12 Surprising Effects of Daylight Saving Time

ISTOCK.COM/TZAHIV
ISTOCK.COM/TZAHIV

Every March, clocks "spring forward" across much of the United States, robbing people of one precious hour of sleep. (In 2019, Daylight Saving Time will occur March 10.) While hearing those same people complain about being tired is one not-so-surprising effect of Daylight Saving Time, the possibility of a longer prison sentence for those going before a judge on "sleepy Monday" is less expected. Here are 12 surprising effects of Daylight Saving Time—the good, the bad, and the scientifically ambiguous.

1. Increased Spending

Woman whips out her credit card while hanging out on a hammock
iStock.com/martin-dm

In 2016, JP Morgan Chase decided to look into the economic consequences of Daylight Saving Time (DST) by examining Los Angeles and Phoenix, two cities that are large, relatively close to each other, and have stable weather. Critically, Phoenix doesn't observe DST while Los Angeles does [PDF].

Among their findings, DST was "associated with a 0.9 percent increase in daily card spending per capita in Los Angeles at the beginning of DST." Perhaps more surprising, the end of DST was associated with a per capita daily spending reduction of 3.9 percent.

2. A Higher Risk of Heart Attacks

An image of a man grabbing his chest.
iStock.com/PeopleImages

Many studies have shown that DST is associated with an increase in heart attacks, with one study showing a 24 percent increase in the number of heart attacks on the Monday after DST at a group of Michigan hospitals. According to the University of Michigan, Mondays are bad for heart attacks in general (researchers believes the stress of beginning a new workweek and changes to the sleep-wake cycle are the reason why), but DST makes everything worse. Interestingly, the Tuesday following the end of DST was associated with a 21 percent drop in patients.

3. Missed Appointments

Young man runs to catch a missed train
iStock.com/Drazen_

Somewhat relatedly, a 2017 study found that the percentage of missed medical appointments increased significantly following DST. But as with heart attack risk, the missed appointments decreased in the fall—at least temporarily.

4. More Car Accidents … Maybe (at Least for a Few Days)

An image of a car with a broken headline after being in an accident.
iStock.com/CHRISsadowski

Another field where studies aren't as consistent as one might expect is traffic accidents. In 2001, an American study found that there was a significant increase in accidents on the Monday after the shift to DST. A 2018 New Zealand study echoed the sentiment, finding that on the first day of DST road accidents increased 16 percent. In contrast, a Swedish study found that DST didn't have any important effect in that country.

Of course, there's more to DST than just those first couple days. After DST has gotten started, there's more light on the road later in the day. Several studies have found this light reduces accidents substantially, so much so that one study concluded that a year-round DST would reduce motor vehicle occupant fatalities by 195 per year.

It's so complicated that a 2010 analysis in Minnesota listed 10 studies that found positive effects of DST on road safety, and six studies that showed negative effects in both the spring and fall changes.

5. Longer Prison Sentences

A photo of a judge handing out a sentence with a clock sitting next to her
ISTOCK.COM/TZAHIV

Researchers frequently use DST to study sleep deprivation in populations, as it's a period of time when we all wake up an hour before we’re used to. One of these studies focused specifically on judicial punishment in U.S. federal courts. The researchers looked at "sleepy Monday" (the Monday after the time change) and compared the sentence lengths to other Mondays. They found that on "sleepy Monday," judges handed out 5 percent longer sentences. But don't think you can get a lighter sentence during the fall switch; the researchers found no effect on sentencing at that time. But the researchers point out that this probably isn't limited to judges—even managers may find themselves in the mood for doling out harsher punishments.

6. More Mining Injuries

An image of mining helmets on a shelf.
iStock.com/dannyfroese

According to one study of mining injuries from 1983 to 2006, the Monday directly after the switch to DST was associated with 5.7 percent more workplace injuries and 68 percent more workdays lost because of injuries, indicating that there are more injuries that are more severe after the switch [PDF]. There isn't, however, a corresponding decrease in the fall.

