Tag Archive: David M. Sykes

April 25th is International Noise Awareness Day

by David M. Sykes, Vice Chair, The Quiet Coalition

Wednesday, April 25th marks the 23rd annual celebration of International Noise Awareness Day, an event born in the U.S. that has grown into an international occasion.

Congratulations to the event’s founder, Nancy Nadler, for her pioneering work and to other Americans who have long contributed to and supported it, including The Quiet Coalition founding member, Arline Bronzaft PhD.

Commenting on the history and significance of International Noise Awareness Day, Dr. Bronzaft said:
In 1992, I worked with Nancy Nadler, now the Deputy Executive Director of Center for Hearing and Communication (CHC), when she created the Noise Center and four years later I was part of the CHC group who introduced International Noise Awareness Day (INAD) worldwide. In New York City, INAD was recognized with a Mayoral Proclamation at City Hall, poster contests in schools speaking to the dangers of noise, vans provided by CHC to assess hearing of New Yorkers and panel discussions on noise throughout the city. One year, the Borough President of Brooklyn feted the children of the winning Noise Poster Contest, as well as their parents, at a Borough Hall reception.

In the U.S., International Noise Awareness Day precedes the month long celebration of May as Better Hearing and Speech Month led by the National Institute of Deafness and Communication Disorders, the American Speech Language Hearing Association, and other scientific, professional, and governmental organizations.

TQC’s founders hope that professionals in public health and hearing health will join with researchers and citizens representing the 48 million Americans who suffer from hearing disorders to mark both International Noise Awareness Day and Better Hearing and Speech Month.

In addition to serving as vice chair of the The Quiet Coalition, David Sykes chairs several professional organizations in acoustical science: The Acoustics Research Council, American National Standards Institute Committee S12, Workgroup 44, The Rothschild Foundation Task Force on Acoustics, and the FGI Acoustics Working Group—a partner of the American Hospital Association. He is the lead author of “Sound & Vibration 2.0 (2012, Springer-Verlag), a contributor to the National Academy of Engineering report “Technology for a Quieter America,” and to the US-GSA guidance “Sound Matters”, and co-founded the Laboratory for Advanced Research in Acoustics (LARA) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. He recently retired from the board of directors of the American Tinnitus Association. A graduate of the University of California/Berkeley with graduate degrees from Cornell University, he is a frequent organizer of and speaker at professional conferences in the U.S., Europe, Asia, and the Middle East.

Is it time to redefine “noise”?

Photo credit: Alby Headrick licensed under CC BY 2.0

By David M. Sykes, Vice Chair, The Quiet Coalition

It seems obvious we need a better definition of noise than the one we’ve got, doesn’t it? We all think we know what “noise” is, but the technical and legal people who develop policies and regulations need to have a solid, authoritative, operational definition and history doesn’t provide them with one.

Believe it or not, the technical literature on noise—written by legions of distinguished physicists and engineers during the last century—defines noise simply as “unwanted sound.” That elegant definition certainly complies with the principle of Occam’s Razor, but is it enough?

But unfortunately it also suggests that noise is subjective and not measurable—which is completely wrong. What does “unwanted” mean? Unwanted by whom? And the absence of a working, technical definition has helped opponents of noise-control regulations, who routinely say that noise is subjective and merely annoyance. The definition tacitly gives them permission to utter dismissive bromides like “one person’s noise is another person’s music.”

People have been fighting the noise issue for 40 years, but the tide began to turn in 2011 when the World Health Organization published the report, “Burden of Disease from Environmental Noise (pdf).” It took awhile before the implications of that work were recognized here in the U.S., but within a few years U.S. policy makers began to realize that noise really is much, much more than annoyance, it’s actually a legitimate public health problem that affects hundreds of millions of people. In other words, they had to step back and recognize where this country’s policy pronouncements had been on this subject 50 years earlier—when, in 1968-69 the U.S. Public Health Service and the American Speech and Hearing Association organized the first global meeting on noise as a public health problem at which Surgeon General William H. Stewart was the keynote speaker.

