Hacker News Reader

Comment by novok | Hacker News Reader

An issue with keeping yourself warm with clothing is some hotspots get too warm, and others too cold. Like the armpits usually get too warm, but your exposed hands too cold. If your slippers have sheep's wool in them, like ugg slippers, then they often sweat a lot or feel a little wet while simultaneously feeling cold at times, or warm enough. Most sweaters are also not designed to keep your armpits a little bit cooler so you stay evenly warm along your body.

If you want to wear gloves, then finger and hand mobility is effected, and usually with hands, it's the fingers that are cold anyway, making fingerless gloves not feel that useful.

While if the room is all one consistent warm enough temperature, you don't get these cold & hot spot effects.

View on HN

Last December, Nevada County Ca, where I live, had a massive snow storm that knocked out power and snowed people in for 1-3 weeks. I wound up huddled in my apartment with 45 degree heat for five days or so. With enough sweaters, I was a comfortable temperature.

Aside from what you mention, since basically you providing your own heat for yourself, you have to put or take off layers depending on physical activity. And so naturally this process involves too-hot and too-cold periods that are less than pleasant. Still, I survived to tell the tale.

I mean, we could all live like the hero of To Build A Fire, at least until we died.

> we could all live like the hero of To Build A Fire

That (and 45 degrees) are strawperson arguments against turning down the thermostat a little and putting on a sweater (and let me recommend shoes). My sense is that many people generally (I don't know the parent commenter) shoot down any individual action, because it's individual action - it's reactionary, ridiculing any 'liberal' idea.

I'm actually pretty progressive and do sometimes leave my sweater on after taking walk and turn the thermostat down.

However I have a bunch of other "personal comfort issues", related to health. so often leave the heat at seventy while I deal with these.

But even more, I do think the "liberal spirit" of trying to solve or pretending you can solve social or environmental issues with exhortations to individual action is reactionary in the end. The only solution to global warming or pollution or etc is action by the state involving the regulation of private enterprises. These "if we all consumed less" positions are kind of the flip side of telling people who make minimum wage they're poor 'cause they drink a soda at lunch or have netflix etc.

Edit: TL;DR; Exploring what you're comfortable with is a good, even suggesting other explore this good. But the spirit of "the problem is you-all consumer too much" is problematic.

It's another strawperson argument. It's not all one or the other. Reducing your energy consumption is not sufficient, and I don't know anyone who says it is.

The idea that individuals are powerless is antithetical to democracy, which IMHO is why the reactionaries push it. They say the same thing about protests (despite a long history of success) and any other individual/collective action. Democratic government is a form of collective action, and so they decry that too. They want you dependent on strongpersons and corporations, and IMHO by buying into it, you are surrendering your power and (unwittingly for most) doing nothing less than fighting agaist freedom and democracy. Collective action is quite powerful - ironically, the reactionary movement uses it heavily, and is the foundation of a free society, as is individual responsibility. (It's also the foundation of a free market and SV-style entrepenurialism - individuals doing something in their garage and changing the world.)

Communities, society, depend on everyone doing their part as individuals. You can't prevent trash on the streets in your community by obstaining from littering yourself, but we do keep the streets clean in large part by each person not littering (and we also obey the law, help people in need, etc. etc.).

Reality is quite the opposite of reactionary propaganda: Individuals acting works incredibly well. The Minutemen in the American Revolution were volunteers, who defeated the subjects of the British King. After centuries of unprecendeted success in human history, it's incredible that people abandon it simply because of propaganda.

> I'm actually pretty progressive

I don't know you, of course, and it's just one comment in one moment in your life, but the parent comment is clearly anti-progressive.

But we all do consume too much for it to be sustainable. While I agree that we primarily need regulation, mostly on industries and the production of goods and services, our collective individual choices do matter. And I can’t credibly fight for regulations while driving a huge SUV or crisscrossing the world with jet planes.

Pretending these little moments do anything to help is not a liberal idea. It’s just as stupid as avoiding exercise and eating less to reduce your carbon dioxide output. It demonstrates a complete disconnect from the ability to contextualize real issues from things that actually help.

