Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

Napping - the outcast tradition

By imrdkl in Op-Ed
Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 08:18:04 AM EST
Tags: Freedom (all tags)

The tradition of napping, or Siesta as it's also called, has a long, quiet, and peaceful history. Taking a good afternoon nap is still quite popular in Spain, Italy, and other countries of southern Europe, and also in Mexico and other Latin America countries.

Recently however, it's been reported that the tradition of napping is dying out in some of these places, due to the pressures and demands of the new economy. In this article, I will show conclusively that this stifling and suppression of the human need for 40 winks is both wrong headed, and bad for the economy. This trend must be addressed as a serious and threatening assualt on the peace of mind, liberty, and general well being of those who still have the courage and wisdom to practice this excellent tradition.

Latin folk are not the only ones who like to catch 40 winks when they can. Some of the most important and highly-regarded people of the modern age take (took) naps. JFK, Winston Churchill, Thomas Edison, Napolean Bonaparte, Johannes Brahms, Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan, and even Andy Rooney, according to the highly-regarded book on the subject, called The Art of Napping. Churchill himself perhaps said it best when he stated:
You must sleep sometime between lunch and dinner, and no halfway measures. Take off your clothes and get into bed. That's what I always do. Don't think you will be doing less work because you sleep during the day. That's a foolish notion held by people who have no imaginations. You will be able to accomplish more. You get two days in one -- well, at least one and a half."
Clearly, this is one of Churchills most inspiring and insightful statements, and he made alot of them.

Prior research has shown that the we quite naturally begin to feel a bit sleepy in the early to mid-afternoon. Lots of people suppress the desire to give in to this urge by drinking coffee. But the general consensus, derived from more than 25 years of solid, scientific research, is that the only way to restore productivity and get things done is to take that nap, and be proud to do so.

More recently, a study was done on some German subjects, employees of a company who were given the opportunity to have a quick snooze after lunch. The results were published last month, and guess what? These lucky folks felt better, and got more done for their company, and their company's insightful and forward-looking management, in the afternoons when they'd had a quick snooze.

So I say, be proud and snore loudly, when you take your nap on the job. Perhaps your statement will eventually win you the admiration and respect of your coworkers, who have been oppressed and disinformed about the importance of a bit of shuteye for so long, that they simply can't grasp the significance or importance anymore.

Finally, remember that April 8 is National Workplace Napping Day. What, you say you missed it? Well, perhaps if you had been more alert...


Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure


I nap on the job
o regularly 20%
o occasionally 16%
o whenever I can sneak one in 28%
o not since I was caught and flogged publically 34%

Votes: 67
Results | Other Polls

Related Links
o Siesta
o Spain
o Italy
o Mexico
o dying out
o catch 40 winks
o The Art of Napping
o Prior research has shown
o general consensus
o quick snooze
o nap on the job
o National Workplace Napping Day
o Also by imrdkl

Display: Sort:
Napping - the outcast tradition | 89 comments (88 topical, 1 editorial, 0 hidden)
I'm one of those weirdos.. (3.83 / 6) (#2)
by locutox on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 07:14:11 AM EST

..who get migraines from napping. I'm a little mystified to the cause of these headaches. Can anyone explain?

Maybe (4.25 / 4) (#5)
by bob6 on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 07:31:37 AM EST

You have been hypnotized by your boss so you won't have a nap so you'll work more...

Seriously I don't know. It's hard to tell because I don't know much about your life. It depends on what you eat for breakfast and for lunch, how many time you usually sleep, etc.
I suspect that the drop of blood pressure is responsible : it drops because you just eat and because you're sleeping. I have terrible headaches when I wake too late in the morning (afternoon).

[ Parent ]
similar (3.33 / 3) (#8)
by cetan on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 07:57:52 AM EST

I don't get migraines, but after I nap, I am useless for the rest of the day. I am disoriented, have clouded thoughts, lack concentration, and basically am never fully awake again for the rest of the day.

I just can't nap, and it sucks.

===== cetan www.cetan.com =====
[ Parent ]
I agree (3.50 / 2) (#42)
by AragornSonOfArathorn on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 12:35:10 PM EST

I am exactly the same way. I am totally useless if I take a nap; I can't think or do anything. I may as well just stay in bed until the next morning. And this does suck because if naps worked for me I could really use them.

The only time I'll let myself nap is if I had pulled an all-nighter the night before cause by the middle of the day I'm useless anyway, so may as well go to bed.

[ Parent ]
Shut eye (4.00 / 2) (#67)
by MoonVine on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 05:47:53 PM EST

Effective refreshing napping only requires at most, fifeteen minutes of shut eye. Anything more, will cause sluggishness, and produce the opposite effect, making you feel downright lethargic, grumpy, and mean.

You can do it, quick shut-eye that is, at breaktime, lunchtime, on the way back from work on the subway, between classes, next to the bums at Barnes and Noble, wherever you feel comfy. And you will wake up feeling refreshed and sprightly. Even on the subway. Yeah, if you get mugged , you will have that much more energy to chase down the mofo and pound him senseless. I need a nap.

[ Parent ]
How much siesta is enough? (3.50 / 2) (#37)
by satch on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 11:17:26 AM EST

I read a time ago about "correct" napping. You can choose to sleep 30 minutes or 90 minutes, other options aren't really good.

The claim is that the brain after 30 minutes goes into deep sleep so if you are woken up during this period you will get headaches and such usually. Next period of light sleep is 90 minutes after, when you can wake up in a good way.

As a note, less that 30 minutes seems to work well too, but the typical one hour nap is not a refreshing one.

[ Parent ]

The Medic answers (4.50 / 2) (#41)
by mmmr7ckl on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 12:08:38 PM EST

(take with a pinch of NaCl)

Here is my explanation:

The normal sleep pattern is this: daytime activity, (sleep starts) slowing down maintaining for ~1 hour, (REM starts) temporary frenzy of activity, (REM stops) back to slow sleep. And so the cycle goes on until waking up.

It is highly likely that you are waking up during the REM sleep, that's when your brain is very active and your heart is pumping out blood fast; the high blood pressure acts on your brain to give you tension headache (I doubt that you have migraine... migraine is characterised by visual disturbances / flashing lights etc). At this stage a mild painkiller is sufficient.

Or you have a sleeping disorder, for which a doctor would help exclude narcolepsy.

[ Parent ]
Medic Eh.. (4.00 / 2) (#73)
by locutox on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 07:16:34 PM EST

Yeah, I was over exaggerating when I said migraine :) I don't think i'm waking up during REM sleep though, since even after a 5-10 minute nap I still feel the same effects of a 1 hour nap.

[ Parent ]
Heh (4.00 / 1) (#80)
by mmmr7ckl on Wed Apr 17, 2002 at 12:49:49 PM EST

Well I won't take professional responsibility for this but an easy way to tell if you're waking up during REM sleep: if you remember your dreams you probably just had REM... otherwise no. REM happens several times per night... and all people woken up during REM were dreaming. Those woken up inbetween were not.

In any case, don't worry huh? Painkillers are cheap and effective. Just don't abuse them!

[ Parent ]
problem is (4.57 / 7) (#3)
by bosk on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 07:14:50 AM EST

Where does one sleep while at work? Most people don't go home for lunch. I doubt most people would adopt Churchill's "full measures" and take off all of their clothes at work to take a snooze even if they could find a spot to get cumfy. Of course, you could try to power-nap while at you desk, sitting down with you head on your desk, but that won't stop uninformed co-workers from interrupting you.

