THE EXTENT AND CAUSES OF HEARING IMPAIRMENT IN AUSTRALIA
One in six Australians is affected by hearing loss...With an
ageing population, [this] is expected to increase to one in four...by 2050.
Access Economics, Listen Hear! The economic impact and cost of
hearing loss in Australia, (February 2006), p. 5.
The most common causes of hearing loss are ageing and
excessive exposure to loud sounds. The effects of age and noise exposure are
additive so that noise exposure may cause hearing loss in middle age that would
not otherwise occur until old age.
Department of Health and Ageing, Submission 54, [p. 1].
The increasing prevalence of hearing loss is due largely to an ageing
population, although there are a range of factors and behaviours among other
sectors of the population which will have a flow-on effect on people's hearing
in later life. These factors will be canvassed in this chapter.
This chapter will consider the causes of hearing loss, aspects of the
severity and impacts of different levels of hearing loss, and the current and
projected prevalence of hearing loss in Australia.
The committee drew on evidence from hearing loss experts and from people
with hearing loss themselves. In addition, Access Economics' report Listen
Hear! was of great value to the committee in considering the issues raised
in this chapter.
Severity of hearing impairment
This section summarises some of the language and concepts around the
severity of hearing loss. This will assist the reader to understand the evidence
which follows about prevalence and causes of hearing loss.
There are a range of facets to hearing loss, including:
- decreased audibility, where people with hearing impairment do not
hear some sounds at all, depending on the severity of hearing loss. As a
consequence, a person may be unable to understand speech, as some essential
parts are inaudible;
- decreased dynamic range. The dynamic range of an ear is the level
of difference between the threshold of audible sound and the threshold of loudness
discomfort. A person with a hearing impairment will have a smaller dynamic
range than that of a person with normal hearing;
- decreased frequency resolution. A person with hearing impairment
may have difficulty separating sounds of different frequencies. A person with
normal hearing is able to separate speech from background noise; however a
hearing impaired person is unable to differentiate between speech and noise
where the frequencies are close together. This can also affect the
intelligibility of speech in some cases; and
- decreased temporal resolution. Intense sounds can mask weaker
sounds that immediately precede or follow them, and inability to perceive the
weaker sounds adversely affects speech intelligibility. The ability to hear
weak sounds during fluctuating background noise gradually decreases as hearing
In combination, these deficits can cause a reduction in
intelligibility of speech for a hearing impaired person compared to a
normal-hearing person in the same situation.
Hearing levels are determined by testing the range of sounds that can be
heard and how softly one can hear such sounds. The range of sounds is measured
in hertz (Hz) or waves per second and the intensity or strength of sound is
measured in terms of a scale of decibels (dB).
Figure 2.1 is a visual representation which equates different decibel
levels with common noises.
Figure 2.1: Approximate sound
levels (dB) for common types of noise exposure
Figure by Australian Hearing, provided in DOHA, Submission 54, p.
The severity of hearing loss is categorised as mild, moderate, severe,
or profound, depending on how loud a sound has to be before a person can hear
it. The severity of hearing loss is categorised differently for different age
Table 2.1: Severity of hearing loss
by decibel range and age
Source: Access Economics, Listen
Hear! The economic impact and cost of hearing loss in Australia, (February
2006), p. 5.
Hearing loss is measured using either subjective tests, such as
audiometric testing, or objective tests, which measure a physiological response
from the individual. Newborn hearing tests are objective tests which use an
auditory brain stem response technique to an acoustic stimulus.
The extent of hearing impairment in Australia
Access Economics reported extensive data on the prevalence of hearing
loss amongst Australians. In 2005 around 3.55 million Australians had some
hearing loss. Of these, some 99.7 per cent were aged 15 years or older.