7. Fewer Koala Collisions

A street sign warns of koala bears
iStock.com/hidesy

One study decided to look at how DST affected human-wildlife interaction, specifically koala-vehicle collisions [PDF]. Because koalas are largely nocturnal, they often cross the road in the evening or at night. By shifting traffic patterns to times when it wasn't dark, the researchers found that DST could "decrease collisions with koalas by 8 percent on weekdays and 11 percent at weekends" (although the difference between weekend and weekdays wasn't significant, the researchers proposed that a slight increase in morning collisions lessened the benefit during the weekday). The researchers hope that further study can be done on human-animal interactions and DST.

Koalas aren't the only ones crossing a road that benefit from DST; pedestrians might be safer as well. One study found "no significant detrimental effect on automobile crashes in the short run" and in the long run was associated with "a 8 to 11 percent fall in crashes involving pedestrians … in the weeks after the spring shift to DST." Meanwhile, another study found that a year-long DST would mean 171 fewer pedestrian fatalities a year.

8. Decreased Satisfaction With Life in General (and Increased Use of the Word Tired)

A woman sitting in front of a computer looking tired.
istock.com/PeopleImages

In both the UK and Germany, studies have shown that life satisfaction deteriorates in the first week after the switch to DST in the spring. One study even quantified the deterioration in Germany with money. For the entire sample, the cost was calculated to be €213 (about $262), but for people in full employment—with relatively inflexible schedules—that increases to €332 ($408). And for the men in the sample, the cost of transition was €396 ($487).

Meanwhile, a Facebook analysis looked at the "feelings" people were sharing on the platform. On the Monday after the start of DST, the use of the word tired increased by 25 percent, with similar increases for "sleepy" and "exhausted" (as well as "wonderful" and "great"). In just the period from 5 a.m. to 12 p.m. on Monday, "feeling tired" usage increased an average of 86 percent, from a 12 percent increase in the non-DST Arizona up to a 231 percent increase in Delaware. By Thursday, "tired" is back to normal.

9. Sleepier Kids (Maybe)

A little girl sleeping with her mouth open.
iStock.com/quintanilla

The studies surrounding DST and school children are surprisingly inconclusive. On the one side, a 2009 article in Sleep Medicine looked at 469 Germans from 10 to 20 years old and divided them up into 'larks' (those who go to bed early and wake up early) and 'owls' (those who go to bed late and wake up late). They found that after the DST transition the group was sleepier for three weeks after the transition, with owls showing higher daytime sleepiness, and proposed that tests shouldn't take place in the week following the switch over to DST.

A 2017 article in Economics of Education Review, however, looked at 22,000 Europeans students and found that, at least for low-stakes tests, the effect wasn't statistically significant.

10. More Cyberloafing on the Job

A woman gets caught cyberloafing at work
iStock.com/Manuel-F-O

Another study looked at people's Google search trends for the Mondays before the switch to DST, immediately after the switch, and a week after, with a specific focus on sites like Facebook, YouTube, and ESPN (i.e. entertainment sites that people probably aren't Googling for their jobs). They found that on the Monday after the switch, people searched for 3.1 percent more entertainment websites than the Monday before DST, and 6.4 percent more than the subsequent Monday. While the researchers caution they can't be sure this was all "cyberloafing," the fact that there was nothing else special about these Mondays meant it very likely was.

11. Mistimed Insulin Shots

A woman injecting herself with an insulin pen.
iStock.com/6okean

It might seem that in this age of smartphones and connected devices that figure it all out, the twice-yearly ritual of finding all the clocks to change is a thing of the past. But that's not necessarily true. In a 2014 article in the Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology, the authors pointed out an easy clock to miss: insulin pumps. Because most commercial pumps aren't GPS-enabled and lack internal time change mechanisms, they have to be manually set up. The study authors discuss an international college student with an insulin pump that came from a country that didn't observe DST, meaning the clock was an hour off. They say that no significant harm resulted, but it just serves as a reminder to make sure you check all your clocks.

12. Higher Energy Bills

Man reviews an energy bill on a tablet app
iStock.com/baloon111

One of the main rallying cries for DST is that it saves energy, but studies have been mixed. In 1975 the Department of Transportation issued a report about whether a short-lived, year-long DST experiment had been worthwhile [PDF]. They declared "modest overall benefits might be realized by a shift from the historic six-month DST system," but cautioned that these benefits were difficult to isolate. Optimistically, though, they said DST might help reduce 1 percent of electricity use.