In Vechta, Germany, civil servants working at the townhall roll out mats after lunch so they can take a quick snooze. While this may improve their health it hasn't improved their image as hard workers.

Vietnam: problem solved. (4.40 / 5) (#28)
by Tezcatlipoca on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 10:35:23 AM EST

People there sleep under their desks during siesta time. Including the recepctionist. I fell over her once.

I swear it was not in purpose, the fact she is the sweetiest girl in the whole of Ho Chi Minh City is pure coincidence.
"At eighteen our convictions are hills from which we look;
at forty-five they are caves in which we hide." F. Scott Fitzgerald.
[ Parent ]
Siesta is alive and well, luckily (4.58 / 12) (#4)
by 8ctavIan on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 07:26:31 AM EST

I am pleased to report that the siesta is still alive and well here in Spain. The schedule of work, in shops particularly have a lot to do with it surviving (9AM-2PM - break for lunch 5PM-8PM). In the summer, the siesta is pretty much mandatory because of the heat. I think factories are slowly getting away from this schedule, but the emphasis is on slowly. I take mine everyday in the summer and try to take it often in the winter (when time permits). I have read a few articles that backs up what the imrdkl says, namely that the human body seems to need sleep twice in a 24 hour period. Even a so-called 'cat nap' is good. It is reported that Salvador Dalí, (a Spaniard) was a big advocate of cat naps. He held a spoon in his hand and got some sleep in a chair until he reached a state of just going into deep sleep. At that point, his muscles relaxed and he dropped the spoon into a plate below causing a noise that woke him up.

The siesta is a good thing. I really hope it lasts here and than it catches on in other parts.

Injustice is relatively easy to bear; what stings is justice. -- H.L. Mencken

same in Greece (4.00 / 1) (#47)
by Delirium on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 01:35:55 PM EST

It's still very much alive and well in Greece -- everything closes around 2pm and reopens around 5pm. In fact I believe there are laws against opening shops during this period in order to preserve the siesta, out of a fear that some people would stay open 2-5 to gain a competative edge and then everyone else would have to as well.

[ Parent ]
A cold climate breeds fascism. (3.10 / 28) (#6)
by bc on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 07:39:34 AM EST

If we consider that all latin countries the world over aren't noted for their economic prosperity, and further note that almost all Northern countries are economic powerhouses, we can quickly see that there must surely be some relationship between climate and economic performance.

I would hazard that warmer countries have lazier inhabitants who love nothing more than to sleep the most productive part of the day away with siestas and 40 winks, while their Northern brethren, innoculated against laziness by an unforgiving, freshening climate, get down to work and stay at work, creating a vastly more productive nation.

Where are the economic basketcases in the world? By my theory, they should be concentrated around the equator, and economic performance should gradually increase as you get further away from this girdle of stagnation around the world's centre.

If we look at the facts, we can see this is indeed the case.

I would also argue that a successful economy needs a degree of self sacrifice for the good of the nation, the Volk. Oftentimes this is unconscious. America, Britain, Germany & other northern nations consider themselves to be founded upon an ideal of individual rights, but those rights are expressed in terms of how one should interact with others, betraying their collectivist nature. "You have a right to free speech" is just another way of saying "You have a duty not to hinder the speech of others."

Warmer countries are much more individualistic, meaning they have no truck with such collectivist, social constraints. This is especially apparant in sub-saharan Africa, where the masses are so individualistic that states there can only exist through military force, unlike the North, where the idea of "nationality" ensures that everyone subscribes to the same values, the same identity (more or less) and that they never cross the line and become too individualist.

I think this is because in the colder nations, people have to look out for each other to a far greater degree than in the south. Who can doubt that an especially cold winter draws a community together? Further, warmth breeds a degree of insouciance in people. A feeling of "not giving a fuck." I further suspect that the prevalence of marijuana in warmer nations has grave cultural effects on the work ethic there. How apt that, when Northern countries were using hemp to make the sails and ropes that would allow them to conquer the globe, southerners were 'toking up' and lazing about. I suspect this is the cultural origin of the "siesta."

Even in terms of personality, we can see that southerners are far more varied and interesting than northerners. Who can doubt the wonderful personalities of the Italians, the Mexicans, the Spanish, Morrocans, Egyptians, & Senegalese? They are far more varied and interesting than their stodgy Anglo/German/Scandinavian northern equivalents. We northerners have forgotten what it is to exist for ourselves, to have fun, and have sublimated our own desires for the good of the state & society. This northern fascism (for that is what it is) certainly guarantees a good standard of living for everybody, as long as we play by the rules, but are we really having fun?

I myself am not bothered so much by this state of affairs. I think it is good that we in the North unwittingly work for our fellow man and sacrifice ourselves for the common good, when the alternative is fun individualism but a short, chaotic, miserable life as seen in Latin America, Africa, and so on.

We may be born into the world, but we are raised in the bosom of society & the state, and later in life we should pay our dues accordingly.

♥, bc.

typical (4.00 / 7) (#9)
by h2odragon on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 08:01:04 AM EST

from someone whose ancestors were chased out of the habitable portions of the globe and forced to contend with the bleak unhospitable wastelands to be found about 45 degrees past the equator. (there's a cold half of the southern hemisphere too; don't forget)

This inherited resentment combined with the fact that human brains freeze up and malfunction in colder climates explains both the drab sameness of the northern and/or colder climate peoples, and the blithering idiocy evinced in your final "pay our dues to the state" line.

[ Parent ]

Huh (4.14 / 7) (#11)
by bc on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 08:14:29 AM EST

from someone whose ancestors were chased out of the habitable portions of the globe

I really don't know anything about my ancestors, so I can't be as certain as you. Only Americans are interested in geneaology, for only they are obsessed with finding their "roots" and wearing whatever identity takes their fancy.

combined with the fact that human brains freeze up and malfunction in colder climates

Some sort of hat is in order, then.

the blithering idiocy evinced in your final "pay our dues to the state" line

We all have a duty to the state, and to society. Or at least, this is the undeniable northern attitude & cultural inheritance. Only in the North have states and society as entities historically outweighed the rights of the individual.

You can either accept this (as most do), as the price we pay for existing as such a superbly organised and wealthy society, or try to change it for some sort of anarchist system. I am not convinced that the various libertarian philosophies really make any difference here, concerned as they are only with the concrete, legal aspects of conformity and not with the cultural pressures which are all around us, from birth, to work and exist for the good of the state & society.

Most people feel a need to exist for something greater than themselves, and that function, before the rise of the state and the concept of "society", used to be fulfilled by God. Now, we can glory in the good we do for others, through such concepts as state & society, and be happier, well adjusted individuals.

♥, bc.
[ Parent ]

Mmmm.... (3.00 / 1) (#32)
by JAM on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 10:56:41 AM EST

So, are you saying that in Spain (since is not a 'Northern State') for example, the society has never outweighed the rights of the individuals? Or that it is not a prosperous economy? And I suppose the reason is the 'warm climate' (Hint: Topic, come to Madrid on January and enjoy the 'warm climate', and I'm not even speaking of some northern parts like Vitoria-Gasteiz AKA Siberia-Gasteiz).

-- Sorry for my engRish (TM)
[ Parent ]

Well (4.50 / 2) (#55)
by bc on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 04:15:31 PM EST

Unemployment rates topping 20% do not give credence to the idea of Spain as an "economic powerhouse."

Say that in London and I think you'd be laughed off the bourse, mate.

As others have mentioned, Spain and Italy are rather better economically than some nations which lie further to the south, although they are not nearly as powerful as more northern nations. In Italy, of course, it is the North of the country which provides what economic might it has. And as you have yourself mentioned, Spain can become cold at times, in areas such as Madrid where much of the economy is concentrated.

