DST (2018)

[hotdogPi]

Also, I'd appreciate it if we could stop needlessly inserting Trump into the DST thread.

The next shoe to drop in this saga is the Trump administration coming out with their own proposal to eliminate the biannual time changes in America (by extending DST year-round).  The pace of this discussion will likely gain strength in this country once the DST issue is voted on in California in the November midterms.  Once you have Florida and California both proposing year-round DST, it would be hard for the federal government to ignore this issue (especially considering the European Union is proposing to abolish DST).  It's completely appropriate to insert Trump's name into this discussion, seeing he's going to be the one shaping the DST conversation in this country moving forward.

If it's just in California and Florida (especially as a ballot question), that's at the state level, not at the national level, so Trump isn't involved.

[tradephoric]

Also, I'd appreciate it if we could stop needlessly inserting Trump into the DST thread.

The next shoe to drop in this saga is the Trump administration coming out with their own proposal to eliminate the biannual time changes in America (by extending DST year-round).  The pace of this discussion will likely gain strength in this country once the DST issue is voted on in California in the November midterms.  Once you have Florida and California both proposing year-round DST, it would be hard for the federal government to ignore this issue (especially considering the European Union is proposing to abolish DST).  It's completely appropriate to insert Trump's name into this discussion, seeing he's going to be the one shaping the DST conversation in this country moving forward.

If it's just in California and Florida (especially as a ballot question), that's at the state level, not at the national level, so Trump isn't involved.

The Sunshine Protection Act has already passed the Florida legislator and was signed into law by the governor.  The Sunshine Protection Act of 2018 was introduced in the US Senate on March 12, 2018 and if passed would amend the Uniform Time Act of 1966 to make daylight savings time the new, permanent standard time in this country.  A similar bill, H.R.6202 that was introduced on June 22, 2018, would allow States to elect to observe year-round daylight saving time.  It has moved passed being just a state issue now that bills have been introduced in the US Congress. 

[20160805]

Scientific studies have shown that our current system of waking up in the dark is quite unhealthy.  Productivity would also likely be improved if we worked natural hours (relative to the sun) instead of extremely early ones.
https://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/snoozers-are-in-fact-losers

According to Roenneberg, poor sleep timing stresses our system so much that it is one of the reasons that night-shift workers often suffer higher-than-normal rates of cancer, potentially fatal heart conditions, and other chronic disease, like metabolic syndrome and diabetes. Another study, published earlier this year and focussing on medical-school performance, found that sleep timing, more than length or quality, affected how well students performed in class and on their preclinical board exams. It didn't really matter how long they had slept or whether they saw themselves as morning people or not; what made a difference was when they actually went to bed–and when they woke up. It's bad to sleep too little; it's also bad, and maybe even worse, to wake up when it's dark.

Fortunately, the effects of sleep inertia and social jetlag seem to be reversible. When Wright asked a group of young adults to embark on a weeklong camping trip, he discovered a striking pattern: before the week was out, the negative sleep patterns that he'd previously observed disappeared. In the days leading up to the trip, he had noted that the subjects' bodies would begin releasing the sleep hormone melatonin about two hours prior to sleep, around 10:30 p.m. A decrease in the hormone, on the other hand, took place after wake-up, around 8 a.m. After the camping trip, those patterns had changed significantly. Now the melatonin levels increased around sunset–and decreased just after sunrise, an average of fifty minutes before wake-up time. In other words, not only did the time outside, in the absence of artificial light and alarm clocks, make it easier for people to fall asleep, it made it easier for them to wake up: the subjects' sleep rhythms would start preparing for wake-up just after sunrise, so that by the time they got up, they were far more awake than they would have otherwise been. The sleep inertia was largely gone.

