I qualified as a CA with EY in London around 15 years ago in banking audit. Left soon after qualifying. Some weeks I clocked in over 50 hours but never usually much more. Never had to do an all-nighter though I knew loads of people who did. Part of the reason I had a good experience was that I was lucky enough to work with an excellent manager who was well organised and knew how to audit without wasting time on spurious nonsense. I had to sacrifice a few Easter bank holidays in busy season but we got back the time in lieu. Outside of busy season was fairly quiet - Thursday afternoon pub lunches etc.
Some people did far more hours than me but I think it was mostly self imposed. A small minority of the partners were twats but the vast majority were mindful of people’s well-being. Friday evening drinks in corney and barrow were sacred and on days I didnt want to work longer I just got up and left to the disbelief of the audit room - they got over it though!
Their function effectively becomes one of emotional/vibe meetings.
You and your coworkers are 'drunk', so whatever you say has an excuse now.
Because of the stiff upper lip, so to speak, culture of the normal workdays, you can't complain about workload, or that Steve is an ass, or that the project is pointless, etc. But with a 'drunk' cover, you can, and that information can get to the bosses and they can adjust things. That's why those meeting times are needed and all the folks need to be there with that excuse literally in hand.
Or, so I've been told by older functional-alcoholic consultants back in my consulting days.
Hey, at least the beer and gin were on the company card.
Work drinks in fields like law and finance is London are _huge_. Even in tech they're a thing. Working in a pretty no-name tech company, I've did my share of out-til-2am, home by 3am, then back in work by 9am. Less so now I just exited my 20s, but the culture lives on.
This is definitely true. Distance/time running is the most effective lever you can pull to increase performance assuming your form isn’t completely messed up.
I used to run competitively in my teens. Now nearly 40 and getting back into it. Recently upped distance to 50 miles a week (mostly slow) from 20 and I’m suddenly doing sub 17min 5ks. Couldn’t get below 19 mins before upping mileage.
Very good! Can second that. I run alot and sometimes get knotty leg muscles/tendons. I've found for quad knots, the best way is to jam your elbow into the knot and hold until the muscle releases. For harder to reach areas like IT band then I use a massage gun with the pointy tip but you need to be careful not to bruise the area.
Fit athletes can run quite fast at a low heart rate, that in some cases might even be lower than walking for regular people. That is to say, the runners are exerting themselves less from a cardiovascular perspective than an unfit person walking. E.g. I can run 8min/mile pace on the flat at a 120bpm heart rate (around 67% of VO2max). But I know people who have the same (or higher) heart rate by just walking or doing house work. So what exactly are we saying by pointing out that running is bad for you? High heart rates for a long period of time are bad for you? The action of running is bad for you? Something else? None of this research makes sense to me.
But why just running? What about other sports like cross country skiing, or rowing? Mountaineering? What is it specifically about running which is bad? Or are all these other sports bad too?
I had a cardiovascular age test done recently which uses pulse wave velocity [1] to determine arterial stiffness. It turns out my "cardio age" is 11 years younger than my actual age and I run at least 50 miles a week. Mostly slow, some fast. So that seems to contradict some of this research, or the pulse wave velocity test is BS?
On another note, there's so much nonsense in that linked thread above I don't even know where to start. Great timing because I enjoyed reading this hackernews thread [2] about the phenomenon that most info about a subject is wrong and you only really notice it if you are an expert or have first hand knowledge.
My understanding that the problems occur during (ultra) endurance running style events where proper care isn't taken to keep up with hydration and dietary needs (electrolytes, etc.). Blood can thicken to such a point that the heart starts to get damaged, muscle acidity rises to the point where heart muscle damage occurs, etc.
A fit individual going for a 12 mile or less run probably won't have these problems unless they're in an extreme environment.
To your point, I'm sure you could do similar types of damage from other activities done for long periods of time if the proper hydration isn't followed.
I have 6.5kW of solar PV and a 16kWh battery system in the UK. On a sunny day I’ll generate about 50kWh and export more than half of that to the grid. The rest is for charging my hybrid car (25kWh) and just general house use.
So far this year, our net grid import is 3000kWh and solar generation is 2500kWh. We have a 5kW heat pump and that uses quite a lot of electricity in winter when we don’t generate too much.
I have gone off the idea of solar at home. I’m on the octopus agile tariff where there are changing prices every 30 minutes. Given that sometimes I am paid to use electricity it would seem better to just buy a battery system and offset the usage.
Especially in the winter months when it’s blowing but not sunny. But I don’t see people selling this setup.
I remember teaching in China nearly 20 years ago and all the kids did this. I thought it was so strange. Crazy music would come on between each class, which was the prompt to start “eye exercises”. They all stopped what they were doing and massaged their eyes and forehead for about two minutes. Then got back to doing whatever they were doing. Non-participation was punished.