I think your points back me up, rather than refute me.

♥, bc.
[ Parent ]

Again... (4.00 / 1) (#61)
by JAM on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 05:05:08 PM EST

I'm only triying to show you that you are making oversimplifications, and that economic development depends more on other factors. Others had pointed you more examples that 'break' your theory.

And for the 'Madrid' climate, as I said, it usually is really cold in winter, but in summer the mini-continental climate made it one of the hottest places in Spain (along with Sevilla, probably) so hot that the city at 3PM is almost empty, so, acording with your theory where do we 'Madrileños' fit?
-- Sorry for my engRish (TM)
[ Parent ]

I know I know!! (2.66 / 3) (#70)
by President Steve Elvis America on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 06:07:47 PM EST

  • so, acording with your theory where do we 'Madrileños' fit?
In the ovens, fascist.


Mr. President Dr. Steve Elvis America
[ Parent ]

Oh... (4.00 / 1) (#63)
by JAM on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 05:12:29 PM EST

I forgot to say, the current unemployment rate in Spain is 12.8%, not 20%, which is sadly still very high compared with the european average of 8.4%.
-- Sorry for my engRish (TM)
[ Parent ]
Did you consider the research? (4.66 / 3) (#15)
by imrdkl on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 08:45:12 AM EST

Sleeping the most productive part of the day away seems to be both productive and conservative. While more moderate summer climates such as those you describe may provide the environment to continue working, it's notable the crucial point that others have already pointed out, namely that the stifling heat in countries more closely situated to the equator gives an additional impetus to save strength and rest during the hottest times of the day.

This is simple common sense, not laziness. When I claim a right to use my energies in the most sensible manner, I simultaneously encourage you to do so, even if a certain amount of deprogramming or restoration of common sense may be necessary for you to grasp the logic. Neither shall you be hindered, it seems, from attempting to be productive in the countries which do practice this most wise tradition, but you may find yourself working alone. Perhaps that is when you are most productive, in any case?

[ Parent ]

A problem (2.85 / 7) (#18)
by hstink on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 08:55:28 AM EST

Said theory seems to hold true in Australia - those at the northmost tip (an almost tropical climate) are bad at everything, but get progressively more brilliant as you travel south, down to neighbourhood granularity.

Unfortunately, the theory breaks down as you continue the southern descent. In particular, New Zealand.


[ Parent ]
RE: A problem (none / 0) (#88)
by BLU ICE on Fri Apr 19, 2002 at 07:16:14 PM EST

Unfortunately, the theory breaks down as you continue the southern descent. In particular, New Zealand.

One thing about that: Take a look at the globe. You see where they are located? That's their problem. Also, they have no good natural resources. Their farmland isn't the best. Nice mountains though. I hope to visit their someday.

Also, it's not like NZ is that bad off. They got a bad economy, yes, but I think their per capita GDP is around $18,000. Just a little behind britain.

I tend to disagree with the adequacy guy's theories. Here is why:

Most warmer-clime nations were colonies at some point. This produces unstable and/or corrupt gov'ts that we see in these nations today. That corresponds to lower economic status.

They aren't shirkers in Latin America or Africa. People such as an African lentil farmer or a Latin American sweatshop work their asses off compared to you. They will work 12 hours a day, easy. They have to to earn a decent living.

"Is the quality of this cocaine satisfactory, Mr. Delorean?"
"As good as gold."

-- I am become Troll, destroyer of threads.
It's like an encyclopedia...sorta: Everything2

[ Parent ]

Well (none / 0) (#89)
by hstink on Wed Apr 24, 2002 at 01:53:54 AM EST

New Zealand is to Australians as Canada is to USAians, and I was aiming at readers from the Commonwealth who would recognise such (as a joke).

And as for the article, of course. There is a mix of lazy, stupid, smart or industrious people wherever you go, and the ratios are determined more by tradition than climate.


[ Parent ]
Wow. (3.00 / 2) (#21)
by catseye on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 09:08:38 AM EST

Do you actually believe the things you post?

How can we fight Islamic Fundamentalism abroad if we do not fight Christian Fundamentalism at home?
[ Parent ]
Does bc belive what he writes? (1.00 / 1) (#35)
by codemonkey_uk on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 11:01:51 AM EST

Of course not. What a ridiculous suggestion.
"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there is no good evidence either way." - Bertrand Russell
[ Parent ]
He,he,he. (4.80 / 5) (#39)
by Tezcatlipoca on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 11:24:16 AM EST

If we consider that all latin countries the world over aren't noted for their economic prosperity, and further note that almost all Northern countries are economic powerhouses, we can quickly see that there must surely be some relationship between climate and economic performance.

France and Italy are prosperous countries. And they are Latin as well. Spain, since the death of dictator Franco, has progressed enourmusly.

There was a time when Argentina had a greater GDP than many countries in Europe.

Your midly amusing attempt to link climate and economic performance breaks completely when one widens the sample of countries to consider: Singapore lies practically in the Equator and that has not stopped it to become a fully developped country (most other developped countries would be happy to have public transport like theirs). Other countries in the same area (Malaysia, Thailand, Phillipines, Indonesia) had spectacular growth in the 90s (in spite of the climate).

So it seems to me like economic performance has more to do with policies and governance (Argentina became poor because bad policies, not because its Latin heritage).

I take issue particularly with your following assertion:

I would hazard that warmer countries have lazier inhabitants who love nothing more than to sleep the most productive part of the day away with siestas and 40 winks...

Even as a joke this offends.

In Mexico many people live in poverty (blame bad policies and lack of democracy, which the US helped to derail, but I disgress). Those people will commute long distances every day in cities to reach their badly paid jobs. 10 hour shifts (8 work + 2 for lunchtime) plus 4 hours commuting are not rare. These people, when working in the "formal" economy very often don't get more than 5 days of vacation per year (if you add all the public holidays in Mexico then it is around 15 days). Way below the European norm.

In the countryside, where agriculture is mostly low tech, the farmers have to start work early in the morning (5:00am) and very often go home well after 19:00 or 20:00.

Then we have the "informal" or "black" economy, where millions of people prefer to rather sell trinkets in street markets or clean your car's windshield during a stop in a bussy intersection than become thieves.

We may have bad politicians, we may as a country had taken bad decisions in the past, but believe me, everybody was working as hard as you can imagine. Anybody that calls my people lazy is completely uninformed and such utterance is deeply offensive. I am willing to go allong with most jokes and stereotypes of all kinds, specially when spewed in a place like K5, but in all honesty sometimes even a joke needs some more context that shows it is not that funny after all.

"At eighteen our convictions are hills from which we look;
at forty-five they are caves in which we hide." F. Scott Fitzgerald.
[ Parent ]

inadequacy (1.00 / 6) (#49)
by dogwalker on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 01:40:07 PM EST

Where can I get a perl script that will grep the comment header for the string "adequacy" and mod the comment at 1 if the string is found?

share and enjoy

[ Parent ]

If you were 1337, (3.00 / 6) (#54)
by derek3000 on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 03:59:49 PM EST

you could write it yourself.

But then again, you are an illiterate fucknuckle.

Not too political, nothing too clever!--Liars
[ Parent ]

whatever. (1.00 / 3) (#62)
by dogwalker on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 05:08:42 PM EST

Yeah, I probably could do it myself. I just prefer not to re-write existing code.

