> Besides, it's not like standard time is any more natural than daylight savings
The question is whether there are any downsides from abruptly changing wake cycles twice a year. That article does seem to bound the cardiac risks somewhat, but there's also the auto accident angle. There's also just the human suffering: stepping the clocks sucks.
> and their bodies would gradually adjust to the seasonal shortening and lengthening of daylight with no abrupt transition necessary.
Yah, but there's nothing gradual or natural about a 1 hour society-wide step in wakeup times.
I'm not saying that people or businesses should never adjust what they're doing for daylight or other considerations. DST is a ham-fisted, blunt approach attempting to crudely fix the problem just by stepping society's clock.
The question is whether there are any downsides from abruptly changing wake cycles twice a year. That article does seem to bound the cardiac risks somewhat, but there's also the auto accident angle. There's also just the human suffering: stepping the clocks sucks.
> and their bodies would gradually adjust to the seasonal shortening and lengthening of daylight with no abrupt transition necessary.
Yah, but there's nothing gradual or natural about a 1 hour society-wide step in wakeup times.
I'm not saying that people or businesses should never adjust what they're doing for daylight or other considerations. DST is a ham-fisted, blunt approach attempting to crudely fix the problem just by stepping society's clock.