LISTEN: Hearing aids with an embedded "T" switch (for telecoil) can pick up clearer sound in the Gerald R. Ford International Airport in Grand Rapids, Mich., which has an induction-loop system (identified by blue signs).
Image: Courtesy of Lou Schakel Hope College Public Relations
-
The Wisdom of Psychopaths
In this engrossing journey into the lives of psychopaths and their infamously crafty behaviors, the renowned psychologist Kevin Dutton reveals that there is a...
Read More »
Standard hearing aids capture sound via a microphone and then send an amplified version to an earpiece. They work well in relatively quiet, intimate settings, but in public spaces filled with background noise, most users find them of little use. A simple technology that sidesteps the problem, long available in Europe, has finally begun entering the U.S. market. Advocates hope that with the success of pilot projects, the hearing impaired will be able to find public address announcements and other kinds of speech more intelligible.
The technology is an induction-loop system (known as a hearing loop), whereby electromagnetic waves produced by a microphone, public address system or telephone receiver induce an analogous current in the loop. The loop can broadcast the signals directly to a hearing aid equipped with an appropriate detector—specifically, a tiny copper telecoil wire, which picks up the signal (also via induction) and then sends it for amplification and transmission out of the earpiece. (Hearing loops can also broadcast signals to cochlear implants, which are surgically implanted devices that directly stimulate the auditory nerve.)
Telecoils work somewhat like Wi-Fi for hearing aids, enabling them to serve as customized, wireless loudspeakers, says David Myers, a psychology professor at Hope College and a strong advocate for the devices. Makers of hearing aids are increasingly equipping their devices with telecoils, whose original use was to boost telephone sounds. More than 60 percent of hearing aids come with telecoils, up from 37 percent in 2001, according to a survey report in the April 2008 Journal of Hearing.
Still, Myers notes, although about 36 million Americans suffer from hearing loss, the loop technology has not been as widely embraced in the U.S. as it has been in other regions of the world, particularly in northern Europe. Myers, who himself has impaired hearing, first became aware of the technology more than a decade ago while worshipping in Scotland’s Iona Abbey, where the building’s poor acoustics prevented him from clearly hearing the service. At his wife’s prompting, Myers switched on his hearing aid’s “T” (for telecoil) setting to see what would happen. “The sudden clarity was overwhelming,” he adds, “an experience that I have since had in countless other British venues, from auditoriums to cathedrals to the backseats of London and Edinburgh taxis.”
Since then, Myers and others have worked to introduce the technology to the U.S., which has lagged in adopting the hearing loops because the technology is not a requirement for public venues, Myers says. Since its 2004 revision, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) has required public venues to offer assistive-listening systems. But rather than installing hearing loops, a venue can offer FM or infrared systems, which require users to borrow equipment.
The ADA’s position is that no single approach works for every person and every venue; infrared systems, for instance, are less effective in sunlight than the FM approach but are generally more private. “Differences in [confidentiality], interference, cost, installation requirements and operability make it impossible to simply use one type of [assistive-listening system] in every place,” ADA guidelines state.
Myers disagrees, pointing out that many individuals with hearing loss are self-conscious about asking for an earphone setup. And some are averse to using earphones previously worn by others. Installed hearing loops would enable people to use their own devices discreetly.
For fans of hearing loops, progress is being made, if slowly. Janice Schacter, chair and founder of the advocacy group Hearing Access Program, has succeeded with transportation systems. In September, New York City’s Taxi & Limousine Commission approved hearing loops for cabbies who want to install it in their vehicles, a decision that came after a 13-month pilot program with 15 taxis set up with Schacter’s help. Hearing-loop technology could exist at up to 642 information booths in the New York subway system, Schacter says, who worked with the city to launch the initial pilot test at the Wall Street station.
See what we're tweeting about
15 Comments
Add CommentWe've had this system in the UK for as long as I can remember and it seems to work well, judging by its ubiquity. Almost all NHS hearing aids come with a T-switch, and most theatres, railway stations and black cabs have a loop system. I've even lectured in university rooms equipped with coils. My mother-in-law's small church has just installed a system too!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisVisitors to the UK should look out for a blue or red sign depicting an ear in outline, crossed by a white bar, usually with a T in the lower right hand side.
Good luck with the roll out!
