They're called many things -- "lazy," "unproductive," "lacking in ambition" -- but late risers are starting to fight back. Long the butt of demeaning office jokes, sleepyheads are officially up in arms thanks to a Danish campaign to stop "the tyranny of early risers."
"The Owl has the right to say: `Give me the late riser's rhythm at work, at home and in society,'" trumpets the B-Society Web site, a movement rallying against the Danish 8am to 4pm working culture.
"Let me come to work at 11am and go home at 8pm. Let me have quiet mornings to read my newspaper and ease into the day gently and peacefully," the society says on its Web site.
It may sound far-fetched, but the B-Society has packed quite a punch in Denmark, attracting around 4,800 members in only four months.
Copenhagen City Council is preparing jobs for "chronic late risers" and Carina Christensen, the Danish minister for family affairs, has thrown her weight behind the campaign, saying: "We all live better if our existence is not constantly dictated by an alarm clock."
"We've had tremendous success," agrees B-Society founder Camilla Kring, who has a doctorate in work and life balance.
"We now have a B-high school, with classes starting at noon. Sweden has its own movement, Finland and Norway should soon follow, and there's been huge global interest," she said.
According to Kring, an individual's preference for early rising (an A-person, or lark) and late rising (a B-person, or owl) is as genetically determined as eye or hair color. And, she said, far from the stereotyping of people who can't get out of bed in the morning as lazy sods, it's all down to different circadian rhythms.
"B-people find it easy to stay awake at night, preferring to go to bed at around 1am or 2am, but have difficulty waking in the morning, not feeling fully awake until after 10am," Kring said. "A-people are the opposite -- they love the mornings but collapse in front of the TV at about 10pm."
A convenient excuse to ignore the alarm clock and snuggle under the covers perhaps, but sleep experts agree Kring has a point. Researchers believe that 10 percent of people are extreme owls, 10 percent are extreme larks and the remaining 80 percent fall in between. And according to experts, it's genes, not laziness, that count.
Scientists have long known that early and late risers have genetic differences.
One study from the University of Surrey found that extreme larks are more likely to have a long version of a gene called Period 3, while extreme owls are more likely to have a shorter version, leading to physiological differences.
Angela Clow from the University of Westminster in London found that early risers had higher levels of cortisol, the body's main stress hormone, than the alarm-clock refuseniks.
"Personally I think this is better for you," she said, citing a link between high cortisol levels and greater powers of concentration. "But because cortisol is a stress hormone, some scientists think early rising puts the body under greater stress."
A German research team, Peter Axt and Michaela Axt- Gadermann, subscribe to that point of view. In The Joy of Laziness: How to Slow Down and Live Longer, they argue that these higher cortisol levels can damage brain cells and lead to premature senility. Lazy lie-ins, they say, are the key to good health.
Clow's research showed that over 10 weeks, early risers were more likely to suffer from aches, colds and headaches. Meanwhile, a Southampton University study found that those who burned the midnight oil and slept in the following day were no less healthy than the early risers. In fact, they were slightly wealthier.
So why is our work culture biased towards the rhythms of the average lark? Isn't that all a bit "sleepist"?
Carolyn Schur, author of the night owl's bible, Birds of a Feather, thinks so. Now self-employed, she spent years in the workplace struggling to cope with early appointments.
"I've been called lazy, undisciplined and unprofessional. I was even told I had a psychological problem. I tried to change but just grew more stressed," she said.
At her clinic in Saskatoon, Canada, Schur treats people with insomnia-related problems who, instead of being actual insomniacs, are what she calls "desynchronized night owls", unable to get the sleep they need in a nine-to-five schedule.
"If you're a night owl who needs nine hours' sleep, you won't survive," she said.
Experts agree that we generally need seven to eight hours of sleep, but this varies.
"Some people need less than six, and some more than 10. We don't need it all in one go; napping can help," said Adrian Williams, consultant physician at St Thomas's Hospital sleep disorder center.
According to Williams, sleep deprivation can seriously affect one's judgment, a view backed up by research. One such study, conducted at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina, examined volunteers playing a computer card game, and showed that sleep deprivation causes areas of the brain to malfunction, making people blunder and take rash risks.
"We all carry a sleep debt," said Derk Jan Dijk, sleep and physiology director at the University of Surrey's sleep research center, "and this debt accumulates the longer we skimp on sleep. One night without sleep impairs you to the same degree that drinking alcohol to the legal driving limit does."
All of which paints a bleak picture for an owl struggling in a nine-to-five job. So what should sleep-deprived employees do?
"The first thing is to take your sleeping rhythm seriously," Schur said. "Ask your employer if you can work more flexible hours. State the benefits for the company; say you can provide increased hours of service at no extra cost."
Can you change your sleep rhythm?
"No, but you can modify it with good routines," said Maria Lennernas, from Uppsala University, Sweden, who has a doctorate in nutrition and shift work. "Eat at regular times, go to bed and get up at the same time every day. Then make sure you get enough bright light in the morning."
Failing that, said Jim Horne, from the sleep research center at Loughborough University, you can always go for damage limitation: "A 20-minute nap and a good dose of caffeine should help."
Taiwan should reject two flawed answers to the Eswatini controversy: that diplomatic allies no longer matter, or that they must be preserved at any cost. The sustainable answer is to maintain formal diplomatic relations while redesigning development relationships around transparency, local ownership and democratic accountability. President William Lai’s (賴清德) canceled trip to Eswatini has elicited two predictable reactions in Taiwan. One camp has argued that the episode proves Taiwan must double down on support for every remaining diplomatic ally, because Beijing is tightening the screws, and formal recognition is too scarce to risk. The other says the opposite: If maintaining
The cancelation this week of President William Lai’s (賴清德) state visit to Eswatini, after the Seychelles, Madagascar and Mauritius revoked overflight permits under Chinese pressure, is one more measure of Taiwan’s shrinking executive diplomatic space. Another channel that deserves attention keeps growing while the first contracts. For several years now, Taipei has been one of Europe’s busiest legislative destinations. Where presidents and foreign ministers cannot land, parliamentarians do — and they do it in rising numbers. The Italian parliament opened the year with its largest bipartisan delegation to Taiwan to date: six Italian deputies and one senator, drawn from six
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文), during an interview for the podcast Lanshuan Time (蘭萱時間) released on Monday, said that a US professor had said that she deserved to be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize following her meeting earlier this month with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). Cheng’s “journey of peace” has garnered attention from overseas and from within Taiwan. The latest My Formosa poll, conducted last week after the Cheng-Xi meeting, shows that Cheng’s approval rating is 31.5 percent, up 7.6 percentage points compared with the month before. The same poll showed that 44.5 percent of respondents
Recently, Taipei’s streets have been plagued by the bizarre sight of rats running rampant and the city government’s countermeasures have devolved into an anti-intellectual farce. The Taipei Parks and Street Lights Office has attempted to eradicate rats by filling their burrows with polyurethane foam, seeming to believe that rats could not simply dig another path out. Meanwhile, as the nation’s capital slowly deteriorates into a rat hive, the Taipei Department of Environmental Protection has proudly pointed to the increase in the number of poisoned rats reported in February and March as a sign of success. When confronted with public concerns over young
RSS