But as modern researchers have noted, electricity usage has shifted since then. Chief among the changes: Only 46 percent of the new single family households completed in 1975 had air conditioning, compared to 93 percent in 2016 [PDF].

Indiana provided a good place to test this change, because in 2006 they decided to observe DST as an entire state (individual counties had observed DST before). A study ultimately concluded that while DST does save electricity in lighting, this is more than offset by increased demands for heating and cooling, resulting in Indiana households being hit by $9 million per year in higher electricity bills [PDF]. However, the study only looked at residential electricity consumption, not commercial or industrial.

Around the same time, the Department of Energy also looked into DST and found that during a four-week extension, electricity use decreased about half a percentage point per day. Ultimately, Stanton Hadley at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory told Live Science, "I could see the answer being either way."

This story originally ran in 2018.

16 Things You Might Not Know About William Shakespeare

Hulton Archive, Getty Images
Hulton Archive, Getty Images

Despite his many contributions to English literature, surprisingly little is known about William Shakespeare’s life. For the past four centuries, historians have had the difficult task of piecing together the Bard's biography with only a handful of old legal documents. Here's what we do know about the celebrated actor, poet, and playwright, who was born on this day in 1564.

1. Shakespeare's writing was likely influenced by his father's legal troubles.

When Shakespeare was about 5 years old, his father, John—a glovemaker—was accused of illegal money-lending and wool-dealing by Crown informers. The ordeal plunged the elder Shakespeare into legal troubles that would plague him for the next decade. "William grew to adulthood in a household where his father had fallen in social and economic rank," historian Glyn Parry told The Guardian. Parry argued that the experience likely shaped Shakespeare's attitudes toward power, class, and the monarchy—major themes in his future works.

2. Shakespeare got married because of an unexpected pregnancy.

Shakespeare was 18 when he learned that Anne Hathaway, 26, was pregnant with his first child. The couple quickly decided to marry in November 1582 and greeted daughter Susanna in May 1583. Two years later, they had twins Judith and Hamnet. Unfortunately, Shakespeare has no living direct descendants: Hamnet died at age 11, probably a victim of some disease; Judith outlived her three children; and Susanna had one daughter, Elizabeth, who was childless.

3. Nobody knows what Shakespeare did between 1585 and 1592.

After the birth of his twins, Shakespeare fell off the map for seven years. One unsubstantiated theory (and there are many) suggests that he supported his family by working as a lawyer or legal clerk. Indeed, Shakespeare's plays show an impressive grasp of legal knowledge. "No dramatist of the time … used legal phrases with Shakespeare's readiness and exactness," wrote 19th-century literary critic Richard Grant White. (High praise considering that Shakespeare once wrote, "Let's kill all the lawyers.")

4. Shakespeare was, first and foremost, an actor.

An engraving of Shakespeare by E Scriven, after Humphrey's drawing known as the 'Chandos portrait,' circa 1590.
An engraving of Shakespeare by E Scriven, after Humphrey's drawing known as the 'Chandos portrait,' circa 1590.
Hulton Archive, Getty Images

Shakespeare became an actor at a time when the job was considered downright unsavory. "[A]ctors were already marked as undesirables by England's vagrancy laws, which mandated that traveling troupes had to find aristocratic patronage," John Paul Rollert wrote in The Atlantic. "Rogue players ran the risk of being flogged, branded, and finally hanged." Little is known of Shakespeare's acting chops, but it's believed Shakespeare favored playing "kingly parts," including the ghost in his own Hamlet.

5. Shakespeare may have participated in organized crime.

In the 1590s, many of London's theaters operated as shady fronts for organized crime. (The Lord Mayor of London decried the theater—and specifically plans for the new Swan Theatre, where Shakespeare may have briefly worked—as a meeting spot for "thieves, horse-stealers, whoremongers, cozeners, conny-catching persons, practisers of treason, and such other like.") In 1596, Swan Theater owner Francis Langley accused William Gardiner and his stepson William Wayte of making death threats. Soon after, Wayte retaliated with the same accusations against Langley and—for some reason—William Shakespeare. This has led historian Mike Dash to suggest that Shakespeare may have been involved in some unspoken criminal activity.