Prevalence of hearing impairment in
Australian Hearing submitted that 'between nine and 12 children per
10,000 live births will be born with a moderate or greater hearing loss in both
ears'. In addition, three to four children per 10,000 live births will be born
with moderate hearing loss, and a further 23 per 10,000 will acquire a hearing
loss that requires hearing aids by the age of 17.
This evidence suggests that 39 children in 10,000 will have some form of
hearing loss by the age of 17.
Access Economics reported that the estimated severity of hearing loss in
the Australian child population is currently 36.7 per cent mild, 38.3 per cent
moderate, 13.3 per cent severe and 11.7 per cent profound, as seen in Figure
Figure 2.2: Hearing loss in
Australian children by severity, 2005 (n=10,268)
The Hear and Say Centre noted in their submission that, according to the
World Health Organisation, hearing loss is the most common disability in new
born children worldwide.
The Victorian Deaf Society submitted that more children are having their
hearing impairment diagnosed, but fewer children are being found to have a
severe-profound hearing loss. This is attributed to medical advances and more
Many submitters noted that hearing impairment in Indigenous children is
particularly high. This issue is discussed in detail at chapter eight of this
Prevalence of hearing impairment in
Access Economics reported that amongst adults, the prevalence of hearing
loss varies over age groups. Table 2.2 is a summary of hearing loss among adults
Table 2.2: Hearing loss prevalence
by age group
Hearing loss as a proportion of all people in each
15 to 50 years
51 to 60 years
61 to 70 years
71 years and older
Source: Access Economics, Listen Hear! The economic
impact and cost of hearing loss in Australia, (February 2006), p. 5.
The committee heard that hearing loss was more prevalent in men than
women due to their higher exposure to workplace noise, though the gap reduces
as people get older.
Sixty per cent of adults with a hearing loss are male, and approximately half
of these men are of working age (i.e. 15 to 64 years).
The economic and social impacts of this are explored in chapters three and four
of this report.
Of the 3.55 million Australian adults with hearing loss, 66 per cent had
a mild loss, 23 per cent had a moderate loss and 11 per cent had a severe or
profound hearing loss.
Access Economics estimated that the prevalence of hearing impairment in
children is likely to increase from 10,268 in 2005 to 11,031 by 2050, an
increase of 7.5 per cent. Unlike projections for the adult population, this
estimate is 'fairly static' and is based on population growth.
Hearing loss prevalence in the adult population is expected to more than
double by 2050 to one in four. For all males in Australia, hearing loss is
projected to increase from 21 per cent in 2005 to 31.5 per cent (nearly one in
three) in 2015. The projected increase will be largely driven by the ageing
population. In the absence of a large scale prevention program, the severity of
hearing loss is not expected to change. The growth in hearing loss for males is
expected to increase from 21 per cent to 31.5 per cent and for females from 14
per cent to 22 per cent.
Figure 2.2: Projected growth in
hearing loss by gender (worse ear)
New South Wales (NSW) Health commented that hearing loss projections
support the case for early detection and intervention programs, as well as
strategies to prevent noise induced hearing loss through hearing health
promotion and education.
Causes of hearing loss
As discussed above, around one in six Australians suffer from some
degree of hearing impairment.
Hearing loss can be either present at birth (congenital) or occur later in life
There are three types of hearing loss: conductive, sensorineural or
The diagram of the parts of an ear provided below at figure 2.3 will assist to
understand aspects of hearing loss.
Figure 2.3: The hearing system
Source: Access Economics. Listen
Hear! The economic impact and cost of hearing loss in Australia, (February 2006),
Conductive hearing loss occurs as a result of blockage or damage to the
outer and/or middle ear, and can be either transient or permanent. The most
common cause of hearing loss in children is eustachian tube dysfunction, which
may affect up to 30 per cent of children during the winter months. This may
lead to fluid in the middle ear, or otitis media, in which a bacterial
or viral agent infects the middle ear or ear drum. Otitis media may result in
perforations of the ear drum, and may over the long term cause scarring of the
Sensorineural loss is caused by damage to, or malfunction of, the
cochlea (sensory) or the auditory nerve (neural). Damage can arise from
excessive noise exposures, chemical damage such as smoking, environmental
agents or medications and from the ageing process. Hearing loss can also result
from damage to the auditory nerve. Sensorineural hearing loss is permanent by
Hearing loss in children
Most children born with a hearing loss have a sensorineural hearing loss.
