Dreading a dark winter lockdown? Think like a Norwegian(theguardian.com)
theguardian.com
Dreading a dark winter lockdown? Think like a Norwegian
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2020/sep/26/dreading-a-dark-winter-lockdown-think-like-a-norwegian
117 コメント
Having spent time in various winter locations in Canada, I found...
-35c in Iqaluit? Or northern Alberta? Cold, but actually enjoyable. (Admittedly, that changes during extreme winds or blizzard conditions) -15c in Ontario? Frigid, slushy and nasty.
The difference - many northern regions are actually considered desert climate zones due to the low humidity. However - extreme cold can be a bit more dangerous as without that humidity, people may not cover the tips of their nose/ears properly (if a newbie), so - those can get frost-bite more often than in southern regions.
-35c in Iqaluit? Or northern Alberta? Cold, but actually enjoyable. (Admittedly, that changes during extreme winds or blizzard conditions) -15c in Ontario? Frigid, slushy and nasty.
The difference - many northern regions are actually considered desert climate zones due to the low humidity. However - extreme cold can be a bit more dangerous as without that humidity, people may not cover the tips of their nose/ears properly (if a newbie), so - those can get frost-bite more often than in southern regions.
I liked winters in northern Quebec a lot more than in Berlin. At least it was an actual season and not a more miserable version of summer.
I've only ever spent time in (smaller) cities (Reykjavik, Gothenburg) during the winter and I have to say that with the sun very low even during the day SNOW was what made it bearable. The light (even street lights) reflecting off fresh white snow made it much brighter during daylight and less dismal even at night. This was made clear when I arrived in the afternoon just before a snow and began to despair arriving at a hotel, but woke to fresh snow in the morning and enjoyed quite a long day even into evening walking home through well lit white streets.
> Slush, gravel, dark snow, rain, wet everywhere.
I agree. If winter just means "it's dark, the sky is grey all the time, it's cold and the ground is mushy", it sucks. When it's cold with blue skies, sun is shining and the ground is frozen white, it's much nicer and much more tolerable.
I agree. If winter just means "it's dark, the sky is grey all the time, it's cold and the ground is mushy", it sucks. When it's cold with blue skies, sun is shining and the ground is frozen white, it's much nicer and much more tolerable.
It's not big jackets. It's the jacket etiquette. You must take the jacket off, otherwise it'll be too warm with all the people crammed in there and you will sweat, essentially making the climate in the car worse & smelly, then going outside where you'll get sick, since you're now wet. I don't get why people choose to suffer.
I will wake up at 5 to avoid that and the masses on public transport if I actually have to go to the office.
I will wake up at 5 to avoid that and the masses on public transport if I actually have to go to the office.
So replace "full of people with big jackets taking up too much space" with "full of people bumping into you putting on and taking off big jackets in a confined space". Either way it's a miserable experience.
This has been my experience as well. Drier Scandinavian winters I experienced (one as low as -25C) felt easier to deal with than the constant damp, grey central Europe winters I live through now.
Exactly, I started writing exactly the same thing before I saw your comment, and I lived above the arctic circle for a while. The article relies on false logic that winter is 'worse' the further north you go, but can be the opposite... Snow, northern lights, forests vs tiny expensive apartments in icy raining city...
It does sound logical but as someone living in Denmark I can attest that it would have to be pretty far north. Winter in Denmark is almost always grey and rainy and little snow.
I've been trying to stock up on hobbies to prep for the upcoming Minnesota Winter, COVID-style. Minnesotans are generally stoic about winter, but one of our outlet valves is having indoor gatherings, holidays, and parties and it will be brutal to have those cut out. Never having held one before, I bought a guitar just a week ago. My fingers already hurt. My wife and I are also looking into winter hiking opportunities; Minnesota has a lot of great state parks that are well maintained even in winter.
It'll probably take a couple of weeks for your fingers to callus, after that it's fine. Just keep it up! The trick to improving is just consistent deliberate practice. Practice every day, even if it's just 15 minutes. Take note of what you need to improve on, and practice those things. And don't be afraid to play things at very slow tempos at first, you want your muscle memory to remember how to play things properly. Start slow and build speed over time. A metronome can help a lot with this, and helps train your internal metronome at the same time, so I recommend that too.
My #1 piece of advice though would be to not give up. I find the most frustrating and unrewarding part of learning an instrument is at the very start. You have to build your foundations from essentially nothing, you have 0 muscle memory built up, and progress can seem non-existent sometimes. But once you get through that initial phase, the sky's the limit! In my experience, it only takes a year or two to get good enough that people will enjoy your playing (provided you practice at a relatively consistent rate over that time).
Have fun!
