5 ms·

I'm confused by this... It seems to me like the relevant part is "playing computer games is good" not "the type of sitting you do matters". Playing computer gam

by nbosse 8mo ago

I'm confused by this... It seems to me like the relevant part is "playing computer games is good" not "the type of sitting you do matters". Playing computer games while standing might be even better

eatsyourtacos 8mo ago
It's probably more "active" sitting. If you are a gamer (especially computer gamer), you are generally not just sitting back "relaxing". Your body is more engaged and you are constantly moving your body in some way. Sitting and watching tv you can literally be completely still for long periods of time.
- p0w3n3d 8mo ago
  Depends on the game. I'd say I have two modes of sitting when programming, one is passive and my muscles ache. Another is active, when I try to use belly muscles (abs?) to keep my posture etc but... When I fall deeply into thinking I will eventually release muscles and feel worse later. I wonder if there could be an application that would encourage active sitting
  - layman51 8mo ago
    This is what I was thinking about too. I thought that "Active" sitting was going to be something about making sure you're not slouching, but rather adjusting yourself every so often to make sure you're sitting up straight instead of slouching off the chair.
- yunwal 8mo ago
  They mention reading as an example of active sitting despite the fact that it requires no more motion than changing the channel (or whatever the modern day equivalent is).
- iammjm 8mo ago
  Consider StarCraft: Brood War, a legendary real-time strategy game. To be played well, it requires between 200-400 actions per minute (APM), with some players going even beyond 500 APM. Some games last for more than an hour. Players use both the mouse and the keyboard. There's always more to do than you can realistically do. You are always putting out fires, managing your economy, producing units, securing income, carrying multiple attacks at once, fighting tactical battles, and executing strategic goals. Yeah I'd call that a pretty active sitting :)
  - mna_ 8mo ago
    Let's be honest, most of those actions are useless keybashing and clicking. It's easy to get a high APM.
    - DrewADesign 8mo ago
      In Smash? Sure. In StarCraft? I’ve never measured it, but I wouldn’t say ‘most’ by any stretch.
    - valenceelectron 8mo ago
      This is certainly true in the beginning of a game. Players claim to do this to warm up. However, in a busy confrontation there is no reason to spam any actions that are not directly contributing towards your endeavor. If you spam useless actions during a fight, your opponent who does not will best you.
    - iammjm 8mo ago
      The game's been played competitively for more than 25 years now, people still earn their living plying StarCraft. You wont find a single one of them with APM below 200. Having their livelihoods and legacies depending on this, do you think they'd be repeatedly doing something useless instead of optimizing? Anyways, I think you are missing the point that this thread is about active sitting. I imagine there isn't much difference to the meaning behind movement: movement is movement, meaningful or not.
- PaulHoule 8mo ago
  I am thinking about stance while sitting lately. I am breathing and speaking more from my belly and that starts with posture which is neither slouched forward or back.
  - tartoran 8mo ago
    Me too and it's something I've become more aware as I got older. In short the lesson I learned is be well stacked and relaxed at the same time with the gaze forward. Also be able to freely move around around a fixed point if needed (the sit bones connecting to a sturdy surface of a chair). I find that swivel chairs or too soft of a chair could mess up stability/proprioception. A fixed/rigid chair at the right height helps me plant my feet better into the ground, forming some a sort of a tripod for better stability. Also an eye level monitor and a keyboard in reach without having to stretch out the arms helps keep a better posture. Another thing I practice is not leaning on the backrest too much. I noticed my kid shifting to bad postures when doing homework. Just gently telling him about it from time to time and making him be aware of his improved and what a correct posture should be seems to have improved his habits.
helph67 8mo ago
"A professor at the Institute for Work and Health found that people who stand throughout the day at their jobs have a 2.2 times higher risk of developing heart disease than those people who sit during the day." https://www.ergolink.com.au/blog/standing-vs-sitting-at-a-desk-which-is-better-for-you https://www.ergolink.com.au/blog/standing-vs-sitting-at-a-de...
- goda90 8mo ago
  I can think of a lot of confounding factors for that. Are they just looking at standing desks, or also at the numerous blue collar and service industry jobs that demand long hours of standing at machines and registers? If it's just the former, then there's the question of what kind of people choose standing desks over sitting desks. Is it people worried about their health but don't take the time to exercise outside of work and think standing will be enough? If the latter applies, then there's facts about the stresses and complications of being less financially secure, such as less access to healthcare, longer working hours, poorer diets.
  - kilington 8mo ago
    Certainly but correlations not working make it unlikely that sitting is a dominant factor in current health problems. Looking at the details described it makes sense that sitting is a form of idleness and idleness is possible in a standing job. Therefore idleness could more reasonably be the dominant factor with other correlations then contributing more for idle standers than idle sitters, etc.
- gamerdonkey 8mo ago
  I was a little miffed that this blog didn't include a link to that particular study, especially with how vague the citation is, so I went and found the original publication[0]. Of note, they have a "Setting the record straight" addendum[1] that includes a couple important quotes: "Misconception #1: Office workers should now be confused about whether they should sit or stand, and about whether sit/stand stations are a good idea. They shouldn’t be, says Smith. The study’s main finding was about workers who are required to stand for long periods (i.e. five hours or more) throughout their work shift, without opportunities to sit. Extending this to any worker who stands (e.g. an office worker using a sit-stand desk) is not correct. This is because office workers who stand at these types of workstations likely have the option to sit down when they get tired or when they feel pain in their legs and back." and "Misconception #2: We no longer have to worry about the negative health effects of prolonged sitting, thanks to this study. Not so fast, says Smith. There was nothing in this study to refute the research on the health consequences of a sedentary lifestyle. Much of that research is about sitting too much throughout the day—at work, while commuting and at home. This study only focused on prolonged sitting and prolonged standing at work. "And even within the study, another finding about prolonged sitting at work got lost in the coverage. Yes, prolonged standing occupations were linked with twice the risk of heart disease as prolonged sitting jobs. However, prolonged sitting jobs were still linked, among men, with a 40 per cent higher risk of heart disease compared to jobs that involve a mix of standing, sitting and walking." [0]: https://www.iwh.on.ca/newsletters/at-work/90/standing-too-long-at-work-carries-twice-the-risk-of-heart-disease-as-sitting-too-long https://www.iwh.on.ca/newsletters/at-work/90/standing-too-lo... [1]: https://www.iwh.on.ca/news/study-on-prolonged-standing-and-heart-disease-setting-record-straight https://www.iwh.on.ca/news/study-on-prolonged-standing-and-h...

