Hacker News Reader

> Even this article, while stating the opposite conclusion, directly scientifically supports permanent daylight time as beneficial for most people.

From the published paper:

> Findings suggested that pDST and pST offered health advantages compared with the current twice-yearly clock changes, but the health benefits of pDST were lower than those of pST by a third. Notably, the comparative benefits of pST were greatest in northern regions of the continental US, which are similar to the latitudes in which most people in Canada reside.

* https://www.cmaj.ca/content/cmaj/198/34/E1335.full.pdf

Yes, there are benefits to pDST. There are more benefits to pST.

The data in that article support the opposite conclusion.

The reasoning the article takes to reach its incorrect conclusion is plainly erroneous. For example, it reasons that "Northern latitudes have later onset of winter sunrise and higher prevalence of SAD, with the latter increasing by 0.2% per 1° increase in latitude," ignoring that northern latitudes also have less sunlight overall.

> […] ignoring that northern latitudes also have less sunlight overall.

It does not ignore the fewer hours: it prioritizes them towards the morning, where it is more important for circadian rhythm reasons.

It even mentions public dislike of the lack of morning light in the most recent large-scale pDST experiment in a northern-latitude country

> Russia moved to pDST in 2011. Public dissatisfaction grew rapidly, particularly in northern regions, where winter morning darkness was even more prolonged, with critics citing disrupted biological rhythms, morning travel risks, and effects on daily functioning. The policy was reversed in 2014.[15]

See also comments with link dumps of position statements of various chronobiologist and sleep research societies:

* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30691158

* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30691237

The analysis itself has an Appendix which links to position papers:

* PDF: https://www.cmaj.ca/content/cmaj/suppl/2026/10/01/198.34.E13...

* https://www.cmaj.ca/content/198/34/E1335 / https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.261089

> There is absolutely zero scientific support for the proposition that nine minutes of daylight is healthier for our circadian rhythms than fifty-one minutes of daylight. No person could possibly argue such a thing in good faith.

There are noticeable health effects on people even with-in a timezone depending on whether they live in the eastern or western part of it. For every 5˚ westward (~20 min later sunrise) you are, you have an increased chance of all types of cancer (n=4,000,000):

* https://aacrjournals.org/cebp/article/26/8/1306/283057/Longi...

51-9=42 minutes difference, which is the equivalent to ~10˚ of longitude.

> (Also, I have a terminology quibble with "Standard Time," since Daylight Time is the actual standard, and we observe it eight months of the year.)

Standard Time dates back to the 1800s:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_time

The fact that it is eight months of the year has been true since 'only' the 2000s under Bush43 (I remember it not-fondly, given all the tzdata updates that had to be done at the time). DST was in the minority of the time the year previously.

Why is that the “standard” work schedule? Isn’t that the problem, not the fact that noon happens at noon?

I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question.

What possible meaning could the phrase "noon happens at noon" have? That's tautological and meaningless.

And if your solution requires a wholly independent, newly built mass coordination mechanism rather than just a minor tweak to the existing one, then I think the burden you bear for arguing your position is extremely high.

What do you think it means? I think you’re feigning ignorance.

If we’re going to ignore the position of the sun, let’s just set a single “American time” to follow DC like China does and be done with it.

My post did not ignore the position of the sun. Indeed, it's governed by it.

I am not interested in whatever you've got going on right now. Being dishonest about others' positions is bizarre. Refusing to clarify your own is bizarre. Let me know when you're willing to engage in good faith.

Funny since you’re the one who isn’t engaging in good faith. Judging by votes I received, I think others understand what I mean.

If the work schedule should change, that can be done in either case of the time adopted and the debate would not matter. But with the current schedule, daylight time savings makes much more sense. Where I live in deep winter you just don't see any light at all if you work a normal schedule. If there was daylight savings in the winter instead, you could at least get some light after work.

Right, so let’s change expectations for what a “normal” schedule should be. Perhaps stock market, banking, school, and government hours could change and this would be enough to move everyone else.

The studies are saying it is more important for you to get that limited daylight before work rather than after. It's much better for kids sleep and school for them to walk to school in the daylight.

Noon doesn't actually happen at noon

It’s close enough to solar noon in most places under standard time.

> Noon doesn't actually happen at noon

It used to, until people compromised on that for the sake of better societal coördination:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_time

It is completely ridiculous to say that someone working 9-5 doesn't see any daylight during that period. Go for a walk at lunch time.

Conversely, getting up in the pitch dark and leaving the house in the pitch dark when the sun isn't going to rise for another hour is a horrible prospect and I hope I never have that inflicted on me. The evidence in the article is clear: our bodies need light in the morning more than we need it in the evening. Yes, winter sucks in northern latitudes, but we've just got to make use of the little daylight as best as we can. The flip side is by using DST we get these lovely long evenings in the summer.

> Go for a walk at lunch time.

Quite the entitled, unreflected comment. Not everyone works in an office or somewhere where this is a possibility!

Yeah, ok. If you are working on an airplane, or a submarine this doesn't apply.

Or a hospital, if you allow for praxis.

Daylight in the evening is not equivalent to daylight in the morning if a healthy circadian rhythm is the goal

You can have (almost) permanent daylight time - you just have to relocate regularly between (let's say) Iceland and the southern tip of South America. Or even further north/south for even more daylight (albeit even lower temperatures).