posted by
LaminatorX
on Wednesday April 16 2014, @06:09AM
from the Stand-up-Sit-down-Fight-Fight-Fight dept.
from the Stand-up-Sit-down-Fight-Fight-Fight dept.
A recent BBC article discusses the health benefits of standing instead of sitting while working and the potential costs to switch.
From the article:
Medical research has been building up for a while now, suggesting constant sitting is harming our health - potentially causing cardiovascular problems or vulnerability to diabetes.
We can't simply fix it by heading for the gym.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Switching from Sitting to Standing Offices
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 43 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(Score: 5, Informative) by captain normal on Wednesday April 16 2014, @06:34AM
Standing still at one place is not very good for your health either. It is hard on your feet, knees and back. And it is near murder on your circulatory system. Standing still for long hours can lead to edema and possibility of blood clots.
The best health practice is to not do too much of sitting or standing in one place for long periods.
When life isn't going right, go left.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by c0lo on Wednesday April 16 2014, @09:39AM
I know just the best mixture: use a gym ball for sitting - most of the muscles in your body will be involved. After a couple of hours or so you may need some sugar, but it is definitely the best way... to train your willpower (I gave up after about 30')
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Angry Jesus on Wednesday April 16 2014, @12:00PM
Sitting on an exercise ball has a lot of downsides, [healthyalberta.com] it is very difficult to maintain good posture and sitting with bad posture can do a real number on your body..
Treadmill desks are a lot easier to use without messing up your body. But they are a lot more expensive up front too. At least there are a lot of options, here's just one company's line-up:
http://www.lifespanfitness.com/workplacesolutions- treadmill-desk-and-bike-desk.html [lifespanfitness.com]
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday April 16 2014, @12:17PM
In my personal experience, sitting on an exercise ball is a misnomer: I never managed to just sit, is more like a constant activity involving small adjustments, rolls and such. But I do confirm: it's not a good choice if you suffer from backpain.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Blackmoore on Wednesday April 16 2014, @02:06PM
Actually - it was a part of PT for back rehab.
I much prefer it to my office chair, but even the large ball is a bit too low for my desk. (and they have a tendency to walk away in this office)
but there is no way in hell i will consider standing for 6-12 hours a day at my desk.
(Score: 5, Informative) by pert.boioioing on Wednesday April 16 2014, @12:23PM
Excessive treadmill use has its own downsides as it does much of the work of a normal gait i.e. pulling the leg into the back position, which can cause long-term problems with the knees and hips since the stabilizing musculature is improperly developed. Same problem with excessive cycling without counterbalancing other exercises.
The more reasonable and healthy solution is to use a normal chair and getting up to move around more frequently. Plus, this is good for the eyes since it breaks the extended short-focus gaze and encourages one to focus on distant objects.
(Score: 1) by Leebert on Wednesday April 16 2014, @03:12PM
Well there's your problem. Try something a little smaller than a 30-foot ball. ;)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 16 2014, @11:21AM
In Neal Stephenson's Reamde [wikipedia.org], one of the characters goes from being morbidly obese to just overweight by walking on a treadmill while working at his computer. Granted, it's a solution that would largely be limited to home offices, but I thought it was a clever idea.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by HiThere on Wednesday April 16 2014, @05:17PM
It has it's points, but how's your typing accuracy while walking of a treadmill?
I remember a keypunch machine that was used standing up. The requirement was to only use the machine for punching 10 or fewer cards. A lot of people had to go through the line several times when they hadn't expected to, and I wonder how many didn't check their work carefully enough, and had to do extra compilations.
Additionally, if your attention is diverted to something besides programming, your programming becomes a lot more inefficient, at best.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Open4D on Wednesday April 16 2014, @11:49AM
Sounds sensible. TFA gives the impression that one company switched to standing only. But it also mentions the existence of "sit-stand desks".
Some quotes:
That's what I want, and I'd pay the difference myself.
