New Delhi amongst top cities where hearing is most degraded

March 5, 2017

Washington D.C, Mar 5: Urban noise pollution and hearing loss are closely linked, according to rankings of 50 large cities in both categories released on Friday.cars

High-decibel urban areas-such as Guangzhou, New Delhi, Cairo and Istanbul-topped the list of cities where hearing was most degraded, researchers reported.

Likewise, cities least afflicted by noise pollution-including Zurich, Vienna, Oslo and Munich-registered the lowest levels of decline in hearing.

This statistical link does not necessarily mean the constant din of city life is the main driver of hearing loss, which can also be caused by infections, genetic disorders, premature birth, and even some medicines.

The findings are also preliminary, and have yet to be submitted for peer-reviewed publication.

"But this is a robust result," said Henrik Matthies, managing director of Mimi Hearing Technologies, a German company that has amassed data on 200,000 people drawn from a hearing test administered via cell phones.

"The fact that noise pollution and hearing loss have such a tight correlation points to an intricate relationship," he told AFP.

Researchers at Mimi and Charite University Hospital in Berlin explored the link by constructing two separate databases.

The first combined information from the World Health Organization (WHO) and Norwegian-based technology research group SINTEF to create a noise pollution ranking for cities around the world.

Stockholm, Seoul, Amsterdam and Stuttgart were also among the least likely to assault one's ears, while Shanghai, Hong Kong and Barcelona came out as big noise makers.

Paris-one of the most densely populated major cities in Europe-scored as the third most cacophonous.

The ranking for hearing loss drew from Mimi's phone-based test, in which respondents indicated age and sex. Geo-location technology pinpointed the cities.

The results were measured against a standard for age-adjusted hearing.

On average, people in the loudest cities were ten years "older"-in terms of hearing loss-than those in the quietest cities, the study found.

Stacked side-by-side, the two city rankings are remarkably similar, suggesting more than an incidental link.

The findings highlight the need for better monitoring, the researchers said.

"While eye and sight checks are routine, ear and hearing exams are not," said Manfred Gross, head of the department of Audiology and Phoniatrics at Charite University Hospital.

"The earlier hearing loss is detected, the better the chances are for preventing further damage."

Collaborations between scientists and private companies that collect health-related information from consumers are becoming more common in the era of Big Data.

California-based DNA genetic testing company 23andMe, for example, has worked extensively with university researchers to ferret out rare genetic disorders by combing through mountains of anonymous data from its clients.

Also on Friday, World Hearing Day, the WHO released figures showing annual costs of unaddressed hearing loss of between $750 billion and $790 billion globally.

Direct health care costs were calculated to be up to $107 billion, with loss of productivity due to unemployment or early retirement about the same.

"Societal costs"-stemming from social isolation, inability to communicate and stigma-were estimated at more than $500 billion.

In a recent editorial, the medical journal The Lancet said hearing loss is a "silent epidemic", noting that proper care remains out of reach for millions of people.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
February 23,2020

Los Angeles, Feb 23: According to researchers, if administered quickly, a common medication that reduces bleeding could be a treatment for bleeding stroke.

The Spot Sign and Tranexamic Acid on Preventing ICH Growth - Australasia Trial (STOP-AUST) was a multicenter, prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 clinical trial using the antifibrinolytic agent tranexamic acid in people with intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH).

ICH is a severe form of acute stroke with few treatment options.

Tranexamic acid is currently used to treat or prevent excessive blood loss from trauma, surgery, tooth removal, nosebleeds and heavy menstruation. For this study, one hundred patients with active brain bleeding were given either intravenous tranexamic acid or placebo within 4.5 hours of symptom onset.

Researchers analyzed brain CT scans taken during the 24-hour period after treatment with tranexamic acid or placebo.

Researchers found a trend towards reduced hemorrhage expansion in the group treated with tranexamic acid, especially in those treated within 3 hours of the brain bleed. However, this trend was not statistically significant. The finding was consistent with previous research using the medication.

"Further trials using tranexamic acid are ongoing and focusing on ultra-early treatment - within 2 hours. 

This is where the greatest opportunity for intervention appears to be. Tranexamic acid is inexpensive, safe and widely available. Our results and others provide great impetus for further, focused research using this treatment," Nawaf Yassi said.

Larger trials focused on patient outcomes are required for this therapy to enter routine clinical practice.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
May 17,2020

Geneva, May 17: Spraying disinfectant on the streets, as practised in some countries, does not eliminate the new coronavirus and even poses a health risk, the World Health Organization (WHO) warned on Saturday.

In a document on cleaning and disinfecting surfaces as part of the response to the virus, the WHO says spraying can be ineffective. "Spraying or fumigation of outdoor spaces, such as streets or marketplaces, is... not recommended to kill the Covid-19 virus or other pathogens because disinfectant is inactivated by dirt and debris," explains the WHO.

"Even in the absence of organic matter, chemical spraying is unlikely to adequately cover all surfaces for the duration of the required contact time needed to inactivate pathogens." The WHO said that streets and pavements are not considered as "reservoirs of infection" of Covid-19, adding that spraying disinfectants, even outside, can be "dangerous for human health".

The document also stresses that spraying individuals with disinfectants is "not recommended under any circumstances".

"This could be physically and psychologically harmful and would not reduce an infected person's ability to spread the virus through droplets or contact," said the document.

Spraying chlorine or other toxic chemicals on people can cause eye and skin irritation, bronchospasm and gastrointestinal effects, it adds.

The organisation is also warning against the systematic spraying and fumigating of disinfectants on to surfaces in indoor spaces, citing a study that has shown it to be ineffective outside direct spraying areas.

"If disinfectants are to be applied, this should be done with a cloth or wipe that has been soaked in disinfectant," it says.

The SARS-CoV-2 virus, the cause of the pandemic that has killed more than 300,000 people worldwide since its appearance in late December in China, can attach itself to surfaces and objects.

However, no precise information is currently available for the period during which the viruses remain infectious on the various surfaces.

Studies have shown that the virus can stay on several types of surfaces for several days. However, these maximum durations are only theoretical because they are recorded under laboratory conditions and should be "interpreted with caution" in the real-world environment.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
February 6,2020

Researchers have found the rates of lung cancer are higher in young women than men.

The study, published in the journal Pediatrics, examined lung cancer rates in young adults in 40 countries across five continents and uncovered a trend of higher lung cancer rates in women compared with men in recent years.

The emerging trend was widespread, affecting countries across varied geographic locations and income levels.

The changes appeared to be driven by a rising rate of adenocarcinoma lung cancer among women, said the study researchers from University of Calgary in Canada.

Lung cancer rates have been higher among men than women because men started smoking in large numbers earlier and smoked at higher rates; however, recent studies have reported converging lung cancer incidence rates between sexes.

Among men, age specific lung cancer incidence rates generally decreased in all countries, while in women the rates varied across countries with the trends in most countries stable or declining, albeit at a slower pace compared to those in men.

For the findings, lung and bronchial cancer cases between 30-64 age group from 1993-2012 were extracted from cancer incidence in five continents.

The study found the higher emerging rates of lung cancer in young women compared to young men.

According to the researchers, future studies are needed to identify reasons for the elevated incidence of lung cancer among young women.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.