Ear Plugs Don’t Work

[Bolo]

They way OP is attacked in this discussion is shameful. 

Even when what he was told was incomplete or incorrect, there is no reason to mock someone so harshly for sharing what they consider New Information.

I work as an audiology assistant at a major university hospital in the Netherlands, where I spend my days measuring patients hearing loss, indexing their tinnitus levels, establishing speech recognition scores after cochlear implantation etc. etc.

A Google search will tell you that ear defenders struggle to attenuate more than 30dB SPL on average reliably. They encompass the ears but rest on the os petrosum, the bone behind the ears in which the cochlea is molded. 

Ear plugs, of any make, wil attenuate SPLs up to 25-30ish dB, with a bonus for blocking the auditory canal (the shape of the auditory canal boosts volume around 2k Hz -3k Hz).

Together, at most 50-60 dB of attenuation is achieved. This could be comparable to hushed or polite conversation levels. Sound louder than that will make your head function as transducer and when the skull vibrates, so does the cochlea, making it send that information to your brain and you hear sound. 

When this attenuated sound level reaches intensities that causes fatigue, it can damage the cochlea just like pressure through the auditory canal would.

Now infection. Ears require sufficient clean air to stay healthy. Closed off for too long, temperature and moisture may rise just enough for fungi or bacteria to flourish in spite of you earwax trying to hold them at bay. Keeping your ears and sinuses airated helps against festering and inflammation (hence the eardrum tubes for chronic sufferers).

 

I hope you all read this in sir David Attenborough's voice.

 

[Vinny]

7 hours ago, EBS_freak said:

I keep waiting for a cheery, yet confusing explanation of Modes from the one on the left.

Edited August 5, 2019 by Vinny

[wateroftyne]

18 minutes ago, Bolo said:

They way OP is attacked in this discussion is shameful. 

Even when what he was told was incomplete or incorrect, there is no reason to mock someone so harshly for sharing what they consider New Information.

I work as an audiology assistant at a major university hospital in the Netherlands, where I spend my days measuring patients hearing loss, indexing their tinnitus levels, establishing speech recognition scores after cochlear implantation etc. etc.

A Google search will tell you that ear defenders struggle to attenuate more than 30dB SPL on average reliably. They encompass the ears but rest on the os petrosum, the bone behind the ears in which the cochlea is molded. 

Ear plugs, of any make, wil attenuate SPLs up to 25-30ish dB, with a bonus for blocking the auditory canal (the shape of the auditory canal boosts volume around 2k Hz -3k Hz).

Together, at most 50-60 dB of attenuation is achieved. This could be comparable to hushed or polite conversation levels. Sound louder than that will make your head function as transducer and when the skull vibrates, so does the cochlea, making it send that information to your brain and you hear sound. 

When this attenuated sound level reaches intensities that causes fatigue, it can damage the cochlea just like pressure through the auditory canal would.

Now infection. Ears require sufficient clean air to stay healthy. Closed off for too long, temperature and moisture may rise just enough for fungi or bacteria to flourish in spite of you earwax trying to hold them at bay. Keeping your ears and sinuses airated helps against festering and inflammation (hence the eardrum tubes for chronic sufferers).

 

I hope you all read this in sir David Attenborough's voice.

 

I don’t see any attacking, just a push for clarification, some forthright opinions and a robust defence.

[EBS_freak]

1 minute ago, wateroftyne said:

I don’t see any attacking, just a push for clarification, some forthright opinions and a robust defence.

Indeed, if there is/was an attack, it was more on the views of the doctor, as opposed to the OP.

[Bolo]

9 minutes ago, EBS_freak said:

Indeed, if there is/was an attack, it was more on the views of the doctor, as opposed to the OP.

Repetition of "Click bait", suggestion of "dropped on his head as a child" went too far IMO. Anyway, I hope I have contributed to some clarification on the subject of hearing protection.

[EBS_freak]

14 minutes ago, Bolo said:

Repetition of "Click bait", suggestion of "dropped on his head as a child" went too far IMO. Anyway, I hope I have contributed to some clarification on the subject of hearing protection.

"With some of the posts going on in here, to be fair, I would be more concerned at the fact that I had been dropped on my head as a child, than wearing earplugs."

- your link with the OP, not mine. For reference, I was dropped on my head as a child.

I don't think think anybody would argue with the "Click bait" choice of title though. Still, we are all in here talking about it.

