Tag Archive: David Sykes

New federal law deregulates and disrupts hearing aid market

Photo of Here One wireless smart earbuds courtesy of Doppler Labs

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

Who says this Congress can’t get anything done? Last week huge news appeared for 48 million Americans with hearing disorders, but the media barely noticed::

A new bipartisan law, the “Over-the-Counter Hearing Aid Act of 2017,” will deregulate the hearing aid market, dramatically lowering costs for consumers and releasing a surge of new technologies that will be sold over the counter, without a prescription. Yes, there will be losers as well as winners, but that’s the nature of change….

The new law responds to two federally sponsored reports issued last year (under the Obama Administration). The first report came from the President’s Council of Advisers on Science and Technology. The second was from the National Academy of Medicine. Passed the day before Congress adjourned, the new law creates opportunities for new technology innovators, eliminates the need to get a prescription, and dramatically cuts the cost by allowing substitutes, called “hearables” and “PSAPs” (Personal Sound Amplification Products), to be sold “over the counter.” The goal? a more efficient market that meets the needs of consumers.

As Noah Kraft, co-founder and CEO of Doppler Labs said, “[t]his industry is going to be completely disrupted. The question is by who?”

We have reported about this on several occasions over the past year, but the market disruption is getting underway much sooner that we anticipated thanks to quick action in the House of Representatives and the Senate, action that has emboldened nearly two dozen new entrants to enter the market ahead of schedule.

Who gains? 48 million Americans with incurable noise-induced hearing loss and millions more who are at risk from noise exposure. Who loses? The Big Six  who have dominated the hearing aid market for decades along with approximately 14,000 audiologists, the medical specialists whose services were previously required by the FDA to dispense and “fit” hearing aids to patients. The new Warren-Grassley OTC Act stipulates that the FDA must create a new category for “over-the-counter” hearing assistive devices and let them be sold freely, without intervention.

It’s no secret that the current Congress and the White House crave deregulation. Is deregulation potentially dangerous? Sure, but this is one instance where consumers will clearly benefit. Until now, hearing aids could cost you between $2,500 and $5,000 per ear, so $5,000 to $10,000 total. No wonder so few people have hearing aids—they weren’t covered by insurance or Medicare/Medicaid, so who could afford them? But now prices will drop to 1/10th of that—about $300 to $350 a pair–so lack of insurance coverage is less of a barrier.

We say thanks to the laudable bi-partisan cooperation between Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) for getting this done at a time when Washington seems mired in dysfunction.

What’s the downside of this deregulatory innovation? There are many unknowns, so caveat emptor (buyer beware) and stay tuned…. But for now, it’s “Hip Hip Hooray”—or should we say, “Hear Here”!

P.S.: Our chair, Daniel Fink, MD, cautions that the real solution to the epidemic of hearing disorders in America is NOT more affordable hearing aids, but rather, a badly needed and long-awaited public health effort to prevent hearing loss—and we wholeheartedly agree with him. Prevention can be encouraged by three means:

  1. Educating people about the dangers of prolonged exposure to noise above 70 dB (permanent hearing damage occurs at levels much lower than currently recognized);
  2. Resurrecting federal efforts to reduce noise (as is being done in Europe and Asia already, where noise is recognized as a public health hazard) from obvious sources like planes, trains, trucks, consumer appliances, construction and outdoor maintenance equipment, etc.; and
  3. Educating companies in industries like aircraft manufacturing, car and truck manufacturing, mining, construction, HVAC, and appliance manufacturing, etc. that noise is harmful to public health.

Prevention can be done: currently, the European Union regulates noise emissions from 50 classes of products. According to Dr. Fink, “a hearable or PSAP is a poor substitute for well-preserved normal hearing; it’s far better to avoid loud noise or to wear earplugs!”

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.

Quiet aircraft coming to an airport near you?