My #1 piece of advice though would be to not give up. I find the most frustrating and unrewarding part of learning an instrument is at the very start. You have to build your foundations from essentially nothing, you have 0 muscle memory built up, and progress can seem non-existent sometimes. But once you get through that initial phase, the sky's the limit! In my experience, it only takes a year or two to get good enough that people will enjoy your playing (provided you practice at a relatively consistent rate over that time).
Have fun!
Your #1 piece of advice will work better if you rephrase it like "keep at it" or "stay persistent". People, drunks and kids (so humans basically) understand you better if you leave out the negation, which the brain would have to translate first. Critical with children IMWO, "Don't run on the street" vs "Stop" / "Stand still", or less critical "Don't let it fall" vs "Hold it tightly". Focus on what you want.
Some things I wish someone had told me when I got my first guitar:
* A better guitar will be easier to play than a cheaper one. There are obviously rapidly dimishing returns as you go up the cost scale, but the difference between a low-end and medium-end guitar really can make the difference between "easy to play and nice-sounding enough to keep going" and "so frustrating that you give up".
* If at all possible, get your guitar set up. ("Set up" means adjusting the action and intonation.) You can try to do it yourself, but taking it to a pro is well worth it. A cheap guitar with a good set up is easier to play and sounds better than a high-end guitar with a shitty set up.
* Electrics are much easier on your fingers than acoustics. All of the sound energy in an acoustic guitar must come from the strings itself. They therefore need to vibrate farther which means they have to be higher up away from the fretboard. That higher action means it takes more force to push them down, which is what hurts your fingers. Electrics rely on amplification so the strings can be really close to the fretboard and only require a gentle touch.
I hope you have a great time playing! Guitars are engineering marvels.
* A better guitar will be easier to play than a cheaper one. There are obviously rapidly dimishing returns as you go up the cost scale, but the difference between a low-end and medium-end guitar really can make the difference between "easy to play and nice-sounding enough to keep going" and "so frustrating that you give up".
* If at all possible, get your guitar set up. ("Set up" means adjusting the action and intonation.) You can try to do it yourself, but taking it to a pro is well worth it. A cheap guitar with a good set up is easier to play and sounds better than a high-end guitar with a shitty set up.
* Electrics are much easier on your fingers than acoustics. All of the sound energy in an acoustic guitar must come from the strings itself. They therefore need to vibrate farther which means they have to be higher up away from the fretboard. That higher action means it takes more force to push them down, which is what hurts your fingers. Electrics rely on amplification so the strings can be really close to the fretboard and only require a gentle touch.
I hope you have a great time playing! Guitars are engineering marvels.
Don’t give up! The pain in your fingers will go away with consistent practice in a week or two. I’ve been playing for a long time, but I still really benefit from structured instruction. It keeps me motivated to move forward when I feel stuck. Check out courses like Paul David’s Learn, Practice, Play or other Coursera-type online packages!
If you jog, consider taking up Nordic skiing. Take a lesson or two on “classic” technique and get out there. When the snow is bad, it’s nicer than jogging. When the snow is good, it’s neigh on magical to just float around silently through the woods.
Sounds like the same as cross-country skiing to me.
Yup--they're synonyms.
People tend to use either "Nordic" vs "Alpine" or "Cross-country" vs. "downhill" skiing.
People tend to use either "Nordic" vs "Alpine" or "Cross-country" vs. "downhill" skiing.
Fellow Minnesotan here, also dreading the lack of social release valves. I can confirm that there are hiking opportunities in the winter though, and I'm sure the trails of county and state parks will be especially well kept and trafficked this year.
Another hobby I'm looking to pick up to offset the loss of a gym is winter biking. I purchased an electric bike last year and have thoroughly enjoyed riding it long distances in the warmer months on the local trails. I hear that many of the trails are plowed in the winter, so I'm hoping to find safe places to use it that can avoid the ever-present ice.
Another hobby I'm looking to pick up to offset the loss of a gym is winter biking. I purchased an electric bike last year and have thoroughly enjoyed riding it long distances in the warmer months on the local trails. I hear that many of the trails are plowed in the winter, so I'm hoping to find safe places to use it that can avoid the ever-present ice.
I am in Chicago and am taking a similar approach. Currently have an exercise bike on back order that's suppose to become available in a few weeks. Have no interest in going back to a gym, and I need something to keep me active this winter.
Bigger problem is gatherings. I already have family talking about Christmas and they just dont understand that things aren't going to be the same this year.
Bigger problem is gatherings. I already have family talking about Christmas and they just dont understand that things aren't going to be the same this year.
Maybe the way to do family gatherings for Christmas this year is for everyone coming to take two weeks off for them, and spend the entire two weeks just at the gathering with family. Buy all the food and presents before the gathering starts, and if you need any more things during that two weeks have them delivered.