[skankdelvar]

1 hour ago, Bolo said:

They way OP is attacked in this discussion is shameful. 

Even when what he was told was incomplete or incorrect, there is no reason to mock someone so harshly for sharing what they consider New Information.

[Billy Apple]

7 hours ago, Dankology said:

I am, as it happens. And I have to say that this sounds like tabloid-level nonsense in that a half-truth is being discussed out of context in order to suggest an attention-grabbing non-truth.

 

I have no doubt that prolonged extreme sound levels can defeat the protection provided by ear plugs - whether by overcoming the protection they afford or by transmission through the bone but I also have no doubt that most musicians would rarely, if ever,  find themselves  in that sort of situation. If you need ear defenders, you need to turn down would be my rule of thumb.

 

I'd be interested to know if this chap was a medical doctor with an interest in audiology or an audiologist (with a PhD). And also, as I said before, what commercial interests might be influencing the advice he is giving (or the apparently sensationalist way he is delivering it).

The only thing sensationalist is the reaction of the myopic members who rather choose to attack an individual than actually deal with something that that is outside of the standard issue basschat kit.

i suspected some members would act like they did and of course they did. This does not mean the conversation did not take place. I myself found it very interesting, but I’m open minded to others ideas.

i have no idea of his actual credentials and I didn’t ask to see them. He was introduced to me at a H&S conference as a Doctor and he talked about his back ground in hospitals in London,

I approached him afterwards feeling like a good boy with chat about my ACS Pro 17’s. Was he telling not to wear them, of course not, but he was also saying that they do not attenuate in the way or to the level we think.

He also describes ear defenders as blind folds and went on about ear plug fittings.

I suspect underneath most of us accept the best way to protect our hearing is with ear defenders, but we don’t want to hear it because they look crap on stage.

[wateroftyne]

8 minutes ago, Billy Apple said:

 

I approached him afterwards feeling like a good boy with chat about my ACS Pro 17’s. Was he telling not to wear them, of course not, but he was also saying that they do not attenuate in the way or to the level we think.

Did he tell you they literally don’t work?

[wateroftyne]

21 minutes ago, Billy Apple said:

The only thing sensationalist is the reaction of the myopic members who rather choose to attack an individual than actually deal with something that that is outside of the standard issue basschat kit.

i suspected some members would act like they did and of course they did. This does not mean the conversation did not take place. I myself found it very interesting, but I’m open minded to others ideas.

i have no idea of his actual credentials and I didn’t ask to see them. He was introduced to me at a H&S conference as a Doctor and he talked about his back ground in hospitals in London,

I suspect underneath most of us accept the best way to protect our hearing is with ear defenders, but we don’t want to hear it because they look crap on stage.

You’ve posted something here which potentially turns perceived wisdom on its head. I don’t think we can be blamed for not taking it as gospel, given that there’s other hard evidence anywhere that anyone has found (yet?) that back his statement up, and now you’re backtracking slightly

Believe me, I want to do what is right and practical for my ears, and ‘This bloke at a H&S conference says..’ doesn’t qualify.

Was he representing and ear defender company by any chance? Pneumatic drills, jet engines and that?

Edited August 6, 2019 by wateroftyne

[Bobthedog]

I am a regular gun shot and, amongst the 30-40 shots I shoot with, the vast majority wear full ear defenders with electronic muting rather than ear plugs for the reasons as stated above re noise penetration. I can also state that each of us used different audiologists to come to the same conclusion. Ear defenders are better for us in the field. 

[wateroftyne]

35 minutes ago, Bobthedog said:

I am a regular gun shot and, amongst the 30-40 shots I shoot with, the vast majority wear full ear defenders with electronic muting rather than ear plugs for the reasons as stated above re noise penetration. I can also state that each of us used different audiologists to come to the same conclusion. Ear defenders are better for us in the field. 

I certainly wouldn't rock up to a shoot with a pair of ACS PRO 17's 😄

[DoubleOhStephan]

What @Billy Apple has said is proven medically - 

3.3 OCCLUSION EFFECT 

Occluding and sealing the ear with an earmuff or earplug (Berger, 1988) increases the efficiency with which bone-conducted sound is transmitted at frequencies below 2 kHz. This is called the occlusion effect.

When a musician sings or blows into the mouthpiece of an instrument, the 
sound is transmitted via the jaw to the bone surrounding the inner portion of the ear canal. 