Photo credit: Pedro Aragão licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0

By David Sykes, Vice Chair, The Quiet Coalition

People who live near airports have struggled with noise for over 50 years. The first attempts to address this problem began in 1967, literally 50 years ago! But frankly, there’s been more progress on this issue outside the U.S., where, for example, the World Health Organization has addressed the burden of disease from environmental noise and the European Union has established night noise guidelines for Europe.

Meanwhile, here on American soil, the struggle continues with groups like the Congressional Quiet Skies Caucus and regional Quiet Skies groups experimenting with different approaches. A variety of strategies have been tested with varying success: petitions, fines, law suits, noise curfews, legislation, even complete airport shutdowns. Every American community that has confronted this issue realizes it’s a tough, long, uphill battle against powerful regulatory agencies and corporations that are more committed to commerce than to public health and welfare.

So, why can’t Boeing or somebody just make a quiet aircraft?

Actually they can—that is, the EU conglomerate Airbus canand already does. And the world’s largest passenger airplane, also made by Airbus–the A380–is the quietest both inside and out. So this isn’t a technological problem. Rather, aircraft engineers, manufacturers (other than Airbus), and the airlines that buy their planes, don’t seem to care about the impact of their products on those on the ground.

Interestingly, the quiet jet engine on the Airbus A320neo is made by the American company Pratt & Whitney.

Hooray! So why don’t U.S. airlines buy the A320neo equipped with its quiet jet engines? Wouldn’t this help to address the aircraft noise problem?

Good question.

For U.S. residents there’s also this good news: a new NASA program to develop quiet electric aircraft was recently announced, but the quiet electric aircraft are small propeller craft, so this is the kind of innovation you’ll see at smaller local airports in a few years.

What about helicopters? Can they make quiet helicopters too? The answer is yes again. Quiet, electric helicopters are also in development.

Conclusion? Maybe “technology substitution”–which works in other sectors–is the uniquely American way out of this dilemma.

At any rate, government-funded research and development (R&D) efforts by NASA and Pratt & Whitney demonstrate that somebody is listening! And in typical American fashion, it appears we will invent our way out of the airport noise mess by convincing the government to accelerate funding of both public and private sector R&D—from which entrepreneurs and business titans will reap rewards later.

At The Quiet Coalition and our host, Quiet Communities, we believe that local and regional anti-noise groups might have greater success if, in addition to the other strategies they’re already trying, they also emphasize “technology substitution.” This approach has worked well in cities and towns on issues like:

– leaf blowers and lawn mowers (convince your parks and recreation department to buy electric!);
– motorcycles (get them off Harleys and onto quieter electric motorcycles);
– appliances (the best-selling dishwasher these days is made in Germany and has become very popular worldwide because it’s quiet);
– air conditioning equipment (the best-selling household air-conditioning equipment is the quiet kind from Korea called “mini-splits” that were engineered to be quiet); and
– outdoor concerts (where wireless headsets are replacing noisy outdoor concert venues).

So our tech-driven American approach to “progress” may eventually get us to a quieter end-state—but the emphasis is on eventually.

In the meantime, until quieter times arrive, those of us who live near airports will have to either continue wearing earplugs or maybe experiment with the new “smart earbuds” that are now available.

And don’t forget the final option: move to a quieter neighborhood where your house isn’t underneath a flight path! Because you might have to wait a while before the above solutions arrive.

David Sykes chairs/co-chairs four national professional groups in acoustical science: The Acoustics Research Council, ANSI S12 WG44, The Rothschild Foundation Task Force on Acoustics, and the FGI Acoustics Working Group. He is also a former board member of the American Tinnitus Association, co-founded the Laboratory for Advanced Research in Acoustics (LARA) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, served as lead-author of “Sound & Vibration 2.0 (2012, Springer-Verlag), and was a contributor to “Technology for a Quieter America” (2011, National Academy of Engineering). 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.

iBuds? Apple shows its hand in the “hearables” space

Photo credit: Bjorn Knetsch licensed under CC BY 2.0

By David Sykes, Vice Chair, The Quiet Coalition

This recent piece by Steven Levy in Wired suggests what Apple (and others) are up to in the hearables market. Levy tells us that Apple is collaborating with Cochlear to provide solutions for people with profound hearing loss. This should excite anyone concerned about the epidemic of hearing loss in America, because it suggests that hearing health has gained enough attention that corporate America is applying resources to the problem and turning it into a “technological opportunity.”