Essentially the whole gathering self-quarantines for two weeks, so that if someone attending has COVID but is not yet showing symptoms, there is plenty of time for them, or those they give it to at the gathering, to start showing. If nobody is showing symptoms at the end of two weeks, people can go home.
If cheap, reasonably speedy testing is available in your area, to be even safer the whole gathering could get tested near the end.
Essentially the whole gathering self-quarantines for two weeks, so that if someone attending has COVID but is not yet showing symptoms, there is plenty of time for them, or those they give it to at the gathering, to start showing. If nobody is showing symptoms at the end of two weeks, people can go home.
If cheap, reasonably speedy testing is available in your area, to be even safer the whole gathering could get tested near the end.
This is how I feel in Chicago. Halloween, Thanksgiving, and other winter holidays will be totally different this year to say nothing of the slog that is Jan - March.
I am really not appreciating the comparison in this article. There's a world of difference between living in a beautiful place in a functional country with a long winter darkness (and adapting yourself to it) and living somewhere where it is effectively illegal to see other people as a consequence of your government's abject failure to manage an epidemic and its inability to have a conversation about the trade off between getting sick with this specific disease and suffering all of the other mental and physical health problems that this level of lockdown causes.
"effectively illegal to see other people as a consequence of your government's abject failure to manage an epidemic"
Surely though the current situation is as bad as it is because of other people's inability to manage themselves during an epidemic, as opposed to the government being to blame? I'm not having a poke, but I notice here in Ireland for example, when the government comes out with clear guidelines e.g. "Don't go around licking people's eyeballs. If you do you might get sick" then the general populace is all like "oh but it's so confusing! What if I only lick one of their eyeballs? What is the definition of 'might'? We need more guidance!". So then the guidance comes back "Do not lick people's eyeballs, ever" and BOOM - someone takes a constitutional challenge High Court because "Civil Liberties".
And I do think it's kind of the same in most countries, the government is not to blame, the general population is.
Just a thought :)
Surely though the current situation is as bad as it is because of other people's inability to manage themselves during an epidemic, as opposed to the government being to blame? I'm not having a poke, but I notice here in Ireland for example, when the government comes out with clear guidelines e.g. "Don't go around licking people's eyeballs. If you do you might get sick" then the general populace is all like "oh but it's so confusing! What if I only lick one of their eyeballs? What is the definition of 'might'? We need more guidance!". So then the guidance comes back "Do not lick people's eyeballs, ever" and BOOM - someone takes a constitutional challenge High Court because "Civil Liberties".
And I do think it's kind of the same in most countries, the government is not to blame, the general population is.
Just a thought :)
It's true, a major part of setting public policy is making things as uncomplicated as possible, which results in often stricter statements than would be necessary if people were better at following directions. But from my observations (I live in the US but I read a lot of UK and European news), the government in the UK (less so Scotland) has been whipping back and forth on directives: Don't go in people's gardens! Get back to the office you lazy people! Go to school! Stop talking to people across your garden walls! You can only leave the house for an hour a day! By all means go to the pub, but leave before 10 pm when the corona comes out!
I think you have to take into account what people are going to be able to do for months on end, and it seems unreasonable to me to expect the population of an entire country to avoid seeing friends and relatives for half a year (as is now looks like will be the case going into the winter). While the US in general seems to have failed at this, we have had here in New England some good regional success thus far, without making human connections illegal (within limits -- I'm all for limits on gathering sizes, keeping bars closed, etc). The longer this goes on, the more the trade-offs need to be considered.
I think you have to take into account what people are going to be able to do for months on end, and it seems unreasonable to me to expect the population of an entire country to avoid seeing friends and relatives for half a year (as is now looks like will be the case going into the winter). While the US in general seems to have failed at this, we have had here in New England some good regional success thus far, without making human connections illegal (within limits -- I'm all for limits on gathering sizes, keeping bars closed, etc). The longer this goes on, the more the trade-offs need to be considered.
The anti-masker crowd is annoying but not the majority. You aren't going to ever fix stupid.
The failures of the various governments to respond promptly is more alarming. Guidance on masking in the US is still regional; and the CDC is seized by political infighting. Testing is a train wreck. Some states are trying to fight the spread while their neighbors are busy pissing in the pool.
Deflecting the blame to the 'general population' might work if there was anything coming close to competence at the federal level but it honestly just strikes me as making excuses.
The failures of the various governments to respond promptly is more alarming. Guidance on masking in the US is still regional; and the CDC is seized by political infighting. Testing is a train wreck. Some states are trying to fight the spread while their neighbors are busy pissing in the pool.
