7 ms·
It's worth noting, for those who aren't aware, that current evidence (while scant) does not support the hypothesis that using a standing desk is healthier than
by mistercow 13y ago
It's worth noting, for those who aren't aware, that current evidence (while scant) does not support the hypothesis that using a standing desk is healthier than using an ordinary sit-down desk. In fact, the evidence for ordinary desks being harmful is not nearly as strong as standing desk proponents would have you believe.
It certainly can't be taken as a given, though, that if long sedentary periods are harmful, long periods of standing still are significantly better.
- icpmacdo 13y agoWhile there may not be evidence for it the amount of positve anecdotal stories seem to consistently say its better than sitting at a desk all day long.
- mistercow 13y agoThis is unfortunately a perfect situation where anecdotes are not very valuable, as can be seen by the fact that the same pattern can be observed with obvious nonsense like hologram patches and magnetic bracelets. We see a typically less gullible set of subjects for these anecdotes, but that can unfortunately be explained entirely by the more plausible sounding hypothesis. I'll dispense with the full Bayesian treatment here, but what we have here is a case of the base rate fallacy (although not the form that is usually discussed): failing to account for the prior probability of the evidence. That is, we have some evidence, which is that the anecdotes we see are largely in favor of standing desks being helpful, and we need to account for how likely that evidence is regardless of whether standing desks are helpful. Unfortunately, as our friends with the magnetic bracelets demonstrate, that probability turns out to be very high. If something works, we see overwhelmingly positive anecdotes. If it doesn't work, we see overwhelmingly positive anecdotes. Why might this be? Well, for one thing, there is sensitivity to placebo effects, because have purely qualitative phenomena that are being reported only subjectively. But even stronger is a selection bias that has to do with people's behavior in reporting and reading. Someone is unlikely to write about their experiences publicly who tries a standing desk for a while, finds no significant benefit, and goes back to a sitting desk. She won't find it interesting to talk about, and she may also be self-conscious that she didn't do it right, and would be inviting criticism. After all "I tried X and it didn't work" is, on some level, an admission of personal failure, and people aren't particularly prone to those. And if she does write it up, her write-up isn't likely to get all that much attention because "X didn't work for me" isn't a particularly interesting story. But one who finds the standing desk to be a miracle cure for all of her problems is relatively likely to write about it, and people will take notice, because "making a simple lifestyle change improved my quality of life" is an attention getter.
- IsaacL 13y agoYou're right, but that's still not an argument against trying a standing desk. If some people find them useful, and some don't, and assuming the cost of trying it is low, the rational thing to do is not to wait around until enough meta-studies are written for you to make a completely informed decision, but simply to try it out for yourself and see how you like it.
- mistercow 13y agoSure, and I didn't mean to imply otherwise, but correctly evaluating the situation is still important. The cost/benefit does require evaluating the benefits, and the benefits actually play into the costs as well. If being sedentary is harmful and standing all day isn't a good solution, then it would be harmful to adopt a standing desk instead of exercising. For my part, my week with a standing desk just led to upper back pain (which is not unusual for me, but I am generally able to avoid).
- icpmacdo 13y agoOne of the points was about how he noticed his leg muscles growing, wouldent this be a way to quantify at least one positive aspect.
- mistercow 13y agoYes there would, and that would be one of the more likely effects. But I have not seen an anecdote where someone actually did measure their muscles.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- toasterlovin 13y agoHaving tried standing, I can tell you that I found it to be rather uncomfortable and unsettling. Standing upright is, in my opinion, a transition state. That is, you normally only stand upright in between walking and/or sitting. So, when I'm standing at a desk, I desperately want to be moving to the next state. Physically, this works out okay for mousing tasks, since those are one handed and offer a large degree of freedom. However, it just doesn't work for two handed tasks, like programming or writing, which anchor both of your arms, because your arms are critical for balance and, thus, movement. I also found that this desperation to move around while standing affected me mentally. That is, when standing, I was fine doing short, low-attention tasks like responding to email or IM, since I coud move a little between each task. However, for longer tasks (again, like programming or writing) I found this to be maddening. I felt as if I was constantly being tugged and distracted by this urge to move.
- danneu 13y agoEven if standing all day and sitting all day come out to be equivalent, standing encourages you to move more. From pacing during a bout of thinking to taking a step back while you're idly reading some content to incorporating some spontaneous pushups into your day. For me, that's actually the critical difference.
- dagw 13y agoWe've got standing desks at work and the advice we got from the ergonomist was that the advantage came from varying your position and to use then in the standing position for about an hour in the middle of the day.
- gtaylor 13y agoThe biggest draw for me had nothing to do with the supposed health benefits. For me, I found that I didn't get my 2:00 crash. Before I started standing, I'd go out for lunch and come back around 1:00 or so. About 30 minutes to an hour later, I'd be fighting off hibernation. My post-eating-sleep-reflex thing was just absolutely overpowering. Even now, having to sit down for a meeting around that time of day has me close to nodding off. When I stood, this was completely eliminated. I'm not a doctor, so I couldn't tell you why, but I am a lot more consistently alert/energetic while standing. This has been the big win for me over everything else.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- mcv 13y agoThe post-lunch dip can also be prevented by having a healthier lunch with less carbs (especially sugar and highly processed carbs). Go for a salad with meat or egg, and whole grain bread if you really need bread. And not more than one piece of bread. This has helped me a lot.
- penguindev 13y agoAlso try the 'wheat belly' flax seed wraps - I just made one for the first time last night - AWESOME! Microwaved it for 3 minutes, and it tasted like a cross between a sandwich thin and french toast. http://www.tastebook.com/recipes/3016050-Flaxseed-Wrap?full_recipe=true http://www.tastebook.com/recipes/3016050-Flaxseed-Wrap?full_...
- raldi 13y agoWhat's your citation for that? If it's the Cornell study that circulated two years ago, most of the coverage was misleading. Details: http://www.reddit.com/r/raldi/comments/kfjet/cornells_standing_desks_study_are_we_passing/ http://www.reddit.com/r/raldi/comments/kfjet/cornells_standi...
- hopeless 13y agoCare to provide some of that "current evidence"? Genuine question because the only papers I've come across show sitting to be pretty terrible
- melling 13y agoWell, there is the classic 1949 study about bus drivers in England having a higher incidence of heart attacks because of all the sitting. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Morris#Research http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Morris#Research
- TylerE 13y agoThat's only studying one dimension. Isn't it entirely possible that one group has a lower heart attack risk, but the other has a higher rate of crippling joint degeneration?
- mistercow 13y agoRight, but that doesn't compare sitting and standing. It compares sitting and moving. Standing is not an aerobic activity, so it's way less likely that that will have cardiac benefits.
- EuanB 13y agoI've an architect's chair I got second hand. Sitting our standing takes no effort at all.
- EuanB 13y agoI've an architect's chair I got second hand. Sitting our standing takes no effort at all.
- EuanB 13y agoI've an architect's chair I got second hand. Sitting our standing takes no effort at all.