Sounds like a very big idea for the hearing impaired. But here's an even bigger idea. An iPod equipped with T-loop, Infrared & the FM technologies. Suddenly ageing Boomers that have put off buying a hearing air or an ipod for that matter, will have both a gratifying and practical reason to take the leap. It would be hard to resist! The engineers at MIT could easily redesign the iPod's chip, earphones and mood switch to implement these improvements. Imagine your iPod becoming an aid to hearing whenever needed. The mood selector could have a setting for each as well as an ambient setting to interrupt if a message is broadcast in an airport or train station. Very very cool. Hearing aids are selling for over a thousand dollars, I would be astounded if Apple couldn't integrate all of the above into their system and bring the whole thing to market far below that price. I can hear it now, "I see Mom finally got Dad to wear a hearing aid, yea she bought him an iPode. Bell Tone look out.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOne good hearing aid sells for well over TWO thousand dollars, an iPod would be cheaper. However, I can't see it fitting the needs of those who have a serious hearing impairment. I need my hearing aid ALL the time and it is much easier to wear than an iPod earpiece. But for those who have a more mild loss, a properly equiped iPod may be a better solution for movies, theaters, lecture halls, etc. Good idea, but first we need to get the induction system rolled out. I have a T coil on my aid so it would be nice to use in public places.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThanks for your reply and input. I doubt it will be too many years before iPod earphones are wireless. However with the of the T-loop integration concept as impetus Apple might just hurry the timetable up. There is nothing like competition to hasten progress. And there is nothing like demand to inspire change; as in induction system roll out. Again thanks for the feedback. art
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisartubtu, maybe a better solution would be to have hearing aids come with blue tooth connectivity...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSo what's new about this? The hearing aid I wear now and the cheaper one from 12 years ago both had this capability. I'd like to see two hearing aides that communicate together and emphasize sounds that come in in phase, from directly in front of me.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI have a digital hearing aid system that blue tooths into my i-pod or my tv, and having had to use hearing aids fro several decades this is as good asI have ever had it my system also allows my i-phone to come int hrough my hearing aids. Check with an audiologist I'm sure they will knw what your talking about.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this14 January, 2010
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDear Scientific American:
I am writing regarding the advocacy article by Larry Greenemeier on page twenty of the January, 2010 issue titled, Sound Approach and subtitled, Loopy idea brings in speech loud and clear .
While I applaud the article for bringing attention to a problem for millions of hearing impaired world wide, I take issue with it from a basis of its inaccuracy, timeliness and advocacy of a solution ; with such sever limitations and a track record of overwhelming rejection by the hearing impaired population. Wide spread adoption of loop technology has been advocated for years, but would tie us to a hearing aid input system that is over four decades old and by its very nature prone to all manner of electronic noise interference.
Like the college psychologist, quoted in the article I too am hearing impaired and have worn hearing aids for many years, in my case since 1994. However, unlike the admitted long term advocate , I am an Audioprosthologist, Nationally Board Certified in Hearing Instrument Sciences and have been licensed in the state of Florida to dispense hearing aids since 1983. Such, T-coil (as the devices are known in our industry) advocacy has resulted in a statutory requirement that I discuss this technology, its operation and potential benefits with every patient I serve. And, while some find limited benefit for phone use, the system hasnt achieved wide acceptance for lots of very good reasons.
That the article characterizes the operation of telecoils as; working somewhat like Wi-fi for hearing aids is a gross over simplification. These T-coils, in their simplest form are just that, little tiny coils of copper wire, wrapped around an equally tiny iron bar. In the most common usage, there is a single pole, double throw switch placed within the hearing aids microphone circuit (and actually shown in your picture) that allows for the hearing aids input to be switched from that of the microphone, to the t-coil.
These coils were originally designed to pick up the electromagnetic fields emanating from old fashioned telephone headsets and give the user a one to one coupling with a telephone, and while they still work fairly well with phones with compatible receivers, they dont work at all with most cell phones or with those very light weight, portable phones with speakers that fail to emanate a strong enough electromagnetic field for them to pick up.
Loop systems, are just that, large loops of wire hooked to an amplified public address system in parallel to the regular output speakers, and are designed to transmit an analog electromagnetic field that corresponds to those sounds being recreated through the normal speakers. This open, analog type of transmission does work in certain environments, but your article failed to list any of the limitations of this antiquated protocol. The first such limitation is that all types of electric and electronic devices emit electromagnetic energy in the frequency range and at levels that become quite noticeable and according to many users, quite annoying, when the t-coil is engaged in lots of environments. Other limitations include the size of the coil (when placed in todays small custom fittings.) and the fact that most require the user to choose between being able to hear those other sounds, including voices around them, or switching to the t-coils input and hearing nothing form the microphone. While some systems offer the ability to mix the microphone and t-coil signal, instead of helping most users, this setting often gives them the worst of both worlds, skewing the signal they want to hear into both an acoustic and electronic background mix that makes understanding harder rather than easier.
Also, while Wi-fi may also be transmitted as an electromagnetic part of the spectrum, this is as close of a comparison actual fact will allow. Wi-fi is transmitted in a digital format and represents a sophisticated, two-way protocol allowing for communications between both the hot spot and those connected to it. And while not suitable for communications with hearing instruments, such a dedicated, ultra-low power protocol is exactly what is needed in our industry and the portable communications device manufactures at this time, not a misguided advocacy for a totally antiquated system that is regularly rejected by the vast majority of hearing aid users everyday.