But then again, go swim in a sewer, skinwaste.

share and enjoy

[ Parent ]

Screw productivity! (4.25 / 4) (#50)
by Spork on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 01:57:25 PM EST

OK, the theory advanced in the parent article is stupid. The world's most progressive, pacifistic and anti-faschist countries (Norway, Sweden, Iceland) are in a pretty cold climate. Compare even the USA to Canada. It's not the Canadians who are faschists!

However, I do agree that cold-climate countries seem to develop a culture around maximizing productivity. Perhaps it has to do with the fact that Protestantism is more common in the cold and Catholicism in the warm, but I think the causal explanation goes in the other direction.

In any case, I think it's stupid to care so much about personal productivity. It's much more important that people live well, that they have multi-faceted and well rounded lives, instead of being just cogs in a machine. And for some reason, people in cold-climate cultures resist the tendency to become mere cogs in a machine much less than the people of the more temperate zones. This may bring productivity to those countries, but it does no favors to the people living there. I bet many people posting to K5 are being milked daily for every last ounce of work that they can provide, and their bosses are still trying to come up with ways to make them accomplish more, faster. Even this power-napping issue seems to be getting framed that way: You'll be more productive if you nap. Why do we care so much about that? A country of semi-productive people, if not interfered with, would do fine.

I guess the problem is that the cold-climate countries have a tendency for imperialism, and think they have a right to exploit the warmer countries where your work is not 90% of your life. I think a good case study is Cuba: thanks to Castro and the US sanctions, Cuba has managed to resist westernization for quite a while. They would be doing even better economically if they could get real market value for their exports, but even as it is, they are doing fine. This is not because the Cuban culture is somehow superior to the that of Nicaragua or Honduras, but because Cuba is not a de-facto colony of an imperial state. I strongly suspect that all the other warm-climate countries would turn out like Cuba (and better) if we whities just stopped screwing with them.

It shouldn't surprise us that countries that take the needs of their people seriously are less economically prosperous than the countries that don't. But this is no argument to ignore the needs of the people.

[ Parent ]

Why?? (1.41 / 12) (#53)
by FuriousXGeorge on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 03:08:54 PM EST

Are you idiots modding this racist adequacy troll 5???

Did you even read what he wrote?

[ Parent ]
Ok FINE (2.00 / 4) (#71)
by FuriousXGeorge on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 07:09:25 PM EST

Let the troll do what he wants and mod me down instead, thats really productive.

[ Parent ]
Why a 5? (3.25 / 4) (#72)
by rpm on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 07:09:28 PM EST

I gave him a 5 because it was a appears to be a decent troll.

[ Parent ]
News for Mussolini, I'm sure. (3.00 / 1) (#56)
by pietra on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 04:19:46 PM EST

Benito Mussolini, a Fascist's fascist, was born in Romagna, Italy. He did spend part of his life in Austria and Switzerland, but the majority of his life was spent in a Mediterranean climate.

[ Parent ]
Slight difference (2.00 / 7) (#57)
by bc on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 04:32:17 PM EST

That was not a successful implementation of fascism.

The fascist movements of the Southern European countries can be seen as a yearning to become like the North. Mussolini's fascist Italy was, in many ways, very futurist. Unfortunately, this futurism was never something that could be made a reality, unlike the heady, breathtaking futurism of Nazi Germany, where the future was an exhilarating now.

As nazi Germany collapsed under the assault of even more northern nations such as Britain and the US (at least in terms of climate, the US's powerbase is in the north, and is colder), it lashed out with space age V2 rockets.

The southern European fascist movements were blatantly attempts to instill a new futurist order aping the acheivements of the north. Unfortunately for them, they never acheived it.

How could they? Any attempt to bring southern nations to northern levels of prosperity requires excessive totalitarianism. More often than not, the southerners are culturally opposed to such statist ideas, though sometimes there are exceptions (Singapore, possibly Japan, not exactly a model of freedom and democracy in itself).

So, to sum up, although southern fascism was a reality, it was not successful and was motivated by the desire to ape the north.

♥, bc.
[ Parent ]

Silicon Valley == hot climate != not productive (3.00 / 1) (#74)
by ckm on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 07:23:21 PM EST

I live in SV, and it's hot here. During the summer, it's around 90 all the time, and it's in the 70's (F) in the winter (that's 35 & 20 for the rest of the world). It doesn't rain for roughly eight months of the year, and it's basically a desert.

However, one could hardly argue that SV is not productive. In fact, it's one of the most productive places on the planet. Most people here work insane hours, even with the heat.

I won't even mention LA, 500 miles south of here....

Oh, and Califorians of European descent are in the minority here. Latinos and Asians make up the majority (it's roughly 1/3 of each). You should try visiting sometime, you'll be amazed how productive people can be when the climate is really pleasant and not cold/dreary.

Finally, I don't know what country you are in, but chances are that California has a far larger economy than where you live, given that it's the 5th largest economy in the world.

Perhaps if you travelled more you wouldn't come out with such asinine theories.


[ Parent ]
Air Conditioning (nt) (2.50 / 2) (#75)
by bc on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 08:56:09 PM EST


♥, bc.
[ Parent ]
nap countries (2.25 / 4) (#7)
by ronnya on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 07:41:47 AM EST

Heh, nice try but I guess there's a reason those countries you mentioned aren't exactly frontrunners in this "new economy". ;)

Frontrunners (4.57 / 7) (#12)
by katie on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 08:35:28 AM EST

Yes, but they're also not frontrunners in the "having people die of stress" leagues either.

It depends what you see as being a part of quality of life. Personally, I think I'd be much more productive having a nap in the afternoon. But then I also think I'd be more productive not working in an open-plan "office" that might as well be a corridor, with phones endlessly ringing and everyone and their dog having a chat waiting by the printer behind me.

Productivity isn't a decision maker in the "new economy" countries either. They make decisions based on "perceived productivity", which isn't nearly the same thing.

We don't know that having naps would/would not improve productivity because we haven't tried them in our stress-based economies.

[ Parent ]
Re: Frontrunners (4.33 / 3) (#17)
by ronnya on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 08:53:31 AM EST

Well, if you work under those conditions I don't think a nap would matter much for productivity (you're not able to get much done anyway). :) But I really don't think a nap would matter that much for most people working standard 8 hours a day (unless you're very tired, but then you've got other problems like getting up way too early -- or to bed way too late).

For people who're working MORE than 8 hours (>10), however, a nap would probably be good since productivity tends to go down when working late.

[ Parent ]

China (3.00 / 2) (#14)
by bob6 on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 08:43:00 AM EST

It was not mentionned but China is a nap country and is certainly competitive in any economy.

[ Parent ]
Jokes can spread misinformation. (4.25 / 4) (#26)
by Tezcatlipoca on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 10:29:18 AM EST

The G7 (or G8 if you include Russia) includes Italy and France, both Latin, Mediterranean countries. Spain seems to be in the queue for joining as well.

Mexico is the first or second most important business partner of the US (and 14th economic power in the world).

Vietnam, a country that actually do practice napping, is the most dynamic country in Asia with GDP averaging 7% or 8% since the beginning of the 90s.

"At eighteen our convictions are hills from which we look;
at forty-five they are caves in which we hide." F. Scott Fitzgerald.
[ Parent ]
spain in the G8? (2.00 / 1) (#30)
by mikpos on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 10:43:40 AM EST

Pardon my ignorance, but is Spain even a 1st world country yet? I've always heard Spain referred to as a 2nd world country, and I can't think of a single industry where I'd consider Spain to be a powerhouse of some sort. Great country and all, I'm sure, but I'm skeptical that they'd be joining the G8 (G9?) any time soon.