Deflecting the blame to the 'general population' might work if there was anything coming close to competence at the federal level but it honestly just strikes me as making excuses.
In Sweden the culture, political system and standard of living etc is quite similar to its neighbors. But the government took the herd immunity approach to corona and it so far has resulted in 10x deaths per capita compared to the neighbors, which took a prevention approach.
So it really has very direct meaning on what the government does. They really have a lot of responsibility.
So it really has very direct meaning on what the government does. They really have a lot of responsibility.
«Herd immunity» was never part of Sweden’s approach though, just tune in to any AMA session with Tegnell. They have had much of the same response as other countries, although a more lax version with recommendations instead of strict rules and lockdowns.
Sweden had a high initial death rate, however they have been down to an average 1 per day for the past month. So whatever they're doing lately seems to be working quite well.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/sweden/
https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-data-explorer?minPopu...
Worse for the first six months. Sweden's curve was comparable to Italy and USA in some sense.
Worse for the first six months. Sweden's curve was comparable to Italy and USA in some sense.
But if your government was downplaying the seriousness of licking eyeballs when the whole world knows how bad locking eyeballs is, you can lay at least a little blame on said government, right?
The US has over 200k dead from COVID-19. This could have been avoided if the government had been staunchly pro-mask and social distancing from the start. Instead, they downplayed it as nothing to be worried about at best and a full-on hoax at worst. If the government had done the right thing from the start, all these people who can’t manage themselves would at least be wearing masks and staying away from each other if for no other reason than their president told them it was the right thing to do. I think we can safely blame the government for this one.
The US has over 200k dead from COVID-19. This could have been avoided if the government had been staunchly pro-mask and social distancing from the start. Instead, they downplayed it as nothing to be worried about at best and a full-on hoax at worst. If the government had done the right thing from the start, all these people who can’t manage themselves would at least be wearing masks and staying away from each other if for no other reason than their president told them it was the right thing to do. I think we can safely blame the government for this one.
> I think we can safely blame the government for this one.
It's interesting how the "American" tradition of individualism and self-determination is quietly forgotten when things go wrong on a societal scale.
It's interesting how the "American" tradition of individualism and self-determination is quietly forgotten when things go wrong on a societal scale.
It is the government's job to protect responsible citizens from irresponsible ones. Only the government has the legal authority and power to prevent irresponsible citizens from acting out and putting everyone else at risk. If the government can't do it, then it is not competent.
You are both right.
Individual behavior is a combination if individual choices, local culture, and surrounding leadership.
Most individuals in the US are making smart choices (though you wouldn't be able to see that from the news since they are by nature not newsworthy). Local culture varies widely across the US. Some places are more science-focused than others. Local and state leadership is all over the place. Trump is obviously doing a catastrophically poor job.
All of these things affect the outcomes we see.
Individual behavior is a combination if individual choices, local culture, and surrounding leadership.
Most individuals in the US are making smart choices (though you wouldn't be able to see that from the news since they are by nature not newsworthy). Local culture varies widely across the US. Some places are more science-focused than others. Local and state leadership is all over the place. Trump is obviously doing a catastrophically poor job.
All of these things affect the outcomes we see.
Yeah, the article's giving me the same vibes as an article in 1990s Afghanistan saying "here's how to chill out and relax once music is banned". I'm not exactly mad at the author, it's great to share coping strategies for bad things, but the underlying assumptions going unquestioned are glaring.
Thank you! Your comparison made me laugh (dark humor, of course)
Maybe you're missing a sense of humor.
As a winter dweller, trust me, sense of humor is not what is missing. The sun and heat is what is missing.
Have you considered moving, even if only temporarily? Based on your comment, I'm assuming you're talking about the U.S. but it's a huge country and there are many beautiful places you could live which also have decent enough internet to allow remote work.
I was actually talking about the UK (since it's a guardian article). I actually live in Vermont in the US, which is currently much more like northern Norway than England.
>I actually live in Vermont in the US
So you probably don't have a real appreciation of what is happening in the UK.
So you probably don't have a real appreciation of what is happening in the UK.
how would you know?
How long did you stay in Norway?
Edit: word. If you're gonna compare A to B, get some B experience...
Edit: word. If you're gonna compare A to B, get some B experience...
Unfortunately only a few weeks, and I never made it north of Trondheim. Someday, when travel is allowed again ....
I don't know where the commenter is, but the source article is from the UK, where many commentators are expecting a second lockdown next month.
What do you mean failure to manage the epidemic?
The Imperial College modelling that was done predicted half a million deaths in the UK and 2 million in the US. That was the justification for lockdown, as such it appears that we have managed it incredibly well avoiding 90% of the predicted deaths.
