Slashdot Mirror


'Social Jetlag' May Be Making You Fat

sciencehabit writes "A new study suggests that, by disrupting your body's normal rhythms, your alarm clock could be making you overweight. The study concerns a phenomenon called 'social jetlag.' That's the extent to which our natural sleep patterns are out of synch with our school or work schedules. When we wake up earlier than we're supposed to — or spend all weekend sleeping in and then get up at 6 am on Monday — it makes our body feel like it's spending the weekend in one time zone and the week in another. For people who are already on the heavy side, greater social jet lag corresponds to greater body weight."

197 comments

  1. Thank God! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Thank God! All this time I thought it was the Coke and Fritos doing it to me!

    1. Re:Thank God! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, when you're tired and chugging coke to stay awake, no shit. Is it any suprise that if you're tired you'll burn less energy, and therefore put on fat? This is completely beside the whole discussion about whether the calories in v.s. out thing.

    2. Re:Thank God! by Rooked_One · · Score: 1

      There's not much else I can say but this...

      The lack of attention to the rise in obesity since america got hooked on corn syrup is astounding to me. Sure some of us are less active, but bring in the ease of use of the internet, and the 500 channels of nothing to watch on TV, and you get an excellent equation for a fat country.

    3. Re:Thank God! by Grygus · · Score: 1

      There is no lack of attention. It gets mentioned virtually every day. There is a lack of caring about it.

    4. Re:Thank God! by Phoghat · · Score: 1

      Thank God! All this time I thought it was the Coke and Fritos doing it to me!

      Must be all those fat asses in Wallmarts across the mid-West are really jet setters and are fat through no fault of their own

      --
      Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
  2. Just one more round... by Defenestrar · · Score: 4, Funny

    And here I thought it was staying up late (and eating snacks) while doing things online with friends in a different time zone.

  3. Not Much You Can Do About That by Githaron · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If your biological schedule doesn't match up with the rest of your area, it will be hard to find a job that matches your schedule. All I can do is watch my weight and eat/exercise accordingly.

    1. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by CastrTroy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, there is something you can do about it. Keep the same schedule on the weekends that you do during the week. And ensure you get enough sleep every night. The problem as described in the summary is that people will stay up late and sleep in on the weekends, but will go to be early and get up early on the weekdays. The problem isn't some "biological schedule" it's that your schedule changes between the weekends and the weekdays. Your body can't adjust fast enough.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    2. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by bananaquackmoo · · Score: 1

      Good luck with trying that. Let me know how it goes for you. It's never going to happen for me.

    3. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by Anrego · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yup.

      Made a comment about this below. I used to run through the week on 4 or 5 hours a night, then crash on the weekends. It's tough to do, but if you force yourself to get a decent amount of sleep through the week, and cut back on the sleeping in (I still do sleep in a few hours.. ) it makes a huge difference. It's hard to give up that extra "winding down" time at the end of the day.. but not feeling like a zombie all the time is worth it.

    4. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by jeffmeden · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If your biological schedule doesn't match up with the rest of your area, it will be hard to find a job that matches your schedule. All I can do is watch my weight and eat/exercise accordingly.

      Controlling when you sleep (making it consistent) and when you are exposed to bright light (again, consistency PLUS avoiding it 3 hours before bed time) will get you on track without a heroic effort, unless of course you work a non-traditional shift like 8pm-5am and can't avoid being awake from 5am to 1pm on some days (if you are in the rhythm to sleep those hours 7 days a week you can get along just fine). That kind of schedule swing is a serious bitch.

    5. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by Githaron · · Score: 2

      My biological schedule doesn't change between weekends and weekdays. It stays the same. The only difference is that I am forced to fight my biological schedule on weekdays and I am not on weekends. Also, before anyone says it, my body will not get used to a new schedule if I stick to it long enough. I have tried multiple times in my life and failed. I simply do not function at 100% in the mornings. My mind also does not want to turn off until between 12:00am to 2:00am. It is a fight to get up and a fight to get myself to bed.

    6. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by locopuyo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Same here, if only the days were longer. We need to find some way to slow the rotation of the earth.

    7. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My job won't let me keep the same schedule between weekends and workdays. Work to live, not live to work.

    8. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Getting more exercise early in the day can often help with getting to bed.

    9. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by T-Bone-T · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It happened to me with kids. I haven't slept-in in years because my kids get up right after the sun comes up.

    10. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by CSMoran · · Score: 2

      Have you considered an alternative sleep pattern? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyphasic_sleep

      --
      Every end has half a stick.
    11. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by Defenestrar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It may not be possible, but exposure to bright light in the morning can help a lot - it's best if it's sunlight or at least a fair solar spectrum approximation. The older you are the brighter the light needs to be (due to decrease of eye transmission with age).

    12. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by TheCouchPotatoFamine · · Score: 1

      I don't think your advice is consistent with this article; sleep is incredibly important, and we did NOT evolve to sleep as little as possible on a rigid basis. Our bodies have varying requirements as they react and adjust to the insults life inflicts (or we do). To think waking and rising each day at the same time (if you even can without modern drugs!) is healthy is about as smart as refusing to breathe deeply when you run.

      I hate the typical corporate america attitude for just for this life-shortening idiocy. I won't die for it.

      --
      CS majors know the time/space tradeoff, but they never get taught the 3rd, crucial, tradeoff of the set: comprehension!
    13. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by SomeJoel · · Score: 4, Funny

      Same here, if only the days were longer. We need to find some way to slow the rotation of the earth.

      That sounds like a lot of work, and I'm pretty tired.

      --
      <Complete your profile by adding a signature!>
    14. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by Chrisq · · Score: 5, Funny

      It happened to me with kids. I haven't slept-in in years because my kids get up right after the sun comes up.

      Wait until they're teenagers - it will be you telling them its time to get up.

    15. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I hate schedules, I hate routine. And every girlfriend I've had that came with kids made it so I was always up earlier than everyone else. But when I'm single like I am now, I go right back to agreeing with bananaquackmoo.. :D Although work forces me to get up at a certain time I have to fight myself not to stay up all night and get enough sleep... It's hell, because I'm nocturnal by default. I hate mornings, and I love mid-day and the night.

    16. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      My samplle set of one (yeah, I know) confirms that. I usually wake up before the clock goes off and get up about the same time on weekends, and I'm actually a little underweight (that's mostly genetic, though). Maybe I should start staying up late and make it up on the weekends so I can gain?

      Nah, screw it, if I don't get enough sleep I'm irratable and my brain doesn't function as well.

    17. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm exactly the same way. No matter how diligent I am in going to bed early and getting up early, my mind simply won't shut off until after midnight. My body also wants to take a nap between 3:00pm and 3:30pm. I used to schedule my university classes around this time so that I could grab a nap in the library in one of the cubes

      At work, I simply can't get anything productive done until mid-morning. My most productive time of the day is late morning and after lunch. It's one of the reasons why I don't mind morning conference calls, as long as they aren't too early, and hate afternoon meetings. Fortunately, the company that I work for understands the importance of flex hours. Some of my co-workers come in early and leave early, I come in late and leave late. The benefit for the company is that our IT group has extended business hours...

    18. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That doesn't work for most people. There's still housework and administration that needs to be done and if you don't take your time winding down you may be physically more spunky but you become a mental zombie instead. The only real solution to the problem is to lobby congress to enact a law limiting work hours and imposing import tariffs on goods from countries without such a law.

    19. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by janeil · · Score: 0

      Nope, whether you enjoy the night or whatever, our species is simply not nocturnal. That's simply a matter of choice. No one is a "morning person" or a "night person," we're all genetically conditioned to sleep at night and move around during the day. That said, I also love the wee hours of the morning, but get up well before sunrise because early morning is the greatest, too. Then I eat a huge meal around noon and sleep for a few hours, because I'm a carnivore by default.

    20. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by Terrasque · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Delayed sleep phase disorder

      Yeah, it's exactly what it sounds like. My natural sleeping pattern makes me go to bed around 3-4am. And sleep for ~8-9 hours. And no, just waking early in the weekend does not help. This has been going on since before I started school, and nothing tried the last 20 years have changed that one bit.

      I'm tired of friends and complete strangers saying stuff like "Just change your rhythm" or "You're just lazy, I did it just fine!" - I have tried, it Does Not Help. It does not change a thing.

      In fact, the disorder is sometimes referred to as "social jet lag" - it might even be the exact disorder the article is hinting at.

      Your comment sounds like an asshole seeing a guy in wheelchair, and saying "He's just lazy. Look, I can walk just fine, and so can my friends!"

      --
      It's The Golden Rule: "He who has the gold makes the rules."
    21. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by Zygodac · · Score: 1

      Yes, I can see it now, a 36 hour day.

    22. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by kd5zex · · Score: 1

      I was adjusting the alarm on my phone by a few minutes the other day and when I changed the alarm time a dialog popped up that said "The alarm will go off in 23 hours and 36 minutes."

      I thought to myself, "Shit, why so soon...."

    23. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by geekoid · · Score: 2

      well then, enjoy dying 10 years sooner then you need to.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    24. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by geekoid · · Score: 2

      That is a failure of your mind, not your body.

      Get some will power

      " My mind also does not want to turn off until between 12:00am to 2:00am."
      That because of your sleep schedule, and possible health issues.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    25. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good luck with trying that. Let me know how it goes for you. It's never going to happen for me.

      I pity you.

    26. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      Sounds like you may have real medical condition, that is rare but difficult to live with. What the article (as far as I can tell from the summary, who reads the articles?) is saying is that people who have differing sleep schedules between weekends and weekdays suffer a type of jet lag because it is as if they are trying to switch timezones twice a week, ever week. This plays havoc with your natural rhythm, regardless of what your rhythm is. Rather it's go to sleep at 4 am and wake up at noon, or go to sleep at 10 and wake up at 6.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    27. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by gstrickler · · Score: 1

      Sounds like you may have Delayed sleep phase disorder.

      Read about it. If it sounds like you, get yourself tested. Then, find a job that works with your body cycle. Life is much simpler since I stopped trying to force myself into a "conventional schedule" and created my life around my body's schedule.

