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

Don't Blame Sitting — Yet — for Shorter Lives of the Sedentary

online.wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 36 posts

Re: Don't Blame Sitting — Yet — for Shorter Lives of the Sedentary

#21

Post by needle0 »

tptacek wrote: post #19
aimatt wrote: post #7

I made my own standing desk and I've been using it for a year now. I won't go back because just by doing that, I have more energy through the day. Who cares what the flip-flopping WSJ keeps saying.

You are very possibly harming yourself far more with a standing desk than you would by sitting. Sitting is correlated with fat metabolism issues, but standing for periods of just 10-15 minutes is correlated with vascular disease; standing was shown in studies to correlate with increased stress hormones and increased blood density. You are better off setting a timer and, every 20-30 minutes or so, getting up and movin…

You sound quite certain for what appears to me to be equally ambiguous; Can you elaborate if you have some evidence which points to the hazards of standing far outweighing those of sitting?

Re: Don't Blame Sitting — Yet — for Shorter Lives of the Sedentary

#22

Post by vwoolf »

tptacek wrote: post #19
aimatt wrote: post #7

I made my own standing desk and I've been using it for a year now. I won't go back because just by doing that, I have more energy through the day. Who cares what the flip-flopping WSJ keeps saying.

You are very possibly harming yourself far more with a standing desk than you would by sitting. Sitting is correlated with fat metabolism issues, but standing for periods of just 10-15 minutes is correlated with vascular disease; standing was shown in studies to correlate with increased stress hormones and increased blood density. You are better off setting a timer and, every 20-30 minutes or so, getting up and movin…

Sitting is correlated with fat metabolism issues, but standing for periods of just 10-15 minutes is correlated with vascular disease; standing was shown in studies to correlate with increased stress hormones and increased blood density.

[Citation needed]

This isn't meant as a threat, either: I'd be quite interested in a comprehensive literature review of this stuff.

It reminds me a bit of the brouhaha around barefoot running: some decent evidence suggests barefoot is "better," while some suggests that forefoot striking is really the key. Expert opinion is split.

Re: Don't Blame Sitting — Yet — for Shorter Lives of the Sedentary

#23

Post by jsz0 »

pessimizer wrote: post #5

Step 1: Flurry of fearmongering articles that appeal to the prejudices of the target audience with logical hole large enough to drive a freight train through (usually correlation=causation/post-hoc reasoning or statistical silliness.) Step 2: sell tons of papers, products, and ads to the credulous. Step 3: point out logical flaw. Step 4: sell tons of papers and ads to the incredulous. Step 5: profiles of the people w…

This is exactly why people are skeptical of science. They view it almost exclusively through the mass media filter. When you see massively conflicting stories on a monthly basis it's easy to conclude scientists are just 'making it up as they go' and believe what you want to believe.

Re: Don't Blame Sitting — Yet — for Shorter Lives of the Sedentary

#24

Post by rwhitman »

Isn't it obvious that sitting for prolonged periods of time is completely unnatural? We have evolved to run, jump, climb, not spend 8 hrs a day compressing our spines - it is only in the last 100 or so years that sedentary occupations have become the norm

Re: Don't Blame Sitting — Yet — for Shorter Lives of the Sedentary

#25

Post by kkowalczyk »

rwhitman wrote: post #24

Isn't it obvious that sitting for prolonged periods of time is completely unnatural? We have evolved to run, jump, climb, not spend 8 hrs a day compressing our spines - it is only in the last 100 or so years that sedentary occupations have become the norm

All it means that at some point we'll evolve to be really good at sitting. I'm doing my share to make that happen.

Re: Don't Blame Sitting — Yet — for Shorter Lives of the Sedentary

#26

Post by sliverstorm »

rwhitman wrote: post #24

Isn't it obvious that sitting for prolonged periods of time is completely unnatural? We have evolved to run, jump, climb, not spend 8 hrs a day compressing our spines - it is only in the last 100 or so years that sedentary occupations have become the norm

How can you say it is completely unnatural?

First, have you ever seen cheetahs? Even in their natural environment, they laze about almost all day.

Second, we are intrinsically lazy, and not because "the modern world has corrupted us".

Notice I am not claiming that our bodies were in fact designed to sit forever, but can we really declare it is "obvious" that sitting for a long time is against our nature?

Re: Don't Blame Sitting — Yet — for Shorter Lives of the Sedentary

#27

Post by nhebb »

sliverstorm wrote: post #26
rwhitman wrote: post #24

Isn't it obvious that sitting for prolonged periods of time is completely unnatural? We have evolved to run, jump, climb, not spend 8 hrs a day compressing our spines - it is only in the last 100 or so years that sedentary occupations have become the norm

How can you say it is completely unnatural? First, have you ever seen cheetahs? Even in their natural environment, they laze about almost all day. Second, we are intrinsically lazy, and not because "the modern world has corrupted us". Notice I am not claiming that our bodies were in fact designed to sit forever, but can we really declare it is "obvious" that sitting for a long time is against our nature?

> Second, we are intrinsically lazy

From an evolutionary standpoint, it makes sense that we would preserve energy. Food wasn't always plentiful, and unnecessary calorie burning would work against survival and propagation of the species.

Re: Don't Blame Sitting — Yet — for Shorter Lives of the Sedentary

#28

Post by sliverstorm »

nhebb wrote: post #27
sliverstorm wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can you say it is completely unnatural? First, have you ever seen cheetahs? Even in their natural environment, they laze about almost all day. Second, we are intrinsically lazy, and not because "the modern world has corrupted us". Notice I am not claiming that our bodies were in fact designed to sit forever, but can we really declare it is "obvious" that sitting for a long time is against our nature?

> Second, we are intrinsically lazy From an evolutionary standpoint, it makes sense that we would preserve energy. Food wasn't always plentiful, and unnecessary calorie burning would work against survival and propagation of the species.

Precisely.

Re: Don't Blame Sitting — Yet — for Shorter Lives of the Sedentary

#29

Post by learc83 »

jsz0 wrote: post #23
pessimizer wrote: post #5

Step 1: Flurry of fearmongering articles that appeal to the prejudices of the target audience with logical hole large enough to drive a freight train through (usually correlation=causation/post-hoc reasoning or statistical silliness.) Step 2: sell tons of papers, products, and ads to the credulous. Step 3: point out logical flaw. Step 4: sell tons of papers and ads to the incredulous. Step 5: profiles of the people w…

This is exactly why people are skeptical of science. They view it almost exclusively through the mass media filter. When you see massively conflicting stories on a monthly basis it's easy to conclude scientists are just 'making it up as they go' and believe what you want to believe.

The problem is there are plenty of scientists who are willing to lend their credibility to these sensationalist stories.

Every story has an interview with some expert from some university backing up the premise, because scientists are people too and some of them want their 15 minutes of fame like the rest of us.

Re: Don't Blame Sitting — Yet — for Shorter Lives of the Sedentary

#30

Post by algorias »

kkowalczyk wrote: post #25
rwhitman wrote: post #24

Isn't it obvious that sitting for prolonged periods of time is completely unnatural? We have evolved to run, jump, climb, not spend 8 hrs a day compressing our spines - it is only in the last 100 or so years that sedentary occupations have become the norm

All it means that at some point we'll evolve to be really good at sitting. I'm doing my share to make that happen.

Sure, that will happen at some point. Don't hold your breath though; evolution works over extremely long timescales (hundreds if not thousands of generations)
Post reply on HN