6. Shakespeare was a matchmaker (and a marital peace-maker).

It may be no surprise that the author of Romeo and Juliet had a penchant for bringing lovers together: He once helped arrange the marriage of his landlord's daughter. The only reason we know this, however, is because the marriage had a rocky start. When a dispute over the dowry boiled over, Shakespeare had to go to court to act as a character witness for his landlord, whom he called a "very honest fellow." The transcript is the only record of Shakespeare speaking.

7. The first printed reference to Shakespeare as a playwright was an insult.

The first mention of William Shakespeare as a playwright appeared in 1592, when the dramatist Robert Greene (or possibly Henry Chettle) called him an "upstart Crow [who] … supposes he is as well able to bombast out a blank verse as the best of you." (In other words: A jack-of-all-trades, and a master of none.) Future reviewers would offer kinder words; in 1598, the critic Francis Meres called him "mellifluous and honey-tongued."

8. Shakespeare likely helped steal a theater, piece by piece.

In 1596, the Theatre in Shoreditch—where Shakespeare cut his teeth as an actor—went dark. The lease for the property on which it was built had expired, and Shakespeare's acting troupe, the Lord Chamberlain's Men, were forced to take their show elsewhere. Two years later, the former owners hatched a crazy plan to take their playhouse back. One winter night in 1598, a group armed themselves with swords and axes, snuck into the theater, and began dismantling the playhouse piece by piece—although it would take more than one night to demolish it. While there's no evidence that Shakespeare joined the crew, he certainly knew about the raid. Eventually, parts of the playhouse would go into the construction of a new theater just south of the River Thames. Its new name? The Globe.

9. Only one handwritten script of Shakespeare's exists.

Five examples of the autograph of English playwright William Shakespeare, circa 1610.
Five examples of the autograph of William Shakespeare, circa 1610.
Hulton Archive, Getty Images

Anyone interested in studying the Bard's cramped handwriting has only one reliable place to look—the original draft of the Book of Sir Thomas More, a politically-charged play that targeted, in-part, xenophobia in England. Written mainly by dramatist Anthony Munday, the play was completed with the help of four fellow playwrights. One of them, presumed to be Shakespeare, helped write a stirring monologue in which the lead character asks an anti-immigrant mob to imagine themselves as refugees.

Say now the king …
Should so much come too short of your great trespass
As but to banish you, whither would you go?
What country, by the nature of your error,
Should give you harbour?

The play, by the way, would not be performed. Censors believed it could start a riot.

10. Shakespeare might have experimented with drugs.

Shakespeare might have had some, well, experience with drugs. According to analyses by South African scientists, a handful of 400-year-old clay tobacco pipes excavated from the playwright's Stratford garden contained potential evidence of cannabis (although the study authors noted that "Unequivocal evidence for Cannabis has not been obtained"). Other pipes nearby contained remnants of cocaine and hallucinogens. (There's no evidence that any of these pipes belonged to Shakespeare, but it does indicate that "narcotics were accessible" at the time, the Telegraph reports.)

11. Shakespeare may have been a tax cheat.

In the late 16th century, English residents had to pay a tax on personal wealth called a lay subsidy. In 1597, Shakespeare was supposed to pay a tax of five shillings. The following year, he was supposed to pay a larger tax of 13 shillings and 4 pence. Documents show that the Bard never paid the piper. (His reasons are a matter of speculation, but it could have been a clerical error because he'd already moved away from the parish.)

12. Shakespeare was a grain hoarder.

According to the UK Parliament, between 1604 and 1914 over 5200 enclosure bills were enacted, which restricted the use of vital, publicly-used farmland. Ensuing riots in 1607, called the Midland Revolts, coincided with a period of devastating food shortages. It appears that Shakespeare responded to the situation by hoarding grain. According to the Los Angeles Times, he "purchased and stored grain, malt and barley for resale at inflated prices to his neighbors and local tradesmen."