If you’ve been following outcomes from the two federal reports last year (from the Presidents Council of Advisers on Science and Technology, and the National Academy of Medicine) and the resulting bi-partisan Over-the-Counter Hearing Aid Act of 2017 (OCHA) approved by the Senate last week (earlier approved by the House), you know something’s up in the hearing health sector. And with the passage of OCHA last week, hearing health, an issue that has languished in the shadows for lack of funding for over three decades is suddenly center-stage again after three decades of neglect.

The Wired article, coupled with the legislative success in the Senate, demonstrate that hearing health is finally starting to get the attention it deserves. That Apple is trying to gain a foothold in this world shows that tech companies smell an opportunity. And the passage of OCHA clearly establishes that hearing loss is a nonpartisan issue important to both republicans and democrats, because despite the state of affairs in DC today it’s an issue on which the nation can begin to make progress even if the rest of the legislative agenda is on hold!

David Sykes chairs/co-chairs four national professional groups in acoustical science: The Acoustics Research Council, ANSI S12 WG44, The Rothschild Foundation Task Force on Acoustics, and the FGI Acoustics Working Group. He is also a board member of the American Tinnitus Association, co-founder of the Laboratory for Advanced Research in Acoustics (LARA) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, lead author of “Sound & Vibration 2.0 (2012, Springer-Verlag), and a contributor to “Technology for a Quieter America” (2011, National Academy of Engineering). 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.

Quiet race cars? Yes! “Formula E racing” is a hot new world sport

Photo credit: Smokeonthewater licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0

By David Sykes, Vice Chair, The Quiet Coalition

Race cars are supposed to be LOUD right? I grew up fascinated by Formula 1, Grand Prix racing and the incredibly loud Indy 500—all of which necessitated the use of hearing protection. But no more. In 2014, a new class of all-electric race cars called “Formula E” emerged and began racing in various venues around the world. France, of course, now holds an annual “ePrix,” and Los Angeles was the first city in the U.S. to host a Formula E race. But on July 16th of this year, Brooklyn hosted an exciting one.

If you’re a car nut like me, who’s also concerned about air and noise pollution, this is the sport for you!

Here’s a list of Formula E events in 2017 and the schedule of races in 2018.

Enjoy!

David Sykes chairs/co-chairs four national professional groups in acoustical science: The Acoustics Research Council, ANSI S12 WG44, The Rothschild Foundation Task Force on Acoustics, and the FGI Acoustics Working Group. He is also a board member of the American Tinnitus Association, co-founder of the Laboratory for Advanced Research in Acoustics (LARA) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, lead author of “Sound & Vibration 2.0 (2012, Springer-Verlag), and a contributor to “Technology for a Quieter America” (2011, National Academy of Engineering). 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.

Quiet motorcycles? Tell your neighbor to buy one of these…

Photo credit: Jan Ainali licensed under CC BY 3.0

By David Sykes, Vice Chair, and Jamie Banks, Program Director, The Quiet Coalition

You may be thinking, “quiet motorcycles…how is that possible?” In fact, they already exist—but you might have trouble getting a Harley-riding neighbor to embrace them. For many bikers, noise equals power. But in the case of electric motorcycles there is reason to believe that quiet is powerful too!

Lithium ion battery-powered motorcycles are gaining favor–Consumer Reports is impressed with them. Furthermore, the Department of Defense’s Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has been working on camo-painted, “stealth” hybrid gas/electric off-road motorbikes.

Motorcycle noise is a serious problem—especially for people who suffer from auditory disorders like partial hearing loss, tinnitus, hyperacusis, and misophonia–for whom the racket from motorcycles can be excruciatingly painful. This may be bikers themselves or people who live in neighborhoods that are regularly exposed to this type of noise. Several years ago, the U.S. National Academy of Engineering (NAE) convened a meeting about the problem of motorcycle noise and issued a report in 2014, though it seems to have fallen on deaf ears outside the NAE.