So here we are in the 50th anniversary year: should we celebrate by proposing a new, operational definition of ‘noise” in objective terms that medical and public health professionals can work with and that lends itself to effective and enforceable public policy? Perhaps such a definition already exists? If so, where? TQC co-founder Arline Bronzaft, who’s been fighting the noise battle far longer than most of us, suggests this similarly elegant phrase: noise = “harmful sound” (instead of “unwanted sound”).

This could be backed up with a longer operational definition, such as:

Noise = harmful sound. Noise is radiant energy in the form of vibrations or pressure waves transmitted through a medium such as air or water that can be both directly and indirectly harmful and dangerous as well as disruptive or disturbing to humans and other organisms and to structures. For example acoustic waves may be used to shatter kidney stones or to break glass. ‘Harmful sounds’ may be perceptible or imperceptible depending on their frequency and amplitude. Noise is objectively measured with hand-held instruments designed to international standards using either the A-weighting method (preferred in the USA) or the ITU-R 468 method (preferred in the EU, UK and elsewhere). The World Health Organization, the European Union, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency publish specific levels of ‘noise’ that are harmful to human beings.

What do you think?

In addition to serving as vice chair of the The Quiet Coalition, David Sykes chairs several professional organizations in acoustical science: The Acoustics Research Council, American National Standards Institute Committee S12, Workgroup 44, The Rothschild Foundation Task Force on Acoustics, and the FGI Acoustics Working Group—a partner of the American Hospital Association. He is the lead author of “Sound & Vibration 2.0 (2012, Springer-Verlag), a contributor to the National Academy of Engineering report “Technology for a Quieter America,” and to the US-GSA guidance “Sound Matters”, and co-founded the Laboratory for Advanced Research in Acoustics (LARA) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. He recently retired from the board of directors of the American Tinnitus Association. A graduate of the University of California/Berkeley with graduate degrees from Cornell University, he is a frequent organizer of and speaker at professional conferences in the U.S., Europe, Asia, and the Middle East.

Fresh thinking about quiet, space-saving urban transportation

Introducing the URB-E

by David M. Sykes, Vice Chair, The Quiet Coalition

By now we’ve all seen battery-powered Segways, battery-powered bicycles, and battery-powered motorcycles—awkward, cumbersome, big, heavy commuter vehicles that have enough power to get you from home to the train station or bus stop. Then what do you do with it? Granted they take less space than cars and don’t spew exhaust fumes, but their bulk and weight is a problem.

Now comes URB-E, a cleverly designed, small-scale, apparently foldable electric scooter that you can take right onto the bus or train with you. Brilliant! Kudos to the designers in Pasdena who thought this up. Can’t wait to see them on the roads and campuses around here when spring rolls around. Looks like fun.

In addition to serving as vice chair of the The Quiet Coalition, David Sykes chairs several professional organizations in acoustical science: The Acoustics Research Council, American National Standards Institute Committee S12, Workgroup 44, The Rothschild Foundation Task Force on Acoustics, and the FGI Acoustics Working Group—a partner of the American Hospital Association. He is the lead author of “Sound & Vibration 2.0 (2012, Springer-Verlag), a contributor to the National Academy of Engineering report “Technology for a Quieter America,” and to the US-GSA guidance “Sound Matters”, and co-founded the Laboratory for Advanced Research in Acoustics (LARA) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. He recently retired from the board of directors of the American Tinnitus Association. A graduate of the University of California/Berkeley with graduate degrees from Cornell University, he is a frequent organizer of and speaker at professional conferences in the U.S., Europe, Asia, and the Middle East.

After Cuba can the U.S. still claim noise is just an “annoyance”?

Photo credit: Stevenbedrick licensed under CC BY 3.0

by David M. Sykes, Vice Chair, The Quiet Coalition

Are you following the Cuba episode on “weaponized sound”? If so, here’s some additional reading.

