The SouthCoast Doesn’t Need Permanent Daylight Saving Time

I stand with those Americans who don't like changing the clocks twice a year.

I know the natural rhythm in my body is disrupted, resulting in feeling fatigued, when I lose an hour of sleep. There are studies that show adverse health effects caused by this disruption.

My reasoning for being against making Daylight Saving Time permanent goes beyond personal reasons. I'm thinking about the millions of children across this country who'll be waiting for their school bus in pitch darkness.

As a grandparent, I don't want this, and a lot of scientists also think it's a horrible idea. Having sunrise on the SouthCoast at 8:13 a.m. isn't my idea of starting a productive day. The other troubling part of this Senate-passed legislation is that it wasn't debated. Why wasn't there any debate, giving the people a chance to hear the pros and cons of making any time zone permanent?

Get our free mobile app

Making Standard Time permanent would be better for my health and well being, because research shows that a disrupted internal clock increases overtiredness and the higher chances of a heart attack, weight gain, anxiety, workplace injuries and car accidents. Have you ever experienced jet lag? Imagine living with permanent jet lag.

We're all different, but I need exposure to morning light. When I don't get that exposure, my internal clock drifts later, making it harder for me to wake up, feeling like I'm jet lagged. My clock has always ticked on Standard Time.

Changing the clock back and forth is bad for our health, but changing the clock permanently to Daylight Saving Time would be even worse for folks like me.