The noise has become such a problem in so many communities that even Harley-Davidson’s CEO has spoken out about Hog riders who remove their factory mufflers and install ‘straight pipes.’ Officially, the company doesn’t approve of owners tampering with the factory-installed mufflers, but after-market manufacturers are all-too-willing to meet consumer demand for more noise. The best news is that Harley-Davidson is developing an electric-powered motorcycle too.

Motorcycle noise may be a problem that regulation simply cannot fix. Given the current situation, it is unlikely the Environmental Protection Agency will be able to do anything about it. Instead, The Quiet Coalition (TQC) recommends framing motorcycle noise as a public health issue and encouraging a positive, technology-centered approach by businesses:

  • Become familiar with the large body of scientific literature indicating that loud noise is a public health problem. Authorities, including the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, publicize this information on their websites. Like tobacco smoke a generation ago, it will be necessary to engage public health officials before the motorcycle noise be addressed.
  • Urge individuals and groups that oppose motorcycle noise to encourage businesses to develop quieter, electric-powered alternatives. They are cheaper to operate (solar power is getting cheaper by the minute!) and much easier to maintain or repair (fewer moving parts!).

We believe these two steps are the best, most practical way to get action on this contentious issue and can actually lead to results. For example, The Quiet Coalition’s host, non-profit Quiet Communities, has been helping communities make the quiet transition away from fossil-fuel powered devices (namely landscape maintenance equipment) and towards advanced electric equipment and manual tools and emphasizing the compelling business model for users: the new lithium-ion-powered alternatives are cheaper to operate and maintain, they reduce air pollution, and they operate quietly. For some bikers, adopting technologically advanced, non-polluting, quiet alternatives may be appealing, especially if they have had health and hearing problems related to noisy bikes. It would be the start of a movement.

At TQC, we’re cautiously optimistic.

David Sykes chairs/co-chairs four national professional groups in acoustical science: The Acoustics Research Council, ANSI S12 WG44, The Rothschild Foundation Task Force on Acoustics, and the FGI Acoustics Working Group. He is also a board member of the American Tinnitus Association, co-founder of the Laboratory for Advanced Research in Acoustics (LARA) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, lead author of “Sound & Vibration 2.0 (2012, Springer-Verlag), and a contributor to “Technology for a Quieter America” (2011, National Academy of Engineering). 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.

Jamie Banks, PhD, MSc, is the Executive Director of Quiet Communities, Inc.. She is an environmentalist and health care scientist dedicated to promoting clean, healthy, quiet, and sustainable landscape maintenance, construction, and agricultural practices.

How research, technology, and finance are fueling the new world of hearables

Copyright 2016 www.hearable.world

By David Sykes, Vice Chair, The Quiet Coalition

“For the last 40 years, there’s been very little movement, if any at all on [hearing loss]… and there [are] fundamental regulatory forces in place here that are subject to inertia. …. Now, just literally within the last year, …we’ve seen more movement on this issue than essentially in the last 50 years of U.S. history.”

–Frank Lin, MD, PhD, Assistant Professor, Otolaryngology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health (July 2016)

In the U.S. we grew accustomed to noise and noise-induced hearing loss being ignored. Nothing much happened for three and a half decades after 1981 when, for political reasons, noise and its effects became verboten—serious people wouldn’t talk about it and researchers couldn’t find money to explore it. But lately, what venture capitalists call a “convergence” has occurred—a confluence of research, technology development, and novel sources of financial support (i.e., crowdfunding). And this convergence is creating a surge of interest in this long-ignored subject.