      For the early crowd, there is also Advanced sleep phase disorder

      --
      make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
    28. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by dudpixel · · Score: 1

      We spend the first few years teaching them to stand up and talk and then for the rest of their lives we're telling them to sit down and shut up. ;)

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
    29. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by mikael_j · · Score: 1

      Well, if work hours weren't dictated by religious morality and when people used to get out of bed back when large portions of the population were sustenance farmers maybe most people wouldn't feel the need to switch between their "weekday schedule" and what they're actually comfortable with.

      Of course, on top of that there's the issue of electric lighting (I've had a long-running plan to automate all the lights in my home so that they dim and brighten based on the time of day to deal with this, I've tried a few primitive versions of it but haven't really managed to come up with anything good enough. I suspect the route to go is dimmable LEDs as well as a few photodiodes hooked up to my home server (so that I can control lighting both based on the light level and the time of day easily)).

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    30. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by codeButcher · · Score: 1

      Oh how I wish I could get up with the sun...... Alarms in the dark are a real b****. (Haven't found one of those sunrise alarms to buy either - should probably dust of the electronics skills and cobble something together).

      --
      Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
    31. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by GNious · · Score: 1

      Could you bring your kids over to teach mine? They are impossible to get out of bed in the mornings, weekend or not, pretty much independent of when they go to bed.
      (They're like their parents in that regards, I guess)

    32. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by voidphoenix · · Score: 1

      Nope, some of us really are night people. We can have perfectly regular sleep cycles, only not at "normal" hours.

    33. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Or, he's getting older and doesn't realize caffeine affects older people different than young people.

      At 42, I have learned I have to re-learn my body's needs about once a year. About a decade ago, I realized any caffeine later than one soda with lunch was a disaster of a night waiting for me. Once I stopped consuming it in any quantity, and not ever after lunch (or started making a conscious choice about it) the problem vanished.

      First it was caffeine, then fiber, then hydrating, then reading glasses... it'll continue. Man up, use your damn brain for stuff other than computers and it works itself out.

    34. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by __aaffir7958 · · Score: 1

      I hear that a window can accomplish what you're trying to do. They're fairly cheap, and they even run on solar power!

    35. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by mikael_j · · Score: 1

      Yeah, except I live far north enough that in mid-june the sun barely drops below the horizon for two hours or so. And in winter the opposite happens, I've literally had entire weeks when I've not seen daylight at all, for actual direct sunlight I've gone even longer.

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    36. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting, and looks legit! But that's a disorder so by definition not normal. I like how the article suggests use of marijuana for dealing with this syndrome!

    37. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by bolthole · · Score: 1

      My mind also does not want to turn off until between 12:00am to 2:00am. It is a fight to get up and a fight to get myself to bed.

      Been there, done that. I had huge difficulties going to sleep "early".

      From my own experience, I would guess that your issues are mostly a combination of one or more of the following:

      1. stress
      2. lack of purpose in your life
      3. lack of positiveness in your life.

      Most important tip:

      I have tried multiple times in my life and failed

      That doesnt mean it is somehow impossible for you. It means you were doing it wrong, repeatedly.

      FYI: I got over my late-night ness, when a combination of things happened:

      1. I got older
      2. I had children
      3. I forcibly had to change my work schedule, and yes my life schedule as well
    38. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by Somebody+is+Grar · · Score: 1

      I get little enough sleep during the week. I'll be damned if I'm going to continue the pattern when I don't have to!

      --
      Grar II
    39. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by AndOne · · Score: 1

      I have the same issue. Sleep study confirmed and everything. I was working with a clinical behavioral psychologist to improve some, but life went crazy and my sleep is back to pretty much being shit.

      Light therapy did help some though. I need to get back on trying that.

      People are basically assclowns about it though.

      --
      I don't care what you say, all I need is my Wumpabet soup.
    40. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by K10W · · Score: 1

      Delayed sleep phase disorder

      Yeah, it's exactly what it sounds like. My natural sleeping pattern makes me go to bed around 3-4am. And sleep for ~8-9 hours. And no, just waking early in the weekend does not help. This has been going on since before I started school, and nothing tried the last 20 years have changed that one bit.

      I'm tired of friends and complete strangers saying stuff like "Just change your rhythm" or "You're just lazy, I did it just fine!" - I have tried, it Does Not Help. It does not change a thing.

      In fact, the disorder is sometimes referred to as "social jet lag" - it might even be the exact disorder the article is hinting at.

      Your comment sounds like an asshole seeing a guy in wheelchair, and saying "He's just lazy. Look, I can walk just fine, and so can my friends!"

      thanks for that link on delayed sleep phase disorder. I have that exact same issue and have been called lazy despite often sleeping less than those saying it since I am forced to get up at same early times but haven't slept as even going to bed early I don't sleep. As for routine I've had this since young child and went through school, high school, college, university and so on with the problem. I'd crash when i got home and my parents would scream at me and force me up complaining about being lazy. If anything it just turned me into an angry tired person and didn't motivate me further since I was already f****ing motivated.

    41. Re:Not Much You Can Do About That by voidphoenix · · Score: 1

      Interesting, and looks legit! But that's a disorder so by definition not normal. I like how the article suggests use of marijuana for dealing with this syndrome!

      That's the funny thing, we define a "disorder" as something that isn't "normal", but how do we define "normal"? Someone who doesn't have any disorders? ;) Maybe it's only actually a "disorder" in the sense that a) it's rather uncommon; b) it's inconvenient to have it when trying to fit into the standardized, regimented cycles of most modern, urbanized populations.

      If you think about it, people with the "disorder" generally have regular and "normal"-length sleep cycles, only at a different time from most people, if we aren't forced to comply with the normal sleep-wake cycles. When given the opportunity, we can have perfectly functional and productive lives. Maybe we're not "broken" and don't actually need fixing. Left-handedness was once considered a "disorder" too, right?

  4. Yeah sure by doston · · Score: 4, Informative

    Has nothing to do with the italian grinder you went to bed on, just the rhythmic imbalance. Fix that, change nothing else and the fat will literally melt away. Articles like this pander to the ever expanding population of morbidly obese...probably consciously. Editor's meeting: "Write more stories fat people will like, since everybody's fat".

    1. Re:Yeah sure by Troyusrex · · Score: 0

      My thought exactly! It has nothing to do with my overeating and lack of exercise it's social jetlag!

    2. Re:Yeah sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not everyone's fat. I gave up sweets six months ago, picked up the weights 3 months ago, and now have a better body than a fit 20 year old at 45.

      If you actually care about your health, it's pretty easy to get in shape.

    3. Re:Yeah sure by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      Not "everybody" is fat (overweight or obese). Just 90% of Americans over age 30... that's not so bad.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    4. Re:Yeah sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Has nothing to do with the italian grinder you went to bed on, just the rhythmic imbalance. Fix that, change nothing else and the fat will literally melt away. Articles like this pander to the ever expanding population of morbidly obese...probably consciously. Editor's meeting: "Write more stories fat people will like, since everybody's fat".

      When you're tired, your will breaks down for one thing.

      Secondly, we evolved to get the sleep we need to - we didn't evolve with alarm clocks. That's the factory system that forced us to be a slave to the clock. When I'm training hard, I need more sleep and after a week's work and training, I really need to sleep in; otherwise I become sleep deprived. So, I need to sleep in.

      And with our longer commutes, we need to get up earlier, so that adds to the sleep deprivation.

    5. Re:Yeah sure by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You are correct.

      Look, there's only one way to lose the weight, and that's this:

      Eat less and exercise more.

      I know, it's impossible, right? Well, I started out being unable to bike to the end of the block and weighing a dangerous 250 pounds. I ate crap all the time -- working in a mall I'd often eat NYF poutine, a donair, and an Orange Julius for lunch. I didn't get much exercise. I'd also eat a chocolate bar every single day. The odds were against me and the situation was grim.

      I kept on the bike though. I biked to school, eventually got all the way (2km!) without a rest, biked all the way through school, and biked to work once I graduated (B.Eng.). I still bike to work.

      In addition to that, I did thousands of pushups on the Wii Fit, pulling a lot of weight from my gut and putting muscle onto my chest. I changed my diet, eating a lot more fruit and veggies and cutting out a lot of the chocolate and fast foods. I still eat treats, and lots of them, but nowhere near what I used to scarf down. I drink mostly water, with some sodas as an rare treat.

      Now I weigh 160 pounds, 10% BF, and teach spin classes. The only real problem is that my wife isn't happy with my fitness; she's pretty insecure about it.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    6. Re:Yeah sure by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      Has nothing to do with the italian grinder you went to bed on

      How does dating an Italian woman equate to getting fat? Not all of them cook well!

    7. Re:Yeah sure by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      Disrupt your normal sleeping patterns and you feel lethargic. Feel lethargic and you don't engage in normal activities and you start taking shortcuts (ordering in rather than cooking). I just finished a semester of 4-5 hours sleep time and zero exercise and I feel like a new man now that I'm getting a decent amount of sleep.

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    8. Re:Yeah sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yeah, we all know how much everyone caters to the obese. They're never mocked; you see them so often in ads for clothes, hair, and make-up it's like companies are yelling, "Hey skinny and normally proportioned people, don't you feel ugly for not gaining weight?"; you see the way girls constantly push themselves to eat more because society has so thoroughly built up the image of fatties as being hot that they're willing to even risk death by overeating in order to try to be beautiful by modern standards.
       
      Or, you know, maybe the scientists performing this study looked at some phenomenon and said, "Hey, there's correlation here, and there might be causation." and they did their best to eliminate outside variables, such as caloric intake. There are actually some scientists who do that sort of thing, you know. It's true that the results of the study may be used as an excuse by some people as another justification for their obesity, but I posit that's not nearly as bad as someone like you discounting science in the name of insulting people with weight problems.

    9. Re:Yeah sure by doston · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You are correct.

      Look, there's only one way to lose the weight, and that's this:

      Eat less and exercise more.

      I know, it's impossible, right? Well, I started out being unable to bike to the end of the block and weighing a dangerous 250 pounds. I ate crap all the time -- working in a mall I'd often eat NYF poutine, a donair, and an Orange Julius for lunch. I didn't get much exercise. I'd also eat a chocolate bar every single day. The odds were against me and the situation was grim.

      I kept on the bike though. I biked to school, eventually got all the way (2km!) without a rest, biked all the way through school, and biked to work once I graduated (B.Eng.). I still bike to work.

