Big Step Tomorrow — Car Show

[geg1992]

Hi all,

Hope everyone's well?

Really nervous about tomorrow. Going to a car show tomorrow which will have lots of modified cars so noisy!

There will be drift events, sprints, top speed runs etc. Very worried as there will probably be regular bursts of 100db + and it lasts all day! Plan on wearing ear plugs most of the day which are rated to 33db+ so in theory below 70db most of the time. Should I be worried or take any extra precautions? I don't know if I'm being too lenient here.

Thanks for any advice!

 

[Markku]

Take earmuffs too so you can double up if necessary.

 

[Richard zurowski]

Sod the tinnitus! You have a great day at the car show.

 

[geg1992]

Sod the tinnitus! You have a great day at the car show.

I'm trying to think that, but I have to be realistic too!

 

[geg1992]

There's a shop which sells ear defenders near by the event, although I'll have to turn up late as Sunday hours. Will wearing both provide double protection i.e. if both are 33db, will it reduce by 66? As I swear I read somewhere that it doesn't quite work like that.

Thanks!

 

[Danny Boy]

There's a shop which sells ear defenders near by the event, although I'll have to turn up late as Sunday hours. Will wearing both provide double protection i.e. if both are 33db, will it reduce by 66? As I swear I read somewhere that it doesn't quite work like that.

Thanks!

In the future try these-

Prevention of impulse noise-induced hearing loss with antioxidants.
Kopke R1, Bielefeld E, Liu J, Zheng J, Jackson R, Henderson D, Coleman JK.
Author information

Abstract
CONCLUSION:
These findings indicate a strong protective effect of ALCAR and NAC on impulse noise-induced cochlear damage, and suggest the feasibility of using clinically available antioxidant compounds to protect the ear from acute acoustic injury.

OBJECTIVE:
Reactive oxygen species have been shown to play a significant role in noise-induced hearing loss. In the current study, the protective effects of two antioxidants, acetyl-L-carnitine (ALCAR) and N-L-acetylcysteine (NAC), were investigated in a chinchilla model of hearing loss resulting from impulse noise. It was hypothesized that pre- and post-treatment with these antioxidants would ameliorate the effects of impulse noise compared to saline-treated controls.

MATERIAL AND METHODS:
Eighteen animals were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups and exposed to impulse noise at a level of 155 dB peak SPL for 150 repetitions. ALCAR or NAC were administered twice daily (b.i.d.) for 2 days and 1 h prior to and 1 h following noise exposure, and then b.i.d. for the following 2 days. For the control group, saline was injected at the same time points. Auditory brainstem responses (ABRs) were recorded. Cochlear surface preparations were made to obtain cytocochleograms.

RESULTS:
Three weeks after exposure, permanent threshold shifts for the experimental groups were significantly reduced to approximately = 10-30 dB less than that for the control group (p < 0.01). Less hair cell loss was also observed in the ALCAR and NAC groups than in the control group.

PMID

 

[Markku]

There's a shop which sells ear defenders near by the event, although I'll have to turn up late as Sunday hours. Will wearing both provide double protection i.e. if both are 33db, will it reduce by 66? As I swear I read somewhere that it doesn't quite work like that.

Thanks!

Note for example; at 1000 Hz the combination of a 26-dB plug and a 34-dB muff does not yield 60-dB overall, but rather about 41 dB. The principal reason is the bone-conduction (BC) limits to attenuation, which are also illustrated in Figure 1. The BC limits represent sound that effectively flanks or bypasses the HPD to directly stimulate the middle and inner ears of the wearer. Another limitation on the performance of dual protection is that the plug and muff interact mechanically with each other, and thus do not behave as two completely independent attenuators.