The Alliance for Deaf Children noted that approximately 60 per cent of
congenital deafness is due to genetics, with the remaining 40 per cent due to
environmental factors or complications during pregnancy or birth. Approximately
95 per cent of children with hearing loss are born to parents with normal hearing.
Aussie Deaf Kids reported that conductive hearing loss in children is
due mainly to:
- otitis media – a middle ear infection which is usually treatable
and temporary. Otitis media is particularly prevalent in Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander populations where the disease is likely to become chronic and
respond poorly to treatment, as discussed in more detail in chapter eight;
- cholesteatoma – a slow growing, non‐malignant
growth behind the ear drum which can result in serious damage to the middle and
inner ear. It is normally the result of severe and repeated middle ear
- microtia and aural atresia – a congenital deformity of the outer
ear and the absence of an ear canal. Microtia and aural atresia has a reported
incidence of approximately one in every 6,000 births worldwide. In most cases, microtia
is also associated with aural atresia or stenosis and these children will have
a conductive hearing loss.
As part of the ageing process there is a gradual loss of 'outer hair
cell' function in the cochlea or inner ear. This diminishes the ability to
distinguish similar speech sounds, or sounds heard simultaneously, such as
speech in a noisy setting.
Therefore, as the committee heard many times during this inquiry, as the
Australian population ages there will be increasing numbers of people with
Noise induced hearing loss (NIHL)
Noise induced hearing loss is associated with 37 per cent of all hearing
Workplace noise and recreational noise are the most common source of noise
injury and, according to the Australian Society of Otolaryngology Head and Neck
Surgeons (ASOHNS), the most common form of preventable hearing loss in the
The ASOHNS argued that it is a very important consideration in terms of
maintaining the community's hearing, as its impact is felt across all ages in
Occupational noise induced hearing
An estimated one million employees in Australia may be exposed to
dangerous levels of noise at work. Sound and pressure was the stated cause for
over 96 per cent of workers’ compensation claims for hearing loss in 2001-02.
Risk of hearing impairment in the workplace may also arise through exposure to
occupational ototoxins (these include solvents, fuels, metals, fertilisers,
herbicides and pharmaceuticals, as discussed further in chapter six). Damage is more likely if a person is exposed to a combination of
substances and noise.
The Department of Health and Ageing (DOHA) submitted that the principle
characteristics of ONIHL are that:
- the hearing loss is usually on both sides as most noise exposures
- symptoms may include gradual loss of hearing, hearing sensitivity
and tinnitus (the experience of noise or ringing in the ears where no external
physical noise is present);
- noise exposure alone does not usually produce a loss greater than
75dB at high frequencies and 40 dB at low frequencies, however hearing
impairment may be worse where age-related losses are superimposed; and
- the rate of hearing loss due to chronic noise exposure is
greatest during the first 10–15 years of exposure.
Safe Work Australia provided evidence to the committee that each year
there are an average of 3,400 successful workers' compensation claims for ONIHL
in Australia. The nature of hearing loss is that it has a long latency, and
there is often difficulty determining whether a loss is work related. Therefore
Safe Work Australia believes that these figures are probably understated.
Analysis of workers' compensation claims for hearing loss indicate that
three occupational groups (labourers and related workers; tradespersons and
related workers; and intermediate production and transport workers) account for
88 per cent of claims. The three highest industry sectors affected by
occupational hearing loss are the manufacturing, construction, transport and
storage industries. The highest incidence rates were in mining; construction;
and electricity, gas and water supply.
