• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral

Body clock out of sync

arthurfakaya

Well-Known Member
For many years (perhaps 20 or so) my body clock has been out of sync with the "normal" world. By that I mean that I function best in the evenings, so I stay up late. I am definitely not a morning person, preferring to get going around 9 or 10am if possible. For many years I found it difficult to go to bed before 2 or 3am, or get up before midday, but nowadays I've managed to go to bed by 12 or 1am.

I don't know the reason for this. I'm not on any medication that could interfere with my body clock. It seems to me that it's not so much a conscious choice, or something that has become a habit, but something wrong with me.

My logical mind hypothesises that my body clock may have adjusted to suit my extreme anxiety: staying up when others are asleep (and sleeping when others are awake) reduces my anxiety by avoiding unnecessary social interaction and interruption.

Is it AS-related, anxiety-related, a bad habit, or something else? :S
 
I am a morning person.

I guess it has a lot to do with employment as well. If you have a job you've got to get to at a particular time, then your sleeping habits fall in to suit that. I've been self-employed for longer than I care to remember, so perhaps this has permitted me to keep these weird hours. But I can't help thinking there's some other significance to it.:nah:
 
Human beings being visual creatures, went to bed at dark and arose with the sun, then fire came about and the ability to see at night, this meant that all hours could be utilized and opened up new possibilities ; ]

As far as I am aware, the concept of a body clock is in keeping with a set amount of sleep being considered normal to the body, so I conclude that you can have any set parameters you like to your sleeping and waking times, really, the only time it would be a bother is in going to another 'time zone' and there you would find yourself out of sync with yourself, literally.

I have kept regular daylight hours for periods of employment with minor infringements due to anxiety or the like, but usually I too am a night owl in that that is when there are less people about to make unnecessary noise and bother me for reasons I can’t fathom.
 
I'm totally a night person. And in general I wear shades through daytime... IF I go outside. And usually I'll wait till either it's dark or at least late to take care of my business.

Judging on it, my body clock is messed up big time, but that already started when I was in my teens. For somewhere between 8 to 10 years, I had a newspaperround, which I had to get up for in the middle of the night (4 am-ish), and thus I usually didn't go to bed until I was done with those. I'm not an early sleeper, never have. As a kid I could sleep through the day, and rarely through the night.

And to add with it, bright lights, especially sunlight gives me a headache... though I can't deal with bright indoor lighting either. All lights in my place are fluroescent colored ones... they work way better for me than a "regular" light. The only time I actually use a light (or eventually open my rollerblinds a bit) is when I paint, because colored light doesn't work well with color selection, lol.

So yeah, I'm somewhat physically limited to being a night person as well. I don't want to chew down meds for a headache to be "forced" into a regimen, which eventually force an anxiety/panic attack on me as well. Especially since I live in a rather quiet city, so I can chill out outside at night and not see a single person for hours. Going outside during the day I feel sometimes is way to busy for me. So I'll have to put on music and shades even just to not get stressed out.

I can go out during the day though... it's not that I avoid it at all costs. But I do try to limit it. Been outside, going places, bit of shopping and all twice this week, but that's why I'm not leaving the house for the next 3 days. That exposure was way enough for me.

It's also a reason why I failed in school for a part I guess. The entire notion of getting up early going to college sitting there through the day... it doesn't work for me. I'm quite sure that I college started at 9 pm, till 5 am... I'd be more than OK with it.

Another thing I found out that, probably cause of the sensory overload of daytime... IF I decide to go to bed early in the evening, I can sleep for 16 hours easily. If I sleep during the day I can manage with way less sleep. Usually I hit the bed at 8 or 9 in the morning and I'm up at 12 or 1 in the afternoon, and I feel energetic enough to do most of my things.

I talked about it with my therapist a few months back. She kinda told me, that IF I were to be up for getting employed, I'd probably need therapy and all to see if daytime schedules work for me, since my schedule is both "not normal" but an inherent part of me both since I was a child as well as the circumstances I learned to manage and deal with myself. It was no wonder my anxiety in general wasn't that prevalent... I kept myself clear from those pretty well, living mostly during the night, skipping a lot of school in my teens.
 