Nobody’s certain what’s going on there. Is it a hoax? A Trumpian cover for pulling the U.S. embassy out of Havana?

No. It could be both real and very ironic….

What’s interesting to those of us who are concerned about the epidemic of noise in America and the effects of that noise on everyone’s health, is this:

The official posture of several intimidatingly large U.S. federal agencies—for example the Departments of Commerce and Transportation and the EPA—is that noise is nothing more than “annoyance.” That policy has been in place for over 35 years. But if noise is merely “annoyance” how has it been “weaponized” by some foreign adversary?

The latest speculation is that the “sonic attack” in Havana might have involved “infrasound.”

Fact is, In the U.S. infrasound is poorly understood precisely because there’s been so little funding to research it. Why? Because if noise doesn’t matter, if it’s merely “annoyance,” then just ignore it. And so the U.S. has ignored noise for decades, but that may be coming to an end.

Perhaps the decades of ignoring noise and its impact on health will now change and researchers will have to unscramble some wily adversary’s “secrets” because they appear to be in use against us. Ironically, by ignoring the importance of sound and noise for nearly four decades, the U.S. has fallen behind and will have to scramble to catch up.

But that’s an old story, isn’t it?

In addition to serving as vice chair of the The Quiet Coalition, David Sykes chairs several professional organizations in acoustical science: The Acoustics Research Council, American National Standards Institute Committee S12, Workgroup 44, The Rothschild Foundation Task Force on Acoustics, and the FGI Acoustics Working Group—a partner of the American Hospital Association. He is the lead author of “Sound & Vibration 2.0 (2012, Springer-Verlag), a contributor to the National Academy of Engineering report “Technology for a Quieter America,” and to the US-GSA guidance “Sound Matters”, and co-founded the Laboratory for Advanced Research in Acoustics (LARA) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. He recently retired from the board of directors of the American Tinnitus Association. A graduate of the University of California/Berkeley with graduate degrees from Cornell University, he is a frequent organizer of and speaker at professional conferences in the U.S., Europe, Asia, and the Middle East.

The EU wants quiet, fuel-efficient airplanes sooner

Photo credit: Airbus

by David M. Sykes, Vice Chair, The Quiet Coalition

Some encouraging news this week from the BBC on the EU’s effort to develop quiet, fuel-efficient aircraft engines. Here’s how the BBC summarizes the situation:

Modern jets aren’t nearly as noisy as their predecessors from a couple of decades ago, but they still make quite a racket on landing or takeoff. If your house is close to the airport that’s bad news. Electric motors are a lot quieter, so they could allow more night flights, especially in airports close to city centres. And of course, there’s the question of emissions. Electrified aircraft, like hybrid cars, should be cleaner than conventional models.

If you live near an airport or beneath a glide path, you’re certainly wondering how soon “quiet” aircraft might appear, right? Well, according to the BBC, so do Airbus and it’s partner Siemens, as the BBC writes that “[t]he firms want to fly a demonstrator version of the plane by 2020, with a commercial application by 2025.”

If that’s not soon enough for you then get in touch with your Congressional representative and tell him/her that you want them to support the work of the Congressional Quiet Skies Caucus and the National Quiet Skies Coalition.

In addition to serving as vice chair of the The Quiet Coalition, David Sykes chairs several professional organizations in acoustical science: The Acoustics Research Council, American National Standards Institute Committee S12, Workgroup 44, The Rothschild Foundation Task Force on Acoustics, and the FGI Acoustics Working Group—a partner of the American Hospital Association. He is the lead author of “Sound & Vibration 2.0 (2012, Springer-Verlag), a contributor to the National Academy of Engineering report “Technology for a Quieter America,” and to the US-GSA guidance “Sound Matters”, and co-founded the Laboratory for Advanced Research in Acoustics (LARA) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. He recently retired from the board of directors of the American Tinnitus Association. A graduate of the University of California/Berkeley with graduate degrees from Cornell University, he is a frequent organizer of and speaker at professional conferences in the U.S., Europe, Asia, and the Middle East.