Stopping climate change is not a “liberal idea”, at least not in the mainstream liberal sense. Airplanes are still filled with liberals even quite far left on the spectrum in the US (even AOC flies all over the east coast because her time is “too important” to be disrupted by climate change).

It is liberals that do try to do something about climate change, while the right in the US still question if it even exists.

Some do, but doing something stupid and patting yourself on the back is worse than doing nothing at all. At least someone who intentionally doesn’t do anything knows they aren’t doing something and might vote for real change.

In my experience, those that don't take any individual action rarely take any meaningful action on any other plane either. Either you get it and care, which means you do whatever little you can do yourself and work for changing the society, or you don't get it and you don't care.

Those that criticise individual action are most often the ones that can't bring themselves to sacrifice even the smallest pleasure or convenience, but still feel a small pang of guilt whenever they see other people doing their best to do their part.

One place you still need heat is the shower. Maybe some people are okay with taking a shower in 45F ambient temps, but I would resist it.

One thing that's kind of silly about most of our shower stall designs is their open-top design. While a few are sold with caps most are not. Having a cap on top of the shower allows for lower ambient temperatures in the bathroom while showering in (relative) comfort. This also has the benefit of reducing condensation on the ceiling and walls of the bathroom.

Probably because moisture is a much bigger problem in homes than heat or cold. If the shower stall were closed on top, when the door was closed, the moisture would sit in the shower and not evaporate. That can lead to mold problems.

It's much easier to deal with moisture when it's largely restricted to the interior of the shower! Easy to wipe down the sides and then leave the door open to allow the remaining moisture to evaporate. Seems superior to having the water vapours condensing on ceilings and walls in the bathroom that likely can't be wiped down.

You can also just have a small shower room, with a separate door, it's about equivalent. You see this in many houses where the sink vs shower & toliet are two separate 'rooms' connected to each other.

Yeah I never got why this is the standard. Glad I’m not the only one

Do you mean water or air temps? I would hate a shower in 45F water, but a shower in hot water in 45F temps would be fine.

You’d be surprised how quickly you can get used to cold showers. I’ve been only cold showering for about 5 years now

How cold is cold?

When our gas went out in the summer, taking a 'cold' shower was bearable, some days even enjoyable.

In the freezing winter? Tried it once, never again. I'm not even sure it would be safe to shower in water that cold for any long periods of time.

After you do it if or a while, your definition of cold changes. First it was cold during the summer, now in the summer the water doesn't feel cold at all. For me to really feel cold water (after years of doing this), it has to be well before freezing outside and even then I can be standing under this water for minutes at a time.

I'm not personally advocating for this, but some argue for water conservation by taking a https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navy_shower which involves only about 2 minutes of time in the water.

>A Navy shower (also known as a "combat shower", "military shower", "sea shower", "staggered shower", or "G.I. bath") is a method of showering that allows for significant conservation of water and energy by turning off the flow of water in the middle portion of the shower while lathering.

Hold up - do you mean to tell me that people do not turn off the water while lathering? I've showered this way all my life, is this not the norm?

The controls to get back to your proper temperature after a shutoff are unreliable. What you need is a shutoff valve on the shower head itself, so the temperature stays the same, which is not common on many showers unless they are using the navy shower head too. It's mostly a UI issue.

I came up with this method a few years ago and have used it ever since. I’ve never looked back; I’m no less comfortable now than before, and I enjoy using less energy even though my hot water use is included in the rent.

I’ve had little luck converting friends and family to it, though.

Honestly in the time it'd take to turn it off and on I could basically finish 'lathering', I don't belabour it or find particular pleasure in prolonged showers.

I can understand it for people that like a long shower, maybe.. except that surely it's the water they enjoy rather than just the process, so being there with it off wouldn't be any fun?

Often with combi boilers, if you turn off the water it takes a solid 30s to a minute for the water to come up to temperature again, sometimes longer if you account for the water in the pipes and the thermostat reaching equilibrium.

Obviously newer/better boilers come up to temperature quicker but you don't always have the luxury of choosing your boiler.

Why would you ever do that in a developed country? You'd be saving like 3 cents per shower or less.

It's not a question of economics, it's about not purposefully wasting resources.

Perhaps you'll be surprised to hear that I also turn off the lights in rooms that I am not in, or that I don't keep cars running when I'm not using them to move around.