Blocking the ear canal with an earmuff or earplug allows this noise, which is effectively generated within the ear canal, to build up within the enclosed space.

This causes an increase in the sound pressure level at the eardrum in the occluded ear compared to the open ear for sounds generated by the user (eg vocalist, brass or woodwinds). Compared to a completely open ear 
canal, the occlusion effect may boost low frequency (usually below 500 Hz) sound pressure in the ear canal by more than 20 dB. 

The occlusion effect causes wearers of hearing protectors to experience a change in the perception of their voice quality and other body-generated sounds and vibrations (eg breathing,  chewing, etc). In addition, some people may also feel a sense of pressure or blockage in the ear  when an earplug is inserted.  

There are two ways to reduce or remove the occlusion effect (Ross, 2004). The most effective way is to not completely block the ear canal with an ear-mould, by creating a vent hole that  connects the outer surface of the earplug to the inner surface. This permits the bone-conducted  sound generated in the ear canal to escape the ear in the way that it is supposed to. The amount  of sound that escapes, and therefore the magnitude of the occlusion effect, depends on the size  of the vent. The larger the vent, the more the occlusion effect can be reduced.  

Another method of reducing the occlusion effect is to use a very long and tight ear-mould (Killion, 2003); the plug should make a seal in the second bend of the ear canal (deep in the ear  canal). The presence of the ear-mould deep in the ear canal prevents the sound vibrations  produced by the wearer from being developed. However care is needed because a tight-fitting  ear-mould situated deep in the ear canal may be uncomfortable and irritate the skin in the ear canal. 

Download the full report for yourselves here

[wateroftyne]

1 hour ago, DoubleOhStephan said:

There are two ways to reduce or remove the occlusion effect (Ross, 2004). The most effective way is to not completely block the ear canal with an ear-mould, by creating a vent hole that  connects the outer surface of the earplug to the inner surface. This permits the bone-conducted  sound generated in the ear canal to escape the ear in the way that it is supposed to. The amount  of sound that escapes, and therefore the magnitude of the occlusion effect, depends on the size  of the vent. The larger the vent, the more the occlusion effect can be reduced.  

Another method of reducing the occlusion effect is to use a very long and tight ear-mould (Killion, 2003); the plug should make a seal in the second bend of the ear canal (deep in the ear  canal). The presence of the ear-mould deep in the ear canal prevents the sound vibrations  produced by the wearer from being developed. However care is needed because a tight-fitting  ear-mould situated deep in the ear canal may be uncomfortable and irritate the skin in the ear canal. 

I believe the ACS (and maybe others?) does the latter, especially as there's absolutely no evidence of a boost in low-end frequency when I use them, unlike previous 'off the shelf' plugs I've tried. Here's a pic I pinched off the internet which shows them going around the corner, so-to-speak.

What I do know is that when I wear them, I can enjoy the gig as if I'm not wearing them. And when I take them out, my hearing is fresh and sparkly like I've been sitting in a quiet room for two hours.

,I'm not an audiologist and I'm happy to be educated otherwise, but if someone (i.e. the specialist, not the OP) is trying to tell me they literally don't work, they're going to have to put a hell of a case forward.

Edited August 6, 2019 by wateroftyne

[Billy Apple]

26 minutes ago, wateroftyne said:

I believe the ACS (and maybe others?) does the latter, especially as there's absolutely no evidence of a boost in low-end frequency when I use them, unlike previous 'off the shelf' plugs I've tried. Here's a pic I pinched off the internet which shows them going around the corner, so-to-speak.

What I do know is that when I wear them, I can enjoy the gig as if I'm not wearing them. And when I take them out, my hearing is fresh and sparkly like I've been sitting in a quiet room for two hours.

However I'm not an audiologist and I'm happy to be educated otherwise. If someone (i.e. the specialist, not the OP) is trying to tell me they literally don't work, they're going to have to put a hell of a case forward.

I can see your problem. You’ve got a really weird shaped ear canal. Pinched at one end and fat at the other.

[wateroftyne]

9 minutes ago, Billy Apple said:

I can see your problem. You’ve got a really weird shaped ear canal. Pinched at one end and fat at the other.

