Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

'Social Jetlag' May Be Making You Fat

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the it-certainly-is-making-me-dopey dept.

Science 197

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."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

LOL niggers (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39957493)

Niggers, niggers, niggers! I haaaaaaate niggers!

And kikes, too.

Congratulations (-1, Offtopic)

redrew89 (2636451) | more than 2 years ago | (#39957575)

I created an account just to tell you how ignorant you are. Verdict: Extremely Ignorant.

Re:Congratulations (-1, Offtopic)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958045)

I used my regular old account to tell you not to feed the trolls. It annoys the pig and we need the eggs. Wait, what?

Re:Congratulations (1)

kdawson (3715) (1344097) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958953)

Umm, OP is not a troll.

Thank God! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39957557)

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

Re:Thank God! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39957623)

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.

Just one more round... (4, Funny)

Defenestrar (1773808) | more than 2 years ago | (#39957567)

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

Not Much You Can Do About That (3, Insightful)

Githaron (2462596) | more than 2 years ago | (#39957571)

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.

Re:Not Much You Can Do About That (5, Insightful)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 2 years ago | (#39957811)

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.

Re:Not Much You Can Do About That (1)

bananaquackmoo (1204116) | more than 2 years ago | (#39957921)

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

Re:Not Much You Can Do About That (4, Insightful)

T-Bone-T (1048702) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958263)

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

Re:Not Much You Can Do About That (5, Funny)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958869)

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.

Re:Not Much You Can Do About That (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39958975)

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.

Re:Not Much You Can Do About That (3, Insightful)

Defenestrar (1773808) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958401)

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).

Re:Not Much You Can Do About That (5, Insightful)

Anrego (830717) | more than 2 years ago | (#39957977)

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.

Re:Not Much You Can Do About That (2)

Githaron (2462596) | more than 2 years ago | (#39957999)

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.

Re:Not Much You Can Do About That (2, Insightful)

locopuyo (1433631) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958065)

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

Re:Not Much You Can Do About That (4, Funny)

SomeJoel (1061138) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958839)

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.

Re:Not Much You Can Do About That (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39958109)

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

Re:Not Much You Can Do About That (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39958083)

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

Re:Not Much You Can Do About That (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 2 years ago | (#39959045)

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.

Re:Not Much You Can Do About That (5, Insightful)

jeffmeden (135043) | more than 2 years ago | (#39957987)

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.

Re:Not Much You Can Do About That (1)

TheCouchPotatoFamine (628797) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958661)

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.

Just do it (5, Insightful)

digitalaudiorock (1130835) | more than 2 years ago | (#39957991)

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!

Mod parent up. (2, Insightful)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958097)

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.

Re:Mod parent up. (2)

digitalaudiorock (1130835) | more than 2 years ago | (#39959011)

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!

Re:Mod parent up. (3, Funny)

V. P. Winterbuttocks (2246736) | more than 2 years ago | (#39959169)

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.

Re:Just do it (5, Insightful)

osu-neko (2604) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958117)

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...

Re:Just do it (3, Interesting)

dgatwood (11270) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958575)

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.

Re:Just do it (3, Insightful)

CraftyJack (1031736) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958939)

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.

Re:Just do it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39958781)

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.

Re:Just do it (1)

digitalaudiorock (1130835) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958977)

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

Yeah sure (4, Informative)

doston (2372830) | more than 2 years ago | (#39957605)

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".

Re:Yeah sure (0)

Troyusrex (2446430) | more than 2 years ago | (#39957693)

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

Re:Yeah sure (1)

TheCouchPotatoFamine (628797) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958715)

(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".)

Re:Yeah sure (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39957801)

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.

Re:Yeah sure (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39958809)

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.

Re:Yeah sure (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#39957823)

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

Re:Yeah sure (1)

aztracker1 (702135) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958759)

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.

Re:Yeah sure (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39957861)

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.

Re:Yeah sure (-1, Troll)

doston (2372830) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958333)

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.

Just curious...are you one of those fat guys who fancies himself a muscle man? Those are man-tits, not pecs.

Re:Yeah sure (0)

doston (2372830) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958489)

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.

Re:Yeah sure (4, Insightful)

Beardo the Bearded (321478) | more than 2 years ago | (#39957983)

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.

Re:Yeah sure (5, Insightful)

doston (2372830) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958377)

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.

Re:Yeah sure (4, Informative)

eulernet (1132389) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958387)

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.

Re:Yeah sure (1)

jdavidb (449077) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958453)

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.

Re:Yeah sure (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39958891)

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.

Re:Yeah sure (5, Informative)

Dripdry (1062282) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958459)

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.

Re:Yeah sure (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39958823)

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.

Re:Yeah sure (1)

aoism (996912) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958895)

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 :)

Re:Yeah sure (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958081)

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!