[ Parent ]
Yes (4.50 / 4) (#51)
by JAM on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 03:03:40 PM EST

Spain has taken an impressive development in the last 25 years (AKA "the spanish miracle") and AFAIK is now the 12 economy in the world.

Quoting from this source (which english is sure better than mine ;)

But now all this has changed. Arguably, no country in the world has changed as much in the last twenty-thirty years as Spain. Spain is one of the great success stories of modernization; those who knew the country before 1970 would find it unrecognizable today. Spain has been transformed from top to bottom and in all particulars; it has been moved from third to first world; its political system has democratized, its political culture has been transformed, its social system has modernized, and economically Spain has moved from being one of the poorest countries in Europe to a position where its per capita income is now approximately 80% of the EU average. Spain is no longer the country of quaint customs, fiery flamenco dancers, and long siestas of our fathers', or grandfathers' memories; rather it is alive, dynamic, urban, sophisticated, and very, very hip (...).

(1) (2) (3)
-- Sorry for my engRish (TM)
[ Parent ]

Siestas in Spain & Notes on Rationalization (4.44 / 9) (#10)
by snowlion on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 08:07:42 AM EST

...when I was about 10 or 11 years old. It was weird.

My friend Phil and I would go out, and the entire city was a ghost town from around 2 or 3pm to around 4 or 5 pm. VERY surreal. The suns up. The city is all around you. There are just no people.

Of course, we were a little tired around the time when everyone was awake having dinner (which if I recall, was around 9pm to 10pm; it has been a while). I think I remember that people usually stayed awake until 11pm or 12pm.

Someone who lives in Spain, please correct me..!

All in all, I thought it was a pretty civilized practice. You get a nice break in the middle of the day, when it is hotest and our concentration is worse. And get to work in the cool more often. And it just felt nicer.

Unfortunately, it's probably going to be "rationalized" away... (see 'the McDonaldization of Society'). "Rationalized" is the word used when something is optimized for a particular end (made more efficient from a very narrow and specific perspective). The word is almost always used to talk about "rationalizing" to generate money. People don't like "rationalized" processes, because it detracts from the general perspective of having healthy people in a healthy society living like they would like to live.

The word is used in quotes because it is an ironic word; it doesn't really mean what it purports to mean. In reality, we are actually interested in being happy. So the rational thing would be to do things that make us happy- preserve the siesta and what not. The persuit of money is only useful as a secondary agent, to help us be happy and participate in life.

Map Your Thoughts
Not sure about Spain or the Med., (3.00 / 2) (#16)
by MoonVine on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 08:46:54 AM EST

But having spent a small stint in the asian silicon valley: Bangalore, Hyderabad, siesta is definetly alive and well in some areas of the world. Actually there are some similarities between your expereince as a child in spain and mine in bangalore- Between 2-4pm, no banco, no shopo were ever openo!! Not even ice cream shops ; ( Which was fine with me, cuz naps are what I love best in the afternoon- are the only things I still love in the afternoon, actually). And on top of extensive nap taking, in India, if the World Cup for cricket was on, it would be errily quite in the streets. People would close their little shops, go home and watch the match- and sometimes for days!! Nothing going on anywhere- just people glued to their tv sets. So, all in all, India has a love for both naps and games, it would seem. Correlation to their rich culture and booming software industry?

[ Parent ]
Ha! (Ice cream shops & Soccer in Colombia) (2.66 / 3) (#19)
by snowlion on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 08:58:23 AM EST

Actually, I do remember being specifically disappointed that ice cream shops were closed during those hours..! {;D}=

As for the games- it is the same way in Colombia, from what my girlfriend (resident for 14 years) has said. She says that during the soccar (futbol) games, the streets are empty.

Then... ...the team Colombia loves gets a goal!

The entire [empty!] streets are filled with the sounds of people cheering!

Dude, we are talking about a country where soccer players and fans exchange death threats. (Amber tells me something about a soccar team not going to Colombia for fear of death, or something like that. I forget if anyone was killed or not.)

Map Your Thoughts
[ Parent ]
Soccer in Columbia (2.00 / 1) (#24)
by Steve Hamlin on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 10:06:33 AM EST

You're correct. During the 1994 World Cup, a Columbian soccer player (Andres Escobar) scored a point in the wrong goal and his team lost, 2-1.

About a week later, Andres Escobar was killed following an arguement with a rabid soccer fan outside a bar in Bogota.

[ Parent ]

Naps don't work in big Cities (4.25 / 8) (#13)
by redelm on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 08:36:49 AM EST

While I very much prefer going home for lunch, and having a decent 1 hr nap afterwards, it just doesn't work in modern big conurbations [greater metropolitain areas].

For whatever reason, many people seem to live around 30 minutes commute from work (some closer, some further) and this hour round trip militates significantly against naps. Why lose an extra hour commuting, use the fuel & create the pollution?

Lunch at home/naps are only feasible in small towns or where people otherwise live close to work [universities?].

Need a cot in the office (3.50 / 2) (#68)
by scruffyMark on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 05:48:44 PM EST

You can't go home for a nap, but maybe you can have a quick snooze at the office...

[ Parent ]
Falling asleep (4.16 / 6) (#20)
by Paul Johnson on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 09:02:13 AM EST

I dread going to meetings. Not because I necessarily find them boring or useless, but because I keep falling asleep. If there is something on that I am particularly interested in personally then I can generally stay awake for it, but if its the boring-but-important stuff then I just fall asleep. People notice this. Its really embarassing.

My wife tells me I sometimes talk in my sleep. Ghod help me if I ever do *that* in a meeting.

You are lost in a twisty maze of little standards, all different.

See your doctor (3.50 / 2) (#40)
by mmmr7ckl on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 11:52:44 AM EST

Hi there,

I think that some things like that warrant you going to your doctor. Just tell him you keep falling asleep and are suspecting narcolepsy; it is a real medical condition and is very troublesome and embarassing. If he/she refuses, keep insisting on a neurology referral.



[ Parent ]
Same here (4.00 / 2) (#43)
by theboz on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 12:44:48 PM EST

That's also why I tend to browse K5 at work, otherwise I'll fall asleep if I focus on work the whole time.

[ Parent ]

Air quality? (4.50 / 2) (#66)
by scruffyMark on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 05:46:53 PM EST

I worked at a lab at my school a couple of summers, and had almost the same problem - I didn't quite fall asleep in meetings, but I got drowsy, and sort of nodded off despite my best efforts. This happened no matter whether the meeting was interesting or boring (granted, they were mostly boring). It took me about half an hour after a meeting to be productive again.

Usually we had these meetings in a conference room without any windows, and only one door, which was closed to keep out noise. Sometimes in good weather we had meetings outside on the lawn, or in the lab when there were demos to run. At these meetings, I was alert all the way through, and able to go back to work right away after.

There is also one poorly ventilated building on campus that does this to me. I never get much out of the classes that are held there - I just zone out, my eyes glaze over, and I feel sleepy until I go outside for a little while.

[ Parent ]

Siesta in Mexico is dead.Fscking stereotypes. (4.16 / 6) (#22)
by Tezcatlipoca on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 09:24:16 AM EST

And it has been dead (or asleep) in most of the country for at least 40 years.

In Mexico City, where one fifth of Mexico lives, although most companies give lunch breaks of two hours these are used to (surprise) have lunch and then attend to personal errands, rarely to sleep. Similar patterns exist in all big cities (and since Mexico is an urban country, the sterotype, often negative, of the Mexican having siesta is pure myth).

