use it, you'll probably use it because you got screwed up in an auto accident (few people carry enough insurance to cover lost work for a software engineer for very long) but I think auto accidents are common enough to want to hedge against it.
This is what long term disability insurance is for.
If you don't have it through your employer it can be pricy, but it it's a very small cost if you're concerned about becoming disabled.
If you have it as a group plan through your employer it's either employer paid (free for you) or incredibly cheap.
I still haven't been able to identify a clear trigger, though I think it may be dehydration.
I haven't had any noticable problems because of it, but I do kinda wonder if it didn't cause a bit of damage.
A magnifying glass produces a small point of heat, with fairly low temperature and area. Many people in history have worked glass with no eye protection without serious consequences, other than cataracts perhaps (many older Italians still do not wear didymium glasses, much less the ones with welding shades).
I don't know what's the truth.
I do know that infrared can cause serious problems, such as burns and perhaps macular degeneration. It is mainly what welding shades and our glassblowing glasses filter.
IR drops off adequately at spectating distances, and when I am at a demo, watching other people work, I don’t wear my glasses. Not sure about at a nuclear blast though.
And even if he reasoned UV light wouldn't hurt him, he still had to duck to avoid the exposure. So if there's anything to take away from his story it's that he didn't know what he was talking about.
On the other hand, it is bad news for you. You can catch a naughty bacteria and die. You can slip by the door step and become paraplegic. If you are concerned about your family, get insurance. If you are concerned about your life (paraplegic or blind is not fun) then... tssk... bad luck. There is no insurance for that.
ps: I'm not suggesting you go do irresponsible things but worrying beyond reasonable yield no better results.
I doubt that one can calculate the sound amplitude accurately without doing experiments or complex simulations here. It's possible that the toilet bowl or lid focused the sound like a satellite dish, and the protagonist's ear was in the exact wrong place at the wrong time.
Visual aid: https://blueandgreentomorrow.com/energy/in-pictures-new-wave...
I researched and discovered that it's a known, somewhat common side effect, and it may be permanent. I count myself as a bit lucky, since it sometimes causes permanent deafness.
I'm pretty sure if my doctor had mentioned the possibility of going deaf, I would have chosen a different treatment.
The rapid onset of the sound is an important factor. The ear has muscular reflexes that lessen the damage of loud sounds, but only if the onset of the sound takes longer than the time it takes the reflex to kick in. The toilet tank sound probably had onset approaching that of a square wave, so this neatly evaded the reflex.
Evolutionarily, one can understand why there was no need to protect the ear from loud rapid-onset sounds... those sounds don't exist widely in nature, e.g. a roaring waterfall roars continuously. Someone could smash two rocks together right next to your ear, but the fact that the rocks didn't smash your cranium is perhaps more important. :-)
> If an impending collision is detected, the vehicle’s sound system plays a short interference signal, which can trigger a reflex, whereby the stapedius muscle in the ears contracts, which alters the link between the eardrum and the inner ear for a split second and better protects the inner ear against high acoustic pressures, which can result from a loud crash.
There are probably other materials that would also work, though... I'd expect any material used for toilet seat lids (plastic, or coated wood composite) satisfies similar constraints.
Incidentally, ceramic can become razor-sharp when broken, so the article's suggestion of making lids easier to break carries its own set of risks.
I don't think there's really anything wrong with plastic toilet seats, but they feel less good, I think, than the heavier, more solid toilet seats.
The worst, in my mind, are the foam/shag carpet covers. those just seem wrong and gross - I mean I imagine my reaction is completely irrational, but I remember once I moved into a very cheap aparment; the toilet seat was sealed plastic covering foam in a way that the toilet seat was actually cushioned. something about it really squicked me out; the first night I went to the hardware store and bought a regular solid toilet seat and installed it.
Personally, I like keeping a heavy seat and just installing a dampener hinge, though I suppose that wouldn't help if you drop it during installation.