5 ms·

Thanks. I stopped reading the article here: > Research, however, suggests that warnings about sitting at work are overblown, and that standing desks are overra

by jm__87 8y ago

Thanks. I stopped reading the article here: > Research, however, suggests that warnings about sitting at work are overblown, and that standing desks are overrated as a way to improve health. Who cares what research says. If someone says it helps them and they prefer it to sitting, that is enough proof for me.

savanaly 8y ago
By that logic, I guess homeopathy is also perfectly proven as effective?
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- sebleon 8y ago
  Yes, if someone has a home remedy that gets great results, why switch to a substance from someone in a lab coat?
  - JshWright 8y ago
    Exactly, that's what I keep saying about my bear repellent rock I keep on my front porch. Haven't seen a single bear yet.
    - narrowingorbits 8y ago
      People whose reactions when confronted with something new, unknown, and unexpected are to laugh at it or respond sarcastically, instead of to accept the surprise, approach with curiosity and humility, and question if there is something they're not understanding, are unlikely to ever discover anything new. Everything that we call science today was once alternately laughable or mysterious.
      - asdff 8y ago
        Because science isn't about belief, its about reasoning. One person having a good response to something doesn't say anything about that something, that person, or that good response. Only after things have been repeatedly tested, and alternative explanations thoroughly ruled out, can a claim be considered accurate. Everything was once alternately laughable or mysterious, until it was thoroughly proven to be true. There is a reason why we aren't letting your blood because you have a cold anymore.
        kd5bjo 8y ago
        Yes, but one person repeatedly having a good response to a thing is good evidence that thing is helpful to that person. While it's good for society to find and recommend things that are beneficial to most people, we shouldn't prevent people from doing the things that they find helpful.
    - brlewis 8y ago
      Your employer wins because you're spending less time worrying about bears. My employer wins because I spend less time thinking about whether I would benefit from a sit/stand desk...at the very least. I suspect I get a real productivity advantage from it at times.
      - Retra 8y ago
        And both of you lose because you're purposefully dismissing the value of research and making decisions based on ritual and conformity.
        brlewis 8y ago
        I think you meant your reply to go to the homeopathy comment. Unless you have specific research into the effectiveness of bear-repellent rocks.
    - sebleon 8y ago
      A closer analogy for a remedy to an illness would be: Whenever your yard gets overrun with bears, putting a rock on the porch makes them go away for an unknown reason. Don’t let yourself be limited by science, which is bounded by human intelligence.
  - asdff 8y ago
    One person randomly having a favorable outcome doesn't tell you if a result is great, let alone even exists.
    - sebleon 8y ago
      Fair - correlation does not mean causation. That being said, countless experiments show placebo can have empirical results; even the simple belief in a remedy can improve healthcare outcomes.
- jm__87 8y ago
  Honestly, I see these sort of comments on here all the time and it drives me nuts. Comparing homeopathy and a standing desk is comparing apples and oranges. Everyone has experience with standing - we evolved to do this. Taking homeopathy remedies to cure illness is not something we evolved to do, so we do not know what the potential downsides may be. Another reason this is comparing apples to oranges is the potential downside risk given the difference in unknowns. Again, what is the downside risk of standing instead of sitting? Maybe sore feet, maybe a sore back, you'll know when you try it. What is the downside risk of treating your cancer with homeopathy? Maybe it doesn't work and you die. Not even in the same ball park. When these things are in the same ball park: we know the risks involved and the risks are small. Under these circumstances, my argument stands: if someone likes taking homeopathy remedies when they get a cold and it is not a financial burden on them, who cares what they do. The only risk is having this same attitude toward homeopathy regardless of the ailment you are treating and then people start dying.
JshWright 8y ago
Turns out, you and the author agree... > Sit-stand desks are not exactly inexpensive, but like many things in life, they’re fine if you like them. And if it helps alleviate some back and neck pain, so much the better. It’s just that most people probably don’t need them.
- epmaybe 8y ago
  I will chime in here and say that I found an inexpensive standing desk implementation here: http://iamnotaprogrammer.com/Ikea-Standing-desk-for-22-dollars.html http://iamnotaprogrammer.com/Ikea-Standing-desk-for-22-dolla...
  - trhway 8y ago
    my post-office-move cardboard boxes, fine-tuned by printing paper packs, beat even that on price. Ia typical efficiency style of BigCo, some departments in our company have very nice expensive top-of-the-line sit/stand desks issued to everybody and most of the people there never use them for standing, while in other departments like ours one can't get it even after passing through the gauntlet of ergonomic forms and assessments - at the end it happens that they don't have a model suitable, whatever it means, to the office space we're in.
    - bitwize 8y ago
      I'm going to put out a guess and say that most of the department with the nice desks have "Manager" or "Director" in the title, and your department is something like software, which is management for purposes of determining overtime exemption and plebs for every other purpose. It's like the bit about open-plan offices. Management knows they're shit and you can't get work done in them. That's why they have offices of their own. You have to live with them as part of "paying your dues". And because it's an affordable panopticon.
      - trhway 8y ago
        >I'm going to put out a guess and say that most of the department with the nice desks have "Manager" or "Director" in the title not exactly. It is just "nicer" departments like legal, etc and more important/cool/key projects as the top management see. >It's like the bit about open-plan offices. Management knows they're shit and you can't get work done in them. That's why they have offices of their own. oh yes! The most fresh hot-off-the-pan "open" office plans that we've recently got don't repeat a foolish mistake of the open office plans they implemented just a few years ago - the few years ago they put everybody including directors (and sometimes even low ranking VPs) in the "open", while now it is like the old typical cubicle farm where cubicle space for plebs was surrounded by private offices for managers, etc. - only minus actual cubicles (for better inter-plebs collaboration and communication :). Full panopticon for the plebs.
ravenstine 8y ago
I can't think of many subjects that can't be written in the same manner. "Research, however, suggests that warnings about smoking are overblown, and that not smoking is an overrated way of improving health."

by jm__87 8y ago

savanaly 8y ago

By that logic, I guess homeopathy is also perfectly proven as effective?

