I think this is very good news overall. As this suggests, hopefully this can help people who otherwise wouldn’t get hearing aids or couldn’t get them to get them.
The cost of hearing aids and the technology may also improve in a competitive marketplace.
It’s not all roses though. While it’s hard to think that at least some or maybe most of the resistance to the idea of OTC hearing aids coming from hearing professionals is a type of “income security” self interest- there are other factors to consider.
Hearing aids are not quite as simple as “put it in your ear and hear…” they can cause unpleasant side effects or even be dangerous.
This is one of those things where a lot- maybe most people can do their due diligence and be fine on their own to select and set up a device and deal with it. That said- hearing aids can cause serious hearing damage if used improperly or for the improper application and they can even impact our cognition depending on various factors (age being a major
one.) There are quite a few other things to consider as well- one I will name is the negative sides of an “open market” on hearing aids- that is to say that while new non prescription devices may be able to leverage new technologies and may lower prices and even spur novel developments- the fact the devices are no longer illegal to buy on an “open market” so could lead to the opposite in some cases. A flood of low cost and low quality products from unscrupulous sellers could not only leave many consumers worse off than before, but without guidance of a professional in a sea of these devices in this scenario- many could be effective timely left without guidance to which products are “good” or rip offs. Making a small device that amplifies sound isn’t particularly difficult- novelty “spy devices” and such have been around a looong time and often for $5USD or less. Making devices that are safe, reliable, and effective let alone long lived is a bit hardsr
But the devices themselves are all relatively simple despite some of the complex research and engineering that can go in to them. So there lies another potential issue- the concerns of things like IP infringement or “knock offs” is slightly less in tightly regulated market where only a doctor level professional can legally allow you to purchase such devices and only merchants with the ability to sell restricted medical devices can stock and carry such items legally. The profit for companies trying to “bootleg” etc. isn’t there readily if they have no legal route to sell their product. Illegal sales have surely happened in the past- but due to the potential consequences and a somewhat small market whom you then have an even smaller potential client base as you must find those who need hearing aids and are willing to buy unlawfully- and won’t “snitch” if you offer.
So with an open market- overseas firms can reverse engineer devices or just straight copy them or make cheaper facsimiles and then sell on common web sites etc. if you play your cards right it’s perfectly legal, but even when unlawful- well- it is much harder for the main perpetrators of such schemes to get caught or face punishment. We’ve all seen the products online or at mall kiosks or swap meets etc. that are obviously not legitimate or legal. If the “original” cost $3500 and the “knock off” costs $500-1000, many consumers will take the knock off. If it offers similar or better performance from their standpoint for sure, but sometimes even when it gets terrible reviews.
This becomes relevant because the “knock off” maker didn’t do testing or development- they copied a design. Part of why they can charge less. Knock off makers rely on those who create originals to have product. As often happens on these situations where it is costly to bring a quality product to market and profits are impacted greatly by “knock offs,” it can become not feasible or seen as worth it for producers of original devices to make new things just so they can feed the profits of knock offs. That or going out of business are extreme cases (but do happen-) but another danger there is two fold. Where businesses seek to profit in a segment where “knock offs” are easy or common, they usually have only a few major strategies. One is to adopt business practices to claim market share or profits. These can be things like subscription based services that ensure steady revenue and are difficult for knock off makers to copy. Another is to actually raise prices and create a market where..
.. those who want “quality” essentially shop on higher price instead of lower. Brand recognition is one expression of this but so are things like offering the same products or slowing release cycles to try and earn more from each round of development. Holding back features, many potentially harmful things for a consumer.
The other major strategy is to simply say “if you can’t beat ‘em- join em…”
If people flock to buy cheap, often inferior, goods- many segments just ditch quality so they can slash prices. We’ve seen this all over various industries. The service industry is a big example as is automotive and many more. If the “big names” cut back on “extras” and “quality” and lower prices to competitive levels with cut rate rivals, for a time their name recognition can drive sales back to them. “A BMW for $30k? Sure!”
But as the quality becomes apparent the prestige of the brand tends to suffer. This is in large part how American cars became largely jokes for a long time.
“Badge engineering” saw prestigious names selling cheap crap to consumers who they knew would buy on their reputation.So there is some danger that the overall quality of products or rate of improvement could suffer.