Wright concluded that much of our early morning grogginess is a result of displaced melatonin–of the fact that, under current social-jetlag conditions, the hormone typically dissipates two hours after waking, as opposed to while we're still asleep. If we could just synchronize our sleep more closely with natural light patterns, it would become far easier to wake up. It wouldn't be unprecedented. In the early nineteenth century, the United States had a hundred and forty-four separate time zones. Cities set their own local time, typically so that noon would correspond to the moment the sun reached its apex in the sky; when it was noon in Manhattan, it was five till in Philadelphia. But on November 18, 1883, the country settled on four standard time zones; railroads and interstate commerce had made the prior arrangement impractical. By 1884, the entire globe would be divided into twenty-four time zones. Reverting to hyperlocal time zones might seem like it could lead to a terrible loss of productivity. But who knows what could happen if people started work without a two-hour lag, during which their cognitive abilities are only shadows of their full selves?

Theodore Roethke had the right idea when he wrote his famous line "I wake to sleep, and take my waking slow."  We do wake to a sleep of sorts: a state of not-quite-alertness, more akin to a sleepwalker's unconscious autopilot than the vigilance and care we'd most like to associate with our own thinking. And taking our waking slow, without the jar of an alarm and with the rhythms of light and biology, may be our best defense against the thoughtlessness of a sleep-addled brain, a way to insure that, when we do wake fully, we are making the most of what our minds have to offer.

Also, I'd appreciate it if we could stop needlessly inserting Trump into the DST thread.

Now there's even scientific research that backs my side of the argument, meaning now it's just common sense not to want the sun to be up from 11:00 to 23:00.

[kalvado]

Scientific studies have shown that our current system of waking up in the dark is quite unhealthy.  Productivity would also likely be improved if we worked natural hours (relative to the sun) instead of extremely early ones.
https://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/snoozers-are-in-fact-losers

According to Roenneberg, poor sleep timing stresses our system so much that it is one of the reasons that night-shift workers often suffer higher-than-normal rates of cancer, potentially fatal heart conditions, and other chronic disease, like metabolic syndrome and diabetes. Another study, published earlier this year and focussing on medical-school performance, found that sleep timing, more than length or quality, affected how well students performed in class and on their preclinical board exams. It didn't really matter how long they had slept or whether they saw themselves as morning people or not; what made a difference was when they actually went to bed–and when they woke up. It's bad to sleep too little; it's also bad, and maybe even worse, to wake up when it's dark.

Evolved from original statement of "shift work that involves circadian disruption is probably carcinogenic to humans."
Other papers refer to factors possibly contributing to the issue, but there is nothing specific about waking up in a dark.
Whatever it worth.

[tradephoric]

Also, I'd appreciate it if we could stop needlessly inserting Trump into the DST thread.

MAKE AMERICA SUNNY AGAIN!  I also inserted Angela Merkel's name into this discussion, do you want me to stop mentioning her too?  Sure, Merkel made comments directly relating to EU's proposal to abolish DST but Trump is the president as the 115th Congress debates the merits of year-round DST.  When the European Union is proposing abolishing DST it has become a national issue, and of course Trump is going to be an actor in this debate.  If Hillary was president i would be inserting her name into this discussion and i bet your response would be different.  Much of the world has a visceral hatred for Trump that some people can't even stand hearing his name.

[kalvado]

Also, I'd appreciate it if we could stop needlessly inserting Trump into the DST thread.

MAKE AMERICA SUNNY AGAIN!  I also inserted Angela Merkel's name into this discussion, do you want me to stop mentioning her too?  Sure, Merkel made comments directly relating to EU's proposal to abolish DST but Trump is the president as the 115th Congress debates the merits of year-round DST.  When the European Union is proposing abolishing DST it has become a national issue, and of course Trump is going to be an actor in this debate.  If Hillary was president i would be inserting her name into this discussion and i bet your response would be different.  Much of the world has a visceral hatred for Trump that some people can't even stand hearing his name.

For starters, Merkel did something - probably  in her official capacity, but words came from a specific person - so bringing up name is reasonable, if not unavoidable. Federal control over clock settings includes several different entities: there is a law - e.g. congress  has to be involved if that law is to be amended - and new law needs to be signed by the president; secretary of transportation is an executive branch official formally in charge of the issue. President has only that much say here.
Change of DST dates is often attributed to Bush II, but I don't know much he was personally involved in the issue.
And I want to hope that any decisions will be taken rationally, not by a single person on a spur of the moment. Is that too much to aks?