They're not mine 😄

[Bolo]

OOstephan and Waterofthyne are correct, there is a  boost in SPL around 125-250 Hz in bone conduction when the auditory canals are blocked. And it is the reason for the open tube in earplugs, where the filter is placed that determines the final attenuation level. The denser the filter the higher the attenuation, but also the higher chance of occlusion effect. Because circumaural style earmuffs or eardefenders lock in a larger volume of air to be moved, the occlusion effect is deminished. It simply takes more energy to move more air.

Edited August 6, 2019 by Bolo

[fretmeister]

53 minutes ago, DoubleOhStephan said:

What @Billy Apple has said is proven medically - 

3.3 OCCLUSION EFFECT 

Occluding and sealing the ear with an earmuff or earplug (Berger, 1988) increases the efficiency with which bone-conducted sound is transmitted at frequencies below 2 kHz. This is called the occlusion effect.

When a musician sings or blows into the mouthpiece of an instrument, the 
sound is transmitted via the jaw to the bone surrounding the inner portion of the ear canal. 

Blocking the ear canal with an earmuff or earplug allows this noise, which is effectively generated within the ear canal, to build up within the enclosed space.

This causes an increase in the sound pressure level at the eardrum in the occluded ear compared to the open ear for sounds generated by the user (eg vocalist, brass or woodwinds). Compared to a completely open ear 
canal, the occlusion effect may boost low frequency (usually below 500 Hz) sound pressure in the ear canal by more than 20 dB. 

The occlusion effect causes wearers of hearing protectors to experience a change in the perception of their voice quality and other body-generated sounds and vibrations (eg breathing,  chewing, etc). In addition, some people may also feel a sense of pressure or blockage in the ear  when an earplug is inserted.  

There are two ways to reduce or remove the occlusion effect (Ross, 2004). The most effective way is to not completely block the ear canal with an ear-mould, by creating a vent hole that  connects the outer surface of the earplug to the inner surface. This permits the bone-conducted  sound generated in the ear canal to escape the ear in the way that it is supposed to. The amount  of sound that escapes, and therefore the magnitude of the occlusion effect, depends on the size  of the vent. The larger the vent, the more the occlusion effect can be reduced.  

Another method of reducing the occlusion effect is to use a very long and tight ear-mould (Killion, 2003); the plug should make a seal in the second bend of the ear canal (deep in the ear  canal). The presence of the ear-mould deep in the ear canal prevents the sound vibrations  produced by the wearer from being developed. However care is needed because a tight-fitting  ear-mould situated deep in the ear canal may be uncomfortable and irritate the skin in the ear canal. 

Download the full report for yourselves here

That in no way affects the validity or more to the point invalidity of the OP's comment "Ear plugs don't work."

 

That is demonstrably incorrect and yet instead of addressing it or editing the post he avoids the question.

This is not an issue of whether ear plugs are perfect or not. No Personal Protective Equipment item avoids risk 100%. The point is whether they assist in lowering risk and damage.

 

There is no other way to read "Ear plugs don't work" than as stated.

 

If the comments of the unknown audiologist have been conveyed correctly they were irresponsible. 

 

[TimR]

@Billy Apple Another factor is how you approached the Audiologist. It was at an HSE event. He would be looking at it from an HSE perspective where sound levels in the workplace are strictly controlled. So he is right Ear Plugs don’t work in a lot of situations, or more correctly don’t do the job they’re required to do. 

For the majority of us; the combination of limiting the exposure to loud noise for periods of an hour at a time and the loud noise not being at industrial levels, means plugs will do the job.

In an industrial situation the noise needs to be reduced to the level of normal conversation, with the premise that the user could be in the environment for several hours at a time. 

Reducing the levels that far when performing live music just defeats the aim of the live music in a lot of cases. Practicing for several hours is a different case. But then I don’t think anyone should be practicing at gig levels. The odd rehearsal maybe, but during a practice it is counterproductive. 

Edited August 6, 2019 by TimR

[DoubleOhStephan]

Just my opinion, but the choice of language being correct or incorrect is irrelevant tbh, it has created a debate which, through independent research, has revealed some very interesting information. 

I'm willing to overlook a bit of hyperbole if it increases my understanding (even indirectly) of a subject of such importance. I'm not a singer or wind instrumentalist, so the info uncovered doesn't directly effect me, but these guys are fellow musicians who play in our bands, being in a position to raise their awareness of this outweighs the wording of a headline. 

Edited August 6, 2019 by DoubleOhStephan
What was that closed bracket doing there?