The Imperial College modelling that was done predicted half a million deaths in the UK and 2 million in the US. That was the justification for lockdown, as such it appears that we have managed it incredibly well avoiding 90% of the predicted deaths.
If you go by the doomsday forecasts of what will happen if nothing is done, then yeah, everyone did great. But the US and GB could've done better, which we know by seeing how things played out in other countries.
Countries locked down based on such doomsday scenarios. Millions have lost their jobs or had their businesses destroyed as a result of these doomsday scenarios. Why are we changing the rules afterwards?
It's been a while since i read about the SAGE / Imperial College Model, so I'm rusty on the details. However, my recollection is that a. there were serious technical issues with it, in terms of quality of construction, stability of results from run to run, and with the assumptions that went into it, and b. it predicted a much higher number of deaths even with a full lockdown.
I don’t think the IC model considered social distancing. It was a worst case. However: New York State (about 1/3 the population of the UK) has a cumulative total of 1700 deaths per million, and the UK is close to 600 per million. There are some differences between those populations, but it does seem there’s good evidence that things could have been much worse in the UK without relatively early social distancing.
The question then is why lockdowns were based on this model? Sweden demonstrated that it wasn't needed. Why are we still listening to Neil Ferguson when his track record is absolutely abysmal?
The reason is that the U.K. is not Sweden. Nobody knows why Sweden was so relatively mild, but the fact that the U.K. had a worse outcome even with a lockdown strongly indicates that their no-lockdown outcome would have looked more like NYC or Lombardy than Sweden.
it's not over yet. too early to say we have avoided the deaths.
Fair point, but looking at the curves, deaths rates the virus seems to have run its course in many countries. Sweden didn't bother with lock down and the virus appears to have run it's course there.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/sweden/
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/sweden/
No, it's not a fair point.
It's the same crap they have been spewing for months in order to justify the lockdowns and lifestyle restrictions.
We just don't know = lock down the world for months or years with no tradeoffs, no discussion of how to end them, and no questioning the lockdowns because > 1 people will or have died.
This "we just don't know so we're going to restrict the entire world and pretend individuals can't choose for themselves" argument is the reason that lifestyles have been restricted.
I'm not anti-mask I'm pro-choice.
Let individuals choose, not government.
It's the same crap they have been spewing for months in order to justify the lockdowns and lifestyle restrictions.
We just don't know = lock down the world for months or years with no tradeoffs, no discussion of how to end them, and no questioning the lockdowns because > 1 people will or have died.
This "we just don't know so we're going to restrict the entire world and pretend individuals can't choose for themselves" argument is the reason that lifestyles have been restricted.
I'm not anti-mask I'm pro-choice.
Let individuals choose, not government.
How would that work? You go to a grocery store because you have to, and there's someone spewing out aerosols, potentially infected, while your mask protects them? Are you all for freeloading like say, making taxes optional?
What happens if people infect their elders? Who pays for the hospital costs if not the public? What if ICU capacity is taken up by anti-maskers and people who were taking precautions got unlucky and then have to die?
What happens if people infect their elders? Who pays for the hospital costs if not the public? What if ICU capacity is taken up by anti-maskers and people who were taking precautions got unlucky and then have to die?
The trouble with that argument is that it leads to people who choose not to care, infecting those that do, which can lead to deaths, which many people dislike.
Historically, pandemics are one of the few acceptable reasons for such restrictions in the US, and it's very odd to me that it's been so controversial in that country.
Historically, pandemics are one of the few acceptable reasons for such restrictions in the US, and it's very odd to me that it's been so controversial in that country.
The same as every flu season that we have had for years.
If the flu had no pre-existing immunity and 8x the mortality rate along with unknown side effects lasting months/years, then yes, exactly like the flu.
How can you say that coronavirus has unkown side effects lasting years when the virus has been around for less than a year? You are obviously being hyperbolic.
key word "unknown."
we do not yet know the long term consequences. there are people not feeling recovered after 6+ months. and children having heart inflammation problems after an a-symptomatic covid infection.
we do not yet know the long term consequences. there are people not feeling recovered after 6+ months. and children having heart inflammation problems after an a-symptomatic covid infection.
I want to add that where Denmark has "hygge" and Norway has "koselig" (both about cosiness, warmness), Finland is the odd one with "sisu", which means perseverance. That has a much more realist take to it than the optimist Danish / Norwegian view.
Unrelatedly, the research summarized in this article seems like a big cliche, so much so, that I wonder if the author chose to use quotes for that reason:
> [...] one vital component may be a particular “mindset” [...]
> People who see stressful events as “challenges” [...]
Unrelatedly, the research summarized in this article seems like a big cliche, so much so, that I wonder if the author chose to use quotes for that reason:
> [...] one vital component may be a particular “mindset” [...]