Counter-question: why would you ever keep the water running when you're not utilizing the water?

Because when you turn the water off it's cold. I would rather pay 1.5 cents to remain warm while I lather. If the resource was actually scarce, it wouldn't cost so little to use it.

I think it’s a cultural and technical thing. But still, it’s weird hearing that people leave the water on and this “navy” shower isn’t the norm. Perks of growing up in a communist country, with constant outages.

I love these ideas both just for the joy of tinkering (which many on HN will understand), to experiment with saving resources, and to actually save a little:

In the summer I take cold and cool showers. It struck me that it's a bit insane to consume energy cooling my home, and then using hot water to heat myself up again. Just leave home a little warmer and the cool shower feels great - less AC, less water heating, and happier results.

Also, I took a trip to a poorer country where people, lacking plumbing, bathed using buckets and a big cup. I tried it and it worked fine[0] - almost no drawback at all, just a different habit. I need far less water to shower than I imagined and if I can, turn the water on and off as I shower. Unfortunately, it requires a shower control that is one lever that retains its heat setting; resetting the temperature every time is too cumbersome.

[0] To be clear, I am not at all implying that those people shouldn't have plumbing (they should) or that I was trying to experience poverty in any way (a ridiculous notion, considering where I came from and where I was returning to). I just saw that it worked fine and tried it.

I'd recommend the sauna as an alternative... I'm really interested in the homestead movement and one thing thats promoted is the rocket stove, I've often wondered how such a design might work out if you used it for cooking while using the residual heat for a hot "sauna" wall in the next room...

Most people in the warmer parts of Japan and China (not Hokkaido, not Heilongjiang) don’t use that much heating in the winter, I’ve gotten used to it and don’t really find it a problem.

I lived in Shanghai, which is too warm for snow in the winter. But it's still freezing cold; when I wasn't running heat (because I didn't know how), I'd wake up in the morning with my toes suffering from frostbite. I was miserable all the time until I obtained a space heater.

Frostbite! I'm really sorry you had to go through that, it's a serious thing.

People often don't pay much attention to their toes but they're pretty important for balance. It must be difficult living with that injury.

I have no lasting damage - my blanket was good for that much. My toes would be red and painful when I woke up.

https://www.healthline.com/health/frostnip

I've always found the best way to stay warm when sleeping, is to wear as little clothes as possible. My best guess is that heat escapes from our hands and feet so all the warm clothes causes this huge difference in temperature in our bodies.

Even here in -20 temps, I typically sleep in a t-shirt and shorts. Heat from my body warms up the little enclosed space under the blankets quite quickly and the overall temp is a lot more comfortable than being wrapped up in multiple layers that restrict movement.

I think the depends heavily on having a room/blanket/sleeping-bag arrangement that doesn't leak a lot of heat.

In extremely cold, drafty situations (living in unheated bus) with only blankets rather than a sleeping bag, putting on clothes is necessary.

Of course, if you have a good sleeping bag, as little clothes as possible is how to sleep outdoor.

I agree with you, but for me, maybe because I don’t have much hair on my head, adding a knit cap certainly helps.

That sounds like you have the wrong blanket.

A better set of blankets is potentially a solution to the narrow problem of my toes freezing while I'm asleep. It doesn't do anything for me while I'm awake.

Note that I was living in a school dormitory with bedding provided by the dorm, so it met a local standard of reasonableness.

Some warm socks might help too.

The hero of To Build A Fire was obviously the sled dog, the human was too much whiny and needy - which is what caused the hero to abandon him in the end.

For the issue of "fingers are cold but gloves affect mobility", purchasing a pair of thumbhole arm warmers have made a world of difference for me

They're almost like fingerless gloves, but more comfortable and easier to manage.

You might be worried "but it's the fingers that are cold anyway, so fingerless gloves are not what I need." I thought that too, but trying them immediately proved me wrong and I never had an issue with cold fingers again. I'm fairly sure it's because warming your wrists/palms keep your blood from losing heat in those areas, so your fingers get much warmer circulation.