[J N Winkler]

And I want to hope that any decisions will be taken rationally, not by a single person on a spur of the moment. Is that too much to ask?

I frankly don't see the President becoming personally involved until there is a bill to sign, because the DST issue is all downside and no upside--any change, no matter in what direction, will attract vociferous protest.  And I believe this analysis holds regardless of who the President is.

The story I have heard is that the candy manufacturers drove the Bush-era DST reform, which was oriented at keeping more of the country in light during regular trick-and-treating hours on Halloween.  It is the reason we have to pull the drapes shut and move to the back of the house when it is still light out on October 31.

[vdeane]

Also, I'd appreciate it if we could stop needlessly inserting Trump into the DST thread.

MAKE AMERICA SUNNY AGAIN!  I also inserted Angela Merkel's name into this discussion, do you want me to stop mentioning her too?  Sure, Merkel made comments directly relating to EU's proposal to abolish DST but Trump is the president as the 115th Congress debates the merits of year-round DST.  When the European Union is proposing abolishing DST it has become a national issue, and of course Trump is going to be an actor in this debate.  If Hillary was president i would be inserting her name into this discussion and i bet your response would be different.  Much of the world has a visceral hatred for Trump that some people can't even stand hearing his name.

Merkel is actually involved in this issue.  As far as I know, they only person involved in this issue at the US federal level is Marco Rubio.  Right now, any speculation of Trump getting involved is just that - speculation.  He certainly hasn't given any signs on wanting to join in on this debate to me.  Given his tendency to tweet all the things he tweets, it's safe to say we'd know about it by now if he wanted to personally weigh in.  And the way you phrase stuff broadcasts your political beliefs loud and clear in this thread, not just on issues, but on many others not germane to this forum.

[tradephoric]

And I want to hope that any decisions will be taken rationally, not by a single person on a spur of the moment. Is that too much to ask?

I frankly don't see the President becoming personally involved until there is a bill to sign, because the DST issue is all downside and no upside--any change, no matter in what direction, will attract vociferous protest.  And I believe this analysis holds regardless of who the President is.

The story I have heard is that the candy manufacturers drove the Bush-era DST reform, which was oriented at keeping more of the country in light during regular trick-and-treating hours on Halloween.  It is the reason we have to pull the drapes shut and move to the back of the house when it is still light out on October 31.

Extending DST could be a winning issue for Trump to take on for a variety of reasons: 

#1). The vast majority of people don't believe DST is necessary.  In 2016, Accuweather conducted a poll of it's users and found that 83% felt like DST was unnecessary.  While admittedly unscientific, it's right in line with the Europe-wide public survey just conducted that found over 80% of respondents wanted to abolish DST.   

#2). As part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, extended Daylight Saving Time saved 0.5% in energy consumption in this country each day of extended Daylight.  This energy savings would almost certainly be larger if DST was extended year-round, as very few people are running their AC's 24/7 in the middle of January (even in the southern most states). 

#3). Quarterly GDP growth would likely notch higher if DST was extended year-round.  Potentially you could tack on about another quarter percentage point to quarterly GDP growth by simply extending DST year-round.  Trump would love to see 5% quarterly GDP growth as opposed to 4.6%.

#4).  You won't have an increase in people dropping dead of heart-attacks the Monday after a time-change.  Also there won't be spikes in car accidents after the time changes if DST was extended year-round.

[20160805]

And I want to hope that any decisions will be taken rationally, not by a single person on a spur of the moment. Is that too much to ask?

I frankly don't see the President becoming personally involved until there is a bill to sign, because the DST issue is all downside and no upside--any change, no matter in what direction, will attract vociferous protest.  And I believe this analysis holds regardless of who the President is.