No empirical or theoretically derived equations are available that can predict the attenuation of an earplug and earmuff combination with sufficient accuracy to be useful. At individual frequencies the incremental gain in performance for dual hearing protection varies from approximately 0 to 15 dB over the better single device, but because of the dip in BC limits at 2000 Hz, the gain varies from 0 to only a few decibels at that frequency. Attenuation changes very little when different earmuffs are used with the same earplug, but for a given earmuff the choice of earplug is critical for attenuation at frequencies below 2000 Hz. At and above 2000 Hz, all dual-protection combinations provide attenuation essentially equal to the limitations imposed by the bone-conduction pathways, approximately 40 to 50 dB, depending upon frequency. As a rule of thumb, the OSHA procedure of computing the dual protection by adding 5 dB to the Noise Reduction Rating (NRR) of the more protective of the two devices is a reasonable approximation.

For the best estimate of dual-protection performance a real-ear attenuation at threshold measurement of the combination being evaluated should be conducted. Some manufacturers of hearing protectors can provide such data. Better yet, real-world attenuation values should be considered (Berger, 2000). Unfortunately few of those types of data are available. One study, of which the author is aware, suggests that the highest attenuation in terms of an NRR-like number, that can realistically be obtained for about 84% of the population, is about 25 dB (Hachey and Roberts, 1983). This was observed in one study of a foam earplug worn in combination with a small-volume plastic earmuff. Thus when TWAs exceed about 110 dB, even dual protection is likely to be inadequate. At such times, limited durations of exposure and twice-annual monitoring audiometry should be considered.

The use of dual HPDs is especially recommended when high-intensity noise is dominated by energy at or below 500 Hz since it is in this frequency range that the attenuation of single HPDs will be the least and the potential benefits from dual protection are the greatest.​

Source: http://www.audiologyonline.com/articles/extra-protection-wearing-earmuffs-and-1218

 

[geg1992]

View attachment 7568

Note for example; at 1000 Hz the combination of a 26-dB plug and a 34-dB muff does not yield 60-dB overall, but rather about 41 dB. The principal reason is the bone-conduction (BC) limits to attenuation, which are also illustrated in Figure 1. The BC limits represent sound that effectively flanks or bypasses the HPD to directly stimulate the middle and inner ears of the wearer. Another limitation on the performance of dual protection is that the plug and muff interact mechanically with each other, and thus do not behave as two completely independent attenuators.

No empirical or theoretically derived equations are available that can predict the attenuation of an earplug and earmuff combination with sufficient accuracy to be useful. At individual frequencies the incremental gain in performance for dual hearing protection varies from approximately 0 to 15 dB over the better single device, but because of the dip in BC limits at 2000 Hz, the gain varies from 0 to only a few decibels at that frequency. Attenuation changes very little when different earmuffs are used with the same earplug, but for a given earmuff the choice of earplug is critical for attenuation at frequencies below 2000 Hz. At and above 2000 Hz, all dual-protection combinations provide attenuation essentially equal to the limitations imposed by the bone-conduction pathways, approximately 40 to 50 dB, depending upon frequency. As a rule of thumb, the OSHA procedure of computing the dual protection by adding 5 dB to the Noise Reduction Rating (NRR) of the more protective of the two devices is a reasonable approximation.

For the best estimate of dual-protection performance a real-ear attenuation at threshold measurement of the combination being evaluated should be conducted. Some manufacturers of hearing protectors can provide such data. Better yet, real-world attenuation values should be considered (Berger, 2000). Unfortunately few of those types of data are available. One study, of which the author is aware, suggests that the highest attenuation in terms of an NRR-like number, that can realistically be obtained for about 84% of the population, is about 25 dB (Hachey and Roberts, 1983). This was observed in one study of a foam earplug worn in combination with a small-volume plastic earmuff. Thus when TWAs exceed about 110 dB, even dual protection is likely to be inadequate. At such times, limited durations of exposure and twice-annual monitoring audiometry should be considered.

The use of dual HPDs is especially recommended when high-intensity noise is dominated by energy at or below 500 Hz since it is in this frequency range that the attenuation of single HPDs will be the least and the potential benefits from dual protection are the greatest.​

Source: http://www.audiologyonline.com/articles/extra-protection-wearing-earmuffs-and-1218

Wow, great, thank you for the information.

Sorry to sound stupid, but I assume the approx 22db plug attenuation is purely an example? As looking at the plugs I have, at around 125hz, they claim 38.4db. Thanks for the very useful info.