      In addition to that, I did thousands of pushups on the Wii Fit, pulling a lot of weight from my gut and putting muscle onto my chest. I changed my diet, eating a lot more fruit and veggies and cutting out a lot of the chocolate and fast foods. I still eat treats, and lots of them, but nowhere near what I used to scarf down. I drink mostly water, with some sodas as an rare treat.

      Now I weigh 160 pounds, 10% BF, and teach spin classes. The only real problem is that my wife isn't happy with my fitness; she's pretty insecure about it.

      I knew a guy like that when I worked at AT&T wireless. He was probably 300 lbs when we worked together, but he transferred from engineering to IT. I didn't see him for a couple of years. Ran into him again and I didn't even recognize him. He went from this just lump of cottage cheese to a literal marathon runner. Never seen anything like it in my life. It's super rare and I (of course) have a theory about it. I think he (and probably you) were likely natural athletes and for whatever reason (life happening, depression) got caught in a rut. You're probably just being yourself. Who knows though. You probbaly have a theory of your own on what motivated you. Fear? A diabetes diagnosis? Your wife is right to be insecure about your fitness, if she isn't fit. I'd join in, if I were her; it's like having a live-in life coach.

    10. Re:Yeah sure by eulernet · · Score: 4, Informative

      Another suggestion: eat slowly !

      We eat tons of food without even realizing.
      The satiety comes after a few moments eating, and it differs from people to another one.

      Eating in the shortest amount of time doesn't allow the satiety mechanisms do their job.

    11. Re:Yeah sure by doston · · Score: 0

      Yeah, we all know how much everyone caters to the obese. They're never mocked; you see them so often in ads for clothes, hair, and make-up it's like companies are yelling, "Hey skinny and normally proportioned people, don't you feel ugly for not gaining weight?"; you see the way girls constantly push themselves to eat more because society has so thoroughly built up the image of fatties as being hot that they're willing to even risk death by overeating in order to try to be beautiful by modern standards. Or, you know, maybe the scientists performing this study looked at some phenomenon and said, "Hey, there's correlation here, and there might be causation." and they did their best to eliminate outside variables, such as caloric intake. There are actually some scientists who do that sort of thing, you know. It's true that the results of the study may be used as an excuse by some people as another justification for their obesity, but I posit that's not nearly as bad as someone like you discounting science in the name of insulting people with weight problems.

      The problem with your reply is that there's a difference between fashion marketing and the mainstream press. One is marketing (you look like this when you wear this) the other is pandering (our readers are couch potatoes, let's give them a feel good article). Also, studying things is great and I support that, but writers who search for this material and editors who publish it aren't scientists, they're propagandists.

    12. Re:Yeah sure by jdavidb · · Score: 1

      The only real problem is that my wife isn't happy with my fitness; she's pretty insecure about it.

      What does that mean, exactly? She is worried you are fit enough to leave her for a "better offer" or something?

      Do you flirt with women at the gym? Act really friendly with women in your classes? Gyms are really bad for some people in terms of extramarital relationships. My wife and I go to the gym together and don't get into friendships that don't involve each other. And she loves the resulting increase in fitness! (For both of us.)

      There may be some behavioral changes you can make that would give her security and keep you fit. Your fitness alone may not really be the issue.

    13. Re:Yeah sure by Dripdry · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, that's not entirely true.

      A lot of the science now is showing that eat less/exercise more doesn't produce much in terms of results over the long term.
      There have been studies done on eating less/deprivation, and the repeatedly conclude that it's bad. In extreme cases, of course (like eating a pound of bacon at each meal) there is room to cut back, but in general the whole idea of introducing fewer calories may not be the cure-all many think it is.

      Obesity is actually a sign that we're not giving our body the nutrients it needs, so it stores fat. So eating better (read: more nutritious food) is likely to fix things more easily. Of course, exercise isn't bad or anything, it's just not a cure-all.

      --
      -
    14. Re:Yeah sure by doston · · Score: 0

      Has nothing to do with the italian grinder you went to bed on, just the rhythmic imbalance. Fix that, change nothing else and the fat will literally melt away. Articles like this pander to the ever expanding population of morbidly obese...probably consciously. Editor's meeting: "Write more stories fat people will like, since everybody's fat".

      When you're tired, your will breaks down for one thing.

      Secondly, we evolved to get the sleep we need to - we didn't evolve with alarm clocks. That's the factory system that forced us to be a slave to the clock. When I'm training hard, I need more sleep and after a week's work and training, I really need to sleep in; otherwise I become sleep deprived. So, I need to sleep in.

      And with our longer commutes, we need to get up earlier, so that adds to the sleep deprivation.

      LOL uh ok. Way to take responsibility.

    15. Re:Yeah sure by TheCouchPotatoFamine · · Score: 1

      (as i wrote above).sleep is incredibly important, and we did NOT evolve to sleep as little as possible on a rigid basis How much must I yell it? Our bodies have varying requirements as they react and adjust to the insults life inflicts (or we do). To think waking and rising each day at the same time (if you even can without modern drugs!) is healthy is about as smart as refusing to breathe deeply when you run and I /hate/ the typical corporate america attitude for just for this life-shortening idiocy. I won't die for it.

      (un-fat / remote programming consultant / sleeps 10hr a day / skips on TV / and like to stand occasionally when working and my desk "rises to the occasion".)

      --
      CS majors know the time/space tradeoff, but they never get taught the 3rd, crucial, tradeoff of the set: comprehension!
    16. Re:Yeah sure by aztracker1 · · Score: 1

      Well, the definition for fat/obese is a bit off... You're typical athlete is most likely in the overweight/obese category, despite being more healthy than average.

      --
      Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
    17. Re:Yeah sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not everyone's fat. I gave up sweets six months ago, picked up the weights 3 months ago, and now have a better body than a fit 20 year old at 45.

      If you actually care about your health, it's pretty easy to get in shape.

      Better than a fit 20 year old? Really? You must not remember being 25 too well. I do. I'm fat and out of shape now (despite being able to walk for hours and do things that belie my weight a bit). I don't care how in shape you are at 45, you're 45. An in shape 25 year old will crush you. How many 45 year old UFC fighters win against the 20 year olds? Do you know why motocross racers have an old timer's class (some of the most fit people in the world provided they haven't wrecked enough to destroy their bodies)? You may be way, way more fit than the average person around your age but there's no way you're better off than a fit 25 year old.

      When I was 25 I could go for 90 straight minutes doing jiu jistsu (trying to keep a guy from strangling me on the mat) or arnis de mano (gripping two ratan wood canes in a death grip and pounding them against a partner's canes). No matter how hard my workout, no problems the next day, do it again and ride my bike to work and back. Try even that sometime, see if you can even get up the next morning doing crap like that at 45.

    18. Re:Yeah sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm gonna post in a different browser to not undo moderation here.

      I would like to point out your post is the ONLY one I gave a positive moderation to - and I used up fifteen moderation points.

      There is an INCREDIBLE amount of shaming people for not being fit, and thinking it's as simple as eating less.

    19. Re:Yeah sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only real problem is that my wife isn't happy with my fitness; she's pretty insecure about it.

      What does that mean, exactly? She is worried you are fit enough to leave her for a "better offer" or something? ...

      Many people are very concerned about their own physique. Having a person that you see daily and identify as "in better shape" than you can only make matters worse if you are prone to look at how you neglect yourself (instead of just being happy for them).

      Assuming that this gentleman is the cause of such angst, and then assuming that he's emotionally shallow is blaming the victim. The wife is certainly not barred from doing exercise, and considering that he bothers to mention his wife, odds are excellent that he's just as good a husband as any of us.

    20. Re:Yeah sure by aoism · · Score: 1

      I don't necessarily agree with eating less for folks that are trying to lose weight - at least not initially. It really depends on the quality of what you eat, not the quantity. Remember what Jack LaLane said - 'If it tastes good, spit it out'.. If they eat less, they will have a hungry feeling. Instead, eat the same amount of better things for you, but spread it out over 5 meals instead of 3 meals, and always ensure your last meal of the day is the one you eat the least at, and the first of the day is the one you eat the most.. Take my advice -- I used to be overweight and weak, now at age 32 am rocking a 34 inch waist,16.5 inch arms, and running 2 miles in 15 mins :)

    21. Re:Yeah sure by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      Has nothing to do with the italian grinder you went to bed on

      How does dating an Italian woman equate to getting fat? Not all of them cook well!

      Besides, when she grinds your salami it helps you lose weight.

    22. Re:Yeah sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think he (and probably you) were likely natural athletes and for whatever reason (life happening, depression) got caught in a rut.

      In other words, normal people aren't capable of being fit, unless they are natural athletes? You better come up with a better explanation, friend, because that sounds like rationalization, and has far more scientific evidence against it than for it.

    23. Re:Yeah sure by doston · · Score: 1

      I think he (and probably you) were likely natural athletes and for whatever reason (life happening, depression) got caught in a rut.

      In other words, normal people aren't capable of being fit, unless they are natural athletes? You better come up with a better explanation, friend, because that sounds like rationalization, and has far more scientific evidence against it than for it.

      Look, I'm personally fantastically thin, so I don't need to explain anything myself. As for the obese, I spent probably 30 seconds forming that hypothesis. I think every thinking person knows what causes fat people to be fat, but I'm not so sure it's well understood what causes an morbidly obese person to all of a sudden become an athelete. Keep in mind that my hypothesis (from 2004) was about a very narrow demographic, dumbass.

    24. Re:Yeah sure by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 1

      I'll reply to both of you.

      Basically, yes, my wife is afraid that I'll trade her in for a newer model. I'm not sure why she thinks that. She's not that interested in sex, which is a little disappointing but not a deal-breaker. We work well together in terms of logistics, finances, childcare, hobbies (we tend to have different ones though). Yes, we go to counselling.

      Yes, I'm friendly to everyone, men and women. (It's part of the Art of Manliness, to strike up a conversation with a stranger at least three times a day. It's really tough.) BUT you have to remember that I'm married, and I wear my ring all the time -- gym, sleeping, swimming, showering, etc. I've taken it off once in the last 14 years, and that's because it broke and I had to get it repaired. (It also fell off by accident earlier this week.) I think that when a woman is comfortable talking to me, it's because I'm married and thus harmless. I'm not going to misconstrue "friendly" with "interested".

      My wife runs, she plays a lot of sports like field hockey and field lacrosse, and goes to the gym at her work often. The Y is next door to my work and I have a free membership, so I'm there most days. Today was yoga.