All that said- end of day I hope and think this will do more harm than good. There are many scenarios where this does drive development and competition.It unlocks doors potentially for high end technologies from global sources that previously would have found entering the US with their products to be prohibitive.Some people probably will be harmed. They may injure themselves or give up on hearing aids due to poor performance from improper device selection or set up. Ithink and hope that it will do more good than harm.
anything can cause harm if you're stupid enough; example... i'ma shove this thing up my ass and see if i develop echolocation in my rectum. Earthquake farts and stimulated prostate ftw.
100% true. The fact is someone can hurt themselves with anything* provided intent or sufficient ignorance/carelessness.
There’s a lot of ideological space to cover in between A world where we shrug and let people have plutonium or be able to buy any drug or medicine over the counter and a world where we let anyone fly passenger planes if they want to without any training or licensing etc. obviously these are extremes- but there’s a wide range of possibilities between where we decide how or what or when or if something should be regulated and the particulars of that. There are problems there of course- if someone chooses to use crack- why should society stop that? It’s their life and body. But then it gets tricky. Ignoring arguments that we have some obligation to save others from themselves- especially when they aren’t in a state to make sound decisions- what happens when those crack heads start causing trouble for others? What happens when they steal or rob or tax public works?
Now their choices are taking from others and causing harm- and often, a crack head doesn’t have the means to make restitutions for wrongs, and some wrongs can’t be repaid at all. What happens when a glut of individual choices begins to add to a sum total which fundamental changes society or the world or even endangers the ability to live here?
Tricky stuff. Now- hearing aids aren’t crack lol. But- the decisions of many in any issue like this can and usually do have all sorts of ripples that go behind the immediate issue or the obvious, or even the predictable.
I largely am for the deregulation of hearing aids, but I do think it is worth noting and being cognizant of all sides of the issue.
as for the other crack, not a fan of people smoking it, but to stick to my own ideals if they wanna do that, i'm down to let them.... just don't elevate it into a robbery and we ain't got beef.
it's not as tricky as it seems smoking crack is one thing, stealing and robbing is one thing... it doessn't require crack, it is an entirely different charge. I used to steal just for fun; never smoked crack, never used the money, i just did it cuz i thought it was funny.
Nah. I’m not saying they have to go together- I’m just saying that some choices have a tendency to lead to certain consequences. It’s pretty normal (not condoning it) to steal at some point- lots of kids go through a “shoplifting phase” or something like that, and petty theft usually doesn’t lead to crack use or more serious crimes, but crack use tends to lead to habitual crack use and that tends to lead to other crimes like theft- though not always. The world is full of “functional addicts” and some people are often surprised to discover how many seemingly “upright” professionals and neighbors have coke or meth or other illegal addictions. That said- I’m with you on the principle that I don’t have an issue with people using drugs if they choose to- that’s it’s own complex topic though because of the nature of many drugs and addictions the word “choice” can become arguable at some point. Regardless-
These things tend to have ripples. Using something asides drugs because of addiction issues and other issues with the ability to form rational thoughts and behaviors- building codes are another example. On the surface, if someone doesn’t have the money and/or is happy living in a home made of plywood or using asbestos to build their home etc etc- how is their home my business? Well- the problem is several fold right? Their home can cause safety issues for other nearby properties such as fire hazard. If they use asbestos, the next home owner or guests etc. can be exposed. If they ever take it out those processing the waste may be disposed. If we could count on people to take the (often extreme) steps to avoid exposing others to harm and make proper informed consent disclosures then perhaps.
Lol. Well- honor is it’s own thing. Like alignment in D&D I guess? We tend to think of principles as some noble virtues but it’s like… following a code doesn’t validate the code itself as “good” or “bad,” “noble” or otherwise. Morality is a relative thing. That said- having a code in terms of trust means consistency, and consistency Is a pillar of trust. Even if someone is totally self motivated there can be a level of trust in that if you can predict their behaviors you know when to trust them. For example- a person who is solely self motivated can be relied upon to help you so long as providing that help is the best path to their self interest. A person who is morally motivated can be trusted to help if your situation aligns to their morals, but their moral interpretation can be unpredictable and thusly you may not be able to count on their help either. Certain things like strong addiction and mind altering substances can reduce a persons overall predictability or, like with crack..
.. create a certain level of predictability that at some point you can expect that person to do almost anything to secure the means to more crack. While that isn’t always true and not all “crack heads” will do “anything” to feed the need and not all users of crack are “crackheads,”
The addiction the the substances effects certainly impair judgment.
