3 ms·

"[Noise canelling will] damage your hearing over time" Do you have a good source on that? I'm thinking about getting some noise-cancelling headphones for offic

"[Noise canelling will] damage your hearing over time" Do you have a good source on that? I'm thinking about getting some noise-cancelling headphones for office use.

chris_7 10y ago
Not noise cancelling specifically, just wearing headphones in general for 40 hours a week.
coldtea 10y ago
There's no good source on that, as it's wrong. There's absolutely no damage from noise cancelling, and in fact they're healthier than regular headphones (because you don't need to raise the volume to drawn out external noises).
- rixed 10y ago
  Any source on that?
  - coldtea 10y ago
    >Unlike cell phones, noise-cancelling headphones do not emit low level radiation and do not pose any of the potential hazards that could stem from frequent use of a cell phone held next to the ear. >Actually, noise-cancelling headphones can be beneficial, since both loud noises and constant low-level noise can lead to health problems. Acute loud noises can damage hearing, interfere with sleep, raise blood pressure and stress levels and cause headaches. As for low-level noise, a study published in the Journal of the Acoustical Society of America in March, 2001, found that Austrian children who live in neighborhoods with constant low-level noise (mostly from automobile and train traffic) had higher levels of the stress hormone cortisol than youngsters who lived in quieter neighborhoods. And a study published in the February, 2006, issue of the European Heart Journal found that heart attack risk was higher among people exposed to chronic noise. I actually recommend noise-canceling headphones to help avert the health problems noise exposure can present. http://www.drweil.com/drw/u/QAA400774/Are-Noise-Cancelling-Headphones-Safe.html http://www.drweil.com/drw/u/QAA400774/Are-Noise-Cancelling-H... And tons of others -- besides the basic lack of any mechanism by which noise cancelling cans could be harmful for the ears compared to regular ones. The burden on proof is on the "damage" side.

"[Noise canelling will] damage your hearing over time" Do you have a good source on that? I'm thinking about getting some noise-cancelling headphones for office use.

chris_7 10y ago

Not noise cancelling specifically, just wearing headphones in general for 40 hours a week.

coldtea 10y ago

There's no good source on that, as it's wrong. There's absolutely no damage from noise cancelling, and in fact they're healthier than regular headphones (because you don't need to raise the volume to drawn out external noises).

rixed 10y ago
Any source on that?
- coldtea 10y ago
  >Unlike cell phones, noise-cancelling headphones do not emit low level radiation and do not pose any of the potential hazards that could stem from frequent use of a cell phone held next to the ear. >Actually, noise-cancelling headphones can be beneficial, since both loud noises and constant low-level noise can lead to health problems. Acute loud noises can damage hearing, interfere with sleep, raise blood pressure and stress levels and cause headaches. As for low-level noise, a study published in the Journal of the Acoustical Society of America in March, 2001, found that Austrian children who live in neighborhoods with constant low-level noise (mostly from automobile and train traffic) had higher levels of the stress hormone cortisol than youngsters who lived in quieter neighborhoods. And a study published in the February, 2006, issue of the European Heart Journal found that heart attack risk was higher among people exposed to chronic noise. I actually recommend noise-canceling headphones to help avert the health problems noise exposure can present. http://www.drweil.com/drw/u/QAA400774/Are-Noise-Cancelling-Headphones-Safe.html http://www.drweil.com/drw/u/QAA400774/Are-Noise-Cancelling-H... And tons of others -- besides the basic lack of any mechanism by which noise cancelling cans could be harmful for the ears compared to regular ones. The burden on proof is on the "damage" side.