 

[geg1992]

In the future try these-

Prevention of impulse noise-induced hearing loss with antioxidants.
Kopke R1, Bielefeld E, Liu J, Zheng J, Jackson R, Henderson D, Coleman JK.
Author information

Abstract
CONCLUSION:
These findings indicate a strong protective effect of ALCAR and NAC on impulse noise-induced cochlear damage, and suggest the feasibility of using clinically available antioxidant compounds to protect the ear from acute acoustic injury.

OBJECTIVE:
Reactive oxygen species have been shown to play a significant role in noise-induced hearing loss. In the current study, the protective effects of two antioxidants, acetyl-L-carnitine (ALCAR) and N-L-acetylcysteine (NAC), were investigated in a chinchilla model of hearing loss resulting from impulse noise. It was hypothesized that pre- and post-treatment with these antioxidants would ameliorate the effects of impulse noise compared to saline-treated controls.

MATERIAL AND METHODS:
Eighteen animals were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups and exposed to impulse noise at a level of 155 dB peak SPL for 150 repetitions. ALCAR or NAC were administered twice daily (b.i.d.) for 2 days and 1 h prior to and 1 h following noise exposure, and then b.i.d. for the following 2 days. For the control group, saline was injected at the same time points. Auditory brainstem responses (ABRs) were recorded. Cochlear surface preparations were made to obtain cytocochleograms.

RESULTS:
Three weeks after exposure, permanent threshold shifts for the experimental groups were significantly reduced to approximately = 10-30 dB less than that for the control group (p < 0.01). Less hair cell loss was also observed in the ALCAR and NAC groups than in the control group.

PMID

Thanks Danny, I've often read about NAC. Is it readily available at Pharmacies?

 

[Danny Boy]

Thanks Danny, I've often read about NAC. Is it readily available at Pharmacies?

It's not just NAC. It's a combination of NAC and ALCAR. They work better when combined.

http://www.amazon.com/Foods-Nac-Acetyl-Cysteine-600mg-Vcaps/dp/B0013OUQ3S/
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Swanson-NAC-N-Acetyl-Cysteine-600mg-Capsules/dp/B00068GKC8/

http://www.amazon.com/Acetyl-L-Carnitine-500-240-Caps/dp/B0017OFR6A/
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Swanson-Acetyl-L-Carnitine-500mg-Capsules/dp/B00YQ8PQQK/

 

[geg1992]

It's not just NAC. It's a combination of NAC and ALCAR. They work better when combined.

http://www.amazon.com/Foods-Nac-Acetyl-Cysteine-600mg-Vcaps/dp/B0013OUQ3S/
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Swanson-NAC-N-Acetyl-Cysteine-600mg-Capsules/dp/B00068GKC8/

http://www.amazon.com/Acetyl-L-Carnitine-500-240-Caps/dp/B0017OFR6A/
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Swanson-Acetyl-L-Carnitine-500mg-Capsules/dp/B00YQ8PQQK/

Great, much appreciated, will order some for future uses.

 

[Danny Boy]

Great, much appreciated, will order some for future uses.

No problem. Have fun at the car show! I'll be playing Burnout Paradise lol

 

[geg1992]

No problem. Have fun at the car show! I'll be playing Burnout Paradise lol

Thanks mate Haha used to spend hours on Burnout games!

 

[Danny Boy]

Thanks mate Haha used to spend hours on Burnout games!

They are petty ace! Shame the studio who makes the games are closed. I loved arcady racing games. Guess I'll settle for Forza from now on.

 

[geg1992]

Okay, I bottled it, letting s girl down who I was meeting for the first time.

I just know I'll get an increase then come on here and complain and annoy people who will tell me that I should have protected more. It's not worth the risk. It's horrible as it's something I've always wanted to go to but there's always next year if I'm up for it. I just hate how much T is limiting everything. Thank you for your help with the info though!!

 

[uae96]

Man go for it , make sure u wear ear plugs I don't think you'll be in a harm with them! I went jet skiing before yesterday and nothing happened without ear plugs , but that's just me everyone's diff , don't worry to much put these plugs and don't worry I think it'll be fine , if it's too loud then leave , good luck