No one wants to give up anything for their preferred option but something has to be changed to make permanent DSt or Standard time work.
US continues to go forward
- Thread starter JTOSU
- Start date
I personally would error for the side of health but this is America it will be the all mighty dollar that makes the decision.
I am envious, as I am a morning person. Unfortunately, the majorty of customers I work with are based on the west coast, so if anything I could start work later and end later.
Let me ask my boss, Elon.
Kids should be starting later, period:
In fact, research shows that teenage and adolescent sleep patterns are hormonally influenced, and not behavioral quirks, rebellious statements or decided attempts to fit in socially. In the teenage years, the hormonal response to the 24-hour daily light/dark exposure that influences circadian rhythm is altered, making adolescents physiologically yearn to stay awake later at night and to remain asleep later in the day.
Teenage Circadian Rhythm
Research shows that teenage and adolescent sleep patterns are hormonally influenced, and not laziness or rebellious statements.
JTOSU
Ranger
This is true. A couple of HS in the Tulsa metro area changed the HS and MS start times back 90 minutes due to this study or something similar to it.Kids should be starting later, period:
In fact, research shows that teenage and adolescent sleep patterns are hormonally influenced, and not behavioral quirks, rebellious statements or decided attempts to fit in socially. In the teenage years, the hormonal response to the 24-hour daily light/dark exposure that influences circadian rhythm is altered, making adolescents physiologically yearn to stay awake later at night and to remain asleep later in the day.
Teenage Circadian Rhythm
Research shows that teenage and adolescent sleep patterns are hormonally influenced, and not laziness or rebellious statements.www.neurologylive.com
But with everything there is almost always a negative (or at least parents that will point out a negative). In this case, some transportation issues with athletic events in the afternoon (ie buses and bus drivers not available to drive to athletic events) —- and some students in extracurricular activities were driving home at dark. Nothing at all major, but parents complained.
If that’s what is done I’m fine with the change that way.Kids should be starting later, period:
In fact, research shows that teenage and adolescent sleep patterns are hormonally influenced, and not behavioral quirks, rebellious statements or decided attempts to fit in socially. In the teenage years, the hormonal response to the 24-hour daily light/dark exposure that influences circadian rhythm is altered, making adolescents physiologically yearn to stay awake later at night and to remain asleep later in the day.
Teenage Circadian Rhythm
Research shows that teenage and adolescent sleep patterns are hormonally influenced, and not laziness or rebellious statements.
I dont know if schools would go for that. Im fine with either one as long as it just stays the same but permanent DST means in the northern part of the country it would be almost 9AM before we get full daylight during the winter. It's not a big deal for me but some might not like the thought of their 1st grader at the bus stop when it's pitch black and people are in a hurry to get to work.
My boys have to do this year round for sports.....everyone says it's better for both practice and grades I haven't seen and no one can produce compelling evidence. The only one that makes sense is it's cooler in the morning for football (which is king) but you would be amazed how many schools practice inside here now and most of the "can't practice above/below X degrees" type rules are relatively new.....and it's colder for winter sports.
I just think the whole concept is dumb pick one and go with it. From an energy usage standpoint it doesn't matter it just shifts peak hours around but has no real measurable impact on load.....the whole farmers argument is dumb cause you either work when the sun comes up if it's noon or 6 AM or go off what has to be done right then. I've been in the hay fields way after dark and harvested crops overnight for moisture content. Pick on and go.
It does/did have a huge admin cost on the electrical grid.....it's getting much much easier with technology but the whole thing used you throw it in uproar twice a year with a 25 or 23 hour day. Someone always screwed up a schedule and sent pricing tanking or flying and even things like voltage events occurred.
Last edited:
Seems like a good idea.
www.wsmv.com
Tennessee House passes bill limiting SNAP benefits for junk food
The Tennessee House is expected to discuss and possibly vote on a bill that would place limits on buying junk food using SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
Seems like a good idea.
Tennessee House passes bill limiting SNAP benefits for junk food
The Tennessee House is expected to discuss and possibly vote on a bill that would place limits on buying junk food using SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
I'm torn. Doing something to help low income Americans make healthier choices is a good thing, but Im uncomfortable mandating what people are allowed to eat. That seems intrusive to their personal liberty. On top of that, if we can mandate what people can't eat because of nutritional value, who decides that? Stuff like sugary candy is an easy one, but what about things like candy bars or chips? Do we say they have to make low sodium options or does that impede their ability to buy food with a decent shelf life.
If we make decisions related to nutrition with public assistance, do we do it with other forms of welfare? Do we limit what people on unemployment are allowed to purchase? The purpose of this is to keep people from wasting money correct? If we don't want someone on public assistance wasting money on junk food, do we also tell them welfare can't be used for frivolous purposes?
As a concept I think it has value but saying don't buy that and calling it good is problematic.
It's exactly like the WIC program.
This isn't a mandate on what anyone can eat its just a ruling on what taxpayers will pay for. I'm all for kids being kids and the need Lucky Charms and Snickers bars in their life, but that can't be all they get. In some families, unfortunately, I think that kind of stuff is the bulk of the diet.
Not to mention added cost to the taxpayer for healthcare.
JTOSU
Ranger
Yep. Making a claim that this is a “mandate” just is beyond silly.
The goal of SNAP should be to provide food for families that cannot afford it. Allowing that to be swapped for candy is not solving that problem and devaluing the program.
I'm not the least bit torn. The fact that it has gone on this long is a public health travesty.
Last edited:
You cool with the federal government telling people what they can and can't buy?
Edit-Im kidding with you a bit here. That sounded meaner than I wanted it to be.
Last edited:
JTOSU
Ranger
I would never be cool with the government telling any citizen what they can or cannot do. But the government is not restricting anyone as to what they can purchase, acquire, or consume. They can buy whatever they want. However, if they are going to utilize SNAP — then that is for food.
Similar threads