Need a gift for someone who craves quiet?

by David M. Sykes, Vice Chair, The Quiet Coalition

Have friends who care about noise as much as you do? What better holiday gift than a dvd of this beautiful, inspired film, “In Pursuit of Silence”!
The film got terrific reviews on the film festival circuit in continental Europe, the UK, and the U.S., and then was in selected theaters several months ago prior to this release.

Want more to go with it? Add a copy of the well-reviewed book (now out in paperback) that inspired the film by George Prochnik.

We’re very proud that Arline Bronzaft and Paul Barach—two of The Quiet Coalition’s steering committee members—appear in the film, as does our friend Kurt Fristrup, scientific director of the noise program at the National Park Service, Natural Sounds and Night Skies Division.

In addition to serving as vice chair of the The Quiet Coalition, David Sykes chairs several professional organizations in acoustical science: The Acoustics Research Council, American National Standards Institute Committee S12, Workgroup 44, The Rothschild Foundation Task Force on Acoustics, and the FGI Acoustics Working Group—a partner of the American Hospital Association. He is the lead author of “Sound & Vibration 2.0 (2012, Springer-Verlag), a contributor to the National Academy of Engineering report “Technology for a Quieter America,” and to the US-GSA guidance “Sound Matters”, and co-founded the Laboratory for Advanced Research in Acoustics (LARA) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. He recently retired from the board of directors of the American Tinnitus Association. A graduate of the University of California/Berkeley with graduate degrees from Cornell University, he is a frequent organizer of and speaker at professional conferences in the U.S., Europe, Asia, and the Middle East.

Want better sleep? Bose® has you covered

Bose® noise-masking sleepbuds™

by David M Sykes, Vice Chair, The Quiet Coalition

This CNET review is a intriguing article about Bose’s quest to tap into the auditory health and better sleep market.

PSAPs, or personal sound amplification products, is a term brought to public attention in 2015 by the White House President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology followed by a report from the National Academy of Medicine last October. PSAPs are an emerging class of products that are also called hearables (think wireless earbuds with extra features) that we’ve been following for the past couple of years.

PSAPs are interesting because they represent a host of tech innovations and innovative young tech companies that promises to disrupt the traditional hearing-aid industry that has been dominated for decades by a hegemonic group of risk-averse manufacturers known as the “Big Six,” a market that is carefully regulated by the FDA. The result of decades of regulation and dominance by a handful of companies is that traditional hearing aids are both absurdly expensive, and also not particularly innovative. No surprise there.

But a couple of months ago, the emerging market for PSAPs blew wide open thanks to bi-partisan legislation (the Over-The-Counter Hearing Aid Act, co-sponsored by Senators Warren and Grassley) which exempts PSAPs from regulation. And that means three things:
1. Now you can buy PSAPs directly from the manufacturers or at CVS/Walgreens etc. (“over the counter”) without a prescription and you don’t have to pay an audiologist to fit them;
2. PSAPs cost a fraction of what a pair of traditional hearing aids costs (PSAPs may cost you $150 to $400, but compare that to $4,000 to $10,000 for conventional hearing aids); and
3. Two dozen hungry, young start-ups funded through crowd-sourcing or by venture capital professionals are charging into this market.

So If you, like me, like to watch a tech-race unfold, then get out your binoculars and join the crowd at this track because its an exciting race in a market that has been moribund and over-regulated for decades.