Our industry has come a very long way in providing better understanding to the hearing impaired in a wide variety of environments. Todays digital instruments are light years from those in use when this t-coil technology was first introduced and decades from what we were using to fit people when its advocacy reached the level requiring us to explain its operation and potential to each and every candidate for amplification. And, again while it has limited benefit, the key word is limited.
Most major hearing instrument manufacturers today are working to expand the ability of our technologies to better connect with the other electronic devices that now populate such a growing part of all of our lives. Currently a few have even brought products to market that allow for the real time connection, via a specialized dongle, to any of the myriad Bluetooth� capable devices now out. This new generation of equipment is allowing those of us with hearing loss to begin to enjoy a whole new level of connectivity to not only our acoustic environment but also to the growing electronic communications wonders all around us we had previously only dreamt of.
So, while I applaud you bringing to fore a problem faced by millions, I found your article and advocacy, while well meaning, inaccurate, uninformed, outdated and actually counter productive to bringing a meaningful discussion of the needed protocols that could actually help to solve the problems the hard of hearing face every day.
To interview and quote a strong advocate of a particular solution, who has no formal training, or technical expertise in the devices being discussed and advocated, other than being a personal user and admitted advocate, while failing to interview even a single person within either the hearing instrument manufacturing industry, or dispensing field, prior to making such an uninformed advocacy, shows a level of investigation, editing and reporting on a very important issue, that clearly fails to meet your usual high standards.
Very truly yours,
R. D. Taylor, ACA, BC/HIS, COHC
A Advanced Hearing Care,
720 East New Haven Ave. Suite #12
Melbourne, Florida 32901
321-722-2894
To Mr. R.D. Taylor: As a user of hearing aids with telecoils, inductively looped environments work very well for me. I do not have to spend more money getting assistive hearing gadgets when using a loop equipment. I walk into a looped room, and switch my hearing aid to T-coil (or MT), and hear clearly whatever is broadcast into a microphone. Like professor Myers, I too am an advocate of inductive loop technology, because of its simplicity. A properly installed inductive loop system will not have the interference Mr. Taylor speaks of.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisLoretta Butler
Adult Loss of Hearing Association
Tucson, AZ
R. D. Taylors extended comments merit some replies. He notes (Ill put the gist of his bracketed criticisms in single quotes; his actual words in double quotes):
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this1. [Hearing loops dont use wi-fi.] Indeed not, they use simple magnetism. In saying they function somewhat like wi-fi I only meant, as I always explain, a simple analogy to help people understand that this is a direct wireless communication of a signal to a hearing aid.
2. [This technology has faced a track record of overwhelming rejection by the hearing impaired population. ] To the contrary, the technology in recent years has spread across the Nordic countries and is now in tens of thousands of UK venues, from post office and ticket windows to the back seats of all London taxis to most churches and cathedrals that have PA systems. I first experienced a hearing loop in an ancient Scottish abbey, where, when I turned on my telecoils, the indecipherable sound instantly became crystal clear, as if spoken from the center of my head. Back home in the USA the technology has definitely not been rejected by people with hearing loss because 99% of such people have never heard of it. In West Michigan, where it now is in several hundred locations, and in other states where people with hearing loss are now advocating this inexpensive hearing aid compatible assistive listening, it is being embraced and advocated. Ditto in Europe, where a recent International Hearing Loops conference for attendees from 15 nations strongly endorsed the concept (see www.hearingloops.org).
3. [It is prone to all manner of electronic noise interference. ] Our West Michigan experience is that this rarely is a problem. Old (not flat) screen computer monitors, old fluorescent lighting, and some electric guitar problems generate interference, as do some cars and all airplanes. But I use my hearing aid telecoils to listen to TV (with a trunk power line just one house away), to hear announcements at Grand Rapids Airport, and in lots of other venues with no interference issues whatsoever. Moreover, the audio installers tell me there has been virtually no situation where they havent been able to do an interference-free installation.
4. [Telecoils enable enhanced listening only from old-fashioned telephones and a few cell phones.] Actually, telecoils enhance listening from all modern landline phones manufactured since 1989, and, thanks to advocacy from the Hearing Loss Association of America and others, increasingly with new FCC-mandated lines of hearing aid compatible (interference-free) cell phones. Ergo, "It is the position of [HLAA] that telecoils be given the prominence they deserve as a valuable hearing aid feature that will allow the expanded use of assistive listening devices."
5. [The telecoil hasnt achieved wide acceptance for lots of very good reasons. ] Actually it *is* now receiving wide acceptance for lots of very good reasons. Hearing professional surveys published in the Hearing Review indicate that telecoils are now coming in most (62 percent) of hearing aids, double the percentage of just a few years ago. And recent Hearing Review Products reviews of hearing aid product features indicate that most hearing aids (including all 35 models of in-the-ear aids) now come with an available telecoil. One leading manufacturer, which hasnt had them in its lines of open-fitting behind-the-ear aids (some do, some dont) has indicated it soon will be adding them.
