I mean, they don't. It's very cut and dry. It costs us billions of dollars and real human lives every year. It's a fucking plague on society and needs to go.
I mean, they don't. It's very cut and dry. It costs us billions of dollars and real human lives every year. It's a fucking plague on society and needs to go.
At the very least, the incidence of heart attacks increases in the week or so after switching the clocks forward in Spring. There are more health effects: Daylight Savings Is Linked To Injuries...
At the very least, the incidence of heart attacks increases in the week or so after switching the clocks forward in Spring.
I'm not qualified to do an actual comparison between medical studies, but I found a more recent study than the one you posted showing that over the course of a week or two, the increase in deaths...
I'm not qualified to do an actual comparison between medical studies, but I found a more recent study than the one you posted showing that over the course of a week or two, the increase in deaths during the first 3 days in the Spring was balanced out. Basically, people were just having heart attacks a few days earlier. And of course, there was a similar (but lesser) decline of deaths immediately following the fall switch that also evens out over weeks.
Even if I accept the premise that it's okay to shorten the lives of people who were already going to die (let's ignore the fact that we're dealing with raw numbers here, not following individuals...
Even if I accept the premise that it's okay to shorten the lives of people who were already going to die (let's ignore the fact that we're dealing with raw numbers here, not following individuals likely to have an AMI, which are two different things), what's the trade-off? What are we getting in return for these people dying or having a heart attack a few days or weeks earlier than they would have?
I'm not even claiming that there is no decrease in life expectancy caused by the switch, just pointing out that the story of a staggering, sudden increase in heart attacks caused appears to be a...
I'm not even claiming that there is no decrease in life expectancy caused by the switch, just pointing out that the story of a staggering, sudden increase in heart attacks caused appears to be a bit of myth. Now, of course a sudden spike followed by less active days won't be as easily handled by hospitals (and this also applies to the sudden drop followed by increased days I'd imagine).
As for the reasons for daylight savings time, it does exactly what is in its name, prevent the waste of daylight. Its basically a rather clunky way of mating the natural solar-lock and our scheduled artificial-clock, managing to reduce morning light before daily activities without anything weird like equation clocks.
I'd say that the strongest argument against DST is that the economic reasons (basically energy conservation) for it are outdated. Benjamin Franklin proposed it (not very seriously) as a way to save candles. It was implemented much later by the Germany to save coal during WWI. It also has saved electricity from being used on light bulbs. This all well & good, UNTIL air-conditioning. Nowadays, Air-conditioning means that energy use increases during daylight, and more efficient lighting means less is used at night. Recent observations show that there is either a loss or no difference in energy efficiency. Warmer climates appear to definitely lose efficiency from DST.
I get the historical reasons, I'm just curious what the reasons for keeping it today are. We already know that it costs a lot, economically, from sleep deprivation. People perform worse at their...
I get the historical reasons, I'm just curious what the reasons for keeping it today are. We already know that it costs a lot, economically, from sleep deprivation. People perform worse at their jobs. People get into accidents because they drive, operate machinery, or do other dangerous things while sleepy.
There is no trade-off anymore. In fact, the argument that it's
Its basically a rather clunky way of mating the natural solar-lock and our scheduled artificial-clock
Is not a good argument when examined. Sure, the time the sun rises changes throughout the year, but what if we set it so that the sun is rising at the earliest/latest at some point of our choosing and not adjust the clocks from that point? Why must it shift at some set point during the year? What of the months close to the shift point, where it rises earlier/later than usual? How are we "fixing" anything?
Not really much reason today, just inertia and the fact that it made sense not that long ago (much of Europe began DST as recently as the 80s). The main concern I'd imagine is that there would be...
I'm just curious what the reasons for keeping it today are
Not really much reason today, just inertia and the fact that it made sense not that long ago (much of Europe began DST as recently as the 80s).
what if we set it so that the sun is rising at the earliest/latest at some point of our choosing
The main concern I'd imagine is that there would be month long periods of the sun being hours off from schedules messing with our circadian rhythms (the sun rising/setting hours away from wake up times) . There are definitely people who go through this already, but there are also people who don't sleep regularly aside from DST.
I'm fine with getting rid of DST, I just think that some of the reasons used against it are often exaggerated, and that the dissonance between people's natural sense of time based off light and artificial time is going to cause problems not matter what. DST takes some of the issues that arise from that and put it all 2 days (1 of which is enjoyable) and gets it done with. Simple, pure artificial time might be pretty good and I'll be glad to see the results from the EU soon.
The thing that has weirded me out while looking into this has been that nothing about resistance to it when it was implement has popped up (beside rejections from before it was implemented). I didn't look for them super thoroughly and searches online get cluttered by online resources for when DST switches were, but I'd imagine that people would have complained a lot about the change when it started.
This naturally happens with daylight simply being longer during summer and not during winter. It's no different, unless you're talking about waking up before/after the sun is up, in which case,...
The main concern I'd imagine is that there would be month long periods of the sun being hours off from schedules messing with our circadian rhythms
This naturally happens with daylight simply being longer during summer and not during winter. It's no different, unless you're talking about waking up before/after the sun is up, in which case, you simply set the time to accommodate.
Your statement about "month long periods" of mismatch already hold true today, as we set daylight savings at an arbitrary point in time. It's not like in the days leading up to the reset that we aren't mismatched and it's not like the time doesn't slowly mismatch again until we reset it.
This whole idea of mismatching circadian rhythms is honestly a joke. Many people already have this problem, regardless of what time it is and whether the sun rises or sets. This problem is one that has a lot more to do with technology and blue light, as well as erratic work schedules and a globalized economy than anything else.
but I'd imagine that people would have complained a lot about the change when it started.
