Causation? Which Way? Is There Any?

Thursday, December 22, 2022

Just about anyone who has ever heard a physician discuss the use of cotton swabs to remove earwax will have heard that the practice can cause Bad Things to happen. ("Q-tips can push wax further into the ear canal, which can cause impaction, discomfort, or a rupture in the ear drum....") Some people follow this advice and others ignore it. I have lived in both camps, but will leave it at that for now.

But I have never reviewed the literature on the subject, and that's where a writer known as the Resident Contrarian comes in. The Resident Contrarian admits up front that he is a layman and asks that you not rely on him for medical advice. Fair enough, but he asks some good questions and makes some solid points.

My favorite comes from his consideration of a very commonly-cited study:

Image by Alexander Grey, via Unsplash, license.
[K]ids whose ears were cleaned by cotton tipped swabs were three to four times as likely to have plugs, and that effect is strong enough that we can at least to some extent disregard the small sample size.

But an obvious objection springs to mind - what if causation swings the other way? If the mothers in this survey were more likely to use cotton tipped swabs on kids who had hyper-active earwax production, then the study authors could have their correlation/causation flipped. To their credit, they acknowledge this before saying something seemingly irrational... [bold]
If the Resident Contrarian has indeed performed a thorough literature review, we have an example of conventional medical wisdom that may be complete bunk. Nonetheless, it's easy to see how such a state of affairs could have arisen: Earwax is not that important in the grand scheme of things, is hard to study, or both -- and erring on the side of caution is a common enough practice.

If you're going to pick between too much earwax and damage to the inner ear, you'll probably take the wax -- every day of the week and twice on Sundays if you're choosing on behalf of someone else.

A possible case in point: When I was young, I had heard this advice and followed it for some time. A doctor eventually surprised me during a routine checkup by asking me if I used Q-Tips, as I had lots of wax buildup. He was mildly surprised by my negative answer, then performed a procedure to remove the wax.

It was a couple of days before I became acclimated to how much better my hearing became, and I decided to start using cotton swabs to keep things that way. I have been using them ever since.

In the process of making that decision, I reconsidered the advice and immediately wondered How are the swabs pushing wax into the ear? Who holds them down on the way into the ear? Do people ever push inward when applying pressure?

I realized that while there was advice, that advice didn't work for me, and there was no sensible mechanical explanation for how the bad result was supposed to come about.

So, while anecdotes are not data, my experience comports with the idea that this bit of medical advice is questionable.

-- CAV

6 comments:

Dinwar said...

It's not a medical reason, it's an engineering one. Q-tips and cotton swabs grab onto a little bit of wax via electrostatic charges, and if you only have a little it may be sufficient. If you have a lot, or (as in my case) you have unusually narrow ear canals and rapid wax buildup, the electrostatic charge isn't sufficient to adhere the wax to the cotton. At that point, you're doing what's called pigging--pushing a solid object through a pipe. When this is done with sewer lines or oil pipelines, the gunk comes out the other end. There is no "other end" in your ear, so the was gets pushed back into the tympanic membrane (wax may squish, but it doesn't flow at body temperature). If you're gentle it forms a plug; if you're aggressive it ruptures that delicate membrane.

Oddly enough, the Middle Ages had a somewhat better solution: ear spoons. These were tiny scoops used to remove wax the way you remove ice cream from a tub. There were risks (the ones we've found are brass or bronze, which are harder than wax and thus more easily damage the tympanic membrane), but carefully used they wouldn't have pushed the wax back as much, because they provided somewhere for the wax to go other than "back". We tend to think of Medieval people as stupid, filthy, and ignorant, but this is one example of the reality of the matter: they were people, just as intelligent as we are.

My guess is that there are a few things going on in these studies. First, high wax production. Second, possibly narrow ear canals (it's not a problem, any more than having slender fingers or an aquiline nose is, so it's unlikely to be reported). Q-tip use would also be a factor, encouraged by the excess wax production. Being in certain environments can also exacerbate this. If, for example, the family fried food regularly, the oil droplets can get into one's ears and cause problems (happened to me while I worked as a grill and fry cook). Dusty environments can also cause this. The Q-tips wouldn't be The One True Cause, but rather a factor making an already bad situation worse.

Gus Van Horn said...

Dinwar,

I was at first going to partly disagree with your first paragraph -- until I re-read and saw that you qualified it with the necessary conditions of (1) narrow ear canals and (2) even more wax than I normally have.

Based on that alone, there is a possibility that I hadn't considered: Causality could work eitehr way, depending on the details of an individual case. You describe a case in which swabs could CAUSE (or aggravate) buildup. That doesn't rule out wax buildup motivating swab use -- which would be more like my own situation.

And I also appreciate that you mentioned confounding environmental factors, like airborne grease droplets. Lots of people will say something like "God/"evolution" has a sacred/infallible reason for earwax production. QED, it's wrong to remove it. Biological systems can and do malfunction, and nonobvious things can interfere with normal functioning or worsen an existing malfunction.

Who knew earwax could lead to such an interesting discussion?

Gus

Snedcat said...

Yo, Gus, as I used to have massive ear wax build-up due to allergies, I early on skipped Q-tips. I used to go to the ear doctor fairly often for irrigation, in which they'd use hot water with hydrogen peroxide added and then squirt the mixture into either ear with a repurposed Water Pik or a syringe. These days I need it rather less often and do it myself--after lying on each side with a towel under my head as I let peroxide solution boil and bubble in each ear for about ten minutes (this part is not that pleasant as it tickles and itches like nobody's business), I stand in the tub with a big bowl of warm water and a syringe, squirting the mixture in at a fairly slow pace until the wax plugs fall out, and then I just take a shower. (This part might take a few minutes, as the wax has to get pretty warm before it's pushed out, so slow injection with warm water is better than fast, besides feeling less weird--but neither is as obtrusive as the H2O2 bubbling earlier.)

Gus Van Horn said...

You describe what I think the doctor did for me.

I haven't needed it since, luckily. I hate having liquid in my ear.

Jennifer Snow said...

I mash my Q-tips flat and use them like an ear spoon. I don't produce an unusually large amount of earwax, but when there's any buildup at all it ITCHES LIKE THE DICKENS for me, so much so that I'll almost look like I'm having a seizure when it starts to prickle. So I have to remove it, carefully.

It's weird to me that it doesn't seem to itch for other people.

Gus Van Horn said...

Thinking back on it, I suspect that I (and many) are doing what you do, minus the flattening-out step.

That would explain why something like the pipe analogy above never even occurred to me.