
Study: Sitting is no worse than standing without moving - antimora
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2015/10/14/sitting-for-long-periods-doesnt-make-death-more-imminent-study-suggests/
======
ajarmst
The work looks useful and valuable to this area of study. But WaPo and other
media outlets persist in a ubiquitous and terrible trend in science reporting,
especially those associated with lifestyle and healt : "Here is a study which
has different findings than the other studies we've been reporting on, all
that research is now overturned! Burn your standing desk!" Of course, in a few
months, someone will publish another study calling this one into question, and
they'll tell us all to go out and buy new standing desks. As we all know,
science doesn't work that way. This study needs to be put into context with
other studies, if it contradicts those studies, that needs to be discussed,
future studies that might resolve the discrepancy should be identified,
limitations on the applicability of this study and on the ones it contradicts
should be pointed out, changes in the model we use to understand the effects
of mobility and posture on health should be discussed, etc. etc.

Instead, we get serial repetitions of "standing is bad", "standing is good",
"it doesn't really matter". I have to look at a calendar to figure out if the
caffeine in my coffee is slowly killing me or turning me into a focused super-
intellect. Won't someone please, please tell me if I should be ingesting wine
and/or chocolate this week?

~~~
pizza234
Audiences of those articles (nutrition, "cheap" health advice, garbage
fitness, and so on) simply want trivial, feel-good advice; the media just
fulfill that wish.

It's the cultural substrate which is misguided - having an interest in feeling
good about something, rather than actually accomplishing it - but this is
personal choice.

------
zzalpha
Story is far more nuanced than the title suggests:

 _" Our study overturns current thinking on the health risks of sitting and
indicates that the problem lies in the absence of movement rather than the
time spent sitting itself,"_

Translation: sitting is still bad for you, but standing isn't any better,
which puts a pin in the standing desk fad.

Guess it's time to get one of these!

[http://www.amazon.com/DeskCycle-Exercise-Pedal-Exerciser-
Whi...](http://www.amazon.com/DeskCycle-Exercise-Pedal-Exerciser-
White/dp/B00B1VDNQA)

~~~
djtriptych
I argue that standing is better because the bias towards movement is higher.
You can (and will) shift your weight around and take more frequent breaks,
simply because you don't have to stand up to do so. That might be enough.

~~~
zzalpha
You could argue that, but given there's no evidence to support it, it's at
best colloquial advice.

And to be perfectly blunt, that sounds more like an attempt to go back and
justify the choice of a standing desk after the fact, now that the base
assumption ("standing is better than sitting") has been invalidated.

~~~
ioquatix
I use a standing desk with multiple terminals laid out so I walk between them.
I also agree that while standing you are more likely to take walking breaks or
step away for a moment. I also feel like when I'm standing I'm a lot more
active then when sitting.

Finally, when I sit I have a habit of slouching while standing I tend to have
a much better posture even for extended times.

While a bad back isn't death inducing (usually), we should consider all the
benefits of standing over sitting, not just the fact that you may or may not
die.

~~~
zzalpha
Yes, I'm sure all of this is true.

For you.

You are an anecdote, not data.

I'm sure I could just as easily trot out examples of folks with bad backs or
knees because of extended standing, or due to bad standing posture.

I could probably also find examples of people with circulation problems or
other issues as a result of extended standing.

We were sold on the idea that standing, alone, versus sitting, will offset the
life shortening effects of being sedentary. Given this study seems to
contradict that, the picture is a _lot_ more nuanced.

~~~
djtriptych
Actually you're not sure you could do that. When do people ever stand
perfectly still for hours on end? We get the difference between anecdotes and
data, but it's also ok to formulate testable hypotheses in here.

Anyway this is like saying "Buying a bike won't make you thin". Yes, you have
to ride the bike. But the availability of a bike in your house greatly raises
the chance that you'll ride on any given day. It's indirect, but still a
pretty good idea.

~~~
zzalpha
_but it 's also ok to formulate testable hypotheses in here._

That's a bit odd... you're basically advocating "[formulating] testable
hypotheses" simply to post-justify a choice you've already made.

That's basically science backwards...

It's also human nature. We all love to rationalize. But we can at least see it
for what it is. :)

Edit:

Incidentally, I have personally witnessed the fact that buying a bike has
absolutely no correlation with frequency of riding it... ;)

~~~
alextgordon
You can't use statistical evidence to invalidate someone's personal
experience. It doesn't work that way!

When someone says that a standing desk has helped them, you can't just jump
out and say "aha! this study says on average they don't work, therefore that
someone is rationalising their purchase".

The best you can say is that it works for some people and not others.

------
brlewis
_Our study overturns current thinking on the health risks of sitting and
indicates that the problem lies in the absence of movement rather than the
time spent sitting itself,_

I have a sit/stand desk. I think I'm more likely to take a short walking break
if I'm already standing. In this case, the study merely moves sitting from
being a direct cause to being an indirect cause.

------
credo
This is a (somewhat) misleading headline and report.

The report refers to a study which says that sitting is no worse than standing
without moving the body.

However, the report does nothing to contradict past studies which show that
sitting is bad for the body (in comparison with standing up and walking every
n minutes).