What is going on? Why are some of us so excited about this? Where are we headed? How does this help (or hurt) people who are concerned with the need to control noise, peoples’ exposure to noise, and people who suffer from hearing disorders like tinnitus, hyperacusis, and misophonia? If you follow the writing of The Quiet Coalition’s chairman, Daniel Fink, MD, you may recall that he first wrote about this subject last May. In short, personal sound amplification products (PSAPs) are a positive, exciting step in the right direction. But they will not and cannot solve the larger problem of noise and noise-induced hearing loss in America.

First: What’s going on?

Did it start with research? In 2009, two researchers at Harvard’s Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Charles Liberman, PhD, and Sharon Kujawa, PhD, published a paper revealing that “synaptopathy”, i.e., permanent nerve damage to the nerves that connect the ears to the brain, actually happened at lower noise levels than previously assumed and in the neurological circuits that can’t be seen in an audiological exam (audiologists can only see the pinna, the external auditory canal and the tympanic membrane—after that all has been a big mystery).

As a result, something called “hidden hearing loss” suddenly caught the attention of the policy makers who funded the research. Abruptly, the idea that noise caused only “temporary” damage, i.e., that the ear could recover from what has for decades been called a “Temporary Threshold Shift,” appeared to be really wrong. Hearing damage to nerves is always permanent and, at least until cures are found, irreparable. This caused a shift toward neuroscience research and toward the search for potential cures in partnership with the drug industry.

Did it start with technology innovators? Sony’s phenomenally successful Walkman (launched in 1977, forty years ago) started it, but then Apple’s iPod caused an explosion in the use of “earbuds” for “personal listening.” These wired earbuds were incredibly popular but always troublesome to wear because of the wires, so R&D types began trying to figure out how to get rid of the wires. Then “wireless” arrived. Called “Bluetooth,” it was developed in Sweden (the name “Bluetooth” is a tribute to the ancient King Harald Bluetooth of Denmark who unified parts of Scandinavia). But even wireless earbuds were essentially “dumb” speakers. Eventually, other restless R&D types began exploring what else, with increasingly miniaturized circuit designs, those wireless earbuds could do for you if you thought about the ear as a “portal” for transmitting information to the brain. From that work was born the idea of the PSAP.

But how did an idea turn into a blossoming industry called “wearables” or “hearables” in which at least seventeen companies are now scrambling for your attention? The answer? Money.

Did it start with the idea of “crowdsourcing” money to develop next-generation, smart “earbuds”? Look closely at the chart above and you’ll see that many pioneering PSAP companies currently vying for your attention are financed by “crowdsourcing” campaigns (e.g., Kickstarter and others). Another funding approach now available to companies in this emerging sector is the new SEC-approved “equity crowdsourcing” venture-finance companies, which have only been able to operate since late 2016 in the USA (earlier elsewhere). In other words, now there are whole new ways to start and fund a tech company that do not rely on traditional venture capitalists—those people who traditionally funded lots of other tech companies, but who have had, until now, little interest in hearing technologies because the hearing technology market has been stuck in a rut for three and a half decades.

In truth, all three of these phenomena—research, technology innovation, and capital–occurred independently. But now they have converged and are beginning to affect—and disrupt—existing markets, such as the market for hearing aids.  Hearing aids are over-priced, limited production devices generally aimed at older people and manufactured by a group of six companies (“the cartel” or “The Big Six”) who dominate the industry and make 98% of the world’s hearing aids—in other words, this is a market ripe for disruption.

Now add a fourth catalyst: Regulatory change. Eleven months ago (June 2016), the National Academy of Medicine published a significant report about the emerging, disruptive technology of PSAPs and attempted to warn audiologists, hearing aid manufacturers, and others who have been comfortably ensconced in this stable, profitable but uninteresting market that things are about to change. Then, a few months later two U.S. Senators introduced a bi-partisan bill intended to accelerate transformation of this market. It’s called “The Over-The-Counter Hearing Aid Act,” and it was introduced by Senators Warren (D-MA) and Grassley (R-IA). This act specifically seeks to streamline the market for “hearables”/PSAPs by exempting them from FDA regulation and enabling them to be sold direct to consumers, i.e., “over the counter,” without medical intervention.