When I was living in London after COVID, at first, I didn't enjoy it. I still came into the office but when no-one else was there I realised "what's the point?". The office was exposed as the dull/boring/clinical place it's always been. The people I found going into the office were either those who were young and lived close by and somewhat used work as a social club, or those with nothing else better to do (also me at the time!). Anyone with a family was not there. Meanwhile, I've continuted to work remotely and I moved to the Cotswolds. I swapped a Victorian terrace for a much bigger detatched Cotswold cottage. I have a big garden, a glorious wild flower meadow and sheep grazing adjacent to the garden. There's no traffic on the roads and the nearby countryside is amazing. London is a veritable shithole in comparison. Getting a train to London is like travelling to a different - worse - country.
If I still lived in London and commuted to the office, I would never see my young kids. I'd be out the door by 7:30 and back by 7ish. It would also put a lot more stress on my wife, as she would have to do everything during the day. I'd also get about 30 mins or so a day with my kids. That's terrible. Now, I can play with my kids until 9am and then start work. I finish at 5:30pm and get 2 hours with them before bed. I can also go running during the day.
Switching off isn't really a problem for me because well... work is work. It pays the bills. So I'm quite happy to shut my laptop and forget about it. We had a cabin built in the garden, so my new commute is about 1 minute down the garden to the "shed" during which time I miraciously forget I even have a job in the first place when returning "home". I don't have any work apps on my phone for obvious reasons. I appreciate that's not the same for everyone though.
Regarding cost of commute We've had it drilled into us over the years (gaslighted, even) that it is acceptable for us to spend hours of our day commuting to work and for us to bear the financial burden. Why should that be the case? I used to spend £10 a day on the commute. Commuting 200 days a year, that's £2,000 of my salary I need to spend on just getting to work. For others it is much more. That's absurd but it's just the monetary cost. The opportunity cost in terms of MY time is huge. It's about 2 weeks of the year sitting on a horrid underground train. I realise, you can do things on the train but I guess my point is that being on a train limits you from doing other things like playing with kids or doing some gardening. When recruiters have been getting in touch about new roles I make it clear up front that if said company wants me to routinely attend the office they must pay me for commuting time and the commute cost, otherwise it's a "no" from me. Some companies agree remote is acceptable in that case. I mean, I don't mind paying for the odd trip to the office but on a regular cadence and if it's expected (part of contract), then they must pay.
Also, let's not forget the environmental impact of all this mostly pointless travel to work every day for knowledge workers. How much less carbon would we emit if we stopped doing it? Judging by the dip in CO2 emissions during COVID, quite a bit.
Also an endurance runner and read Pontzer's book. I do enough running for my wife to get pissed off! I agree with you that there's definitely more work which needs doing to understand metabolism in the context of endurance athletes. I don't think his work is outright nonsense though. Here's something to think about...
I ran 21 km yesterday, in zone 2, in a fairly glycogen depleted state. That was about 4:30min/km for 21km, with 600m of elevation - about 1500kcal of energy. I didn't eat or drink anything throughout the run. I'm a big nerd, so I took a lactate sample at the end. I didn't hit the first ventilatory threshold for the whole run and that indicates I'm burning a large proportion of fat compared to a normal person (and probably a normal recreational runner).
Afterwards, I ate a banana and had a couple of spoons of peanut butter + honey. A few 100kcal. Fast forward to the evening. I didn't eat any more than I usually would do if I had a few days off running. I went on with my day as normal and recovered fine the next day. I didn't feel hungrier than usual. Fairly standard. My body is well adapted to this kind of exertion. I think my body is quite efficient at doing every day things. I don't get out of breath walking up stairs, for example. Maybe it's fair to say I'm more energy efficient than a regular person. Perhps, I don't need to eat any more than usual immediately after running because I'm burning a high proportion of fat and my metabolism is quite efficeint anyway.
Someone who has a poor aerobic system wouldn't be capable of doing that. They'd likely be running at a much higher heart rate and bonk after 10km having not eaten any carbs the day before. They'd also likely need to eat a huge bowl of pasta afterwards just to feel OK. I suspect this person would feel like crap for the rest of the day (maybe even multiple days... Imagine.. they've likely just done a 10km at VO2max untrained) and I could completely imagine them having a nap or watching TV for the rest of the day as they'd have no energy to do anything else. Their bodies are not adapted to this kind of exertion. They are not efficient. Their body needs to rest to get back in equilibrium.
The energy requirement is the same in both cases but it comes from a different source. In my case the high fat oxidation is acting as a battery/buffer. In the average person, those fat stores are not really accessible when doing anything more than sitting or light walking. Both examples are in equilibrium but present in different ways.
This is mostly unrelated to the current point, but you’re unquestionably fitter than the average person. I used to dance for about 15 hours a week, and I have no idea what I actually burned calorie-wise, but it was plenty of cardio.
