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

Working Out Inside the Office

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–29 of 29 posts

Re: Working Out Inside the Office

#21

Post by freehunter »

nosequel wrote: post #18
blankenship wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Proof that moderation is still key. Sitting all day is horrible for your health. Standing all day is horrible for your health. Laying down all day is horrible for your health. The human body was made to move.

Why is standing all day horrible for your health? I'm assuming your are talking about the post above yours referring to a work day. I stand 10+ hours a day, with no foot pain, and don't stand on a pad or in shoes. Just because of this, I won't lay down a blanket statement that it IS good for you (based on one person's opinion), so why go as far as saying it is "horrible for your health" with no backing facts?

Being overly active without taking proper precautions (good diet for joint lubrication, proper posture, etc) can lead to joint damage, back problems, foot problems, recurring pain, etc. Specifically, standing still all day causes problems. Moving tends not to.

In general, humans were not designed to do one motion/one task repeatedly all day every day.

Re: Working Out Inside the Office

#22

Post by yummyfajitas »

I interviewed once at a hedge fund that had a power rack in the corner. All four people I spoke with were ripped. So yeah, exercise at the office can work pretty well.

I have no idea what the water bottle curls described in the article are going accomplish, however.

Re: Working Out Inside the Office

#25

Post by omouse »

Heh, I've been looking for more tips to add to my blog about this: http://neverfriday.com/?q=exercising-software-developer-it-w...

It's amazing how awful your back feels after a day in a crappy chair :-/ I'm not sure treadmills are the answer, but at least they're something. Now to get those offices to add some dumbbells! :P

Re: Working Out Inside the Office

#27

Post by tzs »

root wrote: post #20
tzs wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were 18 people participating in a scientific study. There's nothing in the article that suggests that they were forced to participate. They were almost certainly volunteers.

If they were volunteers the study would have a very strong self selection bias and therefore not be scientific.

That might be true for some studies, but the generalization is not correct. It depends on what is being studied.

Re: Working Out Inside the Office

#28

Post by root »

tzs wrote: post #27
root wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they were volunteers the study would have a very strong self selection bias and therefore not be scientific.

That might be true for some studies, but the generalization is not correct. It depends on what is being studied.

Care to give an example where a study with strong self selection bias is still scientific?

Re: Working Out Inside the Office

#29

Post by tzs »

root wrote: post #28
tzs wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That might be true for some studies, but the generalization is not correct. It depends on what is being studied.

Care to give an example where a study with strong self selection bias is still scientific?

Nearly every drug test. E.g., the researchers ask for volunteers suffering from condition X. Those volunteers are then tested with a new drug.

Why would you think the fact that the subjects are volunteers would affect this?

Post reply on HN