Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sitting May Be Bad for Your Heart

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 124 posts

Re: Sitting May Be Bad for Your Heart

#51

Post by mrob »

keenerd wrote: post #45
nxsynonym wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the only real alternative is to get rid of the 8+ hour work day. Correct me if there is evidence to the contrary, but I don't think humans were designed to sit or stand in one position for extended periods of time, habitually. Unfortunately I don't see the 8 hour work day going away any time soon, so imo the best option is to alternate sitting/standing and take as many walking around breaks as possible.

> Correct me if there is evidence to the contrary, but I don't think humans were designed to sit or stand in one position for extended periods of time, habitually. Hard evidence? I can't give you that. But look at all of the other mammals out there. Almost all of them spend substantial amounts of time sitting. Traditional hunter-gatherer societies do almost of their work and food processing sitting down. Every hobbyi…

>Like all of my keyboards are tilted the "wrong" way (away from me) with the front higher than the back. Much easier on my hands and wrists.

Like the horizontally staggered rows of keys, the traditional tilt is a skeuomorphism of a mechanical typewriter. There's no good reason for it to be preserved in electronic keyboards. Ergonomic keyboards are usually tilted the opposite way, with the front higher than the back. This better matches the natural tilt of your hands when you hold them in front of yourself.

Re: Sitting May Be Bad for Your Heart

#52

Post by smegger001 »

have_faith wrote: post #43
nxsynonym wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the only real alternative is to get rid of the 8+ hour work day. Correct me if there is evidence to the contrary, but I don't think humans were designed to sit or stand in one position for extended periods of time, habitually. Unfortunately I don't see the 8 hour work day going away any time soon, so imo the best option is to alternate sitting/standing and take as many walking around breaks as possible.

I don't mind the work day so much, it's the work week that bothers me most. I would rather have a standard 4 day work week.

I could get behind that, even if I worked a 40 hour week still. Four 10 hour shift would not be bad.

Re: Sitting May Be Bad for Your Heart

#54

Post by abawany »

maxxxxx wrote: post #6
feelandcoffee wrote: post #3

I hope this study don't revive the trend of standing desks again. Look I know being sedentary will rob me a few years of life, but going full opposite and being stand 9 to 5 it's Dante inferno at work. Probably the best balance will be having a routine with exercise present, and small breaks to stand and walk a little bit at X minutes sitting.

At home I have a desk I can take up and down. Some days I sit, some days I stand. I think that's the best

I place this (http://www.ikea.com/us/en/catalog/products/90184047/) on my desk when I want a standing desk and remove it when I am ready to sit down :) . I like Ikea.

Re: Sitting May Be Bad for Your Heart

#55

Post by CM30 »

sixdimensional wrote: post #41

Taking a bigger picture view, this makes me wonder.. we took so much effort to move from the industrial age, where hands on work, always active all day work took its toll on workers, to the service or knowledge age, where we sit all day and that takes its toll. Surely the answer lies somewhere in-between, that we must rest, and we must move, and the amount of each must be relative to each person and activity. I would…

Stick the computer on an exercise bike, set it up so its powered by a dynamo and get the programming, marketing and sales teams to cycle while working. Okay, that's not a good idea, but it's one I can see a executive coming up with to 'promote a healthy lifestyle' at one of those newfangled offices Apple and Google and the likes have.

Re: Sitting May Be Bad for Your Heart

#56

Post by sliverstorm »

sixdimensional wrote: post #41

Taking a bigger picture view, this makes me wonder.. we took so much effort to move from the industrial age, where hands on work, always active all day work took its toll on workers, to the service or knowledge age, where we sit all day and that takes its toll. Surely the answer lies somewhere in-between, that we must rest, and we must move, and the amount of each must be relative to each person and activity. I would…

I always understood a lot of the industrial age jobs took a toll because of hazards & health issues. Occupational hazards like mine collapse & black lung, heavy machinery, fumes, and so forth. Are there many accounts of people simply being "all worn out" from hands on work? Are, e.g., lumberjacks who aren't injured, healthy or worn thin?

Re: Sitting May Be Bad for Your Heart

#57

Post by vram22 »

sdiupIGPWEfh wrote: post #7
feelandcoffee wrote: post #3

I hope this study don't revive the trend of standing desks again. Look I know being sedentary will rob me a few years of life, but going full opposite and being stand 9 to 5 it's Dante inferno at work. Probably the best balance will be having a routine with exercise present, and small breaks to stand and walk a little bit at X minutes sitting.

It's almost as if it's lack of constant (even low-grade) activity that's the problem, rather than whether you're sitting or standing. Perhaps not moving all day is the cause.

>It's almost as if it's lack of constant (even low-grade) activity that's the problem, rather than whether you're sitting or standing.

Yes, IMO. And I would add to that: it is likely that the lack of a change is also part of the problem, as in lack of change (at not-too-long intervals) between action and non-action (such as walking or moving for the former, and standing, sitting or lying down for the latter). Noticed it in myself - if I walk or move for too long (many hours), or stand or sit or lie down for too long (ditto, except for sleep), I start feeling uneasy or affected in some way (obvious way is to get tired due to the former, but also uneasy due to the latter).

Edited for typo.

Also, adding to above my points in this comment: about lying down for too long, in particular, I've noticed that if I do that, whether intentionally (not often, maybe sometimes due to getting engrossed in reading something interesting), or accidentally / unintentionally (say due to a fever), the body feels uncomfortable after a while, which seems to reinforce my point above about some change being good.

Re: Sitting May Be Bad for Your Heart

#58

Post by [deleted] »

nxsynonym wrote: post #28
bluGill wrote: post #25

Unfortunately while there is evidence that sitting all day is bad, we don't know if/what alternatives are good. Is standing better, or do you need to move? Maybe it is staring at something close (monitor, papers...) and sitting is only bad as a proxy (I know of no study that can actually say that hypothesis is wrong even though I just made it up). Modern life currently requires a lot of people to spend a lot of time…

I think the only real alternative is to get rid of the 8+ hour work day. Correct me if there is evidence to the contrary, but I don't think humans were designed to sit or stand in one position for extended periods of time, habitually. Unfortunately I don't see the 8 hour work day going away any time soon, so imo the best option is to alternate sitting/standing and take as many walking around breaks as possible.

[deleted]

Re: Sitting May Be Bad for Your Heart

#59

Post by bluGill »

sliverstorm wrote: post #56
sixdimensional wrote: post #41

Taking a bigger picture view, this makes me wonder.. we took so much effort to move from the industrial age, where hands on work, always active all day work took its toll on workers, to the service or knowledge age, where we sit all day and that takes its toll. Surely the answer lies somewhere in-between, that we must rest, and we must move, and the amount of each must be relative to each person and activity. I would…

I always understood a lot of the industrial age jobs took a toll because of hazards & health issues. Occupational hazards like mine collapse & black lung, heavy machinery, fumes, and so forth. Are there many accounts of people simply being "all worn out" from hands on work? Are, e.g., lumberjacks who aren't injured, healthy or worn thin?

Yes, but it isn't clear if they are worn out from 45 years of physical labor, or worn out because their body is 65 years old.

Re: Sitting May Be Bad for Your Heart

#60

Post by sliverstorm »

smegger001 wrote: post #52
have_faith wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mind the work day so much, it's the work week that bothers me most. I would rather have a standard 4 day work week.

I could get behind that, even if I worked a 40 hour week still. Four 10 hour shift would not be bad.

Have you considered a career in healthcare, e.g. nursing or EMT?
Post reply on HN