• rumba@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 minutes ago

    I’ve been trying to talk my wife into dropping the brightness to 50% for years. Her phone is so bright it keeps ME up at night on the other side of the bed. I have to set up a light shield to go to sleep :P

  • AeonFelis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Science is totally right here, I have no doubt. It’s just… that I have zero regard for my own health.

  • taiyang@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    4 hours ago

    If you really wanna ruin your day, apparently late night eating and skipping breakfast also fucks with the rhythm. The body has a few things it uses to keep the internal clock going, not just light.

  • OpenPassageways@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    7 hours ago

    I get why you shouldn’t use it before bed but why not after waking up? If it keeps you awake shouldn’t it help you wake up?

  • minnow@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    109
    ·
    9 hours ago

    I mean, those two things aren’t mutually exclusive. I can believe the science AND ALSO engage in behaviors it says are unhealthy for me.

      • VieuxQueb@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        That’s not a scientific thing tho ! Proven to have no effect in fact.

    • Another Catgirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      I agree. I believe science but I seriously think the BIPM (Bureau International des Poids et Mesures) is wrong. They made SI bad by glossing over the necessary base unit of angle, there should be 8 base dimension, not 7.

      • alsimoneau@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Except it’s not a unit, it’s a unitless ratio. You’d have one for every number of dimension. The mol is arguably the extra one.

  • Skullgrid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Me using phones : wow, I can sleep at 1am, great.
    Me “just going to bed” : great, it’s 4am and I’m still overthinking my shortcomings!

    • sparkles@piefed.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Yeah this is me as well. I just overthink for hours without a distraction. Give me a phone or something to watch and I’m out in 15 minutes honestly. I feel bad because I know I’m probably degrading my sleep but…as least I’m sleeping.

  • SSUPII@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    6 hours ago

    I need my nebuliser ASMR every morning I have to go to work or I will be very grumpy all day

    • weariedfae@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Me too!

      Question: does your schedule slowly morph and change over time or does it stay consistent?

      Because I think I have non-24 on top of it and I was wondering if it was part of the normal symptoms or not.

      • atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 hours ago

        If I let myself I will easily fall into a 28-30 hour cycle and end up only going through 5 or 6 “days” in a week.

    • doctordevice@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 hours ago

      I have a strong feeling I do too, inherited from my mom (both of us self-diagnosed). I also appreciate you calling it a syndrome and not a disorder. It’s only a “disorder” because society decided to only accommodate one type of circadian rhythm. Humans have needed people on night watch forever, my money is that this was an advantageous phenomenon.

    • CobblerScholar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 hours ago

      How were you diagnosed? I’ve experienced a similar difficulty keeping a consistent sleep schedule but I’d always assumed it was screen related

      • weariedfae@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Not OP but I was diagnosed by being sent to a sleep specialist. I complained of fatigue to my PCP so they checked me for sleep apnea and during the initial meeting I described my schedule and what is typical for me. At the end of the questioning I said “yeah, I’ve suspected I have a sleep disorder or something” and she said “you definitely have delayed sleep phase disorder” and BOOM it was in my chart.

        Easiest diagnosis ever. It helps if you keep a sleep log for a little bit. I can’t guarantee the ease of your diagnosis but mine was just being honest instead of lying and pretending to have a normal day walker schedule.

      • atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 hours ago

        When it didn’t go away when I was temporarily taken off my adhd meds as a teen. Before that they thought it was just because of the meds. That was apparently also the earliest indication that I would have adult adhd. If you have an adhd doc talk to them about it, it’s pretty common to have both.

        • CobblerScholar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 hours ago

          More evidence that confirms my personal theory that I do have at least a touch of ADHD. Not sure going through the whole process of diagnosis would help me any though

  • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Small rant, but people saying they believe in science is a pet peeve of mine. Belief has no place olin science.

    You can’t “believe” in science any more than you can “know” in your religion.

    Belief and faith are the realm of the unknowable. Knowledge and fact are the realm of science.

    • TheLeadenSea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Knowledge is itself a justified true belief. Also, the scientific method is the best way of obtaining empirical knowledge, but the idea that empirical evidence is true is still a belief, and not even that justified. Also also, science is constantly trying to prove itself wrong. It’s unlikely that what we think now based on scientific methods will be the same we think in the future.

    • Aremel@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 hours ago

      When people say they “believe” in science, I think they mean they are putting their faith into the scientists performing the science. That whatever conclusion they come to after an experiment or study is the correct conclusion.

      I’m sure you can find the flaw in doing so, as science is constantly being debunked. A good example that comes to mind is the alpha wolf theory.

      It can be argued that while science strives to be in the realm of knowledge and fact, it doesn’t always succeed in doing so. At least not in the first rounds of study. And I think that’s what its strength is; being able to correct itself in the pursuit of knowledge and fact. All the same, science is run by humans, and humans are fallible. But despite that fallibility, some people are willing to put their faith into scientists because of their constant pursuit for the truth. Even if what they said yesterday got debunked today, it doesn’t make yesterday’s scientists any lesser. It only means we are all better for it.

      • marcos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 hours ago

        When people say they “believe” in science, I think they mean they are putting their faith into the scientists performing the science. That whatever conclusion they come to after an experiment or study is the correct conclusion.

        That’s literally what they mean, where “scientists” may as easily mean real scientists as charlatans.

        It’s still completely antagonistic to how science is practiced (if scientists behaved like that, they would never learn anything), and something closer to religion than science.

    • Zorque@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      6 hours ago

      You can believe that an answer can be found scientifically. You can have faith that what you see with your eyes, and that what happens during experimentation is accurate and not a fluke or trick of some sort.

      Just because religion dominates most belief, and there are strong religious groups that hold that belief and faith are binary with no wiggle room whatsoever does not mean that it’s the only way they can function. On can still test faith and belief without losing them, and changing those beliefs to what holds more truth.

      Holding that that belief and faith have no part in science… is a belief in and of itself. A particularly contradictory one at that.

    • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      8 hours ago

      I am not smart enough to come to my own conclusions about a lot of science, so yes I must believe what the collective scientific community asserts, because I have no other way to prove things that happen. For me, that means putting my faith in their accuracy. So yes, I believe in science.

      It should also be noted that there are people out there that treat science as a religion; that it is infallible, and cannot be changed, and to suggest otherwise is blasphemy. 🤷‍♂️

  • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Now that you mention it, my phone is by far the most reliable alarm clock I’ve ever had. It does DST switches for me. The battery recharges itself. I just never noticed because phones sucked at first.

    • tetris11@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      We have phones doubling as alarm clocks to thank for the technological gains in RTC (realtime clock) chips, and deeper CPU sleep states.

      All new chips have robust sleep options these days because phones needed to be reliable alarm clocks when “off”.

      Efficient RTC chips with alarm pins, born out of that chaotic era