I totally relate to this King_Oni. I've never been able to find sunglasses strong enough for my eyes. I like the idea of coloured fluoro lights, I'll have to try it. I cannot cope with bright sunlight entering a window, especially if there's a lot of contrast between light and dark such as narrow strips of sunlight. I also find that if I sleep or take naps during the daytime, that I need much less, and am better refreshed, than with my night time sleep.
 
My body clock has been out of sync for many years now. I'm absolutely a nighttime person as I function much better. Even if I have forced myself to get up early in the morning, and got little sleep as a result, I can still manage to stay awake and function well into the night. I've been told to stay off caffeine and energy drinks to help me sleep better at night and get my body clock back to normal.

Has anyone heard of (or been diagnosed with) delayed sleep phase syndrome?
 
Has anyone heard of (or been diagnosed with) delayed sleep phase syndrome?

Heard of it and it does somewhat apply to me I guess. No diagnosis or anything tough. However... I'm quite sure that if I would need a diagnosis for it, I'd get it, lol. But it requires a lot more testing and all, and I don't see the benefit of getting that as well at the moment.

In general, I'd say caffeine and sugary drinks (or anything that provides energy) should be avoided...

To be honest, I can see how DSPS is an issue, especially in employment or education, yet I find it silly that we want a 24-hour economy, yet we like to cling to 9 to 5 jobs and college hours.

I know a fair share of people who qualify for general traits attributed with DSPS even. But with that they're aspies and in general can't deal with daytime and brightlights, so I don't know if it's a cause and effect thing going on here.
 
I agree with droopy. I have since the day I was born even my mother says that I have never been able to switch from wanting to be up all night and sleep during the sun light. Hence the nickname geeky vampire girl (plus I am allergic to the sun) which might have something to do with it. But am a total night person. I prefer to sleep during the day. Wake up and stay awake until 4-5am when the sun starts to come up and go bed. I wonder if it is a social interaction thing. Its hard to explain that I have to have a nightlight even though I prefer nighttime.
 
I find it silly that we want a 24-hour economy, yet we like to cling to 9 to 5 jobs and college hours.

And with people being able to purchase from the Internet 24/7, bricks and mortar retailers demand longer and longer trading hours to compete. But I don't understand how businesses can afford to pay staff to keep their doors open at times when customers are thin on the ground. I'm sure they'd be smarter to simply have an on-line alternative for those types of customers. I think we need to get back to more traditional opening hours so that families can all be together on weekends.
 
And with people being able to purchase from the Internet 24/7, bricks and mortar retailers demand longer and longer trading hours to compete. But I don't understand how businesses can afford to pay staff to keep their doors open at times when customers are thin on the ground. I'm sure they'd be smarter to simply have an on-line alternative for those types of customers. I think we need to get back to more traditional opening hours so that families can all be together on weekends.

In general I'd say that the concept of "family life" is pushed to the back a bit due to employment in general anyway. To my understanding employers sometimes already rather hire people without kids, marriage plans and pregnancy plans.

In a way I do wonder though, how brick and mortar can sustain. The few stores I see doing it decently is because they offer cheap prices, excellent service OR because they're part of a storechain that's being backed up by an online store even.

What I also think is silly, at least in The netherlands, is how we by law have opening and closing times of stores. That model in general made a few people I know who owned a store, run out of business because their product wasn't a really viable one to sell from 9 tot 5, but rather one you could cater to (alongside facilities to sell/show/demonstrate) if you would be allowed to run your store from say... 5 pm till midnight. This is especially true for hobby, gaming and comicbookstores. It's hobby products which people can only afford by holding jobs, which most of the time are at the same time stores are opened. And since it's no big corporation like a supermarket storechain, they can't really run long shifts in that way. I wouldn't say you have a busy day often, but let's face it... sitting on your butt waiting for someone to come in and have a chat every hour or so, for 16+ hours still is 16 hours of "waiting".

Short story of a store in my area;

We used to have a store that sold different cardgames, tabletop games, some practical magic tricks, anime related stuff... pretty much a collection of geeky stuff I guess. Besides that, it had the facilities for the games they sold. Big room in the back, tables set up for the games they stocked. It opened at noon, closed at 6pm. It was run by a man and his wife. Within 2 years the store got closed down over financial issues. Their location was ace (middle of the center of the city where all the other stores were; easy accesible by public transport).