13. The Globe Theatre burned down during a performance of one of Shakespeare's plays.

An 1647 engraving by Hollar of Shakespeare's Globe theatre.
An 1647 engraving by Hollar of Shakespeare's Globe Theatre.
Rischgitz, Getty Images

On June 29, 1613, a prop cannon caused a fire at the Globe Theatre during a performance of Henry VIII. Sparks landed on the thatched roof and flames quickly spread. "It kindled inwardly, and ran round like a train, consuming within less than an hour the whole house to the very ground," a witness Sir Henry Wotton claimed. According to The Telegraph, "the only reported injury was a man whose flaming breeches were eventually put out using a handy bottle of ale."

14. Shakespeare laid a curse upon his own grave.

When Shakespeare died in 1616, grave-robbing was extremely common. To ensure he'd rest through eternity peacefully, the Bard is believed to have penned this curse, which appears on his gravestone.

Good frend for Jesus sake forbeare,
To digg the dust Encloased heare:
Bleste be [the] man [that] spares these stones,
And curst be he [that] moves my bones.

Unfortunately, somebody apparently ignored the dead man's foreboding words. In 2016, researchers scanned the grave with ground-penetrating radar and discovered that grave robbers might have stolen Shakespeare's skull.

15. Shakespeare's legacy has killed a lot of trees.

And we're not just talking about the millions of copies of books that have been printed with Shakespeare's name on them. In 1762, an anonymous magazine writer claimed that a drunken Shakespeare, after an evening out on the town, once spent the night sleeping under a crabtree in Bidford-upon-Avon. The story is probably a legend, but that never stopped souvenir-hungry Shakespeare lovers from flocking to the famed crabtree and picking it to pieces. By 1824, the tree was nothing but a stump and had to be uprooted.

16. Shakespeare's legacy lived on thanks to two fellow actors.

The cover of a 1623 collection of Shakespeare's works.
Rischgitz, Getty Images

Shortly after Shakespeare died, two of his longtime friends and colleagues—John Heminge and Henry Condell—edited Shakespeare's plays and collected them in a 1623 book titled Mr. William Shakespeares Comedies, Histories, & Tragedies. That same book, now called the First Folio, helped preserve Shakespeare's work for the coming generations and is widely considered one of the most significant books printed in English.

10 Characters Left Out of the Movie Adaptations of Popular Books

© 1939 Warner Home Video. All rights reserved.
© 1939 Warner Home Video. All rights reserved.

While many film adaptations of popular books try to remain faithful to their source material, others take creative liberties by changing the setting, altering relationships, cutting out entire storylines, and eliminating key characters. Here are 10 characters who never made the leap from book to big-screen.

1. Tattypoo // The Wizard of Oz (1939)

In L. Frank Baum’s The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, the Good Witch of the South is named Glinda and is described as an unbelievably beautiful woman. Her counterpart, the Good Witch of the North, is an older woman who later writers dubbed "Locasta" or "Tattypoo." Glinda only appears at the end of the story and tells Dorothy how to return home, while Tattypoo greets the heroine once she arrives in the Land of Oz.

However, in the classic film adaptation, Glinda is the sole Good Witch, acting as a composite character of the two from the book. "Tattypoo" is never referred to at all throughout the film.

2. Madge Undersee // The Hunger Games (2012)

Although she was introduced early in The Hunger Games book series, Madge Undersee was not featured in any of the films. On the page, she was Katniss Everdeen’s best friend and the daughter of the mayor of District 12. Madge also gives Katniss her Mockingjay pin at the beginning of the trilogy.

In the film version, Katniss picks up the iconic pin and gives it to her sister, Primrose, instead. Prim then gives it back to Katniss once she volunteers as Tribute to take her sister’s place.

3. Tom Bombadil // The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)

Although he’s a beloved character from J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings book series, Peter Jackson didn’t include Tom Bombadil in The Fellowship of the Ring movie, despite his memorable appearance in the book. Believing Bombadil would simply slow down the action and that the scene didn’t move the main Sauron/Ring story forward, the director cut the character during the film's development. Poor ol' Tom was also left out of Ralph Bakshi's 1978 animated adaptation of The Lord of the Rings for the same reason.

