Time change

I was prepared to wake up annoyed at the time change this morning, but seeing the light at my usual moment -- 6:45am -- I realized I was delighted. Guess I'm fickle.

But I did find myself wondering: didn't California vote overwhelmingly for an initiative (Prop. 7 in 2018) to stop with all this seasonal clock tinkering. Yes, we did. But apparently we're stuck with it. In order for this measure to become the law, our legislators in Sacramento need to get onboard.

... the California State Senate needs to pass this by a two-thirds vote and they haven't yet. It's stalled. Even if it did get passed in California, the federal government then needs to approve it. 

At Scientific American, Diana Kwan reports her interview with Beth Malow, a professor of neurology and pediatrics at Vanderbilt University. She thinks we might be healthier and happier if we just settled in with "standard time" all the time.

Most people agree that we need to get rid of this transition back and forth. I personally am an advocate for permanent standard. The reason I am is because I look at light as really important for our well-being, our mood and our sleep. Getting enough light, especially in the winter, is critical. If we have permanent daylight saving time, I worry that come May, June, July, we’re getting too much light too late in the evening. Then we have trouble falling asleep because we don’t make [enough] natural melatonin, which requires it to be dark. To me, the beauty of the permanent standard is: you have your light in the morning in the winter, when you need it, and you have your dark in the summer, when you need it.

I'm not so sure I agree. I do well in the early morning, but in our frenzied capitalist context, morning light seems wasted; we're mostly still asleep. Meanwhile more early evening light seems invaluable. 

Your mileage may vary ...