(Score: 2) by mhajicek on Wednesday April 16 2014, @03:38PM
This is especially soylent for me right now, since I was just asked to select a new desk for myself. Adjustable standing desks are all out of budget, but I might be able to do a custom one out of 80/20 rail and squeeze it into the budget.
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 4, Interesting) by evilviper on Wednesday April 16 2014, @07:18AM
I *hate* how crap "studies" like these get passed-off as fact in the media. No mention that this is self-reported statistical correlations with uncontrolled variables.
This "sitting makes you sick" one is the most mind-numbingly obvious case of self-selection bias I've ever seen:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-selection [wikipedia.org]
Isn't it painfully obvious to everyone, that those who are healthy are likely to sit a lot less than those who are unhealthy? Kinda missing the forest for the trees, aren't we? The researches want to claim that "sitting" causes diabetes, but meanwhile it's TRIVIALLY easy to prove that it's diabetes which causes "sitting," which completely undermines and invalidates this nonsensical "study".
I suppose up-next we'll have a rash of studies about how umbrellas cause rain, sunglasses cause clouds to disperse, wheelchairs cause leg & knee injuries, etc.
Hydrogen cyanide is a delicious and necessary part of the human diet.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by TGV on Wednesday April 16 2014, @07:30AM
BBC and science reporting do not always get along well. And then they come with Victorian clerks! How good were the labor conditions in Victorian times? Terribly, terribly bad. Life expectation was under 50. And what proof do we have that Victorian clerks, of which there were relatively few, did benefit from standing rather than sitting? None. Were other conditions comparable to modern office life? No. Conclusion: totally unworthy bollocks.
(Score: 2) by Open4D on Wednesday April 16 2014, @11:30AM
It is obvious that many health conditions would prevent people from doing active jobs. But it is far from obvious that health conditions are a major factor overall in determining who does and doesn't have active jobs. I have an office job because of my brain, not because the rest of my body is unable to handle a more active job.
Which study are you referring to? TFA is about the practicalities of standing offices. Maybe I should quote TFA's introduction to you:
You mentioned diabetes, so lets pick a diabetes study. Here's an article about what appears to be a meta-study: http://www.bbc.com/news/health-19910888 [bbc.com]
It was led by "Dr Emma Wilmot from the Diabetes Group at the University of Leicester". She said:
Do you really insist that this particular study, for example, is "crap" and "nonsensical"?
(Score: 1) by opinionated_science on Wednesday April 16 2014, @11:41AM
The article was emphasizing that work environments was part of the problem. The BBC does tend to indulge in the "cartoon" version of science show where everything is simplified with extreme cases and clear. You may have seen that dreadful "fat vs sugar" one , too, which was very poorly made.
The general problem is sitting at a computer can be compulsive. So can sitting in front of a TV. So can playing a video console. So can eating cakes.... The problem is if your job keeps you sitting, how can you still have a job?
The heart of the issue is how the education that teaches a reasonable life-style has been beaten into submission by economic constraints, to put personal health as a low priority. After all, employers only rent your body anyway, you have to maintain it!!!
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Wednesday April 16 2014, @01:35PM
Isn't this a case of "correlation does not imply causation"?
(Score: 1) by buswolley on Wednesday April 16 2014, @05:32PM
The data in abstracts:
Alternating Bouts of Sitting and Standing Attenuates Postprandial Glucose Responses.
Thorp AA1, Kingwell BA, Sethi P, Hammond L, Owen N, Dunstan DW.
Author information
Abstract
PURPOSE:
To examine whether reductions in sitting time through alternating 30 minute bouts of sitting and standing can reduce postprandial glucose, insulin and triglyceride responses.