However, they used to stay open longer on thursday and/or friday. Sometimes pulling an all nighter. Just lock the front door, keep the people playing the games in. I've ended up there going there in the late afternoon and going home the next day after 12+ hours of gaming with a few people. And that was common. Though, this is where the store pretty much got their sales going on. Not from that part the regularly opened. That's when people came in and browsed and had no clue what a game lik Magic: the gathering or Yu-Gi-Oh was all about. In the evening the hobbyist came in, they bought new cards, new models, and eventually ended up emptying the soda machine overnight.

The owner thought those nights were the best reason to own a store. It's fun, you're in touch with the customers (the community) and he gets sales going on. But suffice to say, these few nights a week where he can pull this off, because both he can't pull all-nighters each week, as well as customers, being college kids for a big part don't have money (as in lots of disposable income) nor time to hang out till late in the morning for gaming, made the store not really viable in the long run.

To me this store is a prime example of facilities that made up a good store, yet it was it's downfall since it catered to only a select group (in a relatively small area populationwise).

On the downside however, the store had to deal with stuff people bought, not at the store, but online. Since... online prices most of the time beat brick and mortar prices by a stretch. Let's face it... I'm all for supporting a local store, but if product X is about half the price online, I know where I"m buying. The entire concept of people having to pay rent for a brick and mortar store shouldn't be a problem to me as a customer. It's a simple fact I once learned when I was employed somewhere. That company gave us a course which revolved around MUDA (which basically is the cost any factor a product makes which doesn't contribute to me as a customer). So in that way; I can't be bothered to be held responsible for the stores rent.

And with online sales that's an even bigger problem. Because people will get the cheapest way to obtain product X. And worse; they will buy it AFTER stores are closed. The comfort of online shopping is way bigger than any reason you might have to go somewhere physical. And more and more people are finally jumping onto that.

The only reason I see this fixed is if the government would tax online sales more, which will result in a decline in online sales, which will make them run out of money, which will get people unemployed again... conclusion; we're screwed. To be honest I feel that online stores are the worst competition of brick and mortar stores in the sense that some stores, no matter what additional services they offer, they can never compete with online stores... ever. (that is; unless they're going to give out their inventory for free and give you money with it... which eventually is a bad business plan by itself).
 
In a way I do wonder though, how brick and mortar can sustain. The few stores I see doing it decently is because they offer cheap prices, excellent service OR because they're part of a storechain that's being backed up by an online store even.

Yeah, I think the whole concept of what a store is may need to change if they're to compete with online businesses. I'm sure governments would love to tax online sales more, as they're always looking for new ways to gather revenue e.g. carbon tax; GST; VAT ( I don't know what system you have in the Netherlands). But in the end, most B & M businesses will need to have an online presence. If they simply try to compete with online businesses on price they will only drive themselves into the ground.
 
Yeah, I think the whole concept of what a store is may need to change if they're to compete with online businesses. I'm sure governments would love to tax online sales more, as they're always looking for new ways to gather revenue e.g. carbon tax; GST; VAT ( I don't know what system you have in the Netherlands). But in the end, most B & M businesses will need to have an online presence. If they simply try to compete with online businesses on price they will only drive themselves into the ground.

That's why B&M stores (I didn't even consider using an abbreviation before, lol) need to increase services and facilities for people to visit the store. In my example that would be that a gaming store (who sells non-digital games) could offer room to play.

Yeah, we have VAT here, they're upping it to 21% in the near future (it's 19% now). And don't get me started on the added taxes and all they have on liquor, cigarettes and gasoline.

It's not neccesarily that I think they should add taxes to create more revenue for the government themselves, but rather as a way to make competition for physical stores more viable. Even big storechains can't compete with low prices on the internet... while those storechains in effect run the small business out of company already. Survival of the fittest in the digital age.
 
Yeah, we have VAT here, they're upping it to 21% in the near future (it's 19% now). And don't get me started on the added taxes and all they have on liquor, cigarettes and gasoline.

Wow, it's only 10% here! Which - I think - is why our government was so keen to introduce a carbon tax, despite making an election promise that they wouldn't.

It's not neccesarily that I think they should add taxes to create more revenue for the government themselves, but rather as a way to make competition for physical stores more viable. Even big storechains can't compete with low prices on the internet... while those storechains in effect run the small business out of company already. Survival of the fittest in the digital age.