But wait, what does this story have to do with our interest in noise control, in ending harmful exposure to noise, in your and your family’s hearing health? Do these new PSAP devices provide some relief for people who already suffer from noise-induced hearing loss? Can they prevent further damage from exposure?

Answer: A big maybe.

Keep in mind that the first word in PSAP is “personal”—these devices only address your noise problem, they don’t solve the noise problem for anyone else. If you travel to work on a noisy subway system, it’s possible some of these PSAP devices may provide you with some relief in the form of an active noise cancellation feature. If you can’t understand conversation in a noisy restaurant, some of the PSAP devices may be able to help you screen out background cacophony and focus on the person who’s speaking to you. In short, PSAPs include a wide array of features that might interest you. They are marketed as wireless earbuds that allow you to optimize “the way you hear the world,” and not as hearing aids, because they cannot be advertised as “hearing aids”—the U.S. Food and Drug Administration prohibits that. Only a “hearing aid” from one of “The Big Six” can be sold as a “hearing aid”—and only those six companies worldwide make devices that are labeled that way.

So “Caveat Emptor” (buyer beware) if you’re interested in trying one of the new PSAPs! This is exciting stuff and they cost less than 1/10th the price of conventional hearing aids. Furthermore, at least two of these companies, Doppler Labs (HERE One) and Nuheara (IQbuds), already have products on the market, so you can actually try out a pair of wireless earbuds and see for yourself.

But do they address the larger social problem that noise has gotten out of hand in America? That we’re all besieged, victimized, permanently injured by too much noise? To this, the answer is definitely “no.” You and a few others might get some relief, but PSAPs are not a solution to the noise problem in America.

David Sykes chairs/co-chairs four national professional groups in acoustical science: The Acoustics Research Council, ANSI S12 WG44, The Rothschild Foundation Task Force on Acoustics, and the FGI Acoustics Working Group. He is also a board member of the American Tinnitus Association, co-founder of the Laboratory for Advanced Research in Acoustics (LARA) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, lead author of “Sound & Vibration 2.0 (2012, Springer-Verlag), and a contributor to “Technology for a Quieter America” (2011, National Academy of Engineering). Mr. Sykes spent several decades in private equity, venture finance, and technology development and has a keen interest in how convergence and disruption affect traditional industries.

Originally posted at The Quiet Coalition.

National Parks: Why quiet matters

By David Sykes, Vice Chair, The Quiet Coalition

On May 4, Science and Phys.org™ published news reports about a recent, significant, multi-year study about the pervasiveness of noise pollution in 492 national parks and natural areas across the U.S.

In “Noise Pollution is invading even the most protected natural areas,” Science writer Ula Chrobak notes that:

The great outdoors is becoming a lot less peaceful. Noise pollution from humans has doubled sound levels in more than half of all protected areas in the United States—from local nature reserves to national parks—and it has made some places 10 times louder, according to a new study. And the cacophony isn’t just bad for animals using natural sounds to hunt and forage—it could also be detrimental to human health.

Under the study, researchers from the National Park Service and Colorado State University “recorded noise at 492 sites across the country with varying levels of protection, [and] used the recordings to predict noise throughout protected areas in the rest of the country.” They also estimated naturally occurring ambient noise and compared the noise levels with and without humanmade noise. The results were damning: noise pollution doubled sound levels in 63% of protected areas and caused a 10-fold increase in 21% of protected areas.

And the impacts of that noise pollution affect all living things withing these areas.  Phys.org reports interviews Rachel Buxton, the study’s lead author and post-doctoral researcher, who states that “[t]he noise levels we found can be harmful to visitor experiences in these areas, and can be harmful to human health, and to wildlife.” The noise pollution findings means that “noise reduced the area that natural sounds can be heard by 50 to 90 percent,” which “also means that what could be heard at 100 feet away could only be heard from 10 to 50 feet.”

So what is the impact on humans and wildlife?  Phys.org explains:

This reduced capacity to hear natural sound reduces the restorative properties of spending time in nature, such as mood enhancement and stress reduction, interfering with the enjoyment typically experienced by park visitors. Noise pollution also negatively impacts wildlife by distracting or scaring animals, and can result in changes in species composition.

