Comments on: Standing workstations – useful, fad or salesmanship?

By: Standing desks distract from systemic analysis « SafetyAtWorkBlog

Standing desks distract from systemic analysis « SafetyAtWorkBlog — Sun, 10 May 2015 23:28:05 +0000

[…] media’s focus on standing desks continues in Australia with the PM radio program on 7 May 15 […]

By: Kevin Jones

Kevin Jones — Thu, 23 Apr 2015 04:33:57 +0000

Crikey.com.au has just published an article on sedentary behaviour that touches on many of the issues raised in my article – http://www.crikey.com.au/2015/04/23/will-sitting-down-really-kill-you/

By: Dan

Dan — Tue, 21 Apr 2015 05:42:04 +0000

Following some brain injuries (accidental and disease related), I can confidently say that this will not work for me – standing for more than about half an hour will send me to the medicine cabinet. It is therefore critical to adhere to the (well supported) conclusion that it should never be more than an alternative, and should relate to the specific job. I can see a woodworker and welder doing the bulk of their job standing, but would a watchmaker or perhaps jeweller be able to do the same? Similarly, many of the chair designs are purported to be THE ANSWER, but are not. Bar stools are probably more applicable to someone serving a counter, while many typists will have difficulty typing from a standing desk or even a bar stool.

By: mick

mick — Sun, 19 Apr 2015 09:11:16 +0000

There are negatives for standing all day as opposed to sitting all day in different types of potential injuries as previously documented ,and as individuals may have different circumstances in their own physical condition it would be wise to give employees the option of one or the other or even both .

By: M. Eburn

M. Eburn — Sun, 19 Apr 2015 07:54:07 +0000

I love my standing desk, and as someone who has had a serious back injury I credit it with no ongoing back pain (which I do get if I sit instead). But I appreciate a sample of 1 does not prove a case. I agree with the conclusion that ‘The best that can be said about standing workstations is that they provide an option for those workers who choose to use them …’

By: Kevin Jones

Kevin Jones — Sun, 19 Apr 2015 07:21:53 +0000

In reply to Luke Dam.

Luke, the quote sounds less silly in the context of the full report, which is only around 11 pages. It is concise and useful.

This article came from some of my disappointment at the original Fairfax Media story which implies that the standing workstation is a solution, largely, in its own right. OHS matters are often represented in the mainstream media in such ways. The writers often miss the chance presented by “small” issues to produce a more detailed article.

For instance I would have gone for more information on how pervasive such workstations are in the public service, talked with several of the companies that use the workstation to evaluate any benefits and how these fit with the companies’ overall existing OHS system, referenced the longer overseas articles that identified potential negatives, and interviewed an ergonomist who has specifically investigated standing workstations.

There is enough in this issue and how it ties to corporate wellness programs for a long-form article but I don’t own a newspaper or have a salaried job with one.

By: Luke Dam

Luke Dam — Sun, 19 Apr 2015 06:51:04 +0000

“The Stand@Work study was successful in reducing sitting time and increasing standing time by about an hour each work day, among those who trialled the workstation.”

Really? Who would have thought?

A Stand@work study found that they could reduce sitting by……wait for it……standing! Wow!

In all seriousness though, this research, as you’ve pointed out is cherry picked, just like all research to support an argument.There’s probably just as much that disputes the benefits of standing.