Why Sitting May Be Bad for Your Brain

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/15/well/move/why-sitting-may-be-bad-for-your-brain.html

by a_w • 8 years ago

154 54 8 years ago

nytimes.com

Leary• 8 years ago

I'm still waiting for the nytimes article on why sitting may be bad for my butt.

prdonahue• 8 years ago

It's actually terrible for your butt (or at least your gluteus muscles, especially the gluteus medius).

When you sit all day these muscles get inhibited/weak. When they're weak, you're more likely to have lower back pain. I sit a lot so I try to counteract that (as best as can be done) with some targeted glute med stuff after work.

Check out http://posturedirect.com/is-sitting-destroying-your-butt-mus... for some more detail.

jondwillis3• 8 years ago

At age 28, after 14 years of pretty intense computer usage... my body is an absolute mess. I work out, do yoga, run. Nothing completely frees me from the pain I have mostly from sitting all day, every day for my work.

sundvor• 8 years ago

I read the GP as highly sarcastic, ie "water is wet - news at 5".

coldtea• 8 years ago

Accumulate a couple of decades of sitting and compare your butt to someone who doesn't have an office work but otherwise eats similarly.

semi-extrinsic2• 8 years ago

There is a Cochrane review [1] on the health effects of reducing time spent sitting at work that came out two years ago, which laid out the truth in no uncertain terms:

"The quality of evidence is low to very low for most interventions, mainly because of limitations in study protocols and small sample sizes."

And still people keep doing shit like this, performing studies with fifteen people??

[1] https://www.cochrane.org/CD010912/OCCHEALTH_workplace-interv...

anonytrary• 8 years ago

The last company I worked for had a "market research" report about mobile data users that claimed 75% of people do X, the rest do Y. The sample size was 4. What's worse is that the report was beautifully styled. It's amazing how much money can be wasted on moot work when you have funding.

cryoshon2• 8 years ago

my experience is that marketing people care nothing for quality or veracity of "facts". if it looks good, it goes.

dalbasal2• 8 years ago

Idk the exact answer, but I doubt the reason is "researchers don't understand the statistics." It is some "how the sausage is made" reason, most likely.

For example: researchers have the budget/resources to to a preliminary study. They use the interesting results of this study to secure funding for a larger sample size study.

Btw, a small sample size study isn't useless necessarily. You can refine methodology, with less on the line. You can also (more or less) validly exclude certain conclusions, to avoid wasting resources on a wider study.

The problem is with pop science headlines, like it is in any other journalistic field. I think it's less of a problem though, than many think. Publishing in the popular press needs to be understood as "academics working on X" not "X has been proven."

koboll2• 8 years ago

The problem is with pop science headlines, like it is in any other journalistic field. I think it's less of a problem though, than many think. Publishing in the popular press needs to be understood as "academics working on X" not "X has been proven."

Writing a headline that misrepresents a single study's conclusion as "proven" or what "scientists say" -- especially when the conclusion is contradicted by most others on the subject -- should be considered by journalistic ethics watchdogs as an extreme violation bordering on an outright lie.

The media seems simultaneously bewildered as to why the public no longer trusts it, while incapable of recognizing and responding properly to obvious breaches of the public trust like inflated science headlines.

gls2ro• 8 years ago

The study you are citing is about "interventions aimed at reducing sitting time at work".

It is not about the health benefits of reducing time spent sitting, but about the effectiveness of methods of reducing the time spent sitting.

So the study you cited does not support your assertion about health effects:

There is a Cochrane review [1] on the health effects of reducing time spent sitting at work

If you have studies that does invalidate the health benefits of standing vs sitting I am very interested to read them and find out more.

semi-extrinsic2• 8 years ago

I concur the review linked is more about effectiveness of intervention methods. My point was that it's been so thoroughly highlighted that we need bigger sample sizes, and yet here we are with N=15.

As for "invalidating the health benefits of standing vs sitting", here is a well-designed study [1] (N=7300 and 12-year span) that found

"""

Occupations involving predominantly standing were associated with an approximately 2-fold risk of heart disease compared with occupations involving predominantly sitting. This association was robust to adjustment for other health, sociodemographic, and work variables.

"""

I.e. I think we can reasonably claim that the jury is still out on the health benefits of standing desks etc.

OTOH, that increased exercise is a good thing is undisputed.

[1] https://academic.oup.com/aje/article/187/1/27/4081581

pasta• 8 years ago

"performing studies with fifteen people"

The study only shows that blood flow to your brain drops when you are sitting for a long period of time. So I think 15 people is a huge sample in this case.

The study doesn't even has any conclusions. So I think 15 people is fine.

