letters to the editor
dear editor: I am writing to ask that Hearing Health magazine change its editorial policy regarding the term “age-related hearing loss,” a phrase used in your survey and on page 31 in the Winter 2021 issue. It should not be used, nor should the similar term “presbycusis.” Here’s why: Hearing loss is common with age, but it is not part of normal physiological aging. Hearing loss with age is predominantly noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL). I came to this conclusion after reviewing the literature, including classic 1960s studies of hearing loss in isolated populations not exposed to noise. Based on experimental observations, Charles Liberman, Ph.D., and team concluded the same in a paper published in the Journal of Neuroscience in August 2020. Yet it turns out neither of us had discovered anything new. Karl Kryter, Ph.D., used the term “sociocusis” in 1983, meaning “non–work–noise– induced hearing loss,” but it was Aram Glorig, M.D., who coined the word back in 1962. If people think hearing loss is part of normal aging, they are less likely to take steps to protect their hearing. They may think, “When I reach middle age, I’ll probably need reading glasses like my parents, and when I get older I’ll probably need hearing aids like my grandfather.” They don’t understand that lenses provide a visual correction, but as your staff writer Shari Eberts has explained, hearing aids merely amplify sounds and don’t help improve speech comprehension anywhere near what glasses or contact lenses do to improve vision. NIHL may be the most accurate term, but sociocusis also includes other causes of hearing loss such as ototoxic drugs or ear infections, while emphasizing the importance of noise exposure. Perhaps Hearing Health magazine can substitute sociocusis for age-related hearing loss and presbycusis.
dear editor: Reviewing the Winter 2021 issue of Hearing Health and filling out the survey has inspired me to write to suggest additional topics for you to explore that would be helpful to people like me, people with hearing challenges who are also advocating for community changes to make it easier for hearing challenged people. While the primary aim of the Hearing Health Foundation is to research to prevent and cure hearing loss, the mission statement also includes the phrase “to promote hearing health.” To this end, it would be helpful to focus on the acoustic environment of public buildings and spaces. I would be particularly interested in the latest findings related to hearing loop technologies and other audio technologies that can support the integration of hearing challenged people into the civic, political, and entertainment culture of our communities. At this time, I am involved in the creation of a new cohousing community in California. We are considering what acoustic treatments will be most effective for our members, many of whom, like myself, are up in years. I am relatively new to the hearing advocacy world. If there are resources that you would recommend on this topic, I would be pleased to receive them. Thank you for your consideration of these suggestions and for all the work you do.
Daniel Fink, M.D. The Quiet Coalition California
Anne Geraghty Washington-Commons.org California
@editor 6
hearing health
hearing health foundatio n
hhf.org
from the editor: Thank you for raising this terminology issue. We rely on definitions established by scientific bodies like the National Institutes of Health and will watch for nomenclature updates. Thank you for also providing references for the work you cite, which we share at hhf.org/spring2021-references.