by nbosse 8mo ago

I'm confused by this... It seems to me like the relevant part is "playing computer games is good" not "the type of sitting you do matters". Playing computer games while standing might be even better

eatsyourtacos 8mo ago

It's probably more "active" sitting. If you are a gamer (especially computer gamer), you are generally not just sitting back "relaxing". Your body is more engaged and you are constantly moving your body in some way. Sitting and watching tv you can literally be completely still for long periods of time.

p0w3n3d 8mo ago
Depends on the game. I'd say I have two modes of sitting when programming, one is passive and my muscles ache. Another is active, when I try to use belly muscles (abs?) to keep my posture etc but... When I fall deeply into thinking I will eventually release muscles and feel worse later. I wonder if there could be an application that would encourage active sitting
- layman51 8mo ago
  This is what I was thinking about too. I thought that "Active" sitting was going to be something about making sure you're not slouching, but rather adjusting yourself every so often to make sure you're sitting up straight instead of slouching off the chair.
yunwal 8mo ago
They mention reading as an example of active sitting despite the fact that it requires no more motion than changing the channel (or whatever the modern day equivalent is).
iammjm 8mo ago
Consider StarCraft: Brood War, a legendary real-time strategy game. To be played well, it requires between 200-400 actions per minute (APM), with some players going even beyond 500 APM. Some games last for more than an hour. Players use both the mouse and the keyboard. There's always more to do than you can realistically do. You are always putting out fires, managing your economy, producing units, securing income, carrying multiple attacks at once, fighting tactical battles, and executing strategic goals. Yeah I'd call that a pretty active sitting :)
- mna_ 8mo ago
  Let's be honest, most of those actions are useless keybashing and clicking. It's easy to get a high APM.
  - DrewADesign 8mo ago
    In Smash? Sure. In StarCraft? I’ve never measured it, but I wouldn’t say ‘most’ by any stretch.
  - valenceelectron 8mo ago
    This is certainly true in the beginning of a game. Players claim to do this to warm up. However, in a busy confrontation there is no reason to spam any actions that are not directly contributing towards your endeavor. If you spam useless actions during a fight, your opponent who does not will best you.
  - iammjm 8mo ago
    The game's been played competitively for more than 25 years now, people still earn their living plying StarCraft. You wont find a single one of them with APM below 200. Having their livelihoods and legacies depending on this, do you think they'd be repeatedly doing something useless instead of optimizing? Anyways, I think you are missing the point that this thread is about active sitting. I imagine there isn't much difference to the meaning behind movement: movement is movement, meaningful or not.
PaulHoule 8mo ago
I am thinking about stance while sitting lately. I am breathing and speaking more from my belly and that starts with posture which is neither slouched forward or back.
- tartoran 8mo ago
  Me too and it's something I've become more aware as I got older. In short the lesson I learned is be well stacked and relaxed at the same time with the gaze forward. Also be able to freely move around around a fixed point if needed (the sit bones connecting to a sturdy surface of a chair). I find that swivel chairs or too soft of a chair could mess up stability/proprioception. A fixed/rigid chair at the right height helps me plant my feet better into the ground, forming some a sort of a tripod for better stability. Also an eye level monitor and a keyboard in reach without having to stretch out the arms helps keep a better posture. Another thing I practice is not leaning on the backrest too much. I noticed my kid shifting to bad postures when doing homework. Just gently telling him about it from time to time and making him be aware of his improved and what a correct posture should be seems to have improved his habits.