The story I have heard is that the candy manufacturers drove the Bush-era DST reform, which was oriented at keeping more of the country in light during regular trick-and-treating hours on Halloween.  It is the reason we have to pull the drapes shut and move to the back of the house when it is still light out on October 31.

Extending DST could be a winning issue for Trump to take on for a variety of reasons: 

#1). The vast majority of people don't believe DST is necessary.  In 2016, Accuweather conducted a poll of it's users and found that 83% felt like DST was unnecessary.  While admittedly unscientific, it's right in line with the Europe-wide public survey just conducted that found over 80% of respondents wanted to abolish DST.   

#2). As part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, extended Daylight Saving Time saved 0.5% in energy consumption in this country each day of extended Daylight.  This energy savings would almost certainly be larger if DST was extended year-round, as very few people are running their AC's 24/7 in the middle of January (even in the southern most states). 

#3). Quarterly GDP growth would likely notch higher if DST was extended year-round.  Potentially you could tack on about another quarter percentage point to quarterly GDP growth by simply extending DST year-round.  Trump would love to see 5% quarterly GDP growth as opposed to 4.6%.

#4).  You won't have an increase in people dropping dead of heart-attacks the Monday after a time-change.  Also there won't be spikes in car accidents after the time changes if DST was extended year-round.

*its 

Counterpoint: Middle and high school children would be in second period when the sun came up if my location were to move to GMT-5 year round.  This itself constitutes circadian disruption, whereas having the clocks on standard time year round would make get-up times and sunrise times align better over the year as a whole.  Given the article above basically said that shift work that disrupts our natural circadian rhythm is bad for us, really it's a no-flipping-brainer.  Now let me go to bed at 21:00, thank you very much, instead of staying up until midnight just to please some hedonistic owl.

[Brandon]

Evolved from original statement of "shift work that involves circadian disruption is probably carcinogenic to humans."

Sounds like a California warning label.

[kalvado]

Evolved from original statement of "shift work that involves circadian disruption is probably carcinogenic to humans."

Sounds like a California warning label.

There are not many fool-proof ways of measuring carcinogenic effects. THose are long term effects, and it is hard to find big enough groups of people who are different by only a single factor of exposure to something for long enough periods of time. Experiments on animals with controlled conditions are not that conclusive (biochemistry is different); and setting up proper experiment on humans could be considered a crime against humanity... 

[tradephoric]

Counterpoint: Middle and high school children would be in second period when the sun came up if my location were to move to GMT-5 year round.  This itself constitutes circadian disruption, whereas having the clocks on standard time year round would make get-up times and sunrise times align better over the year as a whole.  Given the article above basically said that shift work that disrupts our natural circadian rhythm is bad for us, really it's a no-flipping-brainer.  Now let me go to bed at 21:00, thank you very much, instead of staying up until midnight just to please some hedonistic owl.

You never mentioned when 2nd period begins in your location.  In 2014, the American Academy of Pediatrics published a policy statement recommending that middle and high schools start class no earlier than 8:30 am.  On August 31st, California lawmakers narrowly passed SB328 ahead of a midnight deadline and the bill is expected to be signed into law by Governor Jerry Brown.  Once the bill is finalized, middle and high schools in California would be banned from starting classes before 8:30 a.m., with schools given 3 years to comply.  If the nation went to year-round DST, dawn would begin in LA at 7:26 am during the shortest day of the year... a full hour before the start of school assuming the California school districts don't violate SB328. 

California just voted to ban schools from starting before 8:30 a.m. so kids can sleep in
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/04/california-voted-to-ban-school-after-830-so-kids-can-sleep.html

[20160805]

Counterpoint: Middle and high school children would be in second period when the sun came up if my location were to move to GMT-5 year round.  This itself constitutes circadian disruption, whereas having the clocks on standard time year round would make get-up times and sunrise times align better over the year as a whole.  Given the article above basically said that shift work that disrupts our natural circadian rhythm is bad for us, really it's a no-flipping-brainer.  Now let me go to bed at 21:00, thank you very much, instead of staying up until midnight just to please some hedonistic owl.