You still find some smaller towns where perhaps the siesta is honoured, but it comes as a big shock to urban Mexican people that visit those places.

"At eighteen our convictions are hills from which we look;
at forty-five they are caves in which we hide." F. Scott Fitzgerald.
I was under the impression (3.00 / 1) (#27)
by imrdkl on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 10:31:02 AM EST

that Oaxaca is a relatively large town. Is this not true? I realize that it pales in population comparison to MC, but then, most places do. I didn't mean to stereotype anyone. I regard the napping tradition highly, in case that wasn't clear. Do you find it embarassing, or humiliating, in some way?

[ Parent ]
No (3.00 / 1) (#33)
by theboz on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 10:59:05 AM EST

I have never been there so I don't know, but the state of Oaxaca doesn't have that huge of a population. If you want to look at a large city D.F. is the biggest, and I believe Tezcatlipoca is a chilango so he knows all about it. Guadalajara is another major city, where I have spent a lot of time and they do what he described. You go home and eat with your family, or run errands, or whatever. It's also common to work much later than you do in the U.S. as well.

I think since you're basing your research on a travel guide, it is prone to error since they are trying to portray Oaxaca as quaint. I wouldn't be suprised if they say that it's full of people eating worms out of tequila and taking a nap leaning against a cactus with a huge sombrero on. I wouldn't accept anything on that site as fact.

[ Parent ]

Thanks Boz (3.00 / 1) (#45)
by imrdkl on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 01:11:00 PM EST

I dont have any reason to doubt the guide, but it probably concerns the more "touristy" parts of town, in any case. God knows the Mexican people work hard for what they get.

[ Parent ]
I'm not a big fan of those things (3.00 / 1) (#52)
by theboz on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 03:05:54 PM EST

I just view those books like I do politicians with corporate funding. I am very critical because the people that make those sites and books usually are taking freebies from the local tourism board or the specific resorts/hotels/etc themselves.

I see it like this. They would rant and rave about the grand canyon because it's there. However, if all your town has is a ditch on the side of the road, they'll rant and rave about that too just to have something good to say. I have a feeling in this case they want to make Oaxaca look like the "older person's Mexico" rather than something like Cancun with a lot of nightclubs and activities for younger people. For example, the things I've read about Plaza del Sol in Guadalajara make it sound like an old market on dirt roads where you can buy vegetables, chickens, and things made by hand. In reality, it's just the same as going to a mall in the U.S. except it's missing the big stores like Sears. Also, the common areas are outside, but I've seen malls like that in Arizona too.

[ Parent ]

stereotypes (3.00 / 1) (#60)
by theR on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 04:42:21 PM EST

I don't consider it a bad stereotype, regardless. I can tell you that plenty of people in my office typically take naps after lunch. I would love to, also, but they make it difficult. We have nowhere besides our cubicles. Some people have chairs with high backs that make it possible, but I don't. Siestas, or naps if you prefer, are a good thing.

If we were a private company, it would be conceivable that we could convince them to get a couch or two for naps. Unfortunately, it's the government, and people would immediately be up in arms about government waste if they explicitly allowed naps (even off the clock) in the office, even though people do it anyway and it would most likely result in happier, more productive employees.

By the way, I'm in the USA.

[ Parent ]

Napping and Extreme Programming (4.50 / 10) (#23)
by Baldrson on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 09:57:12 AM EST

I took a job as software manager as a major systems integration house back in the 80s. We were designing automated ordnance inspection systems. It was rather stressful work knowing that kids who were in military training exercises could get blown up if we didn't get it right. Nevertheless, the schedule demands were relentless.

Aside from pairing programmers to catch problems early, I frequently had to order programmers to go take naps. This confused the hell out of some of the guys -- especially the ones from southeast Asia. Why would their boss demand that they go take a nap?

The upper management didn't make this easy, of course, so I had to use my own office and VW campermobile as cubby holes for naps. The product did get delivered. The only complaint from the customer was the delivery schedule which had slipped somewhat -- but better that than complaints about kids getting turned to hypersonic hamburger during military exercises.

-------- Empty the Cities --------

Extreme Programming != relentless schedule (3.00 / 1) (#69)
by drivers on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 06:06:42 PM EST

Extreme Programming calls for a 40 hour work week.

[ Parent ]
"relentless" (4.00 / 3) (#77)
by Baldrson on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 10:22:00 PM EST

We did some all-nighters at a later stage in the project, when the crucial aspects of the system were done and we were on the critical path for other groups in the integration. Embedded system work is like that -- extreme programming 40-hour limits notwithstanding. Yes, there were more than 40 hour work weeks but usually not if you count the naps. People's blood sugar levels simply aren't constant during an 8 hour work day and the brain burns glucose like a candle burns wax.

What was "relentless" were the demands from the customer for on time delivery when the sales-promised delivery dates inevitably slipped.

-------- Empty the Cities --------

[ Parent ]

What we do to get by in the workplace... (4.66 / 6) (#25)
by Wondertoad on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 10:29:15 AM EST

A friend of mine learned how to sleep at his keyboard, sitting up, with his hands sitting on his keyboard, his fingers even sitting on the home row of keys. His back was to his cube entrance, and his manager was too short to look over the cube wall. But those of us who could see over that wall would check to see if his eyes were closed before bothering him in the late afternoon.

Chalk it up as just one more of the crazy things people do to adapt to the working world. If only employers would respect people's needs, we wouldn't see stuff like this; and maybe there would also be reward, in respect going from the employee to the employer.

It turns out everyone's different and everyone has different needs. But the workplace seems to be the slowest cultural institution to adapt to cultural changes. It was in the 50s that the US society was oriented around mass compliance and conformity, and it was during those times that the cookie-cutter employee came about. Since then every trend has been towards permitting more individualism and respecting differing approaches... except the workplace, which still demands that you sit in identical offices, arrive and leave at identical times, etc. It was only a few years ago that most of the country gave in to casual Fridays -- as if the lack of fashion conformity would lead to chaos.

Office Space is a documentary...

Oh yes (2.00 / 3) (#36)
by Phillip Asheo on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 11:02:23 AM EST

It was in the 50s that the US society was oriented around mass compliance and conformity,

Oh yes. Of course, now it is much much different.

"Never say what you can grunt. Never grunt what you can wink. Never wink what you can nod, never nod what you can shrug, and don't shrug when it ain't necessary"
-Earl Long
[ Parent ]

I don't think he said... (3.00 / 1) (#76)
by humpasaur on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 09:09:17 PM EST

it's really be RE oriented yet.

Still, if you study American history you'll see, all that bland suburban monoculture we see today really started in the 1950's. Blame McCarthyism, consumerism, or the most obvious culprit, television.

*sigh* Must I explain FURTHER?
[ Parent ]

Depends on the diet (4.50 / 6) (#29)
by Rainy on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 10:42:53 AM EST

I used to get sleepy after lunch if I ate meat, pastry or dairy. Recently I switched to vegan food and it went away. I eat a salad with no dressing on lunch and I don't feel heavy and slowed down at all.

I heard that meat takes a lot of energy to process. It's not absolutely necessary to sleep, but you'll feel drowsy and inactive, so you just might as well take a nap.
Rainy "Collect all zero" Day

I don't like the Spanish system (4.50 / 4) (#31)
by MSBob on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 10:46:20 AM EST

I was pretty surprised when I first learned about mediterranean siestas. I instantly did not like the idea. I also don't like the western idea of a 1pm-2pm lunch hour and work until 5 or 6pm.