> People who see stressful events as “challenges” [...]
The government has created this stressful event with it's actions.
The government can end this stressful event anytime it chooses.
As much as I appreciate yet another article telling me what to do, how to behave, and why I am wrong how about we take a step back and look at the fundamentals.
There would be no "challenge" without the government's foolish rules.
The government can end this stressful event anytime it chooses.
As much as I appreciate yet another article telling me what to do, how to behave, and why I am wrong how about we take a step back and look at the fundamentals.
There would be no "challenge" without the government's foolish rules.
This article is a bunch of crap and just glosses over what a hellscape it is once you add children to the mix. You can't change your mindset and invest in new hobbies when you have a kid that is as depressed about the lack of sun as you are.
> You can't change your mindset and invest in new hobbies
Get some cheapo cross country skis and hit the trails, learn to identify animal tracks etc.
> a kid that is as depressed about the lack of sun as you are.
igloos, snowball fights, etc. My experience at least is children enjoy mucking about in the snow more than adults
Get some cheapo cross country skis and hit the trails, learn to identify animal tracks etc.
> a kid that is as depressed about the lack of sun as you are.
igloos, snowball fights, etc. My experience at least is children enjoy mucking about in the snow more than adults
I live in North Florida where winter is often pleasant, highs can still be in the 70s Fahrenheit, but even if it’s only in the 50s that’s still quite nice for me. The summer however can be brutal. So for some of us we need to approach SUMMER as a challenge rather than a crisis :D
But good article, not critiquing it just hopefully helping some of my fellow swamp rats.
But good article, not critiquing it just hopefully helping some of my fellow swamp rats.
I've heard people from Florida say that it would be impossible to survive in summer without an air-conditioner. Is this true? I guess the humidity is just ridiculously high?
[deleted]
Not literally impossible, but, yes, Florida is miserable without air-conditioning. You can get by in the coastal areas if the building is designed to make the most of the sea breeze. But anywhere away from the coast is hot, humid, and bug-infested. You need the windows open to cool the building, but then the bugs come in.
The population of the entire state was very low until after the invention of air-conditioning. The population roughly doubled between 1940 and 1960.
The population of the entire state was very low until after the invention of air-conditioning. The population roughly doubled between 1940 and 1960.
I mean I suppose it's possible to suffer heat related injuries or dehydration, but people have survived in equal or worse climates, so I assume you dont mean that literally.
Generally though, the heat is pretty bad, particularly if you're stuck inside with no AC. I've had a couple rounds of that and its certainly not comfortable at all. Honestly I'm sick of southeastern weather.
Generally though, the heat is pretty bad, particularly if you're stuck inside with no AC. I've had a couple rounds of that and its certainly not comfortable at all. Honestly I'm sick of southeastern weather.
Central Floridian (non-native) and very much looking forward to the cooler winter months, being able to go outdoors without turning into a puddle of sweat :)
Former Central Floridian that moved to Southeast Wisconsin. The rumors of a sweatless summer are exaggerated. My first three winters were the worst. I'll let you know how the fourth goes.
Yeah Wisconsin gets really humid in the summer and awfully cold in the winter. Need to find winter activities but it’s difficult there as common options like skiing don’t really exist. It’s no wonder a lot of people spend their days in the local tavern.
Summer nights tend to be nice I guess. I love the 4 seasons but Wisconsin has like 2:really hot summers and then suddenly one day extremely cold winters that just drag on and on.
Summer nights tend to be nice I guess. I love the 4 seasons but Wisconsin has like 2:really hot summers and then suddenly one day extremely cold winters that just drag on and on.
Best I can tell, the seasons here are: Sweaty humid ethnic festival season (spring, lots of Italian/Irish/Polish/German festivals), Summerfest Construction Season (big music festival bringing a lot of traffic and road construction), State Fair Traffic Season (big fair in a dairy state bringing a lot of traffic and road construction), and Bowling/Darts/Pool/Dead Car Battery Season.
Hear, hear. That said, I do think the beaches and the springs do quite a bit to help maintain a positive summer attitude.
(Native Floridian)
(Native Floridian)
Not Florida, but Georgia. Looking forward to things cooling down a bit.
I live in Northern Norway in eastern Finnmark. This article seems to miss these points
- When you are sufficiently far north, winter means beautiful snowy landscapes, aurora borealis, good stable conditions for cross country skiing, no grey slush. Winter is just straight up better than further south.
- People who live here can move south whenever they feel like it, so those who don't stay by choice. It's not like this region is a hub of great career opportunities and so on, unemployment rates are generally higher than the rest of the country, so people don't get stuck because of work quite as much. So, there is clearly a selection bias towards people who like winter!