Dr Fleur Champion de Crespigny of Safe Work Australia outlined for the
committee some of the highlights of the National Hazard Exposure Worker
Surveillance (NHEWS) Survey, 2008:
The main findings of the research are [that between] 28 and
32 per cent of Australian workers are likely to work in an environment where
they are exposed to non-trivial loud noise. Workers’ sex, age, night work,
industry and occupation all affected the likelihood of a worker reporting
exposure to loud noise. Of these, male workers, young workers and night workers
all had increased risk of exposure to loud noise. [Excluding the mining
industry], [m]anufacturing and construction workers had the greatest risk of
being exposed to loud noise...Technicians and trades workers, machinery operators
and drivers and labourers were the occupations with the greatest odds of
reporting exposure to loud noise.
Farmers and hearing loss
The agricultural sector also reports high levels of hearing loss among
farmers. 65 per cent of Australian farmers have a measurable hearing loss,
compared to 22-27 per cent of the general population. Hearing loss is also high
among young farmers compared to the general population.
A 2002 study found that of the farmers surveyed, the average hearing loss
commenced earlier and remained much greater than that expected for an
otologically normal population.
The loss of hearing in the farming sector is due to noisy activities
such as using a chainsaw, operating noisy workshop equipment, operating firearms
or driving tractors which do not have a cabin over a sustained period. While
education programs have been conducted to improve hearing protection for farm
workers, the 2009 Rural Noise Injury Program assessment found that:
- only around one third of farmers reported adoption of higher order
noise reduction strategies, such as upgrading to quieter equipment and
dissipating workshop noise;
farmers aged 35-44 years had significantly worse hearing in their
left ears (the ear closest to the tractor engine when the farmer is turned
around watching behind him); and
- younger farmers who always used hearing protection had
significantly better hearing than those who did not.
Data collected predominantly from the Rural Noise Injury Program
(1994–2008), which includes over 8,000 hearing assessments of mostly NSW farmers,
indicate that there has been an improvement in the hearing of farmers, with the
proportion of farmers with 'normal hearing' increasing over the period. For
younger farmers 15-24 years, those with normal hearing increased from 57.3 per
cent in 1994-2001 to 77.0 per cent for the 2002–2008 period.
The difficulties of relying on
workers' compensation data to determine the prevalence of ONIHL
Most discussion of the prevalence of ONIHL in Australia relies on
workers' compensation data. However, there are a number of factors which may
indicate that workers' compensation data do not provide a reliable measure of
For a worker to access compensation for ONIHL, the hearing loss must
reach a minimum threshold. The minimum threshold differs across jurisdictions,
but the Heads of Workers' Compensation Authorities recommended a threshold of
10 per cent hearing loss in 1997.
Access Economics commented that a fall in workers' compensation claims arising
from ONIHL in recent years is most likely due to the introduction of minimum
thresholds. Dr Warwick Williams commented that thresholds in effect hide the
real incidence of hearing loss in the community.
The Australian Safety and Compensation Council (ASCC) reported in 2006
on work-related hearing loss in Australia and stated that compensation
statistics do not fully reflect the true incidence and cost of industrial
Whilst it is a positive sign, an improvement (reduction) in
the number of claims being made does not necessarily correlate with an
improvement in the prevention of NIHL. But they provide good indicators and
useful trends for further examination.
Factors contributing to this understatement include:
- not all employees make claims, or are eligible to make claims,
due to differing criteria;
- there is a need to establish that the disease is work-related;
the industrial deafness threshold is not the same across all
- industries in which employees are known to be at high risk of ONIHL
are not all identified by the analysis of compensation claims (e.g. the music
- the analysis focuses on industries with the largest number of
claims. There may be smaller industries with not many claims, but a very high
rate of claims per employee;
employees move between jobs, so the resulting hearing condition
may be due to a combination of activities; and
- employees may feel under pressure not to claim (e.g. if they
think it may impact on their security of employment).