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
sebleon 8y ago
Yes, if someone has a home remedy that gets great results, why switch to a substance from someone in a lab coat?
- JshWright 8y ago
  Exactly, that's what I keep saying about my bear repellent rock I keep on my front porch. Haven't seen a single bear yet.
  - narrowingorbits 8y ago
    People whose reactions when confronted with something new, unknown, and unexpected are to laugh at it or respond sarcastically, instead of to accept the surprise, approach with curiosity and humility, and question if there is something they're not understanding, are unlikely to ever discover anything new. Everything that we call science today was once alternately laughable or mysterious.
    - asdff 8y ago
      Because science isn't about belief, its about reasoning. One person having a good response to something doesn't say anything about that something, that person, or that good response. Only after things have been repeatedly tested, and alternative explanations thoroughly ruled out, can a claim be considered accurate. Everything was once alternately laughable or mysterious, until it was thoroughly proven to be true. There is a reason why we aren't letting your blood because you have a cold anymore.
      - kd5bjo 8y ago
        Yes, but one person repeatedly having a good response to a thing is good evidence that thing is helpful to that person. While it's good for society to find and recommend things that are beneficial to most people, we shouldn't prevent people from doing the things that they find helpful.
  - brlewis 8y ago
    Your employer wins because you're spending less time worrying about bears. My employer wins because I spend less time thinking about whether I would benefit from a sit/stand desk...at the very least. I suspect I get a real productivity advantage from it at times.
    - Retra 8y ago
      And both of you lose because you're purposefully dismissing the value of research and making decisions based on ritual and conformity.
      - brlewis 8y ago
        I think you meant your reply to go to the homeopathy comment. Unless you have specific research into the effectiveness of bear-repellent rocks.
  - sebleon 8y ago
    A closer analogy for a remedy to an illness would be: Whenever your yard gets overrun with bears, putting a rock on the porch makes them go away for an unknown reason. Don’t let yourself be limited by science, which is bounded by human intelligence.
- asdff 8y ago
  One person randomly having a favorable outcome doesn't tell you if a result is great, let alone even exists.
  - sebleon 8y ago
    Fair - correlation does not mean causation. That being said, countless experiments show placebo can have empirical results; even the simple belief in a remedy can improve healthcare outcomes.
jm__87 8y ago
Honestly, I see these sort of comments on here all the time and it drives me nuts. Comparing homeopathy and a standing desk is comparing apples and oranges. Everyone has experience with standing - we evolved to do this. Taking homeopathy remedies to cure illness is not something we evolved to do, so we do not know what the potential downsides may be. Another reason this is comparing apples to oranges is the potential downside risk given the difference in unknowns. Again, what is the downside risk of standing instead of sitting? Maybe sore feet, maybe a sore back, you'll know when you try it. What is the downside risk of treating your cancer with homeopathy? Maybe it doesn't work and you die. Not even in the same ball park. When these things are in the same ball park: we know the risks involved and the risks are small. Under these circumstances, my argument stands: if someone likes taking homeopathy remedies when they get a cold and it is not a financial burden on them, who cares what they do. The only risk is having this same attitude toward homeopathy regardless of the ailment you are treating and then people start dying.

JshWright 8y ago

Turns out, you and the author agree... > Sit-stand desks are not exactly inexpensive, but like many things in life, they’re fine if you like them. And if it helps alleviate some back and neck pain, so much the better. It’s just that most people probably don’t need them.

epmaybe 8y ago
I will chime in here and say that I found an inexpensive standing desk implementation here: http://iamnotaprogrammer.com/Ikea-Standing-desk-for-22-dollars.html http://iamnotaprogrammer.com/Ikea-Standing-desk-for-22-dolla...
- trhway 8y ago
  my post-office-move cardboard boxes, fine-tuned by printing paper packs, beat even that on price. Ia typical efficiency style of BigCo, some departments in our company have very nice expensive top-of-the-line sit/stand desks issued to everybody and most of the people there never use them for standing, while in other departments like ours one can't get it even after passing through the gauntlet of ergonomic forms and assessments - at the end it happens that they don't have a model suitable, whatever it means, to the office space we're in.
  - bitwize 8y ago
    I'm going to put out a guess and say that most of the department with the nice desks have "Manager" or "Director" in the title, and your department is something like software, which is management for purposes of determining overtime exemption and plebs for every other purpose. It's like the bit about open-plan offices. Management knows they're shit and you can't get work done in them. That's why they have offices of their own. You have to live with them as part of "paying your dues". And because it's an affordable panopticon.
    - trhway 8y ago
      >I'm going to put out a guess and say that most of the department with the nice desks have "Manager" or "Director" in the title not exactly. It is just "nicer" departments like legal, etc and more important/cool/key projects as the top management see. >It's like the bit about open-plan offices. Management knows they're shit and you can't get work done in them. That's why they have offices of their own. oh yes! The most fresh hot-off-the-pan "open" office plans that we've recently got don't repeat a foolish mistake of the open office plans they implemented just a few years ago - the few years ago they put everybody including directors (and sometimes even low ranking VPs) in the "open", while now it is like the old typical cubicle farm where cubicle space for plebs was surrounded by private offices for managers, etc. - only minus actual cubicles (for better inter-plebs collaboration and communication :). Full panopticon for the plebs.

ravenstine 8y ago

I can't think of many subjects that can't be written in the same manner. "Research, however, suggests that warnings about smoking are overblown, and that not smoking is an overrated way of improving health."