The next step could be gathering data from thousands of people to check weather this causes brain damage in any form. But that's not what the study was about. Only the title of the article suggests this.

cryoshon2• 8 years ago

chiming in to agree here.

for something along the lines of basic organ system operation like blood flow, you need only a small sample to show that there is an effect.

example: a sample of 12 people would be more than enough to prove that people bleed if they are cut. you could look at a sample of 10k people just to be sure -- but you're not going to learn anything new. the experimental measurement of the variable is too high level.

the point of this study is to corroborate past research and provide another avenue of future investigation. if a future study finds that the inverse is true, we now have reason to be suspicious of that study's conclusions.

jhabdas• 8 years ago

Thinking too much can be bad for your brain too, which is why I'm grateful this article immediately turned black and unreadable on the HN Android app.

anoplus• 8 years ago

I started stretching and walking around once an hour or so few years ago, and it is the simplest most efficient prevention to various pains. Even in harsh deadlines, when I feel the slightest pain, I stop everything, and get-up/stretch/walk around for 5 minutes. Health is above everything else.

fb03• 8 years ago

Dude, I'm trying to do this right now because of back pain and stuff.

It looks nice on paper but I have trouble focusing so when I actually get in the zone I tend to forget and hours go by, I only stop when I'm actually experiencing pain (an stimulus which reminds me to get back to reality).

Any tips?

matwood• 8 years ago

You need to work on focusing so that you can take breaks and go right back to work. There are many ways to improve that from simply 'do it' to using a certain playlist. I started with the playlist and have now use a combination of that with 'do it' discipline.

I can't find the quote (Shakespeare maybe?), but paraphrasing it says the worst time in ones life is the moment between deciding to do something and doing something. The goal is to get rid of that moment in between.

nickjj• 8 years ago

I've been using a standing desk for about 2.5 years. I stand almost all the time but I tend to take few mile walks every few hours to break up coding / thinking, etc..

I no longer do it by a schedule because my mind will tell me when I should go, but to begin with I would just set an alarm and go get up every 2 or 3 hours, and if you're close to finishing something important (say 10 minutes), finish it first and then go.

degenerate• 8 years ago

I had the same problem. Tried the standing desk, no go. Couldn't get in the zone ever (and I tried it for 2 full weeks).

My tip: drink a LOT of fluids. You will have to keep going to the bathroom which is a natural break point, and not something as abrupt as an alarm; the urge to pee sort of creeps on you, so you can stay in the zone until you really gotta go. The hydration is good for your brain/body anyway, so win-win.

Raphmedia• 8 years ago

Go to a bathroom on the opposite side of the building. Bonus points if it's not on the same floor. It's the best way to get a forced walk. Hey, and you even get to chat with the other departments!

dominotw• 8 years ago

pomodoro technique?

flowardnut• 8 years ago

thirty minutes of stretching targeting at people who sit would do wonders as well.

I do two small sessions a day (targeting hamstrings and groin). any basic yoga video would walk you through warming up and hitting these.

Hockenbrizzle• 8 years ago

In addition to the other comment suggesting yoga for back pain, I might recommend you see a physiotherapist. You want not only stretching but also strengthening and it's difficult to figure this stuff out yourself. In my case, I found out I had no idea how to correctly activate my transversus abdominis, which is a muscle that should be active during all waking hours to support the spine.

hinkley• 8 years ago

Hemingway, on the subject of staying motivated, offered that you should quit writing when you know what happens next.

Work on decomposing work into a bunch of independent steps, and stop when you finish a step. For me it seems to work best when there is one clear course to work on next (easier to retain it when I interrupt myself).

Another trick is drink more fluids. Your bladder will tell you when it’s time to take a break.

timbit42• 8 years ago

Exercise to strengthen the muscles in your core. It will likely help the back pain.

auggierose• 8 years ago

I recently introduced a glassboard to my (home) office, and it makes me stand up regularly, so that's a possible alternative to a standing desk (which I don't like).

cimmanom• 8 years ago

What is a glassboard, and how does it make you stand?

wyclif• 8 years ago

I think he means one of these. Highly recommended, BTW: http://www.glasswhiteboard.com/

bitL• 8 years ago

If you have the luxury of home office, get a fitness bank next to your computer and once an hour do some weight exercises, or once 4 hours do some 10-minute HIIT. It'd do wonders to you. Earning $ and getting ripped at the same time ;-)

amelius2• 8 years ago

If only these glassboards had a "snapshot" button, that allowed me to save the image right into my git working tree ...

(phone camera is too much of a hassle)

amelius2• 8 years ago

Is there a way to measure this? E.g. if blood circulation is impaired, I get a warning? (And why doesn't my body give the warning, by the way?)

peaktechisnow• 8 years ago

Sample size: 15 people.

dhaneshnm• 8 years ago

I wonder how this affects people who meditate regularly for few hours every day. They mostly sit cross legged or in lotus pose, but they do sit for a significant amount of time.

Why Sitting May Be Bad for Your Brain

Related Stories