      It's one thing we can't really talk about, the fitness. She's really concerned about her weight and she resents me for weighing less than she does. She doesn't know what I weigh. I mean, I was poisoned by some bad antibiotics a month ago and dropped 5 pounds. I couldn't even tell her I was worried about it. (It hasn't come back yet, either.)

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    25. Re:Yeah sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, but there's a difference between weight and fitness. Your weight is more or less determined by genetics excepting malnutrition. The right diet (in terms of actually getting enough vitamins, etc.) and exercise may make you fit, but it's not going to make you lose any significant (i.e. more than about 10 lbs) amount of weight.

    26. Re:Yeah sure by manu0601 · · Score: 2

      Eat less and exercise more.

      I agree for exercice, but for nutrition, there is no need to eat less. You can start eating better food. Less high glycemic index carbohydrates, no trans fats, more fruits and vegetables.

    27. Re:Yeah sure by shiftless · · Score: 1

      Well maybe if you had not let yourself become such a fat ass then you could still do that stuff. Ron Paul rides his bikes miles a week at 76. What's your excuse, chubby?

    28. Re:Yeah sure by Lord_Naikon · · Score: 1

      On the contrary, your typical athlete sustains far more injuries than an average person and has a lower life expectancy due to all kinds of internal wear and damage. They are not healthier than average.

    29. Re:Yeah sure by mikael_j · · Score: 1

      Well, it depends on your definition of "fit". If you define a "fit 20 year old" as a professional athlete in peak competition shape then you're setting the bar pretty high. If you instead set it at "someone who's never been overweight, is casually involved in some sport, going to practice once a week and hits the gym once or twice a week" then it's definitely believable that a 45 year old could be in better shape, especially if you factor in genetics.

      And yeah, the 20 year old in my example definitely would be considered fit by most of his peers, the average 20 year old tends to look more fit than he/she is (When I was younger I had plenty of friends who looked quite fit, hit the gym just often enough to look not fat or even slightly "cut" by most people's standards yet in practice a 40 year old who went for a couple of runs and hit the gym a few times per week would've been in much better shape than them).

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    30. Re:Yeah sure by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

      And another glimpse into the mindset of the Paulbot. You scratch away the thin patina of faux "freedom" blahblah and you find nothing but a rotten core of hate mixed with uncritical hero worship. And you are the guys calling others "sheeple". Excuse me while I laugh my arse off.

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    31. Re:Yeah sure by voidphoenix · · Score: 1

      ...I'm not so sure it's well understood what causes an morbidly obese person to all of a sudden become an athelete.

      You said you didn't see him for "a couple of years". That's not "all of a sudden". It's not about being a "natural athlete", it's about making a choice, taking responsibility for yourself and just doing what needs to be done. You spent 30 seconds forming that hypothesis in 2004, and in 8 years you haven't managed to improved on it. Who's the dumbass?

    32. Re:Yeah sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Check out http://www.marriagebuilders.com/ for a scientific plan for getting her interested in sex again and, just as importantly, getting your marriage to a point where you can talk about fitness, your weight, and any other problems that affect either one of you without it becoming an emotional minefield. Frankly most marriage counseling is not scientifically based and has a dismal track record. The MB approach has been tracked literally for decades and people who have followed it have seen great results.

    33. Re:Yeah sure by doston · · Score: 1

      ...I'm not so sure it's well understood what causes an morbidly obese person to all of a sudden become an athelete.

      You said you didn't see him for "a couple of years". That's not "all of a sudden". It's not about being a "natural athlete", it's about making a choice, taking responsibility for yourself and just doing what needs to be done. You spent 30 seconds forming that hypothesis in 2004, and in 8 years you haven't managed to improved on it. Who's the dumbass?

      Not to put too fine a point on it, but I said he all of a sudden became an athlete, not he all of a sudden became thin. And he did all of a sudden become an athlete. I haven't managed to improve on it, becuase I don't sit around thinking about fat people. I go to yoga twice a week, bike, eat right and don't drink. Theories about why fat people become athletic don't preoccupy my mind. Maybe you rack your brain over it. Maybe you should work in sales at 24 hour fitness.

  5. Causation/correlation counterpoint by Shoten · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From the article:

    Previous work with such data has already yielded some clues. "We have shown that if you live against your body clock, you're more likely to smoke, to drink alcohol, and drink far more coffee," says Roenneberg.

    From the slashdot post:
    "or spend all weekend sleeping in and then get up at 6 am on Monday"

    These look to me like behaviors of people who don't take care of themselves and/or who are lazy/inactive. I don't see how sleep is the cause. It makes more sense to me that it'd be the other way around...that inactivity tends to help cause obesity, and also correlates with sleeping in whenever you can, for example.

    --

    For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
    1. Re:Causation/correlation counterpoint by Anrego · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think it's more the behavior of people who grind away on 4 or 5 hours sleep a night through the week then crash on the weekend. I used to be one of them. When I forced myself into getting more sleep through the week, I noticed a huge difference in how I felt and how much energy I had. Also weekends are much more enjoyable when you get up at 10 (so still sleeping in for a few hours) and feel great vice waking up at 2am and feeling groggy.

      If anyone is in the same place I was, I seriously recommend trying it. Set a consistent bed time. It's well worth losing a few hours of "minecraft time" for the extra energy (and probably health benifits). At the very least try it for a week.

    2. Re:Causation/correlation counterpoint by DerekLyons · · Score: 2, Insightful

      These look to me like behaviors of people who don't take care of themselves and/or who are lazy/inactive.

      Yeah. Despite decades of research showing that poor sleep patterns can effect your health... it's all about the lazy people.
       

      It makes more sense to me that it'd be the other way around...that inactivity tends to help cause obesity, and also correlates with sleeping in whenever you can, for example.

      Does inactivity correlate with sleeping in? Get back to me with your cites and studies.

    3. Re:Causation/correlation counterpoint by Znork · · Score: 1

      People have biological clocks that vary which they'll tend to fall into if they have no outside cues. These can be up towards 25-26 hours per day. Most people are sensitive enough to daylight to adjust (if you live in a place where daylight is actually a useful cue), some adjust by syncing to a habit.

      But for some people the biological clock doesn't sync on day or the yearly variation in solar cycle messes with the sensitivity, nor does the habit work. Instead keeping a stable cycle means having constant jetlag. Forcing an 'acceptable' schedule will shift you out of phase with your biological clock one hour further per day, meaning you'll be constantly tired and the body will desperately try to recuperate and resync during weekends. The constant lack of sleep will often lead to depression and other health issues.

      You can try to experience it by figuring out how far your own biological clock can adjust if you shorten your days, ie, see if it can cope with 23 or 22 hour days, and then attempt to sync to, for example, a 21 hour day.

    4. Re:Causation/correlation counterpoint by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      I'll vouch for that. I just wrote a post about how different I feel after a semester of 4-5 hours of sleep (and crashing on weekends). Any idiot with a nice normal schedule can bag on the general population for having to catch up on sleep on the weekends.

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    5. Re:Causation/correlation counterpoint by nine-times · · Score: 1

      I might argue that it's a self-reenforcing vicious cycle. You don't take care of yourself, which means you don't have energy. You don't have energy, and so you don't take care of yourself. This can happen in a few different ways. If you stay up late, maybe you're more likely to have late-night snacks. Maybe the reason you stay up late is because you're out living a lifestyle that's not physically healthy. Maybe the fact that you're unhealthy means you're more likely to have trouble sleeping.

      In any case, I don't think it's surprising that there's a correlation between not sleeping well and being overweight. Over-eating and bad sleeping habits are both examples of failing to take care of yourself, and both can be symptoms resulting from failing to take care of yourself.

    6. Re:Causation/correlation counterpoint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I forced myself into getting more sleep through the week, I noticed a huge difference in how I felt and how much energy I had.

      Well, you're lucky that you can actually force yourself to sleep. I try every night, I get home at 6pm and lay down. I usually lay down for 1-2 hours then maybe drift asleep for an hour before waking back up having to trying and force myself to sleep again. This continues until around 3-4am when I finally get to sleep (and remember dreams), but my alarm goes off at 5 and struggle to get ready and feel exhausted all day.

      If I'm up past 8, I'm not getting to bed. I get a surge of energy and feel awesome and alert and I'm not getting to sleep until 4am. I've quit caffeine and other stimulates, done the whole avoiding blue light thing, even trying orange goggles for several hours before bed, avoiding anything electronic, etc. Nothing works. Herbal teas, melatonin supplements, and even otc sleep drugs at best make me drowsy. Still can't get more than 1 to 2 hours at a time before 4am. Cannabis indica works (especially high CDB strains), but due to work I can't use it (which is also the reason I would need it...).

      If I go to sleep when I feel like it, it's usually around 3-4am and I go to sleep instantly and wake up around noon very refreshed.

      I've tried varying my diet, actually quite dramatically. I've gone from a standard american diet (fast food, processed food, etc) to doing regular vegetable juice fasts and doing a high fat, high protein, low carbohydrate, mostly raw plant-based diet and while that's helping me to drop fat, it's still has no effect on my sleep pattern.

      I try to exercise, but I often feel too exhausted during the week. On the weekends I can usually get in a few hours of walking a day, though.

      At the very least try it for a week.

      I tried for four months, I could not adjust. By the end I felt I couldn't go on much longer (as in, living). I actually ended up sleeping 14+ hours a day for a week after that. So I currently "sleep" from 6pm-5am week days and 4am-12pm on weekends. At least that way I get three days where I don't feel miserable and actually get something done.

    7. Re:Causation/correlation counterpoint by Anrego · · Score: 1

      Damn. That sounds much rougher than what I went through. I get much the same "late night burst of energy" problem .. but not to the degree or effect you describe.

      One thing I'd suggest adding to the list of things to try (if you haven't already), as silly as it sounds, is to go the opposite direction with regards to distractions. I find it almost impossible to "just" go to sleep in a quiet room. If I put a movie or old tv show on however and watch it from my bed.. I'll nod off within 20 minutes. Probably a combination of distracting the brain so it doesn't dwell on stuff and not feeling like you are losing free time for the sake of a good nights rest.

    8. Re:Causation/correlation counterpoint by shiftless · · Score: 1

      Well, you're lucky that you can actually force yourself to sleep. I try every night, I get home at 6pm and lay down. I usually lay down for 1-2 hours then maybe drift asleep for an hour before waking back up having to trying and force myself to sleep again. This continues until around 3-4am when I finally get to sleep (and remember dreams), but my alarm goes off at 5 and struggle to get ready and feel exhausted all day.