METHODS:
Twenty-three overweight/obese sedentary office workers (17 males; 6 females; mean ± SD; age: 48.2 ± 7.9 yrs, BMI: 29.6 ± 4.0 kg/m) undertook two, short-term (5-day) experimental conditions in an equal, randomised (1:1) order. In a simulated office environment, participants performed typical occupational tasks for 8 hours/day while in a: 1) seated work posture (control condition); or, 2) interchanging between a seated and standing work posture every 30 minutes using an electric, height-adjustable workstation (intervention condition). Fasting and postprandial blood samples after a mixed test drink were collected hourly for 4 hours on Day 1 and 5 of each condition to assess serum insulin, plasma glucose and triglycerides. Dietary intake (KJ/d) and physical activity were standardised during each condition. The trial was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12611000632998).
RESULTS:
Following adjustment for time (Day 1 and Day5), incremental area under the analyte time curve (iAUC) differed significantly between conditions for plasma glucose (P=0.007) but not for serum insulin or plasma triglycerides. Adjusted mean glucose iAUC was lowered by 11.1% after the intervention condition (6.38mmol/L·h [CI: 5.04, 7.71] ) relative to the control condition (7.18mmol/L·h [CI: 5.85, 8.52] ). No temporal changes (Day 1 vs Day 5) between conditions were observed.
CONCLUSION:
Alternating standing and sitting in 30 minute bouts results in modest beneficial effects on postprandial glucose responses in overweight/obese office workers.
J Sci Med Sport. 2014 Mar 20. pii: S1440-2440(14)00051-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2014.03.008. [Epub ahead of print]
Breaking up prolonged sitting with light-intensity walking improves postprandial glycemia, but breaking up sitting with standing does not.
Bailey DP1, Locke CD2.
Author information
Abstract
OBJECTIVES:
To explore the effects of breaking up prolonged sitting time with standing or light-intensity walking on a range of cardiometabolic risk markers.
DESIGN:
A randomised three-period, three-treatment acute crossover trial.
METHODS:
Ten non-obese adults took part in three trials: (1) uninterrupted sitting; (2) seated with 2-min bouts of standing every 20min; and (3) seated with 2-min bouts of light-intensity walking every 20min. Two standardised test drinks (total 80.3 carbohydrate, 50g fat) were provided after an initial 1-h period of uninterrupted sitting. Plasma glucose and blood pressure were assessed hourly to calculate area under the curve. Total cholesterol, HDL, and triglycerides were assessed at baseline and 5-h. ANOVAs were used to explore between-trial differences.
RESULTS:
Glucose area under the curve was lower in the activity-break condition compared to the uninterrupted sitting and standing-break conditions: mean area under the curve 18.5 (95% CI 17, 20), 22.0 (20.5, 23.5), and 22.2 (20.7, 23.7) mmolL/5-h, respectively, p0.05). Systolic and diastolic blood pressure area under the curve did not differ significantly between conditions, nor did responses in lipid parameters (p>0.05).
CONCLUSIONS:
This study suggests that interrupting sitting time with frequent brief bouts of light-intensity activity, but not standing, imparts beneficial postprandial responses that may enhance cardiometabolic health. These findings may have importance in the design of effective interventions to reduce cardiometabolic disease risk.
Total sitting time and risk of myocardial infarction, coronary heart disease and all-cause mortality in a prospective cohort of Danish adults.
Bjørk Petersen C1, Bauman A, Grønbæk M, Wulff Helge J, Thygesen LC, Tolstrup JS.
Author information
Abstract
BACKGROUND:
Evidence suggests that sitting time is adversely associated with health risks. However, previous epidemiological studies have mainly addressed mortality whereas little is known of the risk of coronary heart disease. This study aimed to investigate total sitting time and risk of myocardial infarction, coronary heart disease incidence and all-cause mortality.
METHODS:
In the Danish Health Examination Survey (DANHES) conducted in 2007-2008 we tested the hypothesis that a higher amount of daily total sitting time is associated with greater risk of myocardial infarction, coronary heart disease and all-cause mortality. The study population consisted of 71,363 men and women aged 18-99 years without coronary heart disease. Participants were followed for myocardial infarction, coronary heart disease and mortality in national registers to August 10, 2012. Cox regression analyses were performed with adjustment for potential confounders and multiple imputation for missing values.