You never mentioned when 2nd period begins in your location.  In 2014, the American Academy of Pediatrics published a policy statement recommending that middle and high schools start class no earlier than 8:30 am.  On August 31st, California lawmakers narrowly passed SB328 ahead of a midnight deadline and the bill is expected to be signed into law by Governor Jerry Brown.  Once the bill is finalized, middle and high schools in California would be banned from starting classes before 8:30 a.m., with schools given 3 years to comply.  If the nation went to year-round DST, dawn would begin in LA at 7:26 am during the shortest day of the year... a full hour before the start of school assuming the California school districts don't violate SB328. 

California just voted to ban schools from starting before 8:30 a.m. so kids can sleep in
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/04/california-voted-to-ban-school-after-830-so-kids-can-sleep.html

From page 34 of this thread, two and a half months ago:

https://i0.wp.com/www.edisonresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/blog209.jpg

My head is turning at the fact that apparently 53% of Americans wake up at 6:30 or earlier. If you had asked me to guess I would have figured the median to be at more like 7:30.

But then I guess it makes sense when you think about it - anyone who is in high school or has a child in high school will need to be waking up that early because of the absurd schedules high schools have. As will anyone who works at a high school. Or whose job involves serving commuters, or being in a retail establishment that opens before 9. Or who works in construction, which for whatever reason likes to start at 7 AM. Or who likes to go to the gym before work, or otherwise takes forever to get ready in the morning.

Come on now.  High school schedules are not "absurd" - mine ran from 07:25 to 14:56 and made in dent to my sleep schedule whatsoever.  I liked going in and getting out at those times because, well, it wasn't nighttime when I got home and I could still do anything else I wanted to; even now my preferred working hours would be 07:00-15:00.

Well you should consider yourself lucky because many studies show that the majority of teenagers would do better starting at 9 or even later (here's just one article of many on the subject). Most teenagers have delayed circadian rhythms which makes it hard to go to bed early enough to achieve sufficient sleep.

My elementary school (JK to Grade 8) started at 8:45 and my high school (Grade 9 to Grade 12) started at 9:05. I didn't realize that these times we're considered late for Canada, but even then, teenagers are stil a bit tired at that hour. I think a 7:25 start time would be hell for most teenagers and it would affect their academic performance.

Kids who prefer to wake up earlier could still do so and just chill at home before school starts. To me that's a win-win.

Which, if anything, proves that some teens are tired regardless of when school starts.

7:25-ish is quite average for American schools, and you're rarely hearing complaints from most teenagers.  You still have to factor in that they have after school sports and jobs, so moving schedules back will just have them participating in sports later, and probably couldn't even hold a job during the week.

As far as academic performance goes...the smartest kids when school begins at 7:25 will still be the smartest kids when school begins at 9:00.  And the kids that screw around and aren't that great are still going to screw around and not be all that great, regardless of the time school begins.

And as for when second period begins, at my high school it was 8:30 on MWF and 8:24 on T-days.

[tradephoric]

I just took a look at the Detroit Public Schools Community District Bell Schedule and of the 110 Detroit Public schools on the list, 35 have a 7:30 AM start time.  Just delay the 7:30 AM start times to 8:30 AM start times.  That way - assuming the nation does go to year-round DST - kids would be waiting for the bus in the exact same lighting conditions as they do today.  The biggest argument against going to year-round DST in this country has been the safety of school children and the worry that kids would be waiting for the bus in the dark.  That concern is essentially nullified if school districts throughout the country simply adhered to the recommendations made by the American Academy of Pediatrics to start school no earlier than 8:30 AM.  Then year-round DST won't be viewed as this big scary idea that will kill all our children waiting for the bus... and we can consider the merits of permanent DST more rationally.

[jeffandnicole]

I think if we looked at every study conducted about how much time kids should spend doing certain stuff, they would need 38 hour days with 25 of those hours being between 8am and 8pm.