Watching this restless bunch of young PSAP startups and their colorful jockeys (I mean their CEOs), and eyeing them very carefully, are a small but high-powered group of suits you’ll recognize from consumer electronics: Apple, Sony, Phillips, Bose, et al. Why? Because these are the big guys who are already in the ear business–they sell earbuds and headphones, among other things and wireless hearables is a potentially important new market. The ear is their turf. So if they can grab a piece of the de-regulating market for wireless hearing-assistive devices that’s a great business opportunity, right? After all, 48 million Americans are hearing-impaired so this is potentially a big niche market, and who knows how many Americans are sleep-deprived?

But what about Bose?

Bose—an intensely private, even secretive consumer electronics company headquartered on top of a small mountain near Boston—is the first of these big consumer electronics players to make a move in the PSAP race. Bose’s founder, Amar Bose, died a couple of years ago, but he was a singular, legendary force in consumer electronics and seemed to be the fountain from whom all of the company’s products poured. With his death, ownership of the company was turned over to Amar Bose’s alma mater, MIT (yes, MIT controls the majority stake but has no say in management). But can the company still innovate now that it founder and chief idea-guy is gone?

One approach to innovation is through acquisition. So last year, Bose acquired the San Diego-based startup Hush and recently announced the release of a new Bose-branded product based on the work done by three engineer-entrepreneurs who founded Hush not too long ago. If you’ve been watching this emerging market, you probably noticed that only last week, the self-declared front-runner in PSAPs/hearables a product called “Here One” from the company Doppler Labs, ran out of juice and went out of business. Why? They burned through $50 million trying to win this horse race, but then ran out of money and couldn’t get Apple or Sony or any of the rest of the big guys to pony up and buy them out. Sometimes that happens to front-runners and it’s too bad, but it clears the way for others to emerge. And Bose wants to be one of the next group as these horses round the first corner.

Now Bose, in addition to being intensely secretive, has also always done things differently. And they’re certainly going after this emerging PSAP/hearables market from some intriguing angles. For instance, they recently have launched a crowdfuning campaign for their new Bose® noise-masking sleepbuds™. Another example is their newly announced Hearphones for people who need help understanding speech in noisy environments. Both of these products indicate that Bose is probing the now-deregulated “hearing health market”—a big departure from their traditional focus on consumer electronics. Perhaps they think 48 million Americans is a viable niche market where they can beat Apple, Sony, Phillips and the Big Six hearing aid companies by getting out of the gate faster. Who knows? Bose has succeeded by focusing on niches ignored by others and they’ve got their own retail stores, so keep your eyes on them.

It’s a race. And some of us are watching closely to see what happens. If you placed a bet on Here One and lost, then just swallow hard and keep your eyes on the race. It’s only just begun.

In addition to serving as vice chair of the The Quiet Coalition, David Sykes chairs several professional organizations in acoustical science: The Acoustics Research Council, American National Standards Institute Committee S12, Workgroup 44, The Rothschild Foundation Task Force on Acoustics, and the FGI Acoustics Working Group—a partner of the American Hospital Association. He is the lead author of “Sound & Vibration 2.0 (2012, Springer-Verlag), a contributor to the National Academy of Engineering report “Technology for a Quieter America,” and to the US-GSA guidance “Sound Matters”, and co-founded the Laboratory for Advanced Research in Acoustics (LARA) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. He recently retired from the board of directors of the American Tinnitus Association. A graduate of the University of California/Berkeley with graduate degrees from Cornell University, he is a frequent organizer of and speaker at professional conferences in the U.S., Europe, Asia, and the Middle East.

NASA demonstrates another way to reduce aircraft noise

Photo credit: NASA

David M. Sykes, Vice Chair, The Quiet Coalition

I hope you’ve read the new post by our chairman, Dr. Daniel Fink, about the “denialist playbook.” It has been actively used for decades to sideline and undermine all efforts to address aircraft/airport noise. In fact aircraft/airport noise is a textbook case of well-organized and well-funded “denialism” in action.