RESULTS:
During a mean follow-up period of 5.4 years 358 incident cases of myocardial infarction, 1,446 of coronary heart disease, and 1,074 deaths from all causes were registered. The hazard ratios associated with 10 or more hours of daily sitting compared to less than 6 hours were 1.38 (95% CI: 1.01, 1.88) for myocardial infarction, 1.07 (95% CI: 0.91, 1.27) for coronary heart disease and 1.31 (95% CI: 1.09, 1.57). Compared to sitting less than 6 hours per day and being physically active in leisure time, the hazard ratios of sitting more than 10 hours per day and also being physically inactive in leisure time were 1.80 (95% CI: 1.15, 2.82) for myocardial infarction, 1.42 (95% CI: 1.11, 1.81) for coronary heart disease, and 2.29 (95% CI: 1.82, 2.89) for all-cause mortality.
CONCLUSIONS:
The results suggest that a higher amount of daily total sitting time is associated with all-cause mortality, particularly among inactive adults. In relation to coronary heart, disease results were less clear. This paper adds new evidence to the limited data on the evidence of sitting time and cardiovascular disease and mortality.
Standing and Mortality in a Prospective Cohort of Canadian Adults.
Katzmarzyk PT.
Author information
Abstract
PURPOSE:
Several studies have documented significant associations between sedentary behaviors such as sitting or television viewing and premature mortality. However, the associations between mortality and other low energy expenditure activities such as standing have not been explored. The purpose of this study was to examine the association between daily standing time and mortality among 16,586 Canadian adults 18-90 years of age.
METHODS:
Information on self-reported time spent standing as well as several covariates including smoking, alcohol consumption, physical activity readiness, and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity was collected at baseline in the 1981 Canada Fitness Survey. Participants were followed for an average of 12.0 y for the ascertainment of mortality status.
RESULTS:
There were 1785 deaths (743 cardiovascular disease (CVD), 530 cancer, 512 other causes) in the cohort. After adjustment for age, sex and additional covariates, time spent standing was negatively related to mortality rates from all causes, CVD and other causes. Across successively higher categories of daily standing, the multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios were 1.00, 0.79, 0.79, 0.73, and 0.67 for all-cause mortality (p for trend 0.0001), 1.00, 0.82, 0.84, 0.68, and 0.75 for CVD mortality (p for trend 0.02), and 1.00, 0.76, 0.63, 0.67 and 0.65 for other mortality (p for trend 0.001). There was no association between standing and cancer mortality. There was a significant interaction between physical activity and standing (p0.05), and the association between standing and mortality was significant only among the physically inactive (7.5 MET·h·wk).
CONCLUSION:
The results suggest that standing may not be a hazardous form of behavior. Given that mortality rates declined at higher levels of standing, standing may be a healthier alternative to excessive periods of sitting.
PMID: 24152707 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
Are sitting occupations associated with increased all-cause, cancer, and cardiovascular disease mortality risk? A pooled analysis of seven British population cohorts.
Stamatakis E1, Chau JY, Pedisic Z, Bauman A, Macniven R, Coombs N, Hamer M.
Author information
Abstract
BACKGROUND:
There is mounting evidence for associations between sedentary behaviours and adverse health outcomes, although the data on occupational sitting and mortality risk remain equivocal. The aim of this study was to determine the association between occupational sitting and cardiovascular, cancer and all-cause mortality in a pooled sample of seven British general population cohorts.
METHODS:
The sample comprised 5380 women and 5788 men in employment who were drawn from five Health Survey for England and two Scottish Health Survey cohorts. Participants were classified as reporting standing, walking or sitting in their work time and followed up over 12.9 years for mortality. Data were modelled using Cox proportional hazard regression adjusted for age, waist circumference, self-reported general health, frequency of alcohol intake, cigarette smoking, non-occupational physical activity, prevalent cardiovascular disease and cancer at baseline, psychological health, social class, and education.
