iStockphoto
For some reason, Daylight Saving Time (DST), an initiative that was first enacted in the United States in 1918 to conserve energy during World War I, is still with us more than 100 years later. Why? No one you ask really seems to know. What we do know, based on a plethora of studies, is that Daylight Saving Time is really bad for everyone.
Making Daylight Saving Time even more puzzling is that after World War I, and World War II, when it was implemented again, it went away. It wasn’t until the Uniform Time Act of 1966 that everyone got stuck with it on a permanent basis.
That legislation, however, didn’t make Daylight Saving Time mandatory for everyone. All a state had to do was pass a state law saying they were choosing not to observe DST. The state of Hawaii has never observed Daylight Saving Time, not even during World War II. Arizona quit using it in 1967. And almost none of the U.S. territories, including Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, observe Daylight Saving Time. Everyone else is just stuck with it.
Which brings us to yet another study that explains in terms that every person with a functioning brain can understand, why Daylight Saving Time is a bad idea.
This new study, conducted by Stanford Medicine researchers and published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, explains, “The biannual shift between Daylight Saving and Standard Time leads to meaningful, negative societal health consequences.” Where have we heard something like that before?
In the study, the researchers “demonstrate that shifting to permanent Standard Time would lead to a decrease in the prevalence of stroke and obesity. A shift to permanent Daylight Saving Time would also result in a decrease, though less so than permanent Standard Time.”
Proponents of permanent Standard Time base their beliefs “on the theory that early morning light is better for our overall health,” Jamie Zeitzer, PhD, professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences and senior author of the study, said in a press statement. “The problem is that it’s a theory without any data. And finally, we have data.”
The researchers compared how three different time policies — permanent Standard Time, permanent Daylight Saving Time and biannual shifting — could affect people’s circadian rhythms, and, in turn, their health throughout the country. Circadian rhythm is the body’s innate, roughly 24-hour clock, which regulates many physiological processes.
The team found that, from a circadian perspective, we’ve made the worst choice. Either permanent Standard Time or permanent Daylight Saving Time would be healthier than our seasonal waffling, with permanent Standard Time benefiting the most people.
“You generally need more morning light and less evening light to keep well synchronized to a 24-hour day,” said Zeitner. “The more light exposure you get at the wrong times, the weaker the circadian clock. All of these things that are downstream — for example, your immune system, your energy — don’t match up quite as well.”
Switching to permanent Standard Time, according to the Stanford study, would lower nationwide obesity (2.6 million fewer people), and the prevalence of stroke (300,000 fewer cases). Under permanent Daylight Saving Time, obesity would decrease by 1.7 million people, and stroke by 220,000 cases. Both scenarios are better than what we currently do: switching back and forth every year.
In December 2024, Donald Trump claimed he was going to permanently end Daylight Saving Time once he returned to the office of President. He claims the practice is “very costly” to America. Now that we know just how “costly” it is, what are we, and what is he, waiting for?