For something less than $10, it's probably the best purchase I've made for working in the winter

>For the issue of "fingers are cold but gloves affect mobility", purchasing a pair of thumbhole arm warmers have made a world of difference for me

this is calling back to the recent post on Dickensian poverty for me. Everyone not well to do in A Christmas Carol was cold and had layers on and fingerless gloves and stood around shivering. But the rich people were heating the spaces (except Scrooge of course)

Oh that's really cool and good to know. I can totally afford to heat my place, but it's like a challenge for myself to find a set of home clothing that would keep me comfortably warm despite it being a bit chilly inside.

Still need to solve the cold yet damp (from sweating?) feet and sweating armpit issue although.

As others had noticed, the cold hand / feet thing is mostly a computer thing for me. Also probably due to me restricting my eating at times.

It’s because muscles that control your hands are in your forearm and hand so warming your fingers doesn’t actually do much except make them feel nice.

It's a shame that these are stereotyped as female fashion accessory.

Only where you are.

I've found quality wool garments to be very helpful. Examples: A thick wool "cable knot" sweater is both warm and highly breathable, ideal for hiking. Wool socks (and/or wool felt slippers when it's very cold) keep feet warm without any of the clamminess (or smell) associated with cotton or synthetics. Merino wool underwear has similar benefits.

The price is higher compared to cotton or synthetics, but it's possible to find good values by shopping sales. The daily rewards of wool (in every season) are worth the extra effort.

When I'm active outside in the winter I always wear a thin layer of wool as the inner layer, medium thick wool socks and a wool sweater. Over that I use shell clothing like gore-tex jacket and pants. As long as I'm active I will not freeze even if temperatures reaches -20C. If I'm out and about, f.ex. a long ski trip, I will bring a down jacket in my backpack that I will wear over the shell jacket when pausing to eat. Our kids wear wool inner layer, fleece mid layer and a insulated shell "one-piece" when they are out in the snow. Mostly because they often just sit down to play. If they were active all the time mid layer wouldn't be necessary.

Also found that it's perfectly OK to wear thin wool inner layer all the time. It doesn't really get too warm as long as you don't wear warm clothes over.

> An issue with keeping yourself warm with clothing is some hotspots get too warm, and others too cold. Like the armpits usually get too warm, but your exposed hands too cold.

We can sit and imagine problems with every course of action, and never step forward.

In my life, I've never had the quoted problem and I've never heard anyone else say it's a problem. On my list of things to worry about, this ranks near the bottom. No clothing I know of has special cool spots, beyond outdoor recreation equipment (e.g., mountaineering gear with pit zips), yet somehow we all do fine. I expect our bodies adjust fine to such variations.

> While if the room is all one consistent warm enough temperature, you don't get these cold & hot spot effects.

That doesn't add up: No clothing (with the exception mentioned above) has such cooling spots. If our bodies couldn't adjust, a constant temperature would be the same, sweater or not.

EDIT:

> If your slippers have sheep's wool in them, like ugg slippers, then they often sweat a lot or feel a little wet while simultaneously feeling cold at times, or warm enough.

It's incredible that Ugg sells any slippers!

>We can sit and imagine problems with every course of action, and never step forward.

Well, you assume these are fake problems, and so the GP is being disingenuous.

The problems he mentions basically only happen if you stay at a computer, or such unphysical activities that form the basis of modern work. As you properly notice, these problems are mostly nonexistent if you do "real" physical activities, but you can still suffer from them. E.g. while doing inconsistent physical exercise in cold winters , your temperature will rise up a lot, so you may sweat a lot and then get cold fast again in your wet clothing. Any construction worker knows this can be quite a hassle.

He then mention "cold hands". This is called "Raynaud syndrome", and affects 4% of people. This is very difficult to deal with, especially if your primary work is typing at a computer. There are many types of gloves you can buy: compression gloves, fishermen gloves, spandex ones, with 1 to 5 exposed fingers. Each has particular downsides to deal with, none are perfect.

You can get silver-threaded clothing too, although that is quite expensive. Managing good comfort while minimizing room-heating is not easy at all, and that does not even address other "house" issues (at an extreme, water-pipes exploding because of freezing water).

> The problems he mentions basically only happen if you stay at a computer ...

That is what most people I know do for a living, and often during personal time, including me - it's probably the most common job activity among HN readers. And what are we doing now to post these comments? And yet, I've never heard those complaints.