RESULTS:
In total there were 754 all-cause deaths. In women, a standing/walking occupation was associated with lower risk of all-cause (fully adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 0.68, 95% CI 0.52-0.89) and cancer (HR = 0.60, 95% CI 0.43-0.85) mortality, compared to sitting occupations. There were no associations in men. In analyses with combined occupational type and leisure-time physical activity, the risk of all-cause mortality was lowest in participants with non-sitting occupations and high leisure-time activity.
CONCLUSIONS:
Sitting occupations are linked to increased risk for all-cause and cancer mortality in women only, but no such associations exist for cardiovascular mortality in men or women.
(Score: 2) by TheLink on Wednesday April 16 2014, @07:28AM
If you really need to spend hours in one position, I suggest you use a hospital bed with a pressure relief air mattress to reduce the occurrence of bedsores.
But if you can, best is probably regularly alternating between lying down, reclining[1] and walking.
[1] Sitting up straight is not so good for the back.
(Score: 2) by Rivenaleem on Wednesday April 16 2014, @12:29PM
Where can I find a job that lets me lie on my back with my feet elevated all day long? Preferably one where I can use my people-skills.
(Score: 1) by Woods on Wednesday April 16 2014, @01:42PM
Remote IT support (As in, remote assistance, not "far away from everything"). And if you get good enough at it, you never even need to use your keyboard.
I have sat reclined in my chair with my feet up on my desk, while playing with a slinky the whole (hour long) call. I guess it depends on the complexity of your customer base though.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 16 2014, @04:49PM
If you're attractive enough you could try webcam artiste or similar, and use your people-skills... ;)
Seriously though, with the right setup you can use a keyboard and mouse while lying down. For the display, make sure your monitors are securely mounted though. Alternatively use a projector or something like an Oculus Rift.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 16 2014, @09:48PM
There are a few exclusive whorehouse jobs (assuming you are male),6 nevada-men-back-menu-brothel.html [azcentral.com]
http://www.azcentral.com/offbeat/articles/2012080
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male_prostitution [wikipedia.org]
Many more if female...
(Score: 2) by mojo chan on Wednesday April 16 2014, @07:31AM
I suffer from arthritis and CFS, so standing all day isn't an option. I'm not sure how comfortable I'd feel if I were the only one sitting.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
(Score: 3, Insightful) by FatPhil on Wednesday April 16 2014, @12:03PM
And one glass of beer per day too.
And one portion of fresh oily fish per week too.
And
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by mhajicek on Wednesday April 16 2014, @03:32PM
Pretty soon all that will be mandatory.
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Wednesday April 16 2014, @04:11PM
Wait, the Catholics were right after all?
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by mojo chan on Thursday April 17 2014, @09:17PM
Well, I'm allergic to alcohol due to the CFS, so... :-)
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
(Score: 1) by memememe on Wednesday April 16 2014, @09:38AM
At the push of a button you go from sitting to standing desk height. Sitting all day long means I need to take more breaks just to relax the back.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by VLM on Wednesday April 16 2014, @12:26PM
The biggest problem I see is workplace metrics, like you must be sitting there logged in and no more than 2 breaks per working day, unless you're a smoker in which case you're allowed 8 breaks per day, blah blah.
Because I don't work in an environment like that, I get up and walk around whenever I switch gears. Maybe water, bathroom, vending machine, look out a window at interesting weather, whatever.
So if its a "thing" where you work to work at least 3 hours between breaks, you're in big trouble no matter what you do for 3 hours. For me its more like 45 minutes between VERY short breaks.
This was all on Dr advice after some back/leg problems many years ago after sitting in bad posture for up to 4 continuous hours at a time. No problems since then.
In my poor student years I worked some jobs where I stood for 8 hours at a time with only the shortest breaks. Even as a healthy teen I'd never wish that kind of pain on someone. A wide mixture of sit and stand, sure, but not one or the other for an entire day.