Personally I don't think there's too much magic mindset stuff going on. Winter just doesn't suck as much as the author seems to imply. Also, there's plenty of SAD going on so it's not like we are immune..
- When you are sufficiently far north, winter means beautiful snowy landscapes, aurora borealis, good stable conditions for cross country skiing, no grey slush. Winter is just straight up better than further south.
- People who live here can move south whenever they feel like it, so those who don't stay by choice. It's not like this region is a hub of great career opportunities and so on, unemployment rates are generally higher than the rest of the country, so people don't get stuck because of work quite as much. So, there is clearly a selection bias towards people who like winter!
Personally I don't think there's too much magic mindset stuff going on. Winter just doesn't suck as much as the author seems to imply. Also, there's plenty of SAD going on so it's not like we are immune..
In terms of my personal happiness there's nothing that replaces the sun. It's truly miserable here when it sets at 4:30-5pm, no matter how much I try to do outside.
Yeah, it's dark when you go to the office and it's dark when you leave for the day. Luckily I have a couple of colleagues that enjoy a brisk lunch walk, which at least gives some exposure to the sun during the day.
In Sweden, a winter a couple of years ago, I had just dropped off my son at pre-school. I was waiting on an outdoor subway station platform at 8 AM, listening to "Towards the Sun" from the movie Home. When she sings "Turn your face towards the sun" I looked up into the pitch black sky with tiny snowflakes that fell down stretching into infinity. The contrast was so complete that I'll never forget it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdO9cc7WOyE
In Sweden, a winter a couple of years ago, I had just dropped off my son at pre-school. I was waiting on an outdoor subway station platform at 8 AM, listening to "Towards the Sun" from the movie Home. When she sings "Turn your face towards the sun" I looked up into the pitch black sky with tiny snowflakes that fell down stretching into infinity. The contrast was so complete that I'll never forget it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdO9cc7WOyE
>dark when you go to the office and it's dark when you leave for the day
You guys are still going into the office?! We're 100% remote "for the foreseeable future" here.
You guys are still going into the office?! We're 100% remote "for the foreseeable future" here.
My (large) company work from home at least until the end of the year, then we'll see. We're still allowed to go into the office, and some do because they don't have a good working situation at home, but there's like one person per office floor. All office workers in Sweden are highly encouraged to work from home. My company has said that they will do a phased return to the office, so that not everyone returns at the same time. A colleague that had been in the office said that they have closed off every second desk to keep the distance for when people return.
I meant winters in general, not the current situation. Today is grey, but still more light than it will be in January.
I meant winters in general, not the current situation. Today is grey, but still more light than it will be in January.
I am still going into the office, it just happens to be in my house.
Yup. Looking outside at 4:00 pm and seeing the sun start to go down, knowing that you're going to have to head home in the dark soon to shovel the snow that's you've been watching accumulate all day outside your office window is pretty misery inducing.
I think this is the main point in the article, no? I you're used to it and you don't regard it as a negative thing, it won't induce misery. Well, basically goes for a lot of things in life. Hard part is of course changing the mindest.
The sun on your skin is a biological need and induces biological response, it's difficult to just will that away.
But apparently not impossible, as per the article.
Totally. But as a Canadian living in the northern most major city in North America fall is a mourning period and a mental preparation for the long trudge.
I usually survive Edmonton winters by descending headfirst into the arts scene, but this year...
Yup, though has there been official statements about the Flying Canoe or similar activities? Otherwise it'll all be hiding and hoping that we don't have another string of -30 weeks keeping us from leaving the house entirely for January A nice winter evening walk can work wonders for moral assuming you're not dealing with eyelashes frozen shut and air that hurts to breathe in.
I'd really recommend researching into happy lamps. While it's not a sun replacement, it has helped me handle the SADs. I say research it, because the cheaper one's usually have an active distance of less than 1ft while the more expensive ones you're able to keep it at your computer monitor's distance so that you can work and use the lamp at the same time.
https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/reviews/best-light-therap...
https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/reviews/best-light-therap...
These are interesting, any concern with eye damage? Is light on your face enough? What about arms, legs, etc? It's a pretty small surface area really.
>eye damage
Cursory googling says it's not an issue. Personal experience says it's like being out in the bright sun. Definitely talk to your doctor if you already have eye conditions or are more at risk.
>Is light on your face enough? What about arms, legs, etc? It's a pretty small surface area really.
Yep, it works for me! But I'd really suggest doing your own research! This article might be a good first step:
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/seasonal-affe...
Cursory googling says it's not an issue. Personal experience says it's like being out in the bright sun. Definitely talk to your doctor if you already have eye conditions or are more at risk.
>Is light on your face enough? What about arms, legs, etc? It's a pretty small surface area really.