Re:Yeah sure (1)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958959)

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.

Re:Yeah sure (1)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958207)

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.

Re:Yeah sure (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39958219)

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.

Re:Yeah sure (0)

doston (2372830) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958447)

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.

Re:Yeah sure (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39958505)

The only correlation these studies ever find is "unhealthy people with unhealthy habits are unhealthy."

Yes, if you don't bother sleeping and eat poorly, you will be unhealthy. Groundbreaking research.

Yeah, we all know how much everyone caters to the obese.

But they do. There is so much bullshit "fat acceptance" that it's not even funny. "Seatbelt extenders" are not a thing that should need to exist. Every time a story comes out pointing out, yet again, that the majority of fatties are fat because they can't stop eating Twinkies and refuse to exercise, we get idiots like you claiming that it's biological or that it's not their fault because they have some illness or whatever.

Bullshit.

It is 100% your fault. Your fault for not exercising. Your fault for not actively eating well. Your fault for refusing to work to lose weight.

Is it not as easy for use as others? Sure. Doesn't make it any less 100% your fault for not making any effort.

Put down the Twinkie and go to the fucking gym.

Causation/correlation counterpoint (4, Insightful)

Shoten (260439) | more than 2 years ago | (#39957621)

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.

Re:Causation/correlation counterpoint (4, Interesting)

Anrego (830717) | more than 2 years ago | (#39957737)

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.

Re:Causation/correlation counterpoint (1)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958261)

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.

Re:Causation/correlation counterpoint (2, Insightful)

DerekLyons (302214) | more than 2 years ago | (#39957859)

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.

Re:Causation/correlation counterpoint (1)

Znork (31774) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958011)

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.

I don't have a cosmo account (3, Funny)

0racle (667029) | more than 2 years ago | (#39957725)

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

So that's what it is (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39957727)

Yeah, it's social jetlag that's making me fat. Not these fucking cheetos that I keep jamming in my fat fucking face.

No alarm clock here (4, Interesting)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#39957735)

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.)

Re:No alarm clock here (2)

BennyB2k4 (799512) | more than 2 years ago | (#39957853)

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).

Re:No alarm clock here (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#39957913)

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.

Re:No alarm clock here (1)

Githaron (2462596) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958069)

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

Re:No alarm clock here (4, Interesting)

ArsonSmith (13997) | more than 2 years ago | (#39957945)

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.

Re:No alarm clock here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39959053)

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.

Re:No alarm clock here (0)

Onymous Coward (97719) | more than 2 years ago | (#39957955)

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.

Re:No alarm clock here (3, Insightful)

periodic (902820) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958191)

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.

Re:No alarm clock here (2)

Onymous Coward (97719) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958471)

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.

how long is your day clock? (2)

Onymous Coward (97719) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958553)

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 [wikipedia.org] :

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.

Re:No alarm clock here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39958919)

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

Re:No alarm clock here (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39957971)

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.

Re:No alarm clock here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39958973)

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 :'(

Re:No alarm clock here (2)

KhabaLox (1906148) | more than 2 years ago | (#39957939)

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).

Lifestyle makes a difference? Who knew. (1)

djdanlib (732853) | more than 2 years ago | (#39957893)

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.

Personal Experience (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39957909)

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.

No definitive science, as always (0, Troll)

some1001 (2489796) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958003)

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!

Another excuse! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39958017)

You're fat because you keep stuffing your fat face!

This is crap. (3, Insightful)

Daryen (1138567) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958053)

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.

Re:This is crap. (1)

butchersong (1222796) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958137)

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.

Re:This is crap. (1)

Daryen (1138567) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958233)

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."

Re:This is crap. (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39958255)

Look up sleep apnea. And stop spreading jaded ignorance.

Re:This is crap. (2)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958301)

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

Re:This is crap. (1)

Daryen (1138567) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958537)

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."

Re:This is crap. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39958449)

Stupid, ignorant, egotistical, bigoted nonsense.

Slow news day? (1)

TorrentFox (1046862) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958197)

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

easy fix? (1)

treeves (963993) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958199)

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

I'll just leave this here (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39958269)

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.

Eating Makes You Fat. (2)

edibobb (113989) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958417)

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.

No... (0)

pak9rabid (1011935) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958421)

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

I owe someone an apology (1, Funny)

NonUniqueNickname (1459477) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958497)

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...

Laugh (0)

koan (80826) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958501)

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.

Your lack of self control is making you fat. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39958763)

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.

Cause and effect (1)

StikyPad (445176) | more than 2 years ago | (#39958775)

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 [youtube.com] 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.

In this household we obey the laws of thermo- (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39958945)

dynamics Lisa!

no energy intake, no chance of being fat

Always looking for an excuse (1)

EmagGeek (574360) | more than 2 years ago | (#39959057)

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.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?