(Score: 1) by terryk30 on Wednesday April 16 2014, @01:08PM
Even if my workstation could quickly adjust between sitting down or standing up, I'm not sure I'd like that since there's no middle ground, and maybe all I wanted was a shift in position that I could do without breaking my concentration.
When I get a chance I'm going to rejig one of my workspaces to try a "sit-stand stool". From google images:
http://www.morecheap.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013 /01/Sit-Stand-Stool.png [morecheap.co.uk]= 4 [ergocentric.com]
http://www.ergocentric.com/product.asp?id=160&cid
This setup seems like a good idea since it looks like you could shift your weight anywhere in the range of "almost sitting down" to "almost standing up". (And perhaps shifting your keyboard a bit or whatever items you're working with, not adjusting the workstation itself.)
Experience? Impressions?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Wednesday April 16 2014, @01:31PM
Holy shit, when will the workplace madness end???!!! I'm ready to fucking jump off a bridge!!!
"Office Space" didn't come close to showing how bad modern workplaces are. At least in that movie, everyone still had cubicles! Now, all the employers have moved to "open place work areas", with either low walls (so low they might as well not be there) or just having everyone sit together at a big open table.
Now, with this fucking "study", all the employers are going to hold this shit up and say that standing is healthier, and they're going to make us all work standing up!! Of course, the accountants will love this because office chairs are expensive, and eliminating those will save a bunch of money. And of course, the managers (and accountants) will still have their own walled offices with chairs, while they run their mouths telling everyone how great these open-table standing-only work areas are for "collaboration" and "healthiness".
(Score: 2) by useless on Wednesday April 16 2014, @03:08PM
Totally agree! When the "No walls encourages collaboration" crap started, they just took down the cube walls, so you at least still had space around you. These days though, the "open floorplan" offices are looking more like a slaughter pen. I've been on interviews at many places that claimed they had a "cool, open office". I guess it is now "cool" to have a medium sized room filled to the brim with folding tables, and people sitting not 6 inches apart. They couldn't have a right handed and a left handed person sit next to each other because there wouldn't be enough room for two mouse pads side by side.
I can only imagine what this clusterfuck will bring.
(Score: 2) by skullz on Wednesday April 16 2014, @03:28PM
I foresee some kind of wearable harness for your laptop, something that will allow you to type while still shuffling along. You will still need a power cord so in order to prevent damage to the company equipment the power cords will be reinforced with a sturdy metal chain attached to the worker's ankle and secured to the wall near the power outlet. To prevent unauthorized use of the laptops or potty breaks the power cord reinforcement chain will be locked and workers will need to coordinate with their manager for release.
There we go! No pesky desks, happy, healthy workers, less of the companies time spent vacating bladders, and in a pinch (big project is overdue because marketing just can't say no) managers have an effective way to ensure overtime will be worked!
Just ignore the clanking of chains and moans.
(Score: 1) by terryk30 on Wednesday April 16 2014, @03:50PM
Naw - think electric streetcars. A grid of overhead wires, accessed by the trolley pole affixed to your helmet. You'll get used to the arcing, in fact you'll find the smell of ozone quite bracing. Bzzt! Bzzt! Clackety-clack, zoom!
(Score: 2) by useless on Wednesday April 16 2014, @04:22PM
Naw, that would allow movement around, and management couldn't just look over the room and see who was "at their desk, working".
This all seemed very familiar to me, then I remembered Terry Gilliam - "Brazil". That's the next step:
http://todaysfacilitymanager.com/wp-content/upload s/brazil_movie.jpg [todaysfaci...anager.com]
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Wednesday April 16 2014, @04:23PM
There are 2 simple reasons for this phenomenon:
1. Cubicle walls run for $200 a pop. By going to an "open plan", they can save a bunch of money per employee.
2. Cubicles take up more office space than just cramming everyone's desk together in a big room. Office space isn't free either, so by going to an "open plan", they can save a bunch of money per employee.