      Take two hits off a joint about 30 mins before you hit the sack. You will get the best sleep of your life.

      You're welcome.

    9. Re:Causation/correlation counterpoint by shiftless · · Score: 1

      By the way: the reason you feel tired is due to lack of carbs. Don't cut back on carbs--increase your activity level. The "all fruit" diet is garbage.

    10. Re:Causation/correlation counterpoint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By the way: the reason you feel tired is due to lack of carbs. Don't cut back on carbs--increase your activity level. The "all fruit" diet is garbage.

      I felt the same way when getting high levels of carbs.

    11. Re:Causation/correlation counterpoint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Take two hits off a joint about 30 mins before you hit the sack. You will get the best sleep of your life.

      You're welcome.

      I did mention that high-CBD cannabis indica works extremely well (cannabis sativa energizes me). If I vape some of that, I go right to sleep and wake up feeling refreshed, even at 5am. The problem is I can get drug tested.

  6. I don't have a cosmo account by 0racle · · Score: 3, Funny

    What's going on here? The url says slashdot but the summary looks like cosmo.

    --
    "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    1. Re:I don't have a cosmo account by royallthefourth · · Score: 1

      100 amazing sex tips for nerds, stuff that matters

  7. No alarm clock here by cpu6502 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The buttons on my clock stopped working ~11 years ago, and I never bothered to replace the clock. So now I just wake up when I wake up. My internal clock is pretty reliable, waking me between 5 and 6 am each morning. (Assuming I go to bed at a decent hour like 9 or 10..... if I stay up late then naturally I sleep late.)

    --
    My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    1. Re:No alarm clock here by BennyB2k4 · · Score: 2

      That only works if your body's natural clock is fairly close to 24h and your rhythm can sync in with the clock. I think average is around 24.5h. I'm in around the 25h mark. I can sync with 24h for a few days, but if I leave it natural I'll add an hour every day (vacation or on flex time).

    2. Re:No alarm clock here by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      I think it has less to do with the 24 hour clock, and more to do with the 8 hour clock (how long you sleep). If I go to bed at 10pm, I wake up 8 hours later... in time for work But if I go to bed at 8pm, then I still wake up 8 hours later (4am) and have two hours to kill at home.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    3. Re:No alarm clock here by KhabaLox · · Score: 2

      Same here. Ever since our kids started sleeping through the night (about 2.5 years ago), my wife and I don't usually have a problem waking up at pretty close to 6 every day (weekends included). Our two toddlers (3 and 4) usually come into our room and climb in bed between 5 and 6. The younger falls asleep again easily, and can sleep through until 7, while the other is itching to get out of bed (but we make him stay until 6).

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un sig.
    4. Re:No alarm clock here by ArsonSmith · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I noticed this after I had an accident as was in recovery for about 9 months. I noticed my best feelings were if I was on a ~30 hour day with 10 hours of sleep and 20 hours of awake doing stuff. Still wish I could go back to that schedule.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    5. Re:No alarm clock here by Onymous+Coward · · Score: 0

      A number of things cause your internal clock to resync, including when you go to bed. So his schedule is probably getting resync'd daily.

      You're not rolling forward because your internal clock is pushing you forward, you're rolling forward because you're just not disciplined at getting to bed.

    6. Re:No alarm clock here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Delay Sleep Phase Syndrome its called.
      And Lucky you at 25 hours I'm ~26-27 Its brutal to make it though a week.
      I found melatonin supplements help a lot.

    7. Re:No alarm clock here by Githaron · · Score: 1

      I tend to wake up 10 hours later if I don't use an alarm clock.

    8. Re:No alarm clock here by periodic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I find this kind of attitude is very elitistic from persons that seem to have a 24h day and tend to be morning persons. I agree with the former poster, I love to stay awake for a longer period and then sleep for more then eight hours, I can usually do that in the summers since my work is in academia and there is usually no students to sync up with.

      What I mean is that there is an attitude that one are disciplined and productive if one goes to bed early and get up early. If you are a night person or have a longer than 24h natural cycle, this means going to bed when you feel the most alert and productive and having to torture yourself every morning to stay in sync with the society. And still you will feel like piss the entire morning until maybe about lunch, after which your body starts waking up.

      Just don't say that evening persons lack discipline, they are just on a different internal clock. And maybe they are the most disciplined since they constantly have to work against what their bodies are telling them.

    9. Re:No alarm clock here by Onymous+Coward · · Score: 2

      There's a difference between time-of-day and length-of-day and you appear to be conflating the two.

      So-called "evening persons" could, if they were disciplined, get to bed every 4AM and wake at noon (or when their body is ready), and not suffer a "rolling forward" or other putative lag or length-of-day effects.

      I'm not saying that evening persons lack discipline nor am I implying that morning persons don't. I'm saying that "forward-rolling sleep cycle" persons lack discipline.

      If it's elite not to be abusive to one's self through sleep cycle negligence, then I agree with you that I'm elitist.

    10. Re:No alarm clock here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Use whatever excuse you like, you lazy bum. It doesn't make you any less lazier.

    11. Re:No alarm clock here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's N24 when you're longer than 24 hours can can't resync each morning/night. DSPS people still have 24 hours, but their sleep is shifted say 4am - 12pm and can get physically sick when they try to fix it.

      I'm glad melatonin works for you. It makes me dangerously depressed. Shear force of will gets me through about half of the days. I miss the other half :'(

    12. Re:No alarm clock here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My natural rhythm is close to 36 hours. I naturally stay awake for 24 hours, then sleep for 12. I can go for months like this, and be the happiest, healthiest, most productive I've ever been. Unfortunately, I can't find a region on this planet with 36 hour days.

    13. Re:No alarm clock here by cpu6502 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If your body needs 10 hours sleep, then that's what you should do.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    14. Re:No alarm clock here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My natural clock (based on an extended period a few years back when my hours were basically unconstrained) is horrible - nearly 27 hours, based on that I'd drift forward 2-3 full hours per day, to the point that eventually it was no longer "staying up late" but "getting up real early" before repeating.

      The worst part was that whenever I first woke up, the next 2 to 4 entire hours were nothing but a haze of drifting in an out of consciousness in bed, unable to summon the will power to so much as sit up, such that all the time gained by being on a 27 hour clock was lost.

      Only thing I've found that can stop that is a lot of very bright full-spectrum lamps right above my face in bed.

    15. Re:No alarm clock here by shiftless · · Score: 1

      I'm sort of the same way. I am self employed and isolated and my schedule is pretty much free to drift freely. I too find myself staying up a few hours later, then sleeping a couple hours later, resulting in a greater than 24 hour schedule. The only disadvantage to it really is the fact that I live in a small town where all the businesses close early. In a big city I could totally stay on this schedule indefinitely.

    16. Re:No alarm clock here by shiftless · · Score: 1

      You sure it's that we lack discipline? Or maybe we just don't agree on the same priorities?

    17. Re:No alarm clock here by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

      The buttons on my clock stopped working ~11 years ago, and I never bothered to replace the clock. So now I just wake up when I wake up.

      Sounds like an affirmative answer to a question on the 'Am I Part of The One Percent?' quiz.

    18. Re:No alarm clock here by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      Do I earn more than 350,000 dollars? No. Then I'm not part of the 1%. Are you?

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    19. Re:No alarm clock here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps not part of the 1%, but you are up there.

  8. Lifestyle makes a difference? Who knew. by djdanlib · · Score: 1

    I don't get enough sleep during the week, so I drink a lot of sugary, caffeinated beverages at times to keep me awake at my desk job. That's not healthy, I know. However, I also take decently good multivitamins, cut out caffeine and switch to water by mid-afternoon, work out regularly following a personal trainer's advice, and tend to eat intelligently at mealtimes. I don't eat chips, popcorn, candy, cookies, or whatever else during the day.

    This is what works for me, and I'm quite fit by any account. Right in the middle of the recommended weight chart for my height, actually, after a lot of long years in this business. So I would recommend giving it a try to anyone who's struggling with their own routine. Once you get into a habit, it's a lot easier to keep it going.

  9. Personal Experience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I didn't watch their study (it's a video!), but I'm going to have to disagree. I had a circadian rhythm disorder (switches between DSPS and N24); basically a broken body clock. My body wants to get to bed and wake up at different times each day and I go through hell trying to get that matched up with when I need to be awake for school, team project meetings, and everything else I had to do. I swing from averaging 2-3 hours of sleep per 24 hour period to averaging 16 hours. One month last year I only slept ever other day. I was very suicidal before I figured out I had a sleeping disorder (everyone assumes you're really lazy as you're late to everything and always tired, but even 6 alarms clocks don't help).

    The health effects of chronic sleep deprivation are very annoying and do cause physical damage, but I don't gain weight. When I'm tried, eating more helps me stay awake and make it through the day. However I end up burning up that energy due to not getting the down time when sleeping. The article only guesses that you gain weight because your digestive system isn't working as well since you're out of sync with your body clock. I'd guess it's more these people are tired and thus eating more to wake up and get more energy. However, they aren't as sleep deprived as me so they do get their down time at night. They overeat to force themselves awake but don't stay awake long enough to burn off the extra energy.

    The study only links people who are already "on the heavy side". These people probably eat more per meal than the normal weight population, so their extra large breakfast has more of an effect.

    Now I don't know if what I said has any factual basis, but I don't agree slighly adjusting heavy people's sleep times will allow them to manage their obesity. There are much better arguments for changing daylight savings times and better ways to manage obesity (input = output).

    Actually if their digestive system is being disrupted, that means it isn't working as well. Wouldn't that cause weight loss as less things are extracted from the food? Or are people extra overeating because the food is less fulfilling? I find this study flawed. It didn't look at enough factors.

  10. Just do it by digitalaudiorock · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The news is way too full of all these studies etc that just seem to distract from the simple truth that you just plain must exercise...vigorously, and regularly...period. I'm so sick of everything I keep hearing...like all this new stuff about how horrific it is that I sit down at my job. Give me a break...and don't get me started about all these recommendations regarding walking. The main reason people have for not exercising it not having time, and walking...in addition to being neither a good cardie-vascular workout, or a good strength training workout...is the worst bang for your buck timewise. I have the aerobic fitness of someone 30 years younger than I...can do 100 pushups, and have about 10% body fat (at 58)...and I don't kill myself working out either...a total of about 5 hours a week...20 minutes of intense aerobics three times a week and extensive weight training twice a week.