I like it the way it is in Poland and other former eastern bloc countries. The typical work day (even for office jobs) starts around 7am and there is a half hour break around 10:30/11:00am for a so called 'big breakfast'. Then you work until 2:30-3:00pm and then you go home. For all folk with families and kids it's a blessing to have most of the afternoon and evening to spend with your loved ones. Much better idea than enduring your coworkers until 5 or 6pm.

I can't even comprehend the idea of having a 'normal' work day last until 8 or 9pm. That's horrible. Your workday fills up your life pretty much from the moment you wake up almost until it's time to go to bed again. Ugh!

I don't mind paying taxes, they buy me civilization.

Time slide (3.00 / 1) (#38)
by jaymagee on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 11:22:57 AM EST

well, its pretty much teh same here in the US, just slide the times by about two hours each way. You get two more hours to sleep in the morning, so you can stay up two hours later with family. it must be nice to be able to be with them during daylight though, night time limits certain family activities (zoos, parks, and whatnot).
Making a better humanity, one genetic change at a time.
[ Parent ]
One or two-phase? (4.00 / 2) (#34)
by loaf on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 11:01:44 AM EST

There's some evidence to suggest that we do not all respond to sleep the same way. Some people are "built" to function better on sleeping twice per day - two short sleeps being better than one long one.

Also, this item from BBC News suggesting that the lack of sleep in the "new" economy might just be storing up a few troubles for the future ...

Sleeping twice in a day (4.00 / 1) (#65)
by Isabella on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 05:38:12 PM EST

I actually did this and liked it. I was trying to keep up with my normal schedule and my husband's swing-shift schedule, so I would go to work, take a nap when I got home, and then hopefully I would have some time awake when he got back. Sometimes it was hard to get to sleep, but then I would get used to it. In fact, for a long time I would crave a nap every day. I still don't like it if I have a long day in which I don't even get to sit down in a quiet place (whether I fall asleep or not). It's like being a battery; the longer you recharge, the longer you can keep going.

On the other hand, I haven't needed to do this lately. Probably because I have such a flexible schedule right now that I can sleep late in the morning. Sleeping late is a good thing. Unfortunately, I won't be able to live by my biological clock forever; sooner or later I'll have to live by the morning people's schedule again.

"I don't want to run and hide, I've seen it all from either side. Truth and fiction must collide someday." -Midnight Oil
[ Parent ]

Popular all over (3.00 / 1) (#44)
by Rhodes on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 01:07:53 PM EST

Many people in Japan and China also insist on naps, several workers I know end up taking naps after lunch- its either that, or read kuro- you just look busier reading kuro!

Another way (4.00 / 1) (#46)
by SIGFPE on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 01:29:32 PM EST

we quite naturally begin to feel a bit sleepy in the early to mid-afternoon
I used to feel that until I took up working out down the gym. Now I feel pretty alert all day long. Might not work for everyone but it made a dramatic difference to me.
when? (3.00 / 1) (#59)
by feldy on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 04:36:18 PM EST

When do you work out? I work out at night after work, and I feel damn tired in the afternoon. I hear working out in the morning is better for you anyhow -- you burn more calories throughout the day, etc. If that's helping you feel more alert, then maybe I'll give it a try. Unfortunately, I'm not a morning person either...


[ Parent ]
I go in the morning - around 7:30-8:00am. (3.00 / 1) (#64)
by SIGFPE on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 05:15:36 PM EST

Though sometimes at lunchtime instead.

On a related note: I originally started going to the gym because I was suffering badly from insomnia and I was hoping it'd improve my sleep. As it happens it didn't make any difference to my insomnia but the habit stuck.
[ Parent ]

attacking the problem (2.85 / 7) (#48)
by turmeric on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 01:39:32 PM EST

people dont nap because they think it is 'lazy'. they think that unless you work 80 hours a week then you are 'lazy'. they think you are 'dragging down society' if you dont work 80 hours a week. if you fall asleep or something they think you are 'lazy'. if you get in a car wreck on the way home from no sleep, they call it an 'accident', or maybe they say 'well, america isnt for everybody' and they shrug and go back to their 'valuable work'. you attack this with science. not bad. but remember: americans knew for like 50 years that cigarettes cause cancer, and they smoke them anyways. americans know that eating too much fat and meat causes heart diseaes, they dont care. they know too much sugar causes diabetes, yet coca cola is one of the biggest companies in the world. americans know driving cars 50 miles a day is bad for their stress level, their environment, makes them dependent on foreign oil, etc etc etc. americans simply do not care. americans do not care about taking care of their own health they only care if they work until they die. they only care about not being 'lazy'.

Too much sugar (4.00 / 2) (#58)
by theR on Mon Apr 15, 2002 at 04:33:12 PM EST

Too much sugar does not cause diabetes.

First of all, there are three types of diabetes. Type I, also called Juvinile Diabetes, is caused when the pancreas stops secreting insulin. Type II, which up until recently effected adults almost exclusively, is the result of the pancreas still producing insulin, but not at the levels required. The third kind is gestational diabetes, which is a temporary form that only occurs during pregnancy.

Second, none of these forms of diabetes are caused by too much sugar. Sugar intake must be regulated for diabetics, but it has nothing to do with causing diabetes. Even for people who are not diabetics, sugar is just like everything else. Too much is bad for you, but sensible amounts are fine.

[ Parent ]
No (none / 0) (#79)
by CAIMLAS on Wed Apr 17, 2002 at 12:32:17 PM EST

Actually, diabetes can be caused by too much intake of -processed- sugar, such as that in Pepsi, etc. - pretty much any processed food. It occurs when you intake too much sugar, and your pancreas 'says', "whoa, too much sugar for me to keep up with, I'm tired" and becomes fatigued. It then leads to Type II. Due to children/young people still being in developmental stages, this same effect can lead to Type I diabetes in children. Please get your scientce straight.

Socialism and communism better explained by a psychologist than a political theorist.
[ Parent ]

No, sorry, but you are completely wrong (5.00 / 1) (#82)
by theR on Wed Apr 17, 2002 at 02:54:49 PM EST

Why don't you try reading some information that is credible before you start spouting common myths about a disease? I don't mean to be harsh, but the perpetuation of myths like this irks me, especially in a case like this when you seem so sure that you are correct without knowing the causes of diabetes as presented by the medical community and researchers, or perhaps have chosen to ignore them.

For information on what causes Type I diabetes, look here. I quote:

The pancreas, an organ near your stomach, produces insulin. The pancreas contains cells called beta cells. Beta cells have a vital job: They make insulin, a hormone that helps cells take in the sugar they need.

Sometimes, the beta cells get wiped out and cannot produce insulin anymore.

Many things might have killed your beta cells, but in most people with Type 1 diabetes, the immune system makes a mistake. Cells that normally protect you from germs attack your beta cells instead. The beta cells die. Without beta cells, you make no insulin. Sugar builds up in your blood, and you get diabetes.

In Type I diabetes, eating too much processed sugar (or any sugar for that matter) will help diabetes manifest itself, but it will not cause it as far as is known now.

Type II is similarly described though there are obvious differences. Though eating less sugar and/or losing weight can reduce the symptoms (i.e. excess sugar in the blood) or even make them disappear completely, one still has Type II diabetes, as gaining weight again or eating too much sugar will produce the symptoms again.

Since I have the feeling you still may not believe, I will provide links to several more sites that directly address your assertation and/or list causes of diabetes:

There are many more to list, if you like.