[J N Winkler]

I should explain that my belief the President will take no interest in DST is based largely on how Presidents in general handle detail issues.  DST is a question of detail, not fundamental principles like multilateralism versus bilateralism in international relations.  For a President it is advantageous to allow technical issues that attract sharp controversy, like DST, to percolate through Congress so that on the surface at least, the solution that arrives on the desk awaiting signature commands the widest possible basis of consensus and the highest degree of democratic legitimacy.  In actual practice it will boil down to a duel among lobbyists in which the group with the most effective combination of access and strategy wins.

In his autobiography (translated into English as Inside the Third Reich), one of Albert Speer's most trenchant criticisms of Hitler as a manager was his tendency to spend massive amounts of time involving himself in matters of detail.  In Speer's view the effective executive is one who protects his leisure time and thereby gives himself the flexibility to address fully large questions of principle as they arise.

All of that said, I am personally under few illusions about our current President's effectiveness as a manager.  I can easily see him tweeting about DST though I believe it would be a mistake for him to do so.

The vast majority of people don't believe DST is necessary.  In 2016, Accuweather conducted a poll of it's users and found that 83% felt like DST was unnecessary.  While admittedly unscientific, it's right in line with the Europe-wide public survey just conducted that found over 80% of respondents wanted to abolish DST.

There are two problems with these findings:  (1) unscientific polls are unscientific; and (2) the polls measure respondents' unhappiness with the current regime of DST changes but not their willingness to accept the tradeoffs inherent in eliminating the time changes.  Even if a poll surfaced that took (2) into account--and arguably one should be done as part of an even-handed reconnaissance of DST policy--it would likely run aground on the distinction between stated and revealed preferences.

As part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, extended Daylight Saving Time saved 0.5% in energy consumption in this country each day of extended Daylight.  This energy savings would almost certainly be larger if DST was extended year-round, as very few people are running their AC's 24/7 in the middle of January (even in the southernmost states).

0.5% daily power consumption saved per day moved from standard time to DST translates to considerably less than 0.5% yearly power consumption saved over the course of a year.  The days where power consumption goes down are watered down by the more numerous days when it does not change.  Also, since standard time is being retained rather than eliminated altogether, it is entirely likely that the marginal (per day) power savings is smaller in the middle of what is now standard time rather than at the edges where the DST transitions occur.

Quarterly GDP growth would likely notch higher if DST was extended year-round.  Potentially you could tack on about another quarter percentage point to quarterly GDP growth by simply extending DST year-round.  Trump would love to see 5% quarterly GDP growth as opposed to 4.6%.

A few observations here:

*  Quarterly GDP growth figures reported in the media are implicitly annualized.  When the media says GDP grew 5% in the last quarter, they do not mean that GDP is 5% higher at the end of the quarter than it was at the start.  They mean that GDP would be 5% larger at the end of a full year if the same rate of growth were sustained for a further three quarters.

*  0.25% on top of 4.6% is 4.85%, not 5%.

*  Posted GDP figures are subject to large swings according to where the country is in the business cycle and what is going on in the world of high finance in terms of leveraging.  Focusing on DST rather than, say, balloon mortgages = getting mired in detail = falling behind the eight ball.

You won't have an increase in people dropping dead of heart-attacks the Monday after a time-change.  Also there won't be spikes in car accidents after the time changes if DST was extended year-round.

I personally believe the excess deaths associated with the DST changes is the best reason to get rid of them.  And, strictly speaking, the spike in human deaths is largely confined to the spring, although in the fall animal collisions go up in the evenings as traffic shifts from daylight to dark.

[vdeane]

I still wonder how those spikes in deaths happen.  Are people really so consistent about sleep/wake times between the work week and weekend that they even notice it?  Mine swings wildly enough that I don't, though I have been noticing that getting up in the morning is already getting harder as dawn gets later.  And count me as one of those people who thinks that light winter evenings is just not natural.  I still can't get used to it being light out on Halloween.

[J N Winkler]

I still wonder how those spikes in deaths happen.  Are people really so consistent about sleep/wake times between the work week and weekend that they even notice it?

