Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedShould the government regulate volume levels for headphones to prevent hearing damage?
Results so far:
| Yes | 28% | 21 votes | Total: 76 votes | |
| No | 72% | 55 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesOften the cliched phrase, you don't know what you've got until it's gone, is used to describe things such as money, people, and ways of life. Unfortunately that same phrase can be used to express the senses of vision, touch, and hearing. Even more unfortunate is that hundreds of millions of people will have impaired hearing because they weren't warned. Ipod's and other mp3 players must put volume restrictions and warning notices on their products, because they are damaging the hearing of millions of people each day. People are not warned nearly enough about the problems of extended exposure to high decibel volumes, especially on things that are as immensely popular as mp3 players.
Many things can cause hearing loss. A gun shot, chainsaw, or even thunder can cause permanent hearing damage. With a chainsaw, constant exposure is required to cause damage, while a gun shot and thunder can cause hearing damage in the blink of an eye. For constant exposure, you would be surprised how little time it takes to cause hearing damage. For example a chainsaw emits a 110 decibel sound and within two minutes of exposure, hearing damage has begun. There are warnings on chainsaws about the possibility of hearing damage, but no on mp3 players.
Mp3 players are things that millions of people use on a daily basis, but there are no warning for hearing damage on them, yet the risk is just as possible. According to a Consumer Reports, April 2006 report, playing music at max volume, mp3 players averaged 97 decibels ("Consumer Reports"). Using an mp3 player for more than a half an hour of at the volume of 97 decibels is enough to cause permanent hearing damage ("Dangerous Decibels"). Listening to music at 80% volume for more than an hour and a half on an mp3 player can also cause hearing damage ("IPods"). These statistics are staggering, and it is very disappointing that very few people who own mp3 players know about them. Now, you may say that you never use your mp3 player above 80% volume. Have you ever tried to drown out the sound of a busy street, subway, or a noisy gym? If you know you have for any of these it is likely you caused some hearing damage.
After a mere hour of listening to my IPod, my ears hurt. Millions of people, however, listen to their mp3 players daily, and usually listen to them longer than one hour. People play them to drown out other noises, and to relax, but they don't realize how much damage they are doing to their hearing. Most of these people are children, which is even more cause for concern. Countless times have I seen/heard my friends blasting their music through their headphones, and I can't imagine how much damage they are doing to their ear drums. The data shows there needs to be a limit on the maximum volume of these devices to eliminate this problem, or at the very least more warnings on these products.
I guarantee the number of hearing impaired people will increase dramatically as my generation ages. There are no warnings of possible hearing damage on the IPod itself, or any other mp3 players for that matter. There is a way to restrict the maximum volume, but who is going to limit the maximum volume if they don't know there is a possibility hearing damage? Despite recent reports of the very likely threat of hearing damage from these products, why isn't there government involvement on the issue. The government needs to step in and force companies to warn consumers of the possibility of hearing damage. Until then, people won't realize they are damaging their hearing, and how important their hearing is, until they've lost it.
Works Cited
"Consumer Reports - Music players can cause hearing loss 4/06." 4 Feb 2009 <http://www.consumerr eports.org/cro/elect ronics-computers/aud io-video/audio/ipods -mp3-players/music-p layers-hearing-loss- 406/overview/index.h tm?resultPageIndex=1&resultIndex=1&searchTerm=personal% 20music%20players>.
"Dangerous Decibels: About Hearing Loss." 6 Feb 2009 <http://www.dangerous decibels.org/hearing loss.cfm>.
"iPods can be a hazard to your hearing, but noise canceling headphones may help: Consumer Reports Health Blog." 4 Feb 2009 <http://blogs.consume rreports.org/health/ 2008/12/ipods-hearin g-l.html>.
Learn more about this author, Dr. David.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
At some point we need to come together as a nation and agree that citizens need to spend more time regulating themselves. The government's role is not to control every aspect of our lives.
Free will is one of the founding principles on which this country was built. The guiding principle should be - if I want to blow out my eardrums listening to loud music, I have every right to do so. The government's job is not to tell me how to live my life.
This is a dangerous path. Soon the government will be regulating what kind of snacks I can eat, which movies I can watch, and when I go out and enjoy a drink. As individual we make good and bad choices every day, but the great thing about our country is that we are unequivocally free to make those choices.
Politically, Republicans have always positioned themselves as the "smaller government" party. In reality though, the federal government has never once shrunk in size on a Republican's watch.
On the other hand, Democrats tend to be more in tune with social issues, usually working toward helping those who need a hand. The consequences of this, however, is that the Democrats usually find themselves fighting for more government regulation on issues such as how loud we can listen to our headphones. Neither political party satisfies the needs of those of us to generally want to be left alone to make our own decisions.
The only political party that truly seems to want to get out of the business of the American people is the Libertarian party. The main aspect of their platform is to remove government from interfering in people's lives, and allow the public their own liberty. This is certainly an optimistic ideal, but the concern is that many people need help from a governing body. The libertarians might be a little to extreme for the average American.
As always with politics, all sides have certain appealing aspects, and a truly middle ground would be ideal. Give me a Republican's conservative spending (in theory, anyway), paired with a Democrat's social awareness, and a Libertarian's belief in individual freedom, and you've got my vote. That may be the most idealistic, unrealistic thing I've ever written!
Learn more about this author, Sean Curtis.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- Political Issues
- Under a new health care plan, should federal insurance subsidies be used for plans that cover elective abortions?
- Should pharmaceutical companies be required to give up patents necessary to developing a vaccine against pandemic flu?
- The benefits of NASA's space exploration programs justify the costs
- Who won the vice presidential debate?
- Where does the solution on the healthcare crisis come from: the government or the private sector?
- America's culture wars: Do self-identifying Christians face prejudice in US elections?