Also, I think you have things reversed: Active people are the ones who like to buy clothes with pit zips.

> your temperature will rise up a lot, so you may sweat a lot and then get cold fast again in your wet clothing

Tangentially: You can avoid this problem with the proper materials: Don't wear cotton in these situations - it is worse than nothing if damp; it chills you. Wear breathable materials that insulate when wet and dry quickly. Wool is probably best, and then 'fleece', which is effectively synthetic wool. Down (e.g., from geese) is even better but if it gets wet, it clumps up into useless balls; however, I've never seen it do that from perspiration, only from external water sources (rain, falling in a river, etc.). Synthetic down can be very warm and still insulates when wet; I suspect it's warmer per liter or per gram than wool, but I'm not sure.

Also, wear a wind-proof outer shell. Preventing the convection of wind does as much as anything to keep you warm.

> Managing good comfort while minimizing room-heating is not easy at all

In fact, it's very easy and people have been doing it for most of history: Put on a sweater. Are we really debating how hard that is? I mean, we can make anything hard, but ... wow.

>Put on a sweater. Are we really debating how hard that is?

You are either very disingenuous, or have trouble with reading comprehension. The point is, if your hands get cold easily it's not possible to go too low in temperature without discomfort. Of course while having sufficiently warm clothing to have a warm core, as you said earlier.

The 4% figure I mentioned is from the Wikipedia abstract; I haven't bothered to check the research, but I believe it grounds this firmly in the "common" territory instead of the "I never heard of such a thing in my life".

To continue with what your saying.

Yeah I am already wearing a sweater, warm pants, wool slippers with socks and a beanie / hat. The hands are unexposed and I'm thinking at this point I need a different slippers that are bit more breathable. Also staying warm with breathable fabrics can be somewhat deceptive, because your dehydrating yourself faster via sweat your not perceiving.

Wool doesn't work well for me due to skin issues unless I cover it with a layer of nylon / cotton. Yes I've tried good merino wool, and it's still minorly irritating. I've given up on most wool that touches my skin.

Also my apartment is in a fairly temperate place, and what is hot / cold is a bit weird. The floor is a fairly cold hardwood floor, and I think it sucks a lot of heat out somehow. I'm not in a place that is consistently cold, it's only cold for like 4 months, so places here are not very well designed for it. It's also not carpet which probably solves a lot of the cold floor problems via it's built in insulation.

Also I'm more perceptive about my body state than probably most people and try to avoid wearing antiperspirant when I know I'm not going out that day with WFH. Your are probably blocking a lot of the sweating your armpits would do in this modern age as a result, and I believe we should making clothing that keeps that area a little bit more cool.

My internal body temperature can run hotter if I start eating a lot of carbs and more calories, but then I start consistently gaining weight so I don't do that.

I'm also more doing this as a challenge, I can definitely afford to just heat my room to t-shirt levels and put rugs everywhere, but I'm trying to figure out clothing that would work well without it while using a computer for hours. I'm not raynauds level of issues, but it makes sense this is mostly an computer worker issue too.

Mmmm, a cooling system and keyboard that blows warm air up through the keys would be fun.

> In my life, [...] I've never heard anyone else say it's a problem. [...] yet somehow we all do fine. I expect our bodies adjust fine to such variations.

Take the commentor you replied to and myself as people with this problem. Its not for not trying - growing up counting pennies, not in poverty but money was tight, lead to a layers based heating mentality. One of the greatest benefits of the extra wealth afforded to the software career is to heat the space I'm in.

On the flip side I'm also sensitive to hot spaces - I keep my house in the 16-19 celcius range during the day, and colder at night.

2 = 0 for these purposes.

> In my life, I've never had the quoted problem and I've never heard anyone else say it's a problem.

I have the quoted problem. Sitting working at the computer at home. Armpits especially. Groin can be similar.

Think about the problem. In a proper typing position with elbows by your side, the part of your upper body where flesh touches flesh is the side of your chest and your upper arm. It's no wonder the armpits are warmer than elsewhere.

I ameliorate the armpits by using a gilet over thinner layers. It keeps my core warm, but does nothing for poor circulation in my hands. And I find even the thinnest gloves slow my typing.