4. Dr. Martin Guitierrez // Jurassic Park (1993)

Dr. Martin Guitierrez is the only character who appears in both Jurassic Park and The Lost World novels without appearing in any of the film adaptations. In the books, he’s an American biologist who lives in Costa Rica and identifies a small dinosaur that attacked a little girl as the lizard Basiliscus amoratus. But as he learns more about this creature, he begins to doubt his identification. Some of the opening chapters of the Jurassic Park novel were not used in the film, but were later repurposed for The Lost World: Jurassic Park sequel.

5. Captain Marvel // Captain America: Civil War (2016)


Marvel

Captain Marvel (Carol Danvers, then in the role of Ms. Marvel) is one of the most powerful members of the Avengers team. She played an integral role in the comic event Civil War during the mid-2000s, but she doesn’t appear at all in the Marvel Cinematic Universe version. In the comic book, the future Captain Marvel was on Team Iron Man and urged the superpowered to unmask and to obey the Superhero Registration Act. Captain Marvel didn’t appear in the movie because her character wasn’t introduced (or teased) in the Marvel film franchise yet. Now, of course, she's got her own standalone film and will be a key part of Avengers: Endgame and the next phase of the MCU (with Oscar-winner Brie Larson in the role).

In addition, Jessica Jones and Luke Cage were also a big part of Civil War, but didn’t appear in the film because they each had their own Netflix series at the time.

6. Carol Masters // Who Framed Roger Rabbit (1988)

Who Framed Roger Rabbit was actually based on a novel called Who Censored Roger Rabbit?, which followed a cartoon character who hired a hard-boiled private eye to investigate why his company isn’t going to feature him in a new comic strip. Disney acquired the film rights and changed almost everything about the story, such as lightening up the novel’s dark noir tone.

The Mouse House also ditched a number of characters from the original novel, including Carol Masters, Roger’s comic strip photographer. In the book, toons appear in print instead of animation, so photographers are teamed with cartoon characters to take pictures of them posing in comic strips.

7. Alexandra Finch // To Kill a Mockingbird (1962)

Alexandra Finch is Atticus's sister—and Scout and Jem’s aunt—in To Kill a Mockingbird. She was a stern woman who wanted Scout to act more like a lady instead of a tomboy. Her character was omitted from the movie version, as was Uncle Jack, who played a minor role in the book.

8. The Countess Rugen // The Princess Bride (1987)

Described as fashionable and beautiful, the Countess Rugen was left out of the film adaptation of The Princess Bride. She was the wife of Count Rugen, played by Christopher Guest in the movie, and appears at the beginning of the novel at Buttercup’s farm. The Countess was very attracted to Westley, which led to Buttercup realizing she was in love with him. A majority of the farm storyline was cut out of the film to streamline the running time and story flow.

9. Peeves // Harry Potter film series (2001-2011)

Although Peeves, a pesky prankster poltergeist, is a fan favorite from the Harry Potter book series, he never made an appearance in any of the film versions. “Peeves was always an issue,” Harry Potter screenwriter Steve Kloves told io9. “Chris Columbus was determined to put him in the first movie. I think there were even some technological problems with him initially, and [not] being satisfied with how he looked. He was always a bit tangential.”

In the year 2000, director Chris Columbus actually cast Rik Mayall to play the role in Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. He was on set for three weeks before he was eventually cut out of the movie due to problems on set and with the special effects.

“I played the part of Peeves in Harry Potter,” Rik Mayall explained. “I got sent off the set because every time I tried to do a bit of acting, all the lads who were playing the school kids kept getting the giggles, they kept corpsing [slang for breaking character and laughing], so they threw me off.”

10. Mr. and Mrs. Hurst // Pride and Prejudice (2005)

Mr. and Mrs. Hurst are Bingley's brother-in-law and sister, but the unaffectionate couple in Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice doesn’t make an appearance in the 2005 film adaptation from director Joe Wright. Mrs. Hurst is described as arrogant and snobbish, while Mr. Hurst is mostly known as an indolent man who is more interested in food and playing cards than his wife. While the Hursts are not in the 2005 film, they do appear in the six-episode BBC TV series from 1995, played by Rupert Vansittart and Lucy Robinson.

This story has been updated for 2019.

SECTIONS

arrow
LIVE SMARTER