A few other notes. What most people think of as sugar, which are actually just simple sugars, is not the only thing that can cause blood sugar (glucose) to rise above normal levels. Carbohydrates, which are a large portion of most people's diets, end up being converted to glucose and sent to the blood, so it is important for diabetics to closely monitor intake of all carbohydrates, not just simple sugars. The result of simple sugars will enter the bloodstream faster than that of complex carbohydrates because they are digested more quickly.

Also, Type II diabetes is by far the most common. Type II diabetics suffer from insulin resistance, and it is thought that part of the reason may be because fat reduces the efficiency or absorbs insulin, causing more insulin to be needed in proportion than leaner people.

Please get your scientce[sic] straight.

Was that straight enough for you? I repeat, sugar is not a cause of diabetes. It can play a part in obesity, and play a part in complications from diabetes, but it has nothing to do with the lack of the body to produce insulin (Type I) or a shortage of insulin being produced (Type II).

[ Parent ]
Semantics (none / 0) (#83)
by CAIMLAS on Wed Apr 17, 2002 at 06:14:24 PM EST

My appoligies for not being more clear: processed sugars encourage the propigation of diabetes, and do not cause it, since it is genetic in part. :| The fact remains that excessive intake of processed sugars -does- result in diabetes in people that are prone to it - a very vast majority of the US populace, it would appear.

One explaination I've heard is that the betas are attacked by the immune system because they are intruding execssive toxins to the body through the processing of these man-processed sugars, and are thus seen as hostile.

Socialism and communism better explained by a psychologist than a political theorist.
[ Parent ]

I still don't understand you, then (5.00 / 1) (#84)
by theR on Wed Apr 17, 2002 at 09:13:17 PM EST

Excessive intake of processed sugars does not result in diabetes in people that are prone to it. It results in excess glucose in the blood, which is a symptom, not a cause. Perhaps you should be more clear than just saying that excessive intake of processed sugars does result in diabetes in people that are prone to it, because that implies that it is causing the diabetes when it is definitely not. It will produce the symptoms in a person that already has diabetes (whether they know it or not), but it will not cause a person that is not a diabetic to become a diabetic.

I don't think I can argue this much more. You seem to have something invested in believing that you are in some way correct here, when I can't read that into what you are saying. If you have something against processed sugars, that is fine. As I said previously, too much of virtually anything can be bad. It's almost universally accepted and believed in the medical and research communities that eating processed sugars have nothing to do with causing or "resulting in" diabetes.

"The fact remains that excessive intake of processed sugars -does- result in diabetes in people that are prone to it." That's odd. I thought I had linked to several sites that stated this is indeed not a fact at all. Maybe I'm missing the subtle difference between "cause" and "result in." I believe "result in diabetics showing symptoms or having high blood glucose" is accurate. What you said still is not accurate, however.

That's an interesting explanation about why the beta cells would be attacked. However, considering their job is to produce insulin and only the amount varies, what toxins are you speaking of that beta cells are introducing? Whose explanation is this? Also, how exactly would eating processed sugars encourage diabetes? Type I diabetes is widely believed to be genetic. Type II diabetes is brought on by insulin resistance, which is most often associated with obesity (a problem that is definitely related to the common diet in the U.S., including sugar intake), though it is not exclusive to those who are obese. Where can I find information showing that eating processed sugars make one more likely to develop insulin resistance or make one's body more likely to attack its own beta cells? Actually, you have said that eating sugar can result in both types of diabetes, so where can I find information showing that sugars both increase insulin resistance and make the body more likely to attack beta cells?

I'm very certain I have my science straight on this matter. I don't claim to know all there is to know about diabetes, and sugar (among many other things) definitely should be a large concern to those who are already diabetic, but you are choosing to believe a myth.

[ Parent ]
on western culture (none / 0) (#85)
by jmd2121 on Thu Apr 18, 2002 at 12:54:00 AM EST

people in our culture have been taught to be more afraid of failure than death.

I agree completely with your sentiments

Read my sig

[ Parent ]
hmmm (none / 0) (#86)
by jmd2121 on Thu Apr 18, 2002 at 12:57:30 AM EST

well my sig is not really appearing.

Maybe it will on this one. If not, this is the site I meant to point you to.


[ Parent ]
Stupid (2.75 / 4) (#78)
by QuantumG on Tue Apr 16, 2002 at 08:16:05 AM EST

When I was about 4 years old the pre-school teachers used to make me have a nap. They also used to make me drink milk. Finally I rebelled, I didn't need a nap, and unlike the other four year old children I was around, I had plenty to do: reading. The teachers (who I must say were glorified baby sitters) used to take my book bag away from me at play time, because they wanted to see me playing with blocks instead of reading. Finally my mum asked me why I didn't like pre-school and I told her. She was so upset she pulled me out straight away. For the rest of that year I sat next to my mum at the fashion shop where she worked (at the time she was a machinist trying to make it as a designer) and read my books. Sleeping in the afternoon isnt "lazy", but neither is it necessary if you get a good night's sleep. Too many times have I heard my friend's say "you dont _need_ eight hours sleep". To them I suggest they take naps.

Gun fire is the sound of freedom.
WOW! (2.00 / 2) (#87)
by Namagomi on Fri Apr 19, 2002 at 03:59:34 PM EST

..and look how you turned out, an inarticulate headcase!

But seriously, this is so off-topic it's sick. As quaint, if muddled, as your little story was, a 25-60-year-old napping while at work and and pre-schooler having rest time have about as much in common as a bulldog and a NIC card.

P.S. Nobody gives a damn that you could turn the pages in Gree Eggs and Ham six months before the other kids.

There is no #nekomimi cabal.
[ Parent ]

Only in ideal situations (4.00 / 2) (#81)
by CAIMLAS on Wed Apr 17, 2002 at 01:34:07 PM EST

A siesta is only possible in ideal environments. Sure, Mexico and Spain aren't ideal in many respects. Their economies aren't as strong as the US's (or those of various EU nations), and they have less global power - but how many of these higher-powered countries have higher levels of stress?

Let's take a look at the US's social topography. The 'ideal' life style in the US, is generally stereotyped as the life of a college student. Many (I'd argue most, to a large extent) college students take naps in the afternoon and stay up late into the night. It's the 'natural' thing to do when there aren't external pressures forcing us to do otherwise. The Spaniards and Mexicans have capitolized on this, and use it to their advantage - as a result, it appears as if their lives are more full, less stressful, and more enjoyable. The cost might be economic standing, but look where the benefits are: not being so tired in the evening that you're unable to interact with family/friends, thus increasing social cohesion and atmosphere (something terribly missing in America, to a large extent, except on weekends), and being able to 'live' throughout the week, not just on weekends. Consider what seems to be a fairly common American trend: go to work all week groggy and tired from work, just trodding through the day, waiting until 5/6/7/8/9 o'clock so you can go home, eat, relax a little bit, and fall asleep, only to wake up the next morning to repeat the tedious schedule 4 more times, until you can go out to the bar/club/friend's house and try to relax and have a good time, all while tired. Then, Americans sleep all AM and often part of the afternoon, and have a single enjoyable evening on Saturday, some on Sunday. (This at least seems to be the habit of sub-30 and working class Americans, in my experience.) Contrast this to having a full evening of socialization after a nap.

From personal experience, having a nap around 3 or 4PM gives me enough energy to not be drowsy until late into the evening, actually enjoying my time, unstead of simply biding it. I indeed consider it ideal.

Socialism and communism better explained by a psychologist than a political theorist.

Napping - the outcast tradition | 89 comments (88 topical, 1 editorial, 0 hidden)
Display: Sort:


All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest © 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!