[Billy Apple]

21 minutes ago, fretmeister said:

That is demonstrably incorrect and yet instead of addressing it or editing the post he avoids the question.

No it's not, no I'm not and no I won't. You have a habit of making demands on others and you aren't the boss of me.

If you stopped being personal (and IMO a bully) you might get over it and make a valid contribution to the thread, otherwise you sound just like a stuck record... *puts in ACS Pro 17's*.... D'ho!

[cheddatom]

I found the title suitably shocking so I had to read what it was all about. The title is "ear plugs don't work", but the content is "ear plugs don't work as well as ear defenders". Fair enough! Thanks for the info. I find that ear defenders give me a low end boost that's quite pleasing when playing the drums, but quite nauseating when playing the bass. So, I use standard disposable foam ear plugs when playing bass or guitar, and when playing drums live. I use ear defenders when playing drums in the studio

I don't think any of my bands would let me wear ear defenders on stage!!

 

[la bam]

Surely the ear defenders and ear plugs are designed for different usages?

Plugs for a reduction in sound, not total shut out, so we can still hear in order to play along.

Defenders for as much shut out as possible as theres no need to hear the sound?

[fretmeister]

3 hours ago, Billy Apple said:

No it's not, no I'm not and no I won't. You have a habit of making demands on others and you aren't the boss of me.

If you stopped being personal (and IMO a bully) you might get over it and make a valid contribution to the thread, otherwise you sound just like a stuck record... *puts in ACS Pro 17's*.... D'ho!

The NHS website confirms they assist.

Earplugs are sold with attenuation specs that have to be supported by testing to comply with advertising rules and Health and Safety Regulations. Thus there is ample proof they are effective. You have also been provided with analogy such as the crash helmet that still means a wearer is at risk of head injury. To sell earplugs "that do not work" would be a criminal offence of fraud, as well as contravening the various Sale of Goods statutes and Consumer Protection Regulations.

 

Using standard dictionary definitions of the words you used in your title and in your original post there is no other way to read it. It is obviously and demonstrably inaccurate. 

If this forum was subject to newspaper oversight from the PCC a retraction or  correction or clarification may well have been ordered. No earplug maker claims they protect against 100% of hearing damage. No PPE maker of any type would make such a claim. But they do have to show that what they claim about their product is true - particularly for any formal safety standards markings. A steel toe boot is very protective - unless you drop 3 tons on it. Does that mean it doesn't work? No. It will have specs as to impact resistance and deformity under load.

 

I do not have a habit of making demands on anyone and I am not bullying you. I am however arguing robustly and pointing out the flaws in your position. The only personal thing about that is that you make the original claim. Please do not assume robust argument is anything other than robust argument. You may find my tone strident. Frankly I am unconcerned. I am far more worried that someone might take your initial post as gospel and stop wearing earplugs. That reader might not read the rest of the thread where you either ignore questions, move goalposts or backtrack from your original post.

 

You are a moderator on a site where the members are often exposed to high volume levels. Claiming that a proven method of noise attenuation doesn't work, without caveat, is irresponsible. 

When I, and others - including your fellow moderators - have asked you to clarify what was said you have ignored those requests. Even the simple request from WoT "Did he tell you they literally don’t work?" you have ignored.

 

Perhaps you didn't see the post. Now I have drawn your attention to it. It is a simple question. If the "expert" literally said they don't work, then this would be an extraordinary claim that would require extraordinary evidence to over-turn decades of accepted medical advice. If the "expert" did not say it then you expose the inaccuracy of your Original Post. It must be one or the other. It is not unreasonable to expect you to answer such a simple question that is of great importance to anyone who gigs at volume.

 

Perhaps there was additional information. Perhaps the expert said "They literally don't work.... if you are using a road drill all day." That would be a very pertinent matter you neglected to mention and would massively change the applicability of the information in the Original Post.

 

As a moderator, presumably you would delete medical advice posted by others that was demonstrably harmful? Breaches of the Cancer Act for example? Claims that some home-made concoction can cure a condition? Some idiot claiming that a mash of herbs is a better choice than chemo? Are you not concerned that your Original Post might cause others to abandon ear plugs, thus leading them to harm? 

 

This is a forum of noise lovers. It's of interest to everybody here. I think that brings additional responsibilities as to the accuracy of what is passed on as an expert opinion about hearing protection.

 

 

 

 

 

[EBS_freak]

Solid response.