High levels of noise pollution were also found in critical habitat for endangered species, namely in endangered plant and insect habitats. “Although plants can’t hear, many animals that disperse seeds or pollinate flowers can hear, and are known to be affected by noise, resulting in indirect impacts on plants,” said Buxton.

The study results have been widely reported, showing that there is real interest in protecting our national parks and natural areas.  Researchers know that “many people don’t really think of noise pollution as pollution,” but they hope that this study will encourage more people to “consider sound as a component of the natural environment.”

The National Park Service’s huge portfolio of parks and natural areas provides a huge canvas for researchers concerned about the impacts of “noise pollution.” You may be surprised to learn that the National Park Service has a research division called “Natural Sounds and Night Skies Division” that has been looking for several years at the effects of noise not only on visitor experiences, but also on plants and animals. Their work is fascinating and resulted in a 2014 report from the National Academy of Engineering called “Preserving National Park Soundscapes.

David Sykes chairs/co-chairs four national professional groups in acoustical science: The Acoustics Research Council, ANSI S12 WG44, The Rothschild Foundation Task Force on Acoustics, and the FGI Acoustics Working Group. He is also a board member of the American Tinnitus Association, co-founder of the Laboratory for Advanced Research in Acoustics (LARA) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, lead author of “Sound & Vibration 2.0 (2012, Springer-Verlag), and a contributor to “Technology for a Quieter America” (2011, National Academy of Engineering). 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.

Looking for a quiet restaurant? Wall St. values this “quiet” chain at $7.5 billion

Photo credit: Mike Mozart CC by 2.0

By David Sykes, Vice-chair, The Quiet Coalition

Yearn for a quiet spot to dine where you can chat (or read) without clamour? If that seems hopeless in America’s noisy restaurants don’t give up—change is on the way.

It’s true that for decades restaurants in America have gotten louder and more cacophonous on purpose. Why? Restaurateurs and their designers say data show that profits climb when noise levels are high because their patrons are:

  1. attracted by the “buzz,”
  2. drink more alcohol,
  3. consume more food faster, and
  4. leave quickly, allowing more patrons to sit down and repeat the process.

True or not, those crowded, noisy eateries are designed to be that way. The good news is that, just as easily, they can be designed to be quiet. The bad news is that so many restaurateurs still don’t understand that the racket drives away large groups of potential patrons, and also alienates restaurant reviewers, some of whom now even carry sound level meters.

Is there such a thing as a successful quiet restaurant chain? One that profits from allowing patrons to converse with each other or read a book, or put a laptop on the table and work quietly–even at peak dining hours? Amazingly, yes. It’s one that already has 2000 stores, is the hottest “fast-casual” chain in America, and is growing faster than Starbucks. The name? Panera. Panera’s stores don’t pretend to be fashionable bistros nor do they serve alcohol. But the food is healthy, natural, fresh, and tasty and the atmosphere is definitely—and, according to acoustics experts, very consciously—designed to provide a haven where people can enjoy quiet conversations and each other without cacophony.

Quiet dining matters to lots of us—more folks than you might imagine. In fact, about 20% of people in their 20s suffer from hearing disorders (which can include hypersensitivities to noise with names like tinnitus, hyperacusis, and misophonia, conditions that make it impossible for them to enjoy restaurants or clubs). And about 50% of people in their 60s and an extraordinary 90% of people in their 80s suffer from an inability to understand speech when background noise levels are elevated. These are not “fringe” groups. Collectively, there are 40 million Americans who probably avoid dining in restaurants because they literally can’t stand the noise.

Do restaurant owners understand that? If they did, they might create quiet sections to broaden their market appeal. Many apparently do not. For those who do, the market opportunity may be considerable.

It just could be that “quiet dining” is the next trend.  For customers looking for quiet, the prospects are mouth-watering.