After about a year of dancing, I had a moment where I needed to run after someone about a half kilometer away. It was incredible- I’d never felt so buoyant while running. After I passed the message on, I decided to do a measured run. I ran a six minute mile in my late twenties with zero warm-up after having not run in over a decade. I wasn’t even out of breath, it was fucking easy. Cardio is a life hack.
Our son had no screen time and the odd bit of TV up until 2 years old. On his second birthday my wife thought it would be a nice idea to give him an amazon fire kids (because everyone else had one, though not sure how true that is!). A few things we observed:
1. Whilst there IS good content on there. A lot of it is complete nonsense. cocomelon, paw patrol, baby shark, AI generated rubbish etc. and quite a lot of the games are terrible. Toddlers don't know the difference between what is good and what is bad. You cannot monitor them effectively because amazon provides access to all content by default. He would quite easily get through 20-30 apps/videos in one sitting. That's a lot of different content!
2. Instead of reading, playing with his lego, wooden blocks, trainset or doing puzzles, his goto became the tablet. He wanted it at all meal times, in the car, and before bed. If we didn't give it to him, he had a meltdown. So we ended up giving it to him as we didn't have time to deal with the meltdown. Before the tablet, he didn't really meltdown at all.
3. Whilst he communicates well and talks a lot for a 2 year old. When using the tablet, he would completely zone out... "Would you like to eat supper?" ... tumbleweed. That's not great and aligns with TFA.
4. Not sure if correlated because there are lots of other factors at play but his bedtimes became a nightmare. He wanted the tablet, when before we read books like Mog the Cat or similar. Instead of being content with Daddy singing Jelly on the Plate, he wanted the horrid video on the tablet.
5. We live in a lovely rural area in the UK and he stopped wanting to go outside to instead play with the tablet.
6. Again, not sure if correlated but he became more irritable and restless after using the tablet.
7. He would complain there is nothing to do despite the availabily of toys.
And so... One day we told him the computer was broken. Mummy sent it to the factory to get it repaired. And... It's still being repaired to this day.
The first day was hell but now he's stopped asking for it and he's back to his normal self.
Perhaps we'll introduce it again when he's a bit older.
Oh yeah. I get downvoted as hell when I admit that I wish my mom had gently smashed my screens with a hammer instead of hiding my cables, which came to show how powerless she was about the device which was harming my school involvement
Horrifying but honestly seen the exact same thing happen every time.
Honestly don't understand parents who would swap the facade of "it shuts them up" when in reality you have kids who you can take to dinner and they'd happily just sit there with a coloring book vs the drama about how much charge they have left on their tablet and constantly having to tell them to put it down to eat.
Dunno starts to feel like a false economy where you're trading off acknowledging them elsewhere for a moment for every other interaction being amplified into drama mostly centered around the tablet, how much charge is on the tablet, when the tablet must be put down etc.
I give my child zero screen time except on the plane when we are flying across the country to visit family.
Eating out with my son is difficult because he cannot focus on something for more than a few minutes. I’m sure some kids would be content to sit and color for like 30mins but I don’t think it’s the norm at 2.
I know everybody has a suggestion to give and you should listen to nobody, but, if the time comes, give them a nintendo switch with Kirby star allies and yoshi's crafted world (and nothing else).
If videogames are something you want to allow, give the hard ones, they either get bored because it's hard or they learn
Live in rural England and have a heat pump with 7kW of solar PV and 16kWh of battery.
Any outdoor temperature around 10 degrees the, heat pump keeps the house at 20C using about 1kW of power and is only drawing power for half the day. Warmer than 10C, the amount of power it uses is negligible. However, today it’s -1C and the heat pump is drawing nearly 3kW all day to keep the house at 20C. Imported 40kWh from the grid today mostly for heating. Price per kWh is about 27p. Not cheap.
It all balances out when the days get longer and sunnier. Can generate 50+ kWh of electricity, which more than covers our usage so we export a fair bit.
I set the heat pump to heat water to 55C between 2am to 5am and again between 2pm and 4pm if necessary. We also divert any excess electricity after usage and charging batteries to heating the water tank via immersion heater. Had 4 family member over for Christmas and we didn’t run out of hot water once!
Can probably add a few more kW of solar PV but I'm not sure there's much point unfortunately. What I've realised is that the limiting factor is really the rubbish UK weather. Over the last 4 weeks the most I've generated in a day is 5kWh. I guess that will change in a month or two though when the days get longer and hopefully sunnier.
Some people did far more hours than me but I think it was mostly self imposed. A small minority of the partners were twats but the vast majority were mindful of people’s well-being. Friday evening drinks in corney and barrow were sacred and on days I didnt want to work longer I just got up and left to the disbelief of the audit room - they got over it though!