I really dislike this kind of clickbait. I've never heard anything of owls dying and now I have this condescending headline talking down to me.
No, Night Owls Aren’t Doomed to Die Early
31–40 of 54 posts
Re: No, Night Owls Aren’t Doomed to Die Early
#32This is about a study published last year in April in Chronobiology International: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07420528.2018.1... News sites have picked it up and produced headlines on the same study with the complete opposite sentiment: https://news.sky.com/story/nocturnal-night-owls-risk-early-d... My understanding is from the article that night owls are not doomed to die early in the literal sense…
The book, “Why We Sleep” covers this and many other sleep topics at length and in far more depth. It’s fascinating.
It truly is fascinating. I'd recommend anyone to read this, as he also talks about the evolutionary benefits of morning larks versus night owls. It was, perhaps, the most influential book I read last year.
Re: No, Night Owls Aren’t Doomed to Die Early
#33Alternative hypothsis: People who stay up late have a higher probability of going out, enjoy more occasional drinks, are more probable to smoking or take recreational drugs and have more sexual partners and generally enjoy more riskier lifestyle choices, all of which contributes to the statistics showing a shorter life expectation.
Which may also lead to a greater since of community and reduced loneliness which contributes to longer life.
Because no one ever found a sense of community from their morning bike ride or running group or being monogamous and having a family... The idea that sexual promiscuity and doing drugs and drinking to lower social inhibition are what creates a sense of community is pretty misguided.
Re: No, Night Owls Aren’t Doomed to Die Early
#34You know, back in Mexico, we had school in two shifts, rite? It was a morning shift & afternoon shift. It was a way to fix the problem of "too many students and not enough time".
I always took the afternoons. It was great. Life made sense. I wonder if we can ever pressure the bosses to make overlapping shifts? Or is that even possible? A 6-hour workday sounds like an opium dream to me at this point in our timeline.
Re: No, Night Owls Aren’t Doomed to Die Early
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please don't discuss paywalls: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html
Okay, then I encourage everyone to flag every single paywall article posted. They are off-topic, because you cannot read them. The FAQ rule is ridiculous.
Do remember that doing so will primarily lead to you loosing the ability to flag things for misusing the feature.
Re: No, Night Owls Aren’t Doomed to Die Early
#36You know, back in Mexico, we had school in two shifts, rite? It was a morning shift & afternoon shift. It was a way to fix the problem of "too many students and not enough time". I always took the afternoons. It was great. Life made sense. I wonder if we can ever pressure the bosses to make overlapping shifts? Or is that even possible? A 6-hour workday sounds like an opium dream to me at this point in our timeline.
Since I'm a freelancer I sleep from 2/3 - 11/12 without a alarm.
Feel much better now.
Re: No, Night Owls Aren’t Doomed to Die Early
#37I suspect the issue isn't the time you wake up, it's if you're artificially waking up.
(Ex: if you stay up late on weekends then struggle on Monday due to lack of sleep vs simply choosing to wake at 10am daily because you have a flexible work schedule and sometimes like to go to events that are in the evening.)
Re: No, Night Owls Aren’t Doomed to Die Early
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which may also lead to a greater since of community and reduced loneliness which contributes to longer life.
Because no one ever found a sense of community from their morning bike ride or running group or being monogamous and having a family... The idea that sexual promiscuity and doing drugs and drinking to lower social inhibition are what creates a sense of community is pretty misguided.
Not what Im advocating. just providing a counterpoint to the argument that the only outcome to staying up late is that you are making choices that shorten life. Staying out late certainly can contribute to the OPs theory, but that isn't the only outcome. Reduction of stress, finding a community/partner/etc is definitely something that hanging out late can provide. the time of day you feel most awake doesn't mean your default is self destruction.
Re: No, Night Owls Aren’t Doomed to Die Early
#39You know, back in Mexico, we had school in two shifts, rite? It was a morning shift & afternoon shift. It was a way to fix the problem of "too many students and not enough time". I always took the afternoons. It was great. Life made sense. I wonder if we can ever pressure the bosses to make overlapping shifts? Or is that even possible? A 6-hour workday sounds like an opium dream to me at this point in our timeline.
We don't have set hours at our office and about half the people come in early around 8-10am and the other half come in around 1pm. There's enough overlap for afternoon meetings and plenty of time when the office is quieter because half as many people are there.
Re: No, Night Owls Aren’t Doomed to Die Early
#40Why are there so many of these non-news articles from the nytimes lately?
"You don’t want a child prodigy"
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20003367
The latest.
"The Surprising Benefits of Relentlessly Auditing Your Life"
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20009838
More importantly, who keeps boosting it to the frontpage. This isn't news. It's mostly pseudoscientific "self-help" style nonsense.
What's the difference between these nytimes articles and the neverending "Coffee is good for you" followed by "Coffee is bad for you" garbage. Or the relentless "Wine is good for you" followed by "Wine is bad for you" garbage. It's nonsense that doesn't inform or get you anywhere. It worthless and useless fluff purely to make them money.