If you’d like to know how to make a restaurant quieter, check out: Why Acoustics are Important in Restaurant Design and Restaurant Acoustics: Restaurant Noise Reduction by Audimute.

David Sykes chairs/co-chairs four national professional groups in acoustical science: The Acoustics Research Council, ANSI S12 WG44, The Rothschild Foundation Task Force on Acoustics, and the FGI Acoustics Working Group. He is also a board member of the American Tinnitus Association, co-founder of the Laboratory for Advanced Research in Acoustics (LARA) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, lead author of “Sound & Vibration 2.0 (2012, Springer-Verlag), and a contributor to “Technology for a Quieter America” (2011, National Academy of Engineering). 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.

Originally posted at The Quiet Coalition.

Progress Made Against Hospital Noise

By The Quiet Coalition

Some people care most about airport noise. Others focus on noise in schools or restaurants or stadiums. But one group of about 500 professionals has spent twelve years reducing noise in America’s hospitals and healthcare facilities.

Of course, airport noise is a public health problem—especially for people living near America’s 5,194 airports–but noise is a serious public health problem indoors too. This is particularly so for people whose health is compromised, i.e., the millions of patients in America’s 62,414 hospitals and healthcare facilities, not to mention the quarter-million medical and support staff who work there amid the din.

Healthcare facilities are oftentimes the noisiest, most sleep-deprived places you will find anywhere. Have you tried sleeping in an older-style hospital recently? Furthermore, the noise problem has escalated steadily for decades thanks to the burgeoning use of new technologies such as alarmed medical devices.

Fortunately, a group of about 500 professionals known as the FGI Acoustics Working Group has been working continuously for twelve years to address noise in healthcare facilities. So this story contains good news.

The group published it’s first comprehensive noise control criteria in 2010, which were quickly adopted by most states. To hear the difference, visit just about any recently constructed hospital and compare it to an older hospital.  The group’s criteria have now been “exported” to eighty-seven other countries that struggle with the same indoor noise problems (this was accomplished through partnerships with the International Code Council, the US Green Building Council’s LEED for Health Care initiative, and other groups).

But this group’s crusade against noise is not over. This November 2017, they and their hosts will publish more detailed and updated noise control criteria in three separate volumes, one covering America’s 5,564 hospitals, one for the country’s 25,750 healthcare clinics, and another one for it’s 31,100 residential care facilities. If you’re interested you can see their latest work here, FGI Bulletin #2, and here in their first edition (published in 2012).

The Quiet Coalition is proud that its chair, vice chair, and another TQC co-founder are both involved in leading this important work. According to our vice chair, David Sykes, “this decade-long work shows that a broad coalition of interested professionals–in this case, consisting of doctors, nurses, patients and families, public health advocates, hospital administrators, researchers, regulatory agency personnel, lawyers, planners, architects, engineers, designers, and contractors–can achieve meaningful, national progress toward ending the long-ignored public health problem of noise by taking a focused approach and addressing the needs of people who are particularly vulnerable.”

Originally posted at The Quiet Coalition.

Walden, the video game?

Photo credit: Sarah Nichols

David Sykes, the vice-chair of The Quiet Coalition, muses about Walden, the video game, and how trying times compel us to seek stillness and tranquility.  So how exactly does Walden the video game differ from Grand Theft Auto? Like this:

Instead of offering the thrills of stealing, violence and copious cursing, the new video game, based on Thoreau’s 19th-century retreat in Massachusetts, will urge players to collect arrowheads, cast their fishing poles into a tranquil pond, buy penny candies and perhaps even jot notes in a journal — all while listening to music, nature sounds and excerpts from the author’s meditations.

And if you don’t leave enough “time for contemplation, or work too hard, the game cautions: ‘Your inspiration has become low, but can be regained by reading, attending to sounds of life in the distance, enjoying solitude and interacting with visitors, animal and human.’”

Kudos and best of luck to lead designer, Tracy J. Fullerton, the director of the Game Innovation Lab at the University of Southern California School of Cinematic Arts, and her team.