Is Sitting Really the New Smoking? Health of North American Workers Exposed to Prolonged Static Standing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Canada and the United States, many low-paid service providers are required to work long hours in a static standing posture. Women, young people, and low-paid workers are significantly more likely to report standing without moving at work. Prolonged sitting has received negative publicity, being associated with low caloric expenditure and, in some studies, with heart disease. Standing is often recommended, with static standing often conflated with walking. But prolonged standing has been associated with pain in the lower limbs and back, varicose veins, damage to arteries, heart disease, and problem pregnancies. Many US and Canadian jurisdictions such as the province of Quebec, Canada, include mandatory provision of seats in their occupational health regulations. Despite these regulations and subsequent jurisprudence, few cashiers, receptionists, or retail sales staff in these two countries can access seats at work. This article suggests some reasons for the lack of enforcement, describes efforts to transform this situation, and critically examines approaches to legislation, inspection, and intervention.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".