6. [The mic + telecoil setting gives users the worst of both worlds. ] In my experienceas I have my TV broadcast via my customized in-the-ear loudspeakers while also being able to hear conversation or the phone ringingits the best of both worlds . . . and certainly better than the hearing aid incompatible TV listening system I previously used (that requires fussing with extra equipment and that plugs my ears).
7. [Newer technologies are offering a new world of connectivity.] Yes, I tried out and could have purchased $3000 FM boots to add to my $6000 pair of hearing aids. Yes, hearing loops are a very simple and older technology (like computers, theyve been around for decades, but now in lots of new product lines). And yes, these new connective technologies do some very cool things. But Bluetooth isnt an assistive listening answer (it sucks hearing aid battery power and has limited range). I do look forward to an eventual alternative wireless hearing solution that will be similarly a) inexpensive (essentially no cost to the consumer), b) capable of covering a wide area, c) draining little or battery power, and d) sufficiently miniaturized that it can be fit in nearly all hearing aids . . . thus requiring no fuss with locating, checking out, and returning special extra equipment.
This last point is huge. People with hearing loss generally, when at an event and not hearing well, will not take the initiative to get up, go locate, check out, and wear a conspicuous headset or other equipment. But if they need only push a button and their hearing aid (or cochlear implant now) becomes an in-the-ear loudspeaker delivering sound customized they will love it . . . and by word of mouth the technology will spread by demand. And that is what is happening here in West Michigan and now, with growing support from state and national hearing loss organizations, to more and more places in the USA.
David Myers
www.davidmyers.org
www.hearingloop.org
The comments of R. D. Taylor are a fine example of the lack of concern on the part of many hearing aid dispensers (whether an audiologist or a hearing aid specialist) for the real needs of their clients - to hear better for a reasonable cost.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThere may be a technology that replaces loops and telecoils in the future but, at present, it is the most financially reasonable way of providing expanded communiation access to many. The cost to the user is negligible compared to such alternatives as blue tooth and the benefits many. Whether using a hearing looped room or a neck loop, I receive sound corrected for my particular hearing loss pattern via telecoils. I can access FM systems and/or infrared systems using the proper receiver with my neck loop - the sound is far superior to that of a headset for those two alternative listening systems.
I suspect part of Mr.Taylor's objection to the technology could be motivated by a desire to sell his clients FM boots and blue tooth items which add considerably more to the bottom line than the (what for most dispensers are the free) telecoils.
I'm thankful Florida law requires Mr. Taylor to counsel his clients on telecoils but suspect he does a very effective job of convincing those porr folks its not for them before he proceeds to encourge them to buy a more expensive technology.
Stephen Frazier
Albuquerque, NM
R.D. Taylor's response to the article on loop/telecoil technology is, in my opinion, a perfect example of the lack of concern for the real needs on the part of many hearing aid dispensers (both audiologists and hearing aid specialists). The response by David Myers dramatically showcases the lack of knowlege Mr. Taylor has exhibited on the topic.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAt some future date there may be a technology that is as cost effective as loops and telecoils but it's not out there yet. Blue tooth is extremely expensive in comparison. FM is not as versatile and, furthermore, FM listening systems can be easily accessed using a neck loop with the proper receiver rather than an expensive FM boot and infra red systems can likewise be accessed with a neck loop and receiver. Both, integrated with a neck loop and telecoils, give the listener the benefit of corrected sound that neither FM or infra red headsets can offer.
I can plug my neck loop into the TVs at my local gym to get corrected sound while I watch the news. Blue tooth cannot easily and inexpensively do that for me nor can FM or IR. I can plug it into my cell phone to hear the caller in both ears for the cost of a $50 neck loop, not an expensive blue tooth system.
Thank goodness the state of Florida requires Mr. Taylor to counsel his clients on telecoils but I suspect he is very effecitve in convincing those trusting folks that it's not for them and then proceed to promote FM boots, blue tooth etc. to raise his bottom line.
Steve Frazier
Albuquerque, NM
So great to hear from Dr. Myers. I took Psychology 101 from here several decades ago at Hope College. He was THE BEST professor I ever had.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis technology is being employed for nearly a decade in Denmark and I was quite shocked when we got an American patient with the outdated technology. According to statistics we ran, 98% of Danish senior patients that are utilizing digital hearing aids have this technology applied to their instruments (source: http://www.hca.dk/default_uk.aspx). I think the US needs to step up the game soon.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis is a great reply to R. D. Taylor, ACA, BC/HIS, COHC. Seems like he's "out of the loop"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this