What’s particularly astonishing is that answers already exist—they’re just not being implemented by aircraft manufacturers or by airlines. Nor are the FAA and the UN agency ICAO (the International Commercial Aviation Organization, based in Montreal) encouraging their adoption. For instance, the EU manufacturer Airbus already produces aircraft that are substantially quieter. The A380 and the A320neo, with it’s American-produced engines from Pratt & Whitney, are reportedly 75% quieter. How many of those planes are in the fleets of U.S. airlines? Why not a higher percentage?

We’ve also reported on work by NASA to quiet helicopters and launch electrically-powered aircraft. Now here’s another example of significant progress, in this case progress on reducing noise from the airframe itself. Wouldn’t a 30% reduction in airframe noise be a good idea?

In fact, there’s no lack of “good ideas”—the problem is that the air travel industry, including manufacturers, airlines, and local airport agencies, refuse to acknowledge that noise is actually a health hazard for people living near airports. In fact, the “denialist” argument is that aircraft noise is merely local “annoyance,” but there’s plenty of credible medical and public health evidence that health effects are real, serious, and wide-spread.

The Congressional Quiet Skies Caucus recently submitted a request to the Chair and Ranking Member of the House Appropriations Committee’s Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development requesting funds to evaluate the health effects of airport and helicopter noise—though many would argue that the existing evidence is already sufficient to prove the case.

We support the work of the Congressional Quiet Skies Caucus, but respectfully submit that there’s little need for more evidence to prove this point, so if this request fails, there’s no need to wait and write another one.

What’s needed is for more members of Congress (in addition the the 36 who are already members of the Congressional Quiet Skies Caucus) to wake up and realize that the Department of Transportation, of which the FAA is a part, has been playing the “denialism” game for far too long, that the agency is a victim of what economists call “regulatory capture.”

Let’s stop arguing with the denialists because the science is clear. Let’s instead start demanding that aircraft manufacturers and airlines simply adopt the technologies and solutions that are already available. Doesn’t that sound like progress we can all live with?

In addition to serving as vice chair of the The Quiet Coalition, David Sykes chairs several professional organizations in acoustical science: The Acoustics Research Council, American National Standards Institute Committee S12, Workgroup 44, The Rothschild Foundation Task Force on Acoustics, and the FGI Acoustics Working Group—a partner of the American Hospital Association. He is the lead author of “Sound & Vibration 2.0 (2012, Springer-Verlag), a contributor to the National Academy of Engineering report “Technology for a Quieter America,” and to the US-GSA guidance “Sound Matters”, and co-founded the Laboratory for Advanced Research in Acoustics (LARA) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. He recently retired from the board of directors of the American Tinnitus Association. A graduate of the University of California/Berkeley with graduate degrees from Cornell University, he is a frequent organizer of and speaker at professional conferences in the U.S., Europe, Asia, and the Middle East.

Havana mystery: Weaponized sound or ‘spooky action at a distance’?

U.S. Embassy in Havana | Photo credit: Escla licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0

by David M. Sykes, Vice Chair, The Quiet Coalition

Albert Einstein never accepted quantum physics, proving that geniuses don’t know everything. One phenomenon he couldn’t explain—now known as “quantum entanglement”–he simply dismissed as “spooky action at a distance.” But it has lately (decades after Einstein’s death) been proven.

Something else that’s not understood yet is the odd case of “weaponized sound” that appears to have sickened people at the U.S. embassy in Havana, Cuba. This piece in Wired Magazine, as well as this article in The New York Times, are by far the best so far on this mysterious and unexplained situation.

If you, like we, have been pondering this, wondering if an LRAD was involved or perhaps some secret source of weaponized infrasound or ultrasound, don’t expect a definitive answer just yet. Adam Rogers, the author of the Wired piece, and Carl Zimmer, of The New York Times, dug deeper than most and even talked to some scientists (in the U.S. and Russia) to see what, in anything, anybody knows. The answer is this: it’s still a mystery, but stay tuned because they’re gradually eliminating possibilities. The most probable scenario involves a combination of ototoxic chemical exposure with some form of weaponized sound. Yes, there are many ototoxic chemicals and drugs, that is, chemicals and drugs the exposure to which can destroy your hearing, including several chemotherapy drugs.

