3 ms·

I really think that the ruling class should think about this carefully before moving on with this. It is a very popular issue, and I’m sure they would gain a lo

I really think that the ruling class should think about this carefully before moving on with this. It is a very popular issue, and I’m sure they would gain a lot of political capital by moving this through, as many people support this. However they need to do this carefully. There are some health questions unanswered. And some research is needed before they do this. Sleep is important and sleep deprivation is a thing that affects some portion of the working class, and some portion of school children. Before they take this step, they should know the effect this would have on the sleep behavior of this population. If moving to a permanent DST would further disrupt the sleep cycle of this population, the result could be dangerous. I really hope that the ruling class consults public health experts, and asks for research and goes with their recommendation which is based on that research rather then simply going by what people think they want. Sleep is to important to be messed with and disrupted because of a rushed—but popular—decision.

jgwil2 6y ago
We already know that changing the clocks twice a year leads to sleep deprivation for everyone - more car accidents, more heart attacks, etc. The whole point is to stop the twice yearly disruption of our sleep.
- runarberg 6y ago
  What public health experts need to find out then is whether moving to permanent DST is the right call then, as opposed to moving to permanent standard time. I have a hunch that standard is a better choice for most people’s health.
  - WorldMaker 6y ago
    The US spends 2/3rds of a year in DST rather than Standard Time, so that would possibly imply there is no health difference or the health difference is actually weighted towards DST at this point. Also, a problem with hour-wide timezones is that DST is closer to what "standard time" is supposed to be (when solar noon and observed noon most closely match) naturally on the western edges of the timezones. So any arguments over whether DST or Standard is "healthier" also likely have to take into account how much the population is weighted to one edge or the other.
    - runarberg 6y ago
      We are arguing against a move to permanent DST. The fact that the time is clock is moved delays the period where we suffer late sunrise significantly. If instead of DST being 2/3 of the year it would be 3/3 of the year, the remaining 1/3 would be significantly worse for the portion of the population that is forced to wake up before sunrise. As an example, there is a period now (before covid) where my partner’s commute started before sunrise during DST, then we would move to standard and happily the commute was back to during sunrise for a couple of more weeks. If we stayed on a permanent DST those extra couple of weeks would be darker in the morning. And I have a strong feeling that can have health implications for a broad subset of the population.
      - WorldMaker 6y ago
        Sure, I'm just pointing out that there is also the issue with geography of a timezone: on the western edge of a timezone the sun is 45-minutes to an hour-later and a move to permanent Standard Time as an example counter-alternative would have similar implications for the other side of a timezone. (More people getting up before sunrise not just in all of the Winter, but also large parts of Spring, and Fall.) Neither permanent answer is great for the entire hour-wide width of today's timezones. In some ways the DST switch is a large part of how we can sanely keep such large timezones at all.

jgwil2 6y ago

We already know that changing the clocks twice a year leads to sleep deprivation for everyone - more car accidents, more heart attacks, etc. The whole point is to stop the twice yearly disruption of our sleep.

runarberg 6y ago
What public health experts need to find out then is whether moving to permanent DST is the right call then, as opposed to moving to permanent standard time. I have a hunch that standard is a better choice for most people’s health.
- WorldMaker 6y ago
  The US spends 2/3rds of a year in DST rather than Standard Time, so that would possibly imply there is no health difference or the health difference is actually weighted towards DST at this point. Also, a problem with hour-wide timezones is that DST is closer to what "standard time" is supposed to be (when solar noon and observed noon most closely match) naturally on the western edges of the timezones. So any arguments over whether DST or Standard is "healthier" also likely have to take into account how much the population is weighted to one edge or the other.
  - runarberg 6y ago
    We are arguing against a move to permanent DST. The fact that the time is clock is moved delays the period where we suffer late sunrise significantly. If instead of DST being 2/3 of the year it would be 3/3 of the year, the remaining 1/3 would be significantly worse for the portion of the population that is forced to wake up before sunrise. As an example, there is a period now (before covid) where my partner’s commute started before sunrise during DST, then we would move to standard and happily the commute was back to during sunrise for a couple of more weeks. If we stayed on a permanent DST those extra couple of weeks would be darker in the morning. And I have a strong feeling that can have health implications for a broad subset of the population.
    - WorldMaker 6y ago
      Sure, I'm just pointing out that there is also the issue with geography of a timezone: on the western edge of a timezone the sun is 45-minutes to an hour-later and a move to permanent Standard Time as an example counter-alternative would have similar implications for the other side of a timezone. (More people getting up before sunrise not just in all of the Winter, but also large parts of Spring, and Fall.) Neither permanent answer is great for the entire hour-wide width of today's timezones. In some ways the DST switch is a large part of how we can sanely keep such large timezones at all.