It is less to do with consistency between the work week and weekend and more to do with the return to DST being yet another change that has to be accommodated, like an additional straw on the camel's back.  Most of us tough out the change, but it takes only a few people failing to do so in a country of over 300 million to raise deaths noticeably above the steady state.

Mine swings wildly enough that I don't, though I have been noticing that getting up in the morning is already getting harder as dawn gets later.

Since fairly large swings in waking and sleeping times are your personal norm, your coping skills are probably much stronger than those of someone (like me) who is accustomed to maintaining a consistent sleeping schedule.

[tradephoric]

I still wonder how those spikes in deaths happen.  Are people really so consistent about sleep/wake times between the work week and weekend that they even notice it?  Mine swings wildly enough that I don't, though I have been noticing that getting up in the morning is already getting harder as dawn gets later.

People are pretty consistent with their school/work schedules.  On Friday November 2, 2018, millions of people in NYC will be heading home from work at 5:30PM while the sun is still out.  The following Monday, millions of people from NYC will be heading home at 5:30PM in pitch darkness.  There schedule is exactly the same, but the lighting conditions has gone from daylight to pitch darkness over the course of a weekend.  That's a big jolt that millions of commuters in NYC are all trying to deal with at the same time.  It's really not a surprise that there is a spike in car crashes after a time change.  It's just not natural. 

[20160805]

I think if we looked at every study conducted about how much time kids should spend doing certain stuff, they would need 38 hour days with 25 of those hours being between 8am and 8pm.

I've also noticed this same thing.  Also remember 17:00 is supposedly a good bedtime for a 12 year old. 

[TheHighwayMan3561]

Man, I didn't realize DST pissed off so many people to this level.

[vdeane]

I still wonder how those spikes in deaths happen.  Are people really so consistent about sleep/wake times between the work week and weekend that they even notice it?  Mine swings wildly enough that I don't, though I have been noticing that getting up in the morning is already getting harder as dawn gets later.

People are pretty consistent with their school/work schedules.  On Friday November 2, 2018, millions of people in NYC will be heading home from work at 5:30PM while the sun is still out.  The following Monday, millions of people from NYC will be heading home at 5:30PM in pitch darkness.  There schedule is exactly the same, but the lighting conditions has gone from daylight to pitch darkness over the course of a weekend.  That's a big jolt that millions of commuters in NYC are all trying to deal with at the same time.  It's really not a surprise that there is a spike in car crashes after a time change.  It's just not natural. 

Still, driving at night isn't really that hard (not that my commute is ever at night; I get off work at 4:30, so dusk is around or after I get home year round).  Plus you can see it getting darker by looking out the window, so it shouldn't be too much of a shock (beyond associating the light levels with the new times on the clock, which I admit does take a day or two).

Since fairly large swings in waking and sleeping times are your personal norm, your coping skills are probably much stronger than those of someone (like me) who is accustomed to maintaining a consistent sleeping schedule.

I might also be just that good at not noticing any negative effects... I tend to be slightly out of touch with physical needs (I don't notice thirst until I get to the point of wanting to chug a glass or three of water, for example), and since I don't use caffeine, some degree of tiredness tends to be the norm for me.

[english si]

Merkel is actually involved in this issue.

Merkel made a comment, but she doesn't have much power to do anything other than soft-power as it's an EU thing, rather than a German thing (though, unlike at home, she hasn't lost her clout in Brussels).

Especially as the EU Council of Ministers* has been even more sidelined since the unlawful** Selmayr takeover.

* A bit like the pre-1911 US Senate, only which representative the Government of the Member State sends to represent it changes meeting-meeting to match what is being discussed - the only formal power Mutti has in the EU is when she acts as Germany's representative.
** Beyond publishing a report saying the 'both the spirit and the letter of the rules' was broken this 'rules-based organisation' is not doing anything, naturally...

[tradephoric]

Provincial officials vote to end daylight savings time in BC
http://dailyhive.com/vancouver/provincial-officals-vote-end-daylight-savings-time-2018