    Way, way too much bullshit getting thrown around...just do it!

    1. Re:Just do it by osu-neko · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The news is way too full of all these studies etc that just seem to distract from the simple truth that you just plain must exercise...vigorously, and regularly...period.

      Yes, you must exercise. All these other studies, however, are additional information, and not distractions, and leave you better informed, not worse, unless you're simply too simpleminded to comprehend the idea that there might be more than a couple factors involved. Saying your schedule plays a factor does not in any way contradict or detract from the fact that exercise is the biggest factor. Useful information, not distraction...

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
    2. Re:Just do it by dgatwood · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The problem is that most people don't get enough exercise for the same reason that they don't get enough sleep—there aren't enough hours in the day. I would kill to be able to carve out an extra five hours a week for aerobic exercise. However, that would mean giving up either my job, giving up sleep, giving up (at least) one of my hobbies, or never watching another minute of TV for the rest of my life.

      By contrast, I can walk on a treadmill while I'm watching TV (a pair of extreme isolation headphones helps), which means I don't have to give up other activities to do it. That makes it the best bang for my buck, time-wise.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    3. Re:Just do it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The news is way too full of all these studies etc that just seem to distract from the simple truth

      Or the even even simpler truth that people eat more when they are tired. I didn't need a study to tell me my alarm clock breaks my sleep cycle. That's why I bought it.

    4. Re:Just do it by CraftyJack · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I would kill to be able to carve out an extra five hours a week for aerobic exercise. However, that would mean giving up either my job, giving up sleep, giving up (at least) one of my hobbies, or never watching another minute of TV for the rest of my life.

      Everybody is busy. It's a question of priorities. For you, exercise ranks below all of the things you mention there. For me, it ranks above TV, and it counts as a hobby. I have enough fat relatives to have a good idea of what will happen if I don't stay active, and it isn't pretty.

    5. Re:Just do it by digitalaudiorock · · Score: 1

      Someone gave me a Troll modifier for this post...WTF??? Don't blame me if your laziness makes my post somehow sound insulting...jeezzz...

    6. Re:Just do it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe the point is that people who believe they can find some kind of special shortcut (not sitting too much, worrying about alarm clocks, following some simplistic diet, etc) will pay too much attention to these kinds of studies rather than focusing on the basics. This is also one of my pet peeves.

    7. Re:Just do it by mcsqueak · · Score: 1

      Everybody is busy. It's a question of priorities. For you, exercise ranks below all of the things you mention there. For me, it ranks above TV, and it counts as a hobby. I have enough fat relatives to have a good idea of what will happen if I don't stay active, and it isn't pretty.

      This is the secret that I think separates those who enjoy exercise from those who don't: those who enjoy it have somehow managed to find a form of exercise that they have turned into a hobby. It is not not just done for the end results and benefit, but also for the fun of doing the activity itself.

      For me, it's cycling. I LOVE to be out riding my bike, so exercising isn't a chore, it's a hobby and to be honest somewhat of a lifestyle.

      As an example, in April I cycled 27 hours for a total of distance 361 miles and 15,695 ft of elevation climbed. If I didn't love doing it and make time to do it above other activities, I'd never fit that much time in.

      I'm sick of listening to friends complain that they are tired of being "fat" (usually not obese, just excess mid-section fat from lack of activity), yet hardly devote more than an hour or two to "working out" per week (none of it high intensity), then spend all weekend eating and drinking out at bars and whatnot. If you don't like it, make a fucking change. I did three years ago and it was one of the best things I've done for myself.

    8. Re:Just do it by digitalaudiorock · · Score: 1

      Exactly. As the GP says, there's certainly nothing wrong with any new information, but if you just bite the bullet and do what's needed (I personally think exercise is MUCH more important than diet), all the other stuff is pretty much moot. Another pet peeve of mine is that all the exercise information and advice out there is geared towards people that are obese...such as the recommendations to do hours and hours of aerobics. The fact is, if you're not trying to loose a lot of weight, excessive aerobics aren't a good idea. Twenty minutes of intense aerobics a week is plenty.

    9. Re:Just do it by digitalaudiorock · · Score: 1

      Duh...that was supposed to say "20 minutes three times a week...it's not that easy :D

    10. Re:Just do it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes, but you have just explained how that change would not have been possible, had it not turned out that you love cycling. Perhaps when your friends tried it, they did not find a new hobby? You could easily be one of them, and unless they haven't tried at all it's not really to your credit that you're not; you just got lucky that cycling tickled your fancy. Just seems like less contempt would be in order given your particular story.

    11. Re:Just do it by loic_2003 · · Score: 1

      I would kill to be able to carve out an extra five hours a week for aerobic exercise. However, that would mean giving up either my job, giving up sleep, giving up (at least) one of my hobbies, or never watching another minute of TV for the rest of my life.

      Everybody is busy. It's a question of priorities. For you, exercise ranks below all of the things you mention there. For me, it ranks above TV, and it counts as a hobby. I have enough fat relatives to have a good idea of what will happen if I don't stay active, and it isn't pretty.

      Exactly, as I've read elsewhere, what's more inconvenient with your schedule: working out for one hour a day or being dead 24 hours a day?

  11. No definitive science, as always by some1001 · · Score: 0, Troll

    From the article...

    "...living 'against the clock' may be a factor contributing to the epidemic of obesity..."

    You have to be kidding me. So they found a correlation? Yippie. I can find the correlation between number and pirates and global warming. Means nothing.

    What's worse is that they don't even try to explain what's really going on here. Is it that metabolism is slower when things are out of order from circadian rhythm? Where are the citations for that suggestion? Is it actually a true case of causation with experimental evidence in biochemistry, or more regressions and "it looks this way, but we have no idea so here's a paper on it anyway" type of thing?

    Or is it so much more simple? Maybe like... People are eating more calories than they burn?! No way! Common sense just can't come into play ever. Maybe people feel more hungry with less sleep! Oh goodness! Let's do a double regression on chronotypes and amount of sleep so that we can submit another paper and get more funding!

  12. This is crap. by Daryen · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Your weight is a result of calories in vs. calories out.

    Nothing else.

    Yes, disrupting your sleep patterns may affect the "calories out" department slightly, but that is not what is making you fat. It is food that is making you fat. If you have some kind of magical body that violates the law of conservation of energy, please let the scientific community know immediately, otherwise it's time to put down the sandwich.

    1. Re:This is crap. by butchersong · · Score: 1

      You're not saying "this is crap". You're saying that you do not think being tired and lethargic all day would impact the rate a which a person metabolizes food to the degree that it would impact their weight. It appears they have some numbers that might disagree with you.

    2. Re:This is crap. by Daryen · · Score: 1

      I wish I could see these numbers myself instead of getting a vague: "This may affect obesity" in the summary.

      Much more useful would be: "We have determined with 95% certainty that this behavior is responsible for a 20% higher BMI when other factors are ruled out."

    3. Re:This is crap. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Look up sleep apnea. And stop spreading jaded ignorance.

    4. Re:This is crap. by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 2

      What's with all the "just eat less" posts on this story? Are you reading what it's trying to tell you?

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    5. Re:This is crap. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stupid, ignorant, egotistical, bigoted nonsense.

    6. Re:This is crap. by Daryen · · Score: 1

      What's with all the "just eat less" posts on this story? Are you reading what it's trying to tell you?

      Yes, I read what it's trying to tell me.

      "We're not going to give you any hard data, and because the scientific article is behind a paywall, you're shit out of luck. What we WILL give you instead is one more excuse that you can use to rationalize how fat you are. We realize that anything that shifts the blame off of your bad diet and worse exercise routine will make you feel better about yourself. We're going to pass up this opportunity to tell you that that calorie difference between a well rested individual and a tired one is probably only a few hundred calories, and instead make it seem like there's nothing you can do about it."

    7. Re:This is crap. by data2 · · Score: 2

      Actually, less sleep is responsible for more calories in, as we tend to eat lots of sugary stuff to stay awake when tired.

    8. Re:This is crap. by Miamicanes · · Score: 5, Informative

      > Your weight is a result of calories in vs. calories out.

      Actually, it's not. There are plenty of studies demonstrating that chronic sleep-deprivation makes you MUCH more likely to gain weight from a given number of calories. Your body goes into 'crisis' mode, and becomes more aggressive and efficient about converting calories into fat. The fact that you're likely to end up ravenously hungry and fatigued multiples the effect, but even if you kept exercise and calorie count constant, you'd be more likely to gain weight after extended chronic sleep deprivation.

      The same phenomenon has been observed with some psychiatric drugs. In particular, one class of drugs used for treating schizophrenia. I don't remember the exact details, but I remember reading that there were a couple of them that *observably* slowed down the patient's metabolism for reasons that aren't entirely understood (and researchers are certainly trying, because if they can figure out what makes them slow somebody's metabolism down, they might be able to come up with a blockbuster drug that speeds it up and enables effortless weight loss. Assuming, of course, the drug doesn't end up having drug-induced mania or psychosis as a side effect).

    9. Re:This is crap. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Your weight is a result of calories in vs. calories out.

      Actually, it's not. There are plenty of studies demonstrating that chronic sleep-deprivation makes you MUCH more likely to gain weight from a given number of calories.

      I think the solution to this mystery is much simpler. You don't eat a fixed number of calories. You eat when you're hungry or when you feel the craving.

      When you are up in the wee hours, you start to feel hungry or at least feel like eating and can't go to bed with an empty stomach. Also, during the day, when you should be concentrating on your work, you give in to the idea of making a visit to the vending machine for a small snack.

    10. Re:This is crap. by nine-times · · Score: 2

      Your weight is a result of calories in vs. calories out.

      Nothing else.

      I really think you should study the topic more, because a doctor or nutritionist would probably tell you that you're very wrong. There are lots of things that have been shown to contribute to weight gain and weight loss. It's true that eating fewer calories than you expend will cause you to lose weight, but it's neither the only way to lose weight, nor is it necessarily the healthiest guide to losing weight.

