75.167.26.127
In Reply to: RE: Cool post! posted by Enophile on December 10, 2009 at 10:11:06
I like your examples of needing glasses or a hearing aid. In the case of severe environmental illness or chemical sensitivity, the sufferer has an even harder time since their disability is not fully recognized yet. You can get a eye exam and prove you need glasses, but it is extremely difficult to prove you are reacting to someone's perfume, or the cellphone tower in your neighborhood. And of course if say just 1% of the general population is reactive to something, then any scientific studies will also find only 1% of the people using the drug or silicone breast implant or cell phone or whatever had a reaction, which might not be enough to be statistically significant. But of course it might still be true that 100% of the people who are allergic to the drug or to silicone or sensitive to EMF fields are reacting which is very significant for the person who is suffering.
And so in the case of audio, we may be able to have a better understanding that not everyone will benefit from any given tweak if we take into account people's varying levels of sensitivity and reactivity. And I love what you said about how that should be viewed as a fortunate thing. "Great, you did not hear any difference. Lucky you!!!!"
Follow Ups:
Post a Followup:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2009, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ Go Green ]
[ Take5 ]