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

Why Standing Desks Are Overrated

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 207 posts

Re: Why Standing Desks Are Overrated

#181

Post by sytelus »

The article is quite misleading IMO. It cites bunch of studies which directly conflicts with headline and the author just brushes them off. For other studies which mildly agrees with title, author overblows its important. For example, one study says:

standing or walking for more than six hours a day at work was associated with a doubled or tripled risk of needing surgery

Note that it's 6 hours of standing! Also, important to remember that these are correlation studies meaning that surveyors (I refuse to call them "scientists") sends outs surveys and tries to find statistical correlation. This is much different than real scientific studies, i.e., causal studies, where you try to understand cause and effect of your hypothesis.

One of the major issue in sitting all day is pasture management which causes back pain issues. So it's not about getting cardio exercise (that would be silly) but avoiding long term back pain issues. Also, sit-and-stand desk allows you to adjust height easily which is again important through out the day.

Re: Why Standing Desks Are Overrated

#185

Post by dahart »

mistersquid wrote: post #65

Because I disagreed with the conclusions of the article, I submitted this article to the HN community for assessment. Many of the responses here call into question the article's apparent position, especially as regards its inflammatory title, and these responses reflect my own opinion and experience. I expressed my objections as a comment to the article, reproduced here for convenience. [0] > I've been a long distanc…

The article seems very dismissive and hand-wavy to me. It doesn't really address a walking desk at all, but seems to conflate standing and walking as the same thing.

My doctor suggested I use a treadmill desk after I had a bad episode of nerve pinch in my back and sciatica during a crunch time. I bought one and loved it. There were some minor practical issues using it at work, but none related to over-walking or anything like that. Personally, I doubt it's possible to over-walk at work with a treadmill desk, like the author of the article implied.

I'm a runner as well, and I've tried a standing desk (as opposed to a walking desk) a few times, and while some people love it, my feet start to hurt very quickly when I just stand (after 10-15 minutes). Even if I use running shoes and a soft standing mat, and even if I shift my feet & weight a lot (or not). I don't have that problem at all while walking at a treadmill desk.

Re: Why Standing Desks Are Overrated

#186

Post by deanCommie »

projectramo wrote: post #60

I think I see the problem here (with the comments). The main problem is that in order to claim something is "overrated", you have to have some idea of the "rating." So perhaps most of the other commenters were enlightened and knew exactly what the benefits were. Not me. Like (perhaps) the author, I thought sitting is really, really bad for you: for your heart, for your long term mobility, for your health. And that st…

I think the premise of the article/implication is we went from "Sitting is the new smoking" ("and therefore you should quit - by Standing more" => "Standing is the new nicorette") to "Standing is the new Penicillin!

If you accept the premise, the headline and conclusion makes sense. Standing ISN'T a replacement for exercise. There are ways to stand that will cause independent medical issues in joints.

But, like you, I'm also dubious of the premise. While standing (or actually adjustable) desks are all the rage, I don't see an obsession over the concept approaching other overrated cults like crossfit, or keto.

Re: Why Standing Desks Are Overrated

#187

Post by austhrow743 »

klodolph wrote: post #145
closeparen wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Businesses can't seem to admit that they're spending money based on employee preference. There has to be a metrics-driven productivity or healthcare spending argument to justify the budget.

This is true, it’s why you go to your doctor and say, “my back hurts I want a standing desk,” then the doctor writes you a note which says “Jim seems to have back pain and a standing desk would help.”

Or your psychiatrist.

http://slatestarcodex.com/2018/08/29/bullst-jobs-part-1-of-%...

Re: Why Standing Desks Are Overrated

#189

Post by tensor »

olyjohn wrote: post #171
freyir wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't actually seem very wishy-washy? The article is focused on a single point: standing desks don't provide much health benefit to most people. The conclusion follows: use a standing desk if you like it, not if you've been wrongly convinced that you need it. What more committed stance would you like the author to take? Since there are limited health benefits, nobody should ever use a standing desk?

That's the problem. What point is the author trying to make? It even says in the article that sitting all day is bad, and that standing desks can help people with neck and lower back problems. That's exactly the point why I have a standing desk. My back hurts from sitting at my computer all day, so alternating back and forth helps. Not being in pain is a significant health benefit to me. People who don't have pain, a…

There is definitely a narrative being thrown around that standing desks are "good for you" and "healthy" and that you should use them. This article is significant in that it refutes that.

In some select cases it can help with some select problems, but it is not objectively "good for you" nor "healthy." In fact, the study in question found that too much standing is in fact "bad for you"!

It really is a commonly held belief that standing desks are "healthier" than non-standing desks. Perhaps you don't value knowledge of this sort, but I certainly do.

Re: Why Standing Desks Are Overrated

#190

Post by tuukkah »

dugdun wrote: post #157
tuukkah wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Umm, sitting kills. The idea is that a standing desk can let you live longer whatever your body formation.

I don't think that it's sitting that kills. I think it's more the fact that you are less active. You can have the same problem standing all day without moving around.

So either sitting kills by itself and standing up is enough to avoid it, or sitting kills by taking time from being physically active and it's not enough to stand up (which also takes time from being physically active).

Here's some brand-new research based on 1000 people wearing accelerometers 24/7: http://epublications.uef.fi/pub/urn_isbn_978-952-61-2928-0/i...

Sedentary behaviour, physical activity, and risk of coronary artery disease and diabetes mellitus

"From the accelerometer-derived parameters of SB [sedentary behaviour], a higher number of daily SB bouts lasting over 10 minutes was the strongest predictor of a high CVD [cardiovascular disease] risk."

Post reply on HN