A better way of reading the study would be to say that "sitting" and "standing
without moving" are equally bad. A lot of other research suggests that sitting
for hours is definitely worse than taking a break every hour (or n minutes)
and walking for a couple of minutes in that break.

~~~
dang
Ok, we replaced the title with your description, in accordance with the HN
guideline, "Please use the original title _unless it is misleading or
linkbait_."

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

------
m52go
"A truly #ergonomic chair is step one but your best posture is always your
next posture..."

Michael Dura, Herman Miller

[https://twitter.com/mikedura/status/436155774755409920](https://twitter.com/mikedura/status/436155774755409920)

------
JoeAltmaier
For some of us, standing is necessary for back pain etc. So its more
complicated.

------
amelius
Aren't people who spend their days sitting behind a desk also more likely to
be more wealthy than, say, people who do heavy construction work all day long?
Did they factor in the effects of this difference?

Perhaps the extra years gained from being more wealthy are negated by sitting
all day.

------
rhinoceraptor
Most Westerners can't kneel or squat properly, mostly due to sitting. That
definitely has health implications, even if it's not lethal. And it's a lot
harder to get that mobility back than it is to lose it.

~~~
bcoates
It's not just that -- at least in the corner of the West where I grew up,
kneeling and squatting were actually discouraged in young children as somehow
unhealthy (to your knees, iirc).

------
jimejim
I can only give anecdotal evidence on this. I prefer to walk on my treadmill
desk which tends to have less impact on my knees and hips. Standing or sitting
without motion will eventually tire me or cause some pain, though I generally
find I'm likely to move around more while standing. Sitting for too long just
tires me out.

I rotate through all 3 though throughout the day, so if my knees are bothering
me or I feel like taking a break, I'll sit down for a bit.

The most important thing once I starting using the treadmill though was
investing in decent shoes.

------
kawera
Related discussion from yesterday:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10378944](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10378944)

------
aaron695
This study says standup desks are no good, you are not likely to be any more
active than the people in the study just because you are not sitting.

The authors specifically say this in the press release in case you can't see
it from the study

[http://www.exeter.ac.uk/news/featurednews/title_476860_en.ht...](http://www.exeter.ac.uk/news/featurednews/title_476860_en.html)

Dr Melvyn Hillsdon - "The results cast doubt on the benefits of sit-stand work
stations, which employers are increasingly providing to promote healthy
working environments."

I too don't like the result but the study is pretty clear.

How this study could contradict a large body of evidence to the contrary I can
only see as it being a

1\. Badly done study.

2\. Blue collar vs White collar

------
ejcx
Fitness and health studies really bug me. People perceive them as actionable
when they absolutely aren't and should not be.

If your goal is general health in life you only need to do three things (well
4)..

1) exercise regularly 2) eat a balanced diet 3) sleep as much as you need. 4)
drink water.

Don't get hung up in the details.

~~~
shivsta
#3 is not exactly correct. Young people should sleep 9 hours a day whether or
not it feels like you 'need' the sleep. Many people will feel fine after 6-7
hours of sleep in the morning, but studies have shown that even if you feel
rested you will not perform as well on cognitive tasks if you do not get 9
hours.

I got hung up on the details.

~~~
ejcx
I think your comment is characterizing exactly what I say not to do, even if
you might be right.

My comment is about staying healthy over the duration of your life. It's also
about doing what you can and not sweating the small stuff. Studying hard and
sleeping 6 hours will get you better test results than sleeping 9 hours and
not studying. Your comment is splitting hairs about a small increase and
missing the point....

------
laurentoget
Between that and the VW Diesel scandal this is a tough month for silly
environmentalist/health trends. Next thing you know someone will figure out
getting a company to collect your banana peels for composting is bad for the
earth.

~~~
Agathos
I rigged my standing desk so it behaves differently under testing... no, I'm
sorry, I have no idea how this is related to the VW diesel scandal.

------
trhway
has been standing for 4 months. About a month ago noticed that my diaphragm
has, for the lack of better word, "got straightened". Sitting, probably very
incorrect, for 36 years - since the first grade in school - i always thought
that it is just my body construction that i have that difficulty breathing
full lungs while swimming or running. Lower back also feels better where it
matters. And you can't really move while sitting whereis standing you do move
a bit - like walking back and forward while waiting for that beast to rebuild.

------
dahart
Seems interesting to me that most of the discussion is sitting vs standing,
when the results seem to indicate that the important distinction is moving vs
not.

------
SaiKumar
What about sitting on the floor, cross legged or legs extended. Would that be
better than sitting on the chair. Any study on that matter would be good too.

~~~
mikekchar
I suspect it would be better, but I would also like to see a study. I work
from home and have been experimenting with fairly non-traditional setups:

\- sitting on a small stool with no back support.

\- sitting cross legged at a low table

\- standing with my keyboard at about elbow height.

All three are surprisingly good. I thought I would miss a chair, but I do not
in any way. The stool is the least effort, but requires me to be careful of
posture or else I get sore muscles. Standing is quite nice as long as I
remember to keep shifting my weight around. Sitting cross legged is still
difficult for me (lack of flexibility) for more than a few hours, but probably
makes me feel the best when I'm done.

Eventually I want to transition to sitting cross legged for most of the day,
but I think it will require a concerted effort at training my body to accept
it. I'm a bit worried about blood circulation in the legs, though.

My "office furniture" has come in quite a bit under budget with these schemes,
though. I spent the equivalent of $10 on the stool. I use my closet (which has
a surprisingly convenient shelf in just the right place) for standing.

------
StronglyTyped
My lower back pain from sitting all day won't kill me, but it does
significantly lower my quality of life.

~~~
toomuchtodo
I found this exercise on /r/fitness and its been phenomenal for my lower back
pain from sitting all day:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BOTvaRaDjI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BOTvaRaDjI)

------
thoman23
Next up...treadmill desks.

------
afterwhich
Phew.