> In my life, I've never had the quoted problem and I've never heard anyone else say it's a problem.

Anecdotally I've 100% had the slippers problem. Although it is more or less solved by using socks within then.

Do you wear gloves indoors? If not, aren't your hands colder? If yes, how do you cook or work with a computer?

> Do you wear gloves indoors? If not, aren't your hands colder?

No and no. The temperature in my home is set just warm enough that a sweater (and let me add, shoes - insulation from the coldest air and surface in the room) keeps me comfortable. My hands don't get chilled at that temperature.

FWIW - from wilderness experience - it is widely believed that the best way to warm your hands is often to warm your core. Your body naturally prioritizes your core (probably better to keep your heart at 37 C and let your hands get a little chilly than vice versa!); keep that warm enough and energy/blood will be diverted to keeping your extremities warm.

In other words you keep the space hotter to increase your personal comfort.

It’s perfectly viable to keep a living space just above freezing. You however need gloves to stay comfortable at 3-4C (38f).

I wear fingerless compression gloves when coding. They are usually sold for arthritis/carpel tunnel/raynauds. If you get cold fingers these might be life-changing for you as they were for me.

Another factor is just getting up and doing some light exercise every 30 mins or so. 5 push ups, or jogging up and down the stairs a few times, is enough to keep your circulation reasonably balanced.

There are gloves without fingertips.

Yeah, but is that sort of discomfort worth the energy usage of heating the entire room?

An alternative is also, as it is mentioned in the article, to warm certain spots in a room instead of the whole of it.

I tend to be cheap, not even just frugal, but it's worth it to me. During my first winter in my own place, I set the thermostat to the low 60s F to save money. After about two weeks I concluded that feeling perpetually uncomfortable in my own place wasn't worth whatever money I was saving. It felt like trying not to drink water when thirsty to save money. Warmth is just such a basic human need. Better to save in a number of other ways. I definitely wouldn't do this to my wife and kids now.

OK, try 65. IME, most people can turn down the thermostat and still be perfectly comfortable; just find the approximate minimum you need for comfort.

At peak I was using about $2 per day of gas to keep my place at 70F versus 60F.

I could skip buying a coffee and more than make up for it.

> Yeah, but is that sort of discomfort worth the energy usage of heating the entire room?

For the average HN reader in north america? Probably not. For the median person in europe right now? Maybe not (thanks to what's happening in ukraine affecting gas prices).

> If your slippers have sheep's wool in them

I worked in an ice cream factory for a bit, was hard to find socks/shoes that would keep you warm not sweat/freeze. That job was wild like nostrils frozen, break every 45 mins.

I think you can help your body regulate the temperature and even sweat.

There's the old saying: "cold feet? wear a hat."

dress with the right layers. I always put a layer of synthetic beneath cotton.

Nice socks help your body deal with cold quite dramatically. "Darn Tough" brand merino wool socks are pretty exceptional socks that keep your feet warm and (importantly) dry.

Try wool instead of synthetics as inner layer.

I would but... itchy

Are there any good fingerless gloves for typing? I'd like to give them a shot, cold hands are usually what causes me to turn the heat on and I try to use as little heat as I can.

I use a heated desk pad under my keyboard.

Do you have a link to one you recommend?

i haven't done extensive research so there could be thinner gloves out there, but i bought a pair of "edz merino fingerless gloves" a few months ago and they are less restrictive than the pair i had before

still end up with cold-ish fingers though which feels similar enough to cold hands. im thinking what i need is something like mittens but instead of something that wraps around your fingers, it would just rest on top and keep the air off while your fingers are free to move underneath

You could try some fingerless “glove liners” (might find some at REI), but I’d suggest “arm socks”. They come in two basic styles; somewhat feminine knits, and synthetics made for sporting activities or hunting.

I tried MIR infrared heated fabric and it penetrated my skin and centimeters below very nicely.

I wonder if it causes cancer cause it works so well I’m surprised no one talks about it.

If the future of climate change tells us anything, then people better get a bit more comfortable with being a lot more uncomfortable.

There's actually a lot of athletic wear and other clothing that has vents for the armpits if this is an issue for you

Reply on news.ycombinator.com