      For one thing, the same number of calories can be digested differently depending on the food. IIRC, foods with more fiber may be more difficult to digest. There have been recent studies suggesting that raw food is harder to digest than cooked food, and so even eating the same exact food, you absorb more calories after it's cooked. It's been suggested that fat storage is effected by stress levels, and by some of the hormones that impact angiogenesis. It's been found that the kinds of bacterial flora in your gut can have an effect on weight gain.

      The truth is we don't fully understand all of the various factors that impact weight gain, but a healthy body is theoretically capable of shedding excess calories rather than storing them as fat. Though for any given person, eating a small enough number of calories will result in weight loss, "calories in vs. calories out" doesn't explain why two people, eating the same number of calories, can have drastically different weights. Or even one person-- for example, I'm about the same weight as I was 10 years ago, even though I eat a lot less food and exercise much more.

    11. Re:This is crap. by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

      Well, overweight people can loose weight. Your sort of stupidity, however, is incurable. Well, whatever one needs to make oneself feel superior, I guess.

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    12. Re:This is crap. by Inda · · Score: 1

      Oh dear, you've made the fatties rage.

      Their mouth being bigger than their arsehole has a lot to do with it too.

      And cake. Birthday cake to be exact. So much icing sugar.

      And. And. And.

      I lost 5kg in 12 months by reducing my lunchtime sandwiches from four to three. It was simple maths.

      182cm tall, 79kg. Aim for that fatties.

      --
      This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
    13. Re:This is crap. by Daryen · · Score: 2

      I've had 16 different responses from people telling me that I'm wrong. That it isn't calories in vs. calories out. They then go to list things that affect the total number of calories the body spend.

      I hate to tell you this, but I already knew that things could have an effect on the number of calories your body spends. That's what I meant by "calories out." It's not a fixed amount. Sleep, exercise, diet, genetics, environment, your childhood, your mood, and a number of other factors can change "calories out." Your best bet is to manage your "calories in." You have 100% control over that. Let me present you with a simple logic exercise:

      Weigh yourself. Wait one month. Weigh yourself again. Did you lose weight? If yes, keep doing what you're doing. If no, reduce calories. Repeat until desired weight.

    14. Re:This is crap. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      175cm, 72.5kg here. Lost 16.3kg or so in 8 or 9 months by similar actions, after I hit 83kg and decided to pull the trigger. I've gained about 5.9kg since then; still a healthy weight, but higher than I'd like it. I've gotten rather lazy about it, but I'm starting to cut back again. I also need to start exercising more often. I keep telling myself it'll happen when the weather warms up, but the weather's warmed up and it hasn't happened yet.

      Not a terribly big fan of sweets, though... more with over-indulging on the fats and the salty food. Not snack food, but still not very healthy.

    15. Re:This is crap. by kinnell · · Score: 2

      Your weight is a result of calories in vs. calories out.

      Nothing else.

      While that's technically true, it misses the problem completely because you ignore why people eat more than they need. People eat because they are hungry. Why would someone with enough body fat to power their sedentary lifestyle for weeks still feel hungry? That's the problem, and there's a ton of evidence that it's screwed up hormonal signalling from a poor diet and lifestyle which makes people hungry when they shouldn't be. Poor sleep patterns is part of the problem, even if an unhealthy diet and lack of exercise comprises the bulk of it.

      --
      If I seem short sighted, it is because I stand on the shoulders of midgets
    16. Re:This is crap. by nine-times · · Score: 1

      The reason you had so many people responding to you is that you were wrong. An article said that your sleep patterns may contribute to weight gain, to which you replied, "This is crap. Your weight is a result of calories in vs. calories out. Nothing else."

      This is incorrect. Now you're revising it and saying, to paraphrase, "Your weight gain is the result of calories in and a wide variety of other factors which I'll name. And more things." And then you go on to again miss the point.

      The point is, science is still figuring out all the factors which contribute to weight gain, and in the near future we may have better treatments. For now, assuming you don't have a treatable medical condition, there is a good general guideline, but it isn't to continually lower your caloric intake.

      It's better to eat healthy food in a balanced diet with moderate portions while getting a moderate amount of exercise. Learn to listen to your body and eat things that make you feel good (in a healthy way), and when in doubt, err on the side of eating raw vegetables. Also, take a good look at your general lifestyle because stress, depression, and sleep deprivation can all contribute. If you're managing your stress level, doing psychologically healthy behaviors, and getting a good night sleep, that may also help you lose weight. There are many complex factors that you can alter, but starving yourself probably isn't the best idea.

  13. Mod parent up. by John+Hasler · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Conventional exercise recommendations are not based on what is best for you. They are based on what the physiologists think they have any hope of getting you to do, on the theory that anything is better than nothing.

    Get out there and run.

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    1. Re:Mod parent up. by digitalaudiorock · · Score: 2

      Get out there and run.

      Amen. For a long time I used my Concept 2 indoor rower religiously...great workout that you can do year round. Lately I've been doing this: I hold a pair of 20 pound weights and step up to the second step of my basement stairs and then back down...switching which leg I lead with every 10 steps. Last count I was doing 460 of those in 20 minutes...the equivalent of carrying 40 pound up and down 76 flights in 20 minutes...that does the job!

    2. Re:Mod parent up. by V.+P.+Winterbuttocks · · Score: 3, Funny

      I hold a pair of 20 pound weights and step up to the second step of my basement stairs and then back down

      Getting out of your parents' basement... you're doing it wrong.

      --
      I'm the real Vorokrytin P. Winterbuttocks.
  14. Slow news day? by TorrentFox · · Score: 1

    What in the world is a "social clock"? What's social about it? It doesn't seem to have anything to do with interaction.

  15. easy fix? by treeves · · Score: 1

    So if we just sleep in every day instead of just on weekends, we'll lose weight. Brilliant.

    --
    ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
  16. I'll just leave this here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16964783

    "We often worry about lying awake in the middle of the night - but it could be good for you. A growing body of evidence from both science and history suggests that the eight-hour sleep may be unnatural."

    We may, in fact, ALL BE DOING IT WRONG. If an 8 hour sleep cycle is indeed unnatural, then we're fighting our biological clock much more than we thought. Even if you get plenty of sleep.

    1. Re:I'll just leave this here by Guppy · · Score: 1

      Thanks, right after reading the article, I came down to see if anyone else had posted a comment regarding First & Second Sleep:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Segmented_sleep

      Segmented sleep, also known as divided sleep, bimodal sleep pattern, or interrupted sleep, is a polyphasic or biphasic sleep pattern where two or more periods of sleep are punctuated by a period of wakefulness. Along with a nap (siesta) in the day, it has been argued that this is the natural pattern of human sleep. A case has been made that maintaining such a sleep pattern may be important in regulating stress.

  17. Eating Makes You Fat. by edibobb · · Score: 2

    You gain weight if you eat too much. It's the law. Lots of things might make you hungry, but you don't have to eat every time you feel like it.

  18. No... by pak9rabid · · Score: 0

    Your slothy lifestyle is making you fat. But props for trying to redirect the blame though.

  19. I owe someone an apology by NonUniqueNickname · · Score: 1, Funny

    You hear that Super-Sized French Fries? It's not your fault I'm fat. It never was! I'm so sorry, please forgive me and let's get back together again...

  20. Laugh by koan · · Score: 0

    One more excuse for the fatty's book, face it you get fat from taking in more calories than you burn, and being fat just doesn't bother you enough to do anything about it when everyone around you is fat.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    1. Re:Laugh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quickest way to get modded down on /. make a fatty comment or hate on a Mac

    2. Re:Laugh by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

      The Dunning-Krugerites are out in force today, it seems.

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    3. Re:Laugh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the smug fatties.

      "We have shown that if you live against your body clock, you're more likely to smoke, to drink alcohol, and drink far more coffee," says Roenneberg.

      So more likely to indulge, I would wager that includes food.

      "Eating at the wrong time hits your entire digestive system at the wrong time, so it cannot efficiently do its job,"

      Our results demonstrate that living “against the clock” may be a factor contributing to the epidemic of obesity.

      http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822(12)00325-9

      "epidemic of obesity" notice the responsibility free title? Again eating before you sleep leads to gaining weight, is that in your control? Yes.
      Is what you eat under your control? Yes. Is how much you eat under your control? Yes.
      It never ceases to amaze me that the one thing that people have become extremely good at doing is absolving themselves of personal responsibility and adapting this pussified society excuse to their life style.

      The OP is correct it's all excuses because what and when you eat is entirely under your control, as is getting exercise but the "fatties" choose not to take responsibility for their "food addiction".

  21. how long is your day clock? by Onymous+Coward · · Score: 2

    If it's elite not to be abusive to one's self through sleep cycle negligence, then I agree with you that I'm elitist.

    Let me clarify this in case you get me wrong. I'm elitist in the regard that I support the elite (i.e., the persons who get to bed at a regular time, and more generally the disciplined practice of doing so). I personally share your problem of rolling my clock forward through lack of discipline.

    Note that length-of-day disorder ("Non-24") does exist. But you don't have it. You have lack of discipline.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-24-hour_sleep-wake_syndrome#Prevalence :

    The European portal for rare diseases, Orphanet, lists Non-24 as a rare disease by their definition: 1 person per 2,000 or more. There are about 140,000 sufferers of Non-24 in the European Union; a prevalence of approximately 0.03%, or 3 per 10,000.

    1. Re:how long is your day clock? by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

      So the fact that you happen to live on a internal cycle that happens to coincide with societal norms makes you the "elite". Nice to know. Everyone different is "undisciplined". Well, well, well... Nice to meet someone who is not the slightest bit full of it, not at all.

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
  22. Your lack of self control is making you fat. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Face the truth, it is your lack of self control that is making you fat. Had you more control, you would eat less, and exercise more. Stop blaming the world for your own shortcomings, your shitty life is the result of your shitty decisions and choices.

  23. Cause and effect by StikyPad · · Score: 1

    I will say that I tend to eat more when I'm tired, and a biological clock that's out of sync is one reason for being tired, but I'm not sure that being tired necessarily leads to weight gain by itself. I think it's more useful to separate the phenomena than to construct a Rube Goldberg or Toshiba-like chain of cause and effect.

    That said, my biological clock is closer to a 32-36 hour cycle than 24, which sucks. I went to bed at a respectable 10PM last night, so I probably won't start getting tired until around 4AM tomorrow morning.