Yes, I'm all for a level playing field, but then it becomes protectionism, similar to old tariff system, which instead of making B & M businesses become more inventive and competitive, makes online businesses less competitive with overseas online businesses.

I know a fellow Aussie who buys a lot of stuff on eBay, and not only can he source items from non-Australian businesses cheaper, but their shipping costs are a fraction of Australian businesses. I don't understand how that can be the case.

Perhaps the distance that goods are shipped should be taxed. That would also be compatible with the concept of carbon footprint which is popular with a lot of people nowadays, so it wouldn't raise as much objection from citizens.

However, in the end I'm sure that businesses will come up with their own solutions in their need to keep making profits. Your example of how a B & M business could develop a niche was a good one.

Having said all that, we may be drifting a little... :eek:fftopic: (very interesting, however)
 
Having said all that, we may be drifting a little... :eek:fftopic: (very interesting, however)

Your thread, your party ;) but we could eventually go into private messages to talk about it (unless people object cause they think it's a good read, lol)


Wow, it's only 10% here! Which - I think - is why our government was so keen to introduce a carbon tax, despite making an election promise that they wouldn't.

Oh... but the coming 21% isn't all that's added, with that come excise taxes. My parents sometimes go to Luxemburg (a really small country between Belgium and France), and my mom pays just under 2 bucks for a pack of tobacco. That same pack costs almost 7 bucks here, and thus there's only a fraction of (now) 19% added taxes added. But about 3.5 euro just in excise taxes on tobacco/cigarettes.

But it could just as well being that aussies pay a lot of income tax, which might even out how much money you can spend at the end of the month.

Yes, I'm all for a level playing field, but then it becomes protectionism, similar to old tariff system, which instead of making B & M businesses become more inventive and competitive, makes online businesses less competitive with overseas online businesses.

The issue I see is that a lot of B&M stores are limited by regulations and therefore can't be THAT creative. I've pitched ideas for such B&M stores, to where they told me "we can't do it... it's against the law"... while online stores are more... for lack of a better word "lawless" since it's international territory.


I know a fellow Aussie who buys a lot of stuff on eBay, and not only can he source items from non-Australian businesses cheaper, but their shipping costs are a fraction of Australian businesses. I don't understand how that can be the case.

Perhaps the distance that goods are shipped should be taxed. That would also be compatible with the concept of carbon footprint which is popular with a lot of people nowadays, so it wouldn't raise as much objection from citizens.

Oh... that's something I stumble upon myself. I buy a lot of hobby materials from the UK... that company is 10 to 15% under retail (before conversion rates even) AND offers free shipping for even small orders. It might be an idea to tax distance, but I can just see that at some point governments will be like "oh... hey, we can tax this more" and it'll get out of hand. I think there should be some control over it.
 
The issue I see is that a lot of B&M stores are limited by regulations and therefore can't be THAT creative. I've pitched ideas for such B&M stores, to where they told me "we can't do it... it's against the law"... while online stores are more... for lack of a better word "lawless" since it's international territory.

There perhaps need to be a little more online regulation to create a level playing field.

I buy a lot of hobby materials from the UK... that company is 10 to 15% under retail (before conversion rates even) AND offers free shipping for even small orders.

Do you think it's possible that some online businesses are discounting shipping below cost and minimising profits in order to encourage repeat business and online buying habits? Since online businesses have such low overheads they can afford to do things like this that are impossible for B&Ms.

It might be an idea to tax distance, but I can just see that at some point governments will be like "oh... hey, we can tax this more" and it'll get out of hand. I think there should be some control over it.

In a sense, taxing distance is a form of protectionism against foreign goods, so in that respect it bothers me. The additional cost of shipping for foreign goods should be a natural deterrent for consumers. But for some reason these goods are still cheaper. Should countries just give up attempting to manufacture things that can be produced cheaper overseas? This bothers me a bit cos it can't be good for local employment. But then on the other hand you're helping workers in developing nations when you buy overseas goods.

Consumers would prefer to get a bargain than support their local industries. I see goods getting cheaper as this plays out until, there are few local industries left. When this happens, overseas industries can safely raise their prices. However, there'll be fewer people with jobs to be able to afford to support the overseas industries. It's hard to say where it will end. The economic rationalism that began in the 1980s is like a train-wreck waiting to happen.
 

New Threads

Top Bottom