As mentioned earlier,on the basis of 120 samples from a power loom environment and 120 samples from an office setting, I was able to build up workforce profiles.
For the past few years global researchers on noise have been postulating about its non-auditory health effects.By way of a schedule administered to study samples for two years, I tested some of the postulations,with surprising results.
Needless to say, shedule was administered personally by me.A considerable amount of time for this was intentionally allotted & set aside while constructing the study protocol. The subjects were assured about the confidentiality of their responses and were told that the study was an overall health profile study. Extra care was taken to ensure that noise, as an occupational hazard was not stressed upon in any way, nor was it avoided if the subjects initiated discussion about it. In case of a discussion, the researcher gave objective and relevant information relating to the specific query.
1. “Long-term exposures to noise-stress may influence health directly through neuroendocrine mechanisms or indirectly through their association with unhealthy behavior” state Plant et al. (1992), Miller (1999) and Sinha (2001).
Elaborating further they state, workers affected by workplace stress are at risk for excessive use of alcohol and other substances in varying degrees. This will then act separately to cause health effects in addition to those related to noise exposure.
The present study supported conclusions drawn by the studies quoted above because subjects from the high-noise exposed group when compared to subjects from the low-noise exposed control group demonstrated a higher prevalence of alcohol, tobacco, cigarettes and tea use.
Alcohol had a prevalence of 57% in the experimental high-noise exposed group while in the low-noise control group alcohol had a prevalence of 36 %. Similarly, tobacco was used by 48% subjects of the experimental group as compared to 19% in the control group.
Comments
That was a very interesting piece of information. As a scientist with the Pollution Control Board I was involved in noise monitoring activity for some time and we did monitor the ambient Noise regime at Indore city. As the cities spread, the day time ambient noise is becoming an environmental issue for a larger area and hardly any thing is being done to control it.Traffic noise from the highways and super corridors is another point of concern and so is the time specific community noise pollution during festivals.Culturally , we Indians are noisey people. I shall be grateful if you may add some thing about the community noise and its impact on population. Urgent steps are required to contain this menace which is said to kill silently
2. Sleeplessness: Among the non-auditory effects of noise exposure, sleep disturbance is a common effect described by most noise-exposed populations. Noise-induced sleep effects occur with a wide range of variability. They can show up a not only as a decrease in the duration of sleep, but also as a reduction in the quality of sleep. It has been proved that even though one gets used to a level of ambient noise and subjective habituation occurs, none of the cardiovascular responses show habituation to noise Multiple researchers have set the maximum permissible noise intensity with reference to impact on sleep at 55dB(A). In the loom-workers group 33% complained of sleeplessness while it was 8% in the office group.
Just because we cannot see noise pollution doesn’t mean we can turn...
Commissions Noise pollution report proves it’s time for action.
An interesting read at: http://www.eeb.org/index.cfm/news-events/news/commissione28099s-noi...
Pollution Body is Deaf to Noise:
Environmental activists in the Chandigarh city say that high ambient noise levels reflected UT government's failure to implement noise control rules. ''When it comes to implementation of noise norms, pollution control committee and police tend to be casual. We had complained several time against the people who used powerful motorcycles and pressure horns in the midnight, but they did not do anything. http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-06-07/chandigarh/2...
The Noise Pollution(Regulation & Control) Rules 2000 stipulate maximum permissible ambient noise levels with reference to the risk of developing a hearing loss i.e. an auditory effect.It says absolutely nothing about non-auditory effects on exposure to sub-hazardous noise levels.In this area there is NO DATA.My study is the first to generate organized, statistically significant & reliable data.
The noise pollution Act is in place for the past more than a decade now, it is quite sufficient a long period for significant data collection and interpretation of these data/results. Based on these results, we could have based our decisions for policy decisions.
However, it is a well known fact that all the Buses and the CVs- trucks etc., in India are all fitted with Pressure Horns and these vehicle drivers continuously honk horns unnecessarily and doesn't our policy makers know about this truth and can't a policy is framed to completely ban manufacture, marketing, supply and installation of this in the country and the rules are implemented religiously so as these are completely eliminated, thus one element of noise generation is reduced. Simultaneously awareness programmes are implemented looping in the media, school colleges, NGOs, etc., to spread the message all around.
Absolutely! For the auditory effects of ambient noise, standards take the form of Maximum Permissible Levels. Hence it is fine to borrow OSHA, ISO, WHO etc noise standards and we have done precisely that and not re-invented the wheel.
But about the non-auditory health effects e.g. annoyance, anxiety, hypertension, hyperacidity etc that occur even if noise is of sub-hazardous intensity? Some of these effects depend on qualities of the sound other than its absolute decibel value, and the annoyance associated with sound may need to be considered, in regard to its health effects. When we try to link non-auditory effects like annoyance to health impacts, it’s majorly complicated due to a psychological process known as a stress appraisal. This is why we need to build a noise-effect national database in India to formulate effective anti-noise standards.
Noise pollution is a killer and there need to be concerted efforts to mitigate reduction of the source of generation of noise.
It is one thing to have elaborate codes, but quite another for people to follow them in letter and spirit. Yet another is the question of enforcement if people do not adhere to the standards. Weakness of enforcement in India is a real issue. The unraveling of the two videos on this site posted one for noise pollution by vehicles and DG Sets has once again put spotlight on failures of implementations of these rules and lax regulatory systems.
It is suggested to utilize the results of the research already carried out by WHO, OECD and other agencies worldwide and utilized for obtaining best results, instead of re-inventing the wheel.
Absolutely Mr Ghosh!
Unlike other environmental pollutants,due to multiple variables and involvement of a psychological component in any noise reaction, the link between noise and a non-auditory health effect is not easily proved. Most studies are co-relational . Hence to plan anti-noise interventions for its non-auditory effects,it is necessary to first generate a national level database with sufficient detaling of every contributory factor