So in my experience, you can trust an addict to feed and enable their addiction.
When it comes to honor amongst thieves, you’ll find as much honor amongst them as among bankers or police or plumbers. Each person has their own honor and their own conviction to that honor- but what that honor means or entails is it’s own thing.
Lol. I’d say only trust that a crackhead is gonna crackhead. Don’t trust their promises or commitments, don’t trust in your relationship with them or their personality or humanity to guide their decisions. Don’t trust in their morals or such- trust that they are gonna crackhead and avoid positions where them crackheading can harm you.
A tiger is a tiger. It can live with you and sleep in your bed for 40 years and one day kill you. Your problem wasn’t that you trusted a tiger, it was that you ignored the nature of the tiger. Trust it’s nature. It’s nature is that a tiger is gonna tiger. If you put yourself in a position where a tiger being a tiger can hurt you- in all likelihood you’ll get get hurt eventually. That is the nature of the being. Honestly, it is probably best of one can avoid dealing with crackheads in general. Not even most crackheads want to deal with other crackheads if they don’t have to.
The cost of hearing aids and the technology may also improve in a competitive marketplace.
It’s not all roses though. While it’s hard to think that at least some or maybe most of the resistance to the idea of OTC hearing aids coming from hearing professionals is a type of “income security” self interest- there are other factors to consider.
Hearing aids are not quite as simple as “put it in your ear and hear…” they can cause unpleasant side effects or even be dangerous.
This is one of those things where a lot- maybe most people can do their due diligence and be fine on their own to select and set up a device and deal with it. That said- hearing aids can cause serious hearing damage if used improperly or for the improper application and they can even impact our cognition depending on various factors (age being a major
The other major strategy is to simply say “if you can’t beat ‘em- join em…”
If people flock to buy cheap, often inferior, goods- many segments just ditch quality so they can slash prices. We’ve seen this all over various industries. The service industry is a big example as is automotive and many more. If the “big names” cut back on “extras” and “quality” and lower prices to competitive levels with cut rate rivals, for a time their name recognition can drive sales back to them. “A BMW for $30k? Sure!”
But as the quality becomes apparent the prestige of the brand tends to suffer. This is in large part how American cars became largely jokes for a long time.
All that said- end of day I hope and think this will do more harm than good. There are many scenarios where this does drive development and competition.It unlocks doors potentially for high end technologies from global sources that previously would have found entering the US with their products to be prohibitive.Some people probably will be harmed. They may injure themselves or give up on hearing aids due to poor performance from improper device selection or set up. Ithink and hope that it will do more good than harm.
There’s a lot of ideological space to cover in between A world where we shrug and let people have plutonium or be able to buy any drug or medicine over the counter and a world where we let anyone fly passenger planes if they want to without any training or licensing etc. obviously these are extremes- but there’s a wide range of possibilities between where we decide how or what or when or if something should be regulated and the particulars of that. There are problems there of course- if someone chooses to use crack- why should society stop that? It’s their life and body. But then it gets tricky. Ignoring arguments that we have some obligation to save others from themselves- especially when they aren’t in a state to make sound decisions- what happens when those crack heads start causing trouble for others? What happens when they steal or rob or tax public works?
Tricky stuff. Now- hearing aids aren’t crack lol. But- the decisions of many in any issue like this can and usually do have all sorts of ripples that go behind the immediate issue or the obvious, or even the predictable.
I largely am for the deregulation of hearing aids, but I do think it is worth noting and being cognizant of all sides of the issue.
The addiction the the substances effects certainly impair judgment.
So in my experience, you can trust an addict to feed and enable their addiction.
When it comes to honor amongst thieves, you’ll find as much honor amongst them as among bankers or police or plumbers. Each person has their own honor and their own conviction to that honor- but what that honor means or entails is it’s own thing.
A tiger is a tiger. It can live with you and sleep in your bed for 40 years and one day kill you. Your problem wasn’t that you trusted a tiger, it was that you ignored the nature of the tiger. Trust it’s nature. It’s nature is that a tiger is gonna tiger. If you put yourself in a position where a tiger being a tiger can hurt you- in all likelihood you’ll get get hurt eventually. That is the nature of the being. Honestly, it is probably best of one can avoid dealing with crackheads in general. Not even most crackheads want to deal with other crackheads if they don’t have to.