Is this kind of lethal combo possible? Probable? Likely?

Whatever it is, it apparently is NOT an LRAD. Yes, it’s true that LRAD’s are being distributed to and used by police forces since 2009, but whatever has been going on in Havana, that’s not the answer. Stay tuned.

In addition to serving as vice chair of the The Quiet Coalition, David Sykes chairs several professional organizations in acoustical science: The Acoustics Research Council, American National Standards Institute Committee S12, Workgroup 44, The Rothschild Foundation Task Force on Acoustics, and the FGI Acoustics Working Group—a partner of the American Hospital Association. He is the lead author of “Sound & Vibration 2.0 (2012, Springer-Verlag), a contributor to the National Academy of Engineering report “Technology for a Quieter America,” and to the US-GSA guidance “Sound Matters”, and co-founded the Laboratory for Advanced Research in Acoustics (LARA) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. He recently retired from the board of directors of the American Tinnitus Association. A graduate of the University of California/Berkeley with graduate degrees from Cornell University, he is a frequent organizer of and speaker at professional conferences in the U.S., Europe, Asia, and the Middle East.

Researchers confirm cheaper hearables work as well as hearing aids

by David M. Sykes, Vice Chair, The Quiet Coalition

Several Johns Hopkins researchers reported some research in the Journal of the American Medical Association that tested the notion that a cheap ($200-$400) unregulated “hearable” (also known as a personal sound amplification product or PSAP) may be a convenient and inexpensive alternative to a hearing aid.

The researchers tested a handful of the new hearable products just coming on the market and, sure enough, they perform as well as, or nearly as well as, expensive ($2000-$5000 per ear) hearing aids made by the “Big Six.” The Big Six are six companies that have controlled the hearing aid industry; their products are regulated in the U.S. by the Food and Drug Administration.

Recently legislation passed by Congress and signed into law just before the August recess, about which we have written earlier, requires the FDA to de-regulate, i.e. to take a hands-off approach to this new class of high-tech hearing devices. As a result, these new products can be sold over the counter, without a prescription.

Will you need to take them to an audiologist to get them fitted? Certainly you may choose to do so, and that may be the best option, particularly if you are concerned that improper use might endanger your hearing. But with a conventional hearing aid, patients were required to pay professional fees to an audiologist for fittings, etc., resulting in a bundled price that made the hearing aids unobtainable for many people who needed them. You can certainly expect to read articles claiming that these new devices pose a danger. Henceforth, it’s up to the consumer to decide—as he or she already does with regard to many other healthcare products, including over-the-counter drugs that formerly required a doctor’s prescription.

We say caveat emptor (buyer beware), but welcome these new products that cost 1/10th the price of conventional hearing aids. They are suitably priced to be able to meet the needs of 48 million Americans with noise-induced hearing loss, many of whom cannot afford the $4000 to $10,000 price tag for conventional hearing aids. Voters seem to want de-regulation—this is it!

In addition to serving as vice chair of the The Quiet Coalition, David Sykes chairs several professional organizations in acoustical science: The Acoustics Research Council, American National Standards Institute Committee S12, Workgroup 44, The Rothschild Foundation Task Force on Acoustics, and the FGI Acoustics Working Group—a partner of the American Hospital Association. He is the lead author of “Sound & Vibration 2.0 (2012, Springer-Verlag), a contributor to the National Academy of Engineering report “Technology for a Quieter America,” and to the US-GSA guidance “Sound Matters”, and co-founded the Laboratory for Advanced Research in Acoustics (LARA) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. He recently retired from the board of directors of the American Tinnitus Association. A graduate of the University of California/Berkeley with graduate degrees from Cornell University, he is a frequent organizer of and speaker at professional conferences in the U.S., Europe, Asia, and the Middle East.