In the agricultural sector the reasons for the underestimate include:
- only around 54 per cent of the estimated 375,000 strong
agricultural workforce are actually 'employees'. Most farms are small family owned
businesses with no employees;
'employees' within agriculture are a relatively young demographic.
Noise injury is often not apparent for a number of years and job movement of
young workers can be high so young workers are less likely to be able to
establish a claim; and
- hearing screening services in rural areas are often lacking, and
small family-owned farm businesses can not provide hearing screening services
themselves. This means baseline and periodic hearing assessment to establish
noise injury is difficult.
While legislation in all Australian jurisdictions seeks to protect employees
from exposure to dangerous levels of noise, the evidence indicates that
problems remain in the implementation and acceptance of hearing protection.
The findings of the NHEWS Survey, 2008 with regard to training and
provision of safety equipment in noisy workplaces, revealed some areas of
concern, as Dr Champion de Crespigny explained:
Training on how to prevent hearing damage appears to be
underprovided in Australian workplaces. Only 41 per cent of exposed workers
reported receiving any training in how to prevent hearing damage. There also
appears to be a reliance on the provision of personal protective equipment for
reducing exposure to loud noise. The provision of control measures in
workplaces was affected by industry, occupation and workplace size. But, with a
few exceptions, in general, industries and occupations with high odds of
exposure to loud noise also seemed to have high odds of providing control
measures...On the other hand, smaller workplaces—workplaces of a range of sizes
but with fewer than 200 workers—were less likely to provide comprehensive noise
Safe Work Australia told the committee about the Getting Heard
report, which has been funded by DOHA, and which is due to be launched during
Hearing Week in August 2010. Mr Wayne Creaser of Safe Work Australia explained
that the Getting Heard project:
...is intended to look at what impacts on the effective
prevention of hazardous occupational noise and what the attitudinal and
institutional barriers are to effective control measures being put in place.
Access Economics reported that there is no nationally coordinated ONIHL
This issue is examined in detail in chapter seven of this report.
ASOHNS argued the need for reform of noise regulations to implement an
evidence-based standard that can be shown to be effective in preventing or
minimising ONIHL. ASOHNS added that current regulations do not provide for
overarching guidance, supervision, education or the provision of information
for employees and employers. The ASOHNS recommended that government should
implement policy regarding occupational noise induced hearing loss that
- evidence-based guidance and education to employers and employees
with regard to ONIHL; and
- a nationally agreed benchmark method for assessing occupational
In relation to the comments by ASOHNS concerning research, the committee
notes that DOHA was unable to source data linking a reduction in the incidence
of work related noise induced hearing loss to prevention activities.
Acoustic shock and acoustic trauma
Two further sources of preventable hearing loss, commonly associated
with the workplace, are acoustic shock and acoustic trauma.
Acoustic shock describes the physiological and psychological symptoms
that can be experienced following an unexpected burst of loud noise through a
telephone headset or handset, and which most often occurs in call centres.
Acoustic trauma refers to the physiological and psychological symptoms
that can be experienced following exposure to very loud noises for a short
period of time such as a bomb explosion, localised alarm systems, or artillery
fire. Some incidents of both acoustic shock and acoustic trauma may result in
temporary hearing loss, however research is not currently available to
determine the contribution to permanent hearing loss.
Of further interest for research into the long-term effects of acoustic
shock is the occurrence of tinnitus and a possible relationship with the onset
of Meniere's disease.
Recreational hearing loss (RHL)
Hearing loss due to recreational activities was seen as a real and
increasing issue. Concerns were voiced about the lack of regulatory controls on
noise exposures for audiences at music and vehicle racing events, patrons in
restaurants and bars and for the use of personal music players. Witnesses also
commented on increased use of personal music players such as iPods. Personal
music players are a growing source of concern for hearing health, with Apple
indicating that there are 28 million iPods in use worldwide.