helph67 8mo ago

"A professor at the Institute for Work and Health found that people who stand throughout the day at their jobs have a 2.2 times higher risk of developing heart disease than those people who sit during the day." https://www.ergolink.com.au/blog/standing-vs-sitting-at-a-desk-which-is-better-for-you https://www.ergolink.com.au/blog/standing-vs-sitting-at-a-de...

goda90 8mo ago
I can think of a lot of confounding factors for that. Are they just looking at standing desks, or also at the numerous blue collar and service industry jobs that demand long hours of standing at machines and registers? If it's just the former, then there's the question of what kind of people choose standing desks over sitting desks. Is it people worried about their health but don't take the time to exercise outside of work and think standing will be enough? If the latter applies, then there's facts about the stresses and complications of being less financially secure, such as less access to healthcare, longer working hours, poorer diets.
- kilington 8mo ago
  Certainly but correlations not working make it unlikely that sitting is a dominant factor in current health problems. Looking at the details described it makes sense that sitting is a form of idleness and idleness is possible in a standing job. Therefore idleness could more reasonably be the dominant factor with other correlations then contributing more for idle standers than idle sitters, etc.
gamerdonkey 8mo ago
I was a little miffed that this blog didn't include a link to that particular study, especially with how vague the citation is, so I went and found the original publication[0]. Of note, they have a "Setting the record straight" addendum[1] that includes a couple important quotes: "Misconception #1: Office workers should now be confused about whether they should sit or stand, and about whether sit/stand stations are a good idea. They shouldn’t be, says Smith. The study’s main finding was about workers who are required to stand for long periods (i.e. five hours or more) throughout their work shift, without opportunities to sit. Extending this to any worker who stands (e.g. an office worker using a sit-stand desk) is not correct. This is because office workers who stand at these types of workstations likely have the option to sit down when they get tired or when they feel pain in their legs and back." and "Misconception #2: We no longer have to worry about the negative health effects of prolonged sitting, thanks to this study. Not so fast, says Smith. There was nothing in this study to refute the research on the health consequences of a sedentary lifestyle. Much of that research is about sitting too much throughout the day—at work, while commuting and at home. This study only focused on prolonged sitting and prolonged standing at work. "And even within the study, another finding about prolonged sitting at work got lost in the coverage. Yes, prolonged standing occupations were linked with twice the risk of heart disease as prolonged sitting jobs. However, prolonged sitting jobs were still linked, among men, with a 40 per cent higher risk of heart disease compared to jobs that involve a mix of standing, sitting and walking." [0]: https://www.iwh.on.ca/newsletters/at-work/90/standing-too-long-at-work-carries-twice-the-risk-of-heart-disease-as-sitting-too-long https://www.iwh.on.ca/newsletters/at-work/90/standing-too-lo... [1]: https://www.iwh.on.ca/news/study-on-prolonged-standing-and-heart-disease-setting-record-straight https://www.iwh.on.ca/news/study-on-prolonged-standing-and-h...