This isn't about being hip, it's about short-term savings while ignoring the long-term productivity costs. It's the same instincts that moved people from offices with walls and doors to cubicles.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Wednesday April 16 2014, @03:39PM
Here's a suggestion for SoylentNews: make it so I can edit my own posts, like Reddit does.
"open place work areas" above should read "open plan work areas".
(Score: 2) by Open4D on Sunday April 20 2014, @10:48AM
No thanks.
But I do think people who don't trust themselves should be given the option of having a final preview screen, which is the only place they get a 'Submit' button. This final preview screen should be as uncluttered as possible, and in particular it should not let you edit your post (instead, just have a 'Go back and edit further' button).
I would probably enable this.
Optional additions to this final preview screen could include: spell checker and grammar checker, or, showing the post previewed in its thread position, with other nearby posts also visible.
(Score: 1) by Buck Feta on Wednesday April 16 2014, @03:00PM
WalMart cashiers are as healthy as triathletes.
- fractious political commentary goes here -
(Score: 2) by skullz on Wednesday April 16 2014, @03:47PM
I do the standing desk thing but it is not as simple as the article makes it out to be. First of all you need the proper surface area, not that robotic arm contraption the article is showing a picture of but maybe its okay because he is using a Mac and not actually doing work. Your wrists will be killing you after half an hour with that. You also need a monitor at eye level and the keyboard and surface area at elbow level. A bar near your feet (think barstool bar) and comfortable walking shoes (casual!) are a must to prevent foot and leg fatigue. You don't just stand there with knees locked, you shift your weight from one foot to the other and change your position every few minutes. Most importantly you need a regular desk or a standing desk that can be adjusted to chair height because you can't stand all day.
I started my standing desk experiment because I had a knee injury that was being made much worse by sitting all day. It took me well over a month to build up the muscle and endurance (standing desks build up your back and core, believe it or not) to be able to stand for 4-6 hours a day but it was worth it. Standing while coding keeps the blood flowing and helps me focus. It also improved my posture from code monkey Quasimodo to jaded get-off-my-lawn.
(Score: 1) by aclarke on Wednesday April 16 2014, @04:12PM
I'm sitting right now and have been for probably 45 minutes. Prior to that I was standing for the first two hours or so of the day. I don't have an anti-fatigue mat yet so when I get one that will probably help. The first few days I probably spent 75% of my time standing.
I work from home, so I spent my own money on this desk. I sit all day and I really hate sitting. I've been known for years as the guy who is always standing when other people are sitting. I get people offering me a place to sit down all the time, and I'm usually declining as I sit all day and am happy to not be on my butt any longer. Maybe now at the end of the day I'll be more inclined to do the socially acceptable thing and sit with everyone else. I don't expect a standing desk will revolutionize every aspect of my life, but I thought long and hard before spending $1500 on a desk. So far though, I'm very glad I did.
The RISE desk is the only one I've seen in person, but I'm very happy with it. It easily handles my 30" & 24" monitors, speakers, Mac mini, stereo receiver, and a few extra hard drives I haven't found a new home for yet. My scanners and printers are going to go on a separate rack once I've found something for them. The desk is quiet, stable enough at height, and looks quite good in my opinion.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by ngarrang on Wednesday April 16 2014, @04:37PM
I was suffering lower back and knee pains, and have for years. Two years ago, I switched to using a stand-up workstation after much research. The first month was the transition period where my body had new aches and pains as it adapted. I am actively moving about all day as a computer support guy, so I don't have the issue of standing in only one place for more than 10 minutes. My lower back feels significantly stronger now, as well as my legs. I am burning more calories and have lost weight. I have a tall chair so that when I do need to rest the legs, I am not straining my knees and hips to sit down very far.
For some people, stand-up workstations are a boon.
(Score: 2) by Nobuddy on Thursday April 17 2014, @12:43AM
Each and every one of our desks was motorized. We could push a button and move the whole thing to standing position, push another to return to our sitting preset.
It was very nice. As we were phone support (Tier3- supporting onsite techs) our calls were often long, and having the monitors at eye level while you pace about on a long call was awesome.