There's actually a great satirical paper by Benjamin Franklin about daylight savings time. Plenty of arguments against it have existed through time, it's just that most of this happened before the age of internet, so it's tough to find the discussions unless they were written down in some publication.
Hehe I live in a southern state subject to DLS. This year, it didn't affect me on the Sunday morning, as I with the fam were on holidays in Qld. It wasn't until today when we got back home that we...
Hehe I live in a southern state subject to DLS.
This year, it didn't affect me on the Sunday morning, as I with the fam were on holidays in Qld.
It wasn't until today when we got back home that we had to adjust clocks and what not. And it didn't even feel that we had been subject to a time change.
It's absolute bollocks that this causes people to die.
I mean, they don't. It's very cut and dry. It costs us billions of dollars and real human lives every year. It's a fucking plague on society and needs to go.
It costs lives? What?
At the very least, the incidence of heart attacks increases in the week or so after switching the clocks forward in Spring.
There are more health effects:
Daylight Savings Is Linked To Injuries And Heart Attacks, Is It Time To Scrap It?
Daylight saving can affect your health — here's how
I'm not qualified to do an actual comparison between medical studies, but I found a more recent study than the one you posted showing that over the course of a week or two, the increase in deaths during the first 3 days in the Spring was balanced out. Basically, people were just having heart attacks a few days earlier. And of course, there was a similar (but lesser) decline of deaths immediately following the fall switch that also evens out over weeks.
Even if I accept the premise that it's okay to shorten the lives of people who were already going to die (let's ignore the fact that we're dealing with raw numbers here, not following individuals likely to have an AMI, which are two different things), what's the trade-off? What are we getting in return for these people dying or having a heart attack a few days or weeks earlier than they would have?
I'm not even claiming that there is no decrease in life expectancy caused by the switch, just pointing out that the story of a staggering, sudden increase in heart attacks caused appears to be a bit of myth. Now, of course a sudden spike followed by less active days won't be as easily handled by hospitals (and this also applies to the sudden drop followed by increased days I'd imagine).
As for the reasons for daylight savings time, it does exactly what is in its name, prevent the waste of daylight. Its basically a rather clunky way of mating the natural solar-lock and our scheduled artificial-clock, managing to reduce morning light before daily activities without anything weird like equation clocks.
I'd say that the strongest argument against DST is that the economic reasons (basically energy conservation) for it are outdated. Benjamin Franklin proposed it (not very seriously) as a way to save candles. It was implemented much later by the Germany to save coal during WWI. It also has saved electricity from being used on light bulbs. This all well & good, UNTIL air-conditioning. Nowadays, Air-conditioning means that energy use increases during daylight, and more efficient lighting means less is used at night. Recent observations show that there is either a loss or no difference in energy efficiency. Warmer climates appear to definitely lose efficiency from DST.
I get the historical reasons, I'm just curious what the reasons for keeping it today are. We already know that it costs a lot, economically, from sleep deprivation. People perform worse at their jobs. People get into accidents because they drive, operate machinery, or do other dangerous things while sleepy.
There is no trade-off anymore. In fact, the argument that it's
Is not a good argument when examined. Sure, the time the sun rises changes throughout the year, but what if we set it so that the sun is rising at the earliest/latest at some point of our choosing and not adjust the clocks from that point? Why must it shift at some set point during the year? What of the months close to the shift point, where it rises earlier/later than usual? How are we "fixing" anything?
Not really much reason today, just inertia and the fact that it made sense not that long ago (much of Europe began DST as recently as the 80s).
The main concern I'd imagine is that there would be month long periods of the sun being hours off from schedules messing with our circadian rhythms (the sun rising/setting hours away from wake up times) . There are definitely people who go through this already, but there are also people who don't sleep regularly aside from DST.
I'm fine with getting rid of DST, I just think that some of the reasons used against it are often exaggerated, and that the dissonance between people's natural sense of time based off light and artificial time is going to cause problems not matter what. DST takes some of the issues that arise from that and put it all 2 days (1 of which is enjoyable) and gets it done with. Simple, pure artificial time might be pretty good and I'll be glad to see the results from the EU soon.
The thing that has weirded me out while looking into this has been that nothing about resistance to it when it was implement has popped up (beside rejections from before it was implemented). I didn't look for them super thoroughly and searches online get cluttered by online resources for when DST switches were, but I'd imagine that people would have complained a lot about the change when it started.
This naturally happens with daylight simply being longer during summer and not during winter. It's no different, unless you're talking about waking up before/after the sun is up, in which case, you simply set the time to accommodate.
Your statement about "month long periods" of mismatch already hold true today, as we set daylight savings at an arbitrary point in time. It's not like in the days leading up to the reset that we aren't mismatched and it's not like the time doesn't slowly mismatch again until we reset it.
This whole idea of mismatching circadian rhythms is honestly a joke. Many people already have this problem, regardless of what time it is and whether the sun rises or sets. This problem is one that has a lot more to do with technology and blue light, as well as erratic work schedules and a globalized economy than anything else.
There's actually a great satirical paper by Benjamin Franklin about daylight savings time. Plenty of arguments against it have existed through time, it's just that most of this happened before the age of internet, so it's tough to find the discussions unless they were written down in some publication.
Tired people get into accidents in motor vehicles
EDIT: Here's a paper on this
Hehe I live in a southern state subject to DLS.
This year, it didn't affect me on the Sunday morning, as I with the fam were on holidays in Qld.
It wasn't until today when we got back home that we had to adjust clocks and what not. And it didn't even feel that we had been subject to a time change.
It's absolute bollocks that this causes people to die.