Self Help for Hard of Hearing people Australia (SHHH) argued that
recreational hearing damage is now at 'epidemic' levels through the use of personal
music players and commented 'We don't appreciate it yet, but researchers know
that young people are losing their hearing at a rate never before experienced'.
Mr Daniel Lalor went further, stating that personal music players 'will be the
cigarettes and asbestos of Generation Y'.
The University of Melbourne Audiology and Speech Sciences commented:
It is clear that recreational noise exposure reaches levels
that are known to be dangerous. It is not well-established how much this recreational
exposure is contributing to significant hearing loss in later life and the
burden of disease and economic costs. Other recreational activities such as
shooting, motor sport and the use of power tools may also be contributing to
the levels of hearing loss in the community.
There were differing views concerning recreational exposure to noise on
hearing loss. Access Economics stated that there is no epidemiological data
that systematically examines RHL. While studies have shown short term or minor hearing
damage resulting from personal music players and music exposure generally,
there are no studies available that document exposure outcomes that result in
permanent measurable and significant hearing loss. Access Economics went on to
state that researchers have not reached consensus on the contribution of RHL
makes to the overall prevalence of hearing loss.
Dr Warwick Williams has found that recreational noise can be loud enough
to cause damage if the length of noise exposure is long enough. Dr Williams
argued that dangerous recreational noise exposure occurs at a particular stage
of life (i.e. among young people), and there is no evidence that people are
exposed for long enough periods to do damage.
The Deaf Society of Victoria commented that past research had not been
able to draw a conclusive link between personal music players and hearing loss,
but noted a recent (2009) study which suggested there was a link.
The Society also commented that, in its experience, more adolescents and young
people are exhibiting signs of hearing damage:
...already increasing numbers of adolescents and young adults
are showing symptoms related to the early stages of noise-related deafness,
such as distortion, tinnitus, hyperacusis, and threshold shifts...This
development has also been evidenced in recent hearing screenings undertaken by
Other witnesses provided similar evidence arising from their direct
contact with young people. Mr John Gimpel of the Hearing Industry Association
commented that the experience of people undertaking hearing testing indicated
...the prevalence of high-end loss in people in their late 20s
is really starting to come through, and these people have had absolutely no
exposure to any noise in the workplace—all they have ever had is the doof-doof
in their ears.
Mrs Noeleen Bieske of the Deafness Foundation commented:
The seal of the iPod is so tight in the ear that it is just
giving that full blast going into the hearing mechanism. These young people are
not aware. I take calls from people saying, 'I've got this shocking ringing in
my ears.' When I say, 'What have you been doing?' they say, 'I’ve been wearing
my iPod for a minimum of three to four hours a day, I play in a band, I don't
wear musician plugs and I also work in a bar in a pub.' These kids are 30 maybe
or in their late 20s and they are saying, 'Now I can't hear properly. What am I
going to do?'.
Other witnesses pointed to developments overseas. In 2008, the European
Union Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks on
Personal Music Players and Hearing published a report which warned that
listening to personal music players at a high volume over a sustained period
can lead to permanent hearing damage. It was reported that five to 10 per cent
of listeners risk permanent hearing loss. These are people typically listening
to music for over one hour a day at high volume control settings. It estimated
that up to 10 million people in the European Union may be at risk.
In September 2009, the European Commission sought to establish new
technical safety standards that would set default settings of players at a safe
level and allow consumers to override these only after receiving clear warnings
so they know the risks they are taking. Dr Burgess indicated that the Product
Safety Section of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has
been alerted to these developments, and that they have established a project to
look at these issues.
In France the noise level of personal music
players has been limited to 95dB.
In Switzerland, limits on audience exposure at venues with amplified music have
been set with a 93 dB(A) limit for events for under 16 year olds and a 100
dB(A) limit for other events plus a requirement to inform and supply free
hearing protectors when over 93 dB(A).
