Standard Time Switch Could Save 300,000 Lives and Reduce Obesity by Millions

Permanent Standard Time Could Cut Strokes, Obesity Among Americans A new Stanford-led study has found that switching permanently to standard time could prevent 300,000 strokes and reduce obesity in 2.6 million Americans by better aligning circadian rhythms with natural light. The research, published in a recent report, suggests that the twice-yearly clock changes are detrimental to public health. According to senior researcher Jamie Zeitzer, a professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Stanford University in California, "We found that staying in standard time or staying in daylight saving time is definitely better than switching twice a year." The study estimated how different national time policies might affect Americans' circadian rhythms, which regulate various physiological processes. The human body's innate clock is not exactly 24 hours long; it's about 12 minutes longer for most people and can be adjusted based on light exposure. "When you get light in the morning, it speeds up the circadian cycle," Zeitzer explained. "When you get light in the evening, it slows things down." This phenomenon affects how the body responds to time changes, leading to potential health issues. The researchers noted that permanent daylight saving time would offer two-thirds of the benefits associated with standard time. However, they emphasized that switching between standard and daylight saving time twice a year is the worst option for public health. The study's findings have significant implications for society. By understanding how time changes affect human behavior and physiology, policymakers can make informed decisions about national time policies. Background and Context Daylight saving time (DST) was first implemented in 1918 as a wartime measure to conserve energy. Since then, many countries have adopted DST, but its effectiveness has been debated. Some argue that it saves energy, while others claim it disrupts sleep patterns and has negative impacts on health. Additional Perspectives While the study's results are compelling, not everyone agrees with the researchers' conclusions. Some experts argue that the benefits of DST outweigh the drawbacks, citing increased outdoor activities and economic benefits during peak daylight hours. However, Zeitzer countered that "the twice-yearly clock changes have a significant impact on public health, and we should consider alternatives to minimize these effects." Current Status and Next Developments The study's findings have sparked renewed interest in revisiting national time policies. As policymakers weigh the pros and cons of different approaches, they may consider implementing permanent standard time or exploring alternative solutions. Zeitzer emphasized that "further research is needed to fully understand the implications of different time policies on public health." Nevertheless, the study's results provide a crucial starting point for informed discussions about national time policies. *Reporting by Science.*