  24. In this household we obey the laws of thermo- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    dynamics Lisa!

    no energy intake, no chance of being fat

  25. Always looking for an excuse by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

    Every week, there's another "study" that blames obesity on something other than what really causes it: overeating.

    There is no cause for obesity other than overeating. Period. We all must obey the laws of thermodynamics, and if we ingest more calories than we consume, we will gain weight.

    Since apparently half of Americans are going to be obese soon, I guess they're not teaching basic science in school any longer. I guess the "consensus" is that overeating doesn't make you fat, and that it can be blamed on just about anything else.

    1. Re:Always looking for an excuse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you, random internet commenter, for pointing out the flaws in the research of people far smarter than you with far more experience in their field. The real cause of obesity isn't the amount of food ingested but the body's ability to shed weight. Diet plays a huge part in that but there are many, many more factors that cause the body to burn fewer calories or to store energy for longer. I love seeing shortsighted people like you who think you know everything but in reality fail to grasp simple concepts.

    2. Re:Always looking for an excuse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am so sick of you people who say more calories == weight gain.

      Here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM
      and here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XR3FVvEJ-Nk

      Start to actually THINK about the chemical processes that are going on in the body. It is MORE complicated that that. IT HAS BEEN PROVEN IN STUDIES!
      Your body reacts differently to sugar and carbs. This is not rocket science. It is CHEMISTRY!
      All of you people who just say "eat less and exercise more". FUCK YOU! THERE IS MORE TO IT!

  26. Working from home by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Also, working from home and having to drive everywhere to get work completed is not conducive to weight loss.
    Sure it may be cheaper for the company you work for, but it will cost later in health problems.

  27. Sleep and Food... by magamiako1 · · Score: 1

    Interestingly enough I was just talking to a coworker about this today.

    I have never been able to get on a "proper" sleep schedule. Ever since I was a kid. I have always hated getting up in the morning. I have always hated mornings period. The nicest thing about being of school age was I could have summers to readjust to my natural schedule. Having this time off was one of the best things of my time and I am damn sure contributed to my ability to stay skinny. I ate much more food as a teen than I do now--AND I ate much unhealthier. I have consistently been unable to lose the weight after I spent most of my childhood life (read: until I got a fulltime job) so skinny that people thought I was anorexic.

    I have difficulty getting to sleep before 11P/12A. Sometimes this can indeed vary but my most natural sleep schedule is roughly around this time or later. I have tried everything under the sun to get to bed earlier, including lying down at 8 with the intent of sleeping by 10. I've forced myself to try these patterns and it cannot work for me.

    I have 3 alarms in the morning to wake me up, and I try to get at *least* 7 hours/day of sleep. I know that my natural body clock wants me to sleep 8-10 hours (I had a very big habit of a 3AM-12PM sleep schedule since I was a teenager) but it refuses to get to sleep earlier than 11PM. This does not matter if I wake up at 6AM, 7AM, or 8AM.

    This is just who I am, and I know I"m suffering for it because I cannot make my natural body fit with my work schedule.

  28. Sure hasn't been true in my life by Eightbitgnosis · · Score: 1

    I have an awful sleep schedule. I often keep completely different hours each day.

    Yet I'm 5'10 and only weigh 140lbs. I call bunk on this

  29. Well, it's not a simple system by Immerman · · Score: 3, Informative

    There is a bit of a sliding scale involved - as you lose weight you have less body mass to maintain so your BMR will drop. Likewise when operating in a calorie shortage for prolonged periods your body will adapt, getting more efficient and reducing the number of calories necessary to accomplish the same tasks, as well as being more aggressive about storing excess calories. Net result is that at a given calorie+exertion level you will at first lose weight, then plateau, and maybe even start to rebound. The solution, obviously, is you need to periodically update your plan slightly, either cutting more calories or burning them, until you stabilize within an acceptable range.

    The basic fact though is that 3000 Calories ~= 1lb of fat, that's chemistry. If you eat 100 calories less than you burn every day you MUST lose about a pound a month, that energy has to come from somewhere. The trick is to cut calories without cutting food and nutrients, which can be tricky if you need to do more than cut out the obvious junk food. Staying away from processed foods and eating lots of high-fiber alternatives can make that a lot easier - make your body have to work as much as possible for each calorie, and fiber has added the advantage that ~30% of the calories are in a form our bodies can't digest. Raw foods in general help too - we've evolved to let fire do some or digesting for us, breaking down complex starches into simpler things we can digest more easily - cooking can boost the human-accessible calories by 20-30%. If you're really desperate I suppose you could even start eating a lot of grass and sawdust - our bodies can't really process cellulose at all.

    There's also the problem of maintaining enough energy to keep exerting yourself when operating in a calorie deficit. Cutting back on fat can help, since your body normally burns a 50/50 blend of fat and carbs, and if you runs low on carbs you hit "The Wall" that endurance athletes speak of and your body doesn't like operating there and it takes serious willpower to keep going. The fact that it also rapidly switches to burning 90+% carbs for the first half-hour or so when you're strenuously exerting yourself doesn't help with the exercising either, at least not if trying to burn fat.

    And there are also certain long-term penalties for having been overweight - your body has special fat cells for storing fat, sort of like mini fuel tanks. When they fill up you grow more cells to handle the excess. However, when losing weight the cells don't die off, at least not quickly, they just all run nearer empty, and are more prone to filling up again. Remember these things evolved to help us survive through winter, famines, etc, if they're empty your body gets "worried" - obviously you needed them at some point in the past or they wouldn't have grown, if they're nearly empty then the next crisis to hit could kill you.

    Finally there's the personal variations in metabolism - some people just don't store much fat even when consistently overeating, while others seem to store every spare calorie. The latter was no doubt a great survival trait once upon a time, but makes maintaining a health weight a real challenge in a world of plenty.

    --
    --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    1. Re:Well, it's not a simple system by Lord_Naikon · · Score: 2

      3000 calories is only 1lb of fat when all of it is actually digested by the body. If I eat a whole pot of peanut butter right now I can guarantee you that I will just excrete almost all of it. So the notion that if you eat 100 cal less you will lose a pound in a month is simply wrong. The balance between the amount of calories burnt and the amount of calories extracted from the food we eat is very delicate and hard to influence (largely dependent on genetics), hence the problems people are having with losing weight unless they are willing to basically starve themselves.

  30. No Social Life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well I have no social life and I'm pretty skinny. kPOW.

  31. Anything can be a touchscreen.... except by aXis100 · · Score: 1

    Neither the author nor the submitter RTFA when they developed the title - it clearly states that surfaces must be conductive, which is an awfully long way from "anything". The article even mentions smart couches, but then goes on to say saying workarounds are required - non-conductive items must be coated with something conductive.

    Stupid non-tech journalists writing tech articles.

    1. Re:Anything can be a touchscreen.... except by aXis100 · · Score: 1
  32. Fuck the Republicans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    for forcing us to work on unfavorable schedules and jobs just to put food on table and pay the bills. In a proper society people get paid for doing what they love to do, what they do best, at their preferred schedule.

  33. Obesity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No kidding! And all these years I thought getting fat was simply due to self-indulgence and that all other reported factors were minor, or a result of this. Not too many fat people came out of the WW2 concentration camps!

  34. To put it bluntly by shiftless · · Score: 1

    You don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

    Your post needs to be -1, Loud Mouthed Idiot.

    Yes, sleep patterns, or the disruption thereof from an irregular sleep schedule, most certainly does play a huge role in the body's energy (fat) conservation strategies.....amongst countless other things.

  35. Ummm, sure... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What a load of crap!

    Well, I'm still the same weight as I was in High School, if that were the case I'd weigh 1,000 pounds after 57 years of having insomnia and a majorly fucked up varying sleep schedule.

    "We have shown that if you live against your body clock, you're more likely to smoke, to drink alcohol, and drink far more coffee."

    Apparently I'm "special" then, as I do none of that and I'm fucking thin.

    Pork "science" if I've ever seen it, all it "proves" is that they found a (likely) weak correlation with folks who are already heavy, and that the researchers are obsessed with "weighty" issues when they could be preforming science that can actually help society rather than pointing out yet again... 'look, fatty".

    Christ... all this fake science has got my brain "over heated", now I need to yawn...

  36. Social what now is causing what?? by wankaplanetbigdingle · · Score: 1

    What next,too much fresh air is causing a clear head and outbreak of intelligence?? BUT obviously not when it comes to people being over weight!!! Wait,you could always try that non fat chocolate or drink a crate of red wine because its good for your heart!!!! Human beings have a crap habit for latching on to any excuse for problems they have!

  37. Re:This is crap.--No it's not by howdygnome · · Score: 1

    >>Your weight is a result of calories in vs. calories out.

    True. But what happens in between is what matters. It is called metabolism

    >> Yes, disrupting your sleep patterns may affect the "calories out" department slightly, but that is not what is making you fat. It is food that is making you fat.

    It is both. Sleep restriction or sleep deprivation have been shown to limit normal insulin activity. Instead of pulling glucose into cells where it can be used, the glucose remains in circulation. Some is converted to fat. The higher blood glucose levels is also known as diabetes. So when controlling for other factors, weight gain and diabetes (type II) is seen with sleep deprivation.

    Sleep deprivation also changes hormone levels relating to appetite and satiety (feeling full). Look up grehlin and leptin. This fits with the "calories in" part but is driven by biological factors rather than personal failing and character flaws.

    Less sleep ==>more hungry. Less sleep==> more fat storage.

    Yes, people to should eat less and exercise more. I give this advice to patients that I treat. They should also sleep in more natural patterns. I give this advice as well. The motivation, concentration and executive function required to manage new routines are brain functions that also fall victim to sleep deprivation. Put another way, sleep deprived people are less effective than well rested people. So the capacity to work out a new diet (cooking, shopping and time management) is a greater challenge. Ditto exercise. It is still doable and therefore you will read slashdot contributions from those who have been successful. They are probably more to the right side of the bell curve and high functioning even when sleep deprived. But the plural of anecdotes is not data and the population at large will not have the same level of success without health care guidance.

    >>Those who cannot understand the box are doomed to think inside it.

    Evidently.

  38. Wrong Score Slashwhore Assholes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That comment should be rated +1 Funny. This place has really gone downhill.

  39. Nope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's been keeping me skinny. I eat less when I sleep in because I usually skip a meal. Or maybe I just have the good bacteria that keep me from getting fat, or what I eat + exercise. Whatever works.