Yep, it works for me! But I'd really suggest doing your own research! This article might be a good first step:
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/seasonal-affe...
This is my single largest complaint about the PNW. Not only are the days short in the winter, but the sun is constantly behind cloud cover. You can literally go months without experiencing direct sunlight.
Meh, you could go months without seeing sunlight, but you'd have to work at it. The PNW is the area of the country that introduced me to the phrase "sun breaks". It might not last long, but certainly within the span of a month one will have the opportunity to view direct sunlight.
For me, the key thing to living somewhere with dark winters is to get outside regularly. That's how to catch a "sun break" once in a while. Live in the rainy PNW? Gortex was invented over 50 years ago. Pricey, but it works. Even running in the dark, pissing rain at 5:30 a. m. is better than sitting inside all day, IMO. But, hey, we all WFH now, right? Go run when the sun's up.
And if the outdoors ain't your thing, it's probably time for the annual round of corncob light rigs: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21660718
For me, the key thing to living somewhere with dark winters is to get outside regularly. That's how to catch a "sun break" once in a while. Live in the rainy PNW? Gortex was invented over 50 years ago. Pricey, but it works. Even running in the dark, pissing rain at 5:30 a. m. is better than sitting inside all day, IMO. But, hey, we all WFH now, right? Go run when the sun's up.
And if the outdoors ain't your thing, it's probably time for the annual round of corncob light rigs: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21660718
At least in my corner of the PNW, the clouds are always moving. Most days, there's at least some sun peaking out here and there. December and January can get pretty bad though, not looking forward to missing my annual trips.
I know the feeling. A nice fire comes pretty close though. Just don't forget your vitamin D supplements :)
"People who see stressful events as “challenges”, with an opportunity to learn and adapt, tend to cope much better than those who focus more on the threatening aspects – like the possibility of failure, embarrassment or illness. These differences in mindset not only influence people’s mood, but also their physiological responses, such as changes in blood pressure and heart rate, and how quickly they recover after the event." - Quote
This is super interesting and points to the idea that emotions are much more of a "what you let yourself feel" versus "what you feel". Was literally just listening to the below podcast from farnam street on a jog a few hours ago... if this was interesting, maybe the below is interesting to you as well:
https://fs.blog/knowledge-project/lisa-feldman-barrett : Lisa Feldman Barrett: Balancing the Brain Budget — Neuroscientist, psychologist and author, Lisa Feldman Barrett discusses the complexities of the brain, our emotions, improving ourselves and our relationship with others, making good decisions and giving yourself an existential break.
This is super interesting and points to the idea that emotions are much more of a "what you let yourself feel" versus "what you feel". Was literally just listening to the below podcast from farnam street on a jog a few hours ago... if this was interesting, maybe the below is interesting to you as well:
https://fs.blog/knowledge-project/lisa-feldman-barrett : Lisa Feldman Barrett: Balancing the Brain Budget — Neuroscientist, psychologist and author, Lisa Feldman Barrett discusses the complexities of the brain, our emotions, improving ourselves and our relationship with others, making good decisions and giving yourself an existential break.
I was seriously put off by the evident confliction of causation and correlation in the mentioned study (at least the way it was put in the article). Of course people, who live where the winter is harsh would have a positive attitude to the winter. Either, because of selection bias (they live there because they like the winter), or because they had no choice but to grow accustomed to it.
It would have helped to study displaced northerners, and see if their attitudes about winter continued or abated. It would have helped distinguish between selection bias and adaptation.
Am I the only one who can't mentally parse the photograph at the top?
The bit of rock the figure is standing on: is it sticking out with empty space underneath it? It looks inserted from a different photograph.
Maybe I've been looking at too many Escher pictures.
The bit of rock the figure is standing on: is it sticking out with empty space underneath it? It looks inserted from a different photograph.
Maybe I've been looking at too many Escher pictures.
it's a famous spot,a rock sticking out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolltunga
Or think like a FOSS hacker ...
“Think Like a Norwegian” is one of my favorite Bangles b-sides.
Thank you for this delightful comment.
I scrolled past this comment thinking, what in the world...oh. Hehe, that's funny.
Can you explain? I don't understand the reference.
Hackers of a certain age may remember the Bangles earworm "Walk Like an Egyptian".[0]
[0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cv6tuzHUuuk
[0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cv6tuzHUuuk
Living semi-rurally in a cold place is a good predictor for a good winter experience. In the cities, especially southern citites, it is worse. Slush, gravel, dark snow, rain, wet everywhere. And public transport is full of people with big jackets taking up too much space.
It is easy to have a mindset geared toward enjoying winter when that winter acutally has the possbility of being enjoyable. In a rainy cold dark urban center, not much so.