Causes and prevalence of
The committee heard evidence about the particular challenges faced by
Australians who are deaf and blind (deafblind). The Australian DeafBlind
Council stated that there are some 300,000 people in Australia who are
deafblind (if people with a mild hearing loss are included). Of these 7,000 to
9,000 are under 65 and 281,000 (or 93.7 per cent) are 65 years of age and over.
The Senses Foundation provided evidence that in Western Australia (WA) 63 per
cent of deafblind people were male.
The causes of congenital deafblindness include infections such as
Cytomegalovirus (CMV) and Congenital Rubella Syndrome (CRS), chromosomal
abnormalities, genetic disorders and premature birth.
Senses Foundation indicated that the incidence of deafblindness arising
from CRS is relatively rare due to the introduction of widespread vaccination
against rubella. In Australia there were no reported cases of CRS between 1997
and 2002. However, Senses noted that concerns have been expressed about the
maintenance of the level of immunisation required to stop the spread of
rubella. In particular, the lower immunisation levels in Indigenous communities
may not provide adequate immunity.
There are a number of chromosomal conditions and syndromes which may
lead to deafblindness. The incidence of two, Usher's syndrome and CHARGE
syndrome, have increased in recent years. Usher's syndrome is the most common
disease associated with hearing loss and eye disorders.
Deafblindness is also associated with prematurity and Foetal Alcohol
Spectrum Disorder (FASD). The evidence indicates that there appears to be a
strong relationship between poverty and the incidence of FASD.
Acquired deafblindness may be from illnesses such as meningitis,
encephalitis and brain tumours, and trauma such as head injures and ageing.
The Australian DeafBlind Council stated that there is a lack of
'appropriately qualified interpreters' to assist deafblind people to access
health services and community support, and that this causes distress for those
The evidence provided to the committee clearly indicates that hearing
impairment is a major issue in Australia, with one in six Australians suffering
from some degree of hearing loss. While much of the expected increase in
hearing impairment over the coming decades is due to the ageing of the
population, a significant proportion of hearing loss is due to noise damage
which is preventable.
Governments have recognised the dangers that workplaces can pose to
hearing, and have legislated to enforce safety measures, and implemented
prevention strategies. However, analysis of workers' compensation data indicate
that working in many industry sectors still poses a risk to hearing health.
Evidence was received that the workers' compensation data may not be revealing
the full extent of ONIHL.
Evidence also indicates that recreational activities may be an
increasing cause of hearing impairment. Whilst the scientific proof is still
ambiguous, the committee believes that there may be some connection between
hearing loss and the extensive use of personal music players. The committee
notes the evidence of hearing services which have observed emerging patterns of
the detrimental impacts of recreational noise among young people.
The committee also notes that overseas there have been moves to limit
noise levels on personal music players as well as limiting audience exposure at
music venues. The committee considers that the problem of recreational hearing
loss should be targeted in two ways: awareness campaigns directed a young
people (see chapter seven for recommendations); and introducing limits to
exposure to recreational noise.
The committee heard that the ACCC is already investigating the future
application of noise limitations for personal music players sold in Australia.
Whilst their support needs are often acute, the particular issues facing
deafblind people in Australia broadly reflect the issues facing all people with
a hearing impairment, namely: access to services and support; forecast
increased prevalance; and the need for greater understanding about causes of
deafblindness. The committee offers its encouragement to the Australian
Deafblind Council in their efforts to represent and advocate for deafblind
people. The committee has made recommendations at chapters five and six which,
if implemented, will benefit deafblind people.
The committee recommends that the Department of Health and Ageing
work with the appropriate agencies and authorities to devise recreational noise
safety regulations for entertainment venues. Specifically, where music is expected
to be louder than a recommended safe level, that the venues be required to:
(a) post prominent
notices warning patrons that the noise level at that venue may be loud enough
to cause hearing damage; and
(b) make ear plugs freely
available to all patrons.
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page