When I hear people with anti-science attitudes I think back to things like this where an attempt to get a catchy headline published, misleadingly states something that obviously isn't true. So is it a wonder that people are dismissive of the results of other scientific research like climate change research?<p>Overwork *CONTRIBUTES* to the death of more than 745k per year. It did not solely and directly cause those deaths. How would you even know if it did? But the claim of the title is that overwork killed them as if overwork popped out behind them with a gun and shot them. It's just obviously a nonsense claim. And once you put it this way, tons of things CONTRIBUTE to excessive deaths. Poor diet, exposure to many everyday chemicals, living in a city(air pollution).<p>In fact, what are the odds that overwork doesn't correlate with living in a higher air pollution environment? Anyway, the claim in the title is nonsense.
If anything this number is too conservative, since the study looks at just stroke and heart disease. When you start getting into mental health and other less obvious health conditions resulting from overwork, the results are sure to be devastating.
I don't understand the lamentation over a culture of overwork. What other method is there to get ahead as an individual other than out-competing your peers? My understanding of life as a young professional in China or Korea is that the competition is almost unbelievable to someone from North America.
It’s only work if you don’t like it. I worked far less last year on my military deployment but it was really stressful work that raised my blood pressure 40 points and resulted in serious weight gain.<p>Now that I am currently working from home where I can pet my cat, tend my garden, watch Netflix, and still work as much as I want I am happy as a clam.
Not sure how to interpret this. In the 1800's, a 12-hour shift 6 days a week was normal. Life expectancy wasn't much different (except child mortality of course).<p>Have to think its our attitude toward work that is part of the problem? Now, I don't endorse 12-hour days. But it seems that 60-hour weeks aren't the whole story, if 72-hour weeks used to be the norm.
I used to work at a startup, but I left 3 months ago. I just heard that yesterday my old boss had to be taken away in an ambulance, collapsing from complications caused by stress.
I work so much that I do not know what to do with my freetime, and become really bored. So I just go back to work. It's a vicious cycle. It's brutal.
This is what killed my dad though it was not the sole cause: divorce (his fault, but still) which led to depression which caused him to devote all free time into his work. Being a QA manager all the stress of timelines fell on him and it worked him to death.
How do they determine this number, or that someone died of overwork? Can someone summarize the methodology in layman's terms? I tried reading the paper but it is (understandably) technical.
This study is very flawed. They claim there is a direct link, but they didn't control for alcohol and tobacco consumption. If you look at a map of tobacco consumption vs. their map of deaths by overwork, they're very similar.<p>Lower income folks work more hours and are more likely to self-medicate. It isn't the additional hours that kill them, necessarily.
I wonder how many were overworked doctors treating overworked patients. I could imagine a chain reaction occurring where you could wipe out several thousand doctors and nurses merely by showing up at the ER. (Not to mention all the overworked health insurance adjusters who’d necessarily be involved.)
It's sad, but while this is far from the first article on the damage that comes from overwork, the people who have the power to stop it don't seem to care enough to do so.
Work was among the Pandora's box contents. I solve others' problems all day long and I am left with my personal problems after a day at the office.
I work with pricing life insurance in a european country. This study of course piqued interest, because I also see a negative correlation between socio-economic class (e.g. wage) and death probability. I don’t think working a lot is enough for a higher probability of death, you somehow might need to be a lower socio-economic class, as well. I’m not sure if the study controls for this.
> Conclusions — WHO and ILO estimate exposure to long working hours (≥55 hours/week) is common and causes large attributable burdens of ischemic heart disease and stroke.<p>Surely this is the stress these people feel rather than the number of hours? If you work 80 hours per week with 0 stress or pressure, does it still apply? If so, what mechanism causes it?
Can someone explain why overwork kills people? I'm curious, maybe there's a way to work 70 hour weeks without harming your health? (I.e possibly overwork is correlated with lack of sleep / exercise, which are the real dangers, not the work itself).
Another discussion of this study (different article) 12 days ago:<p><a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27180545" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27180545</a> (362 points/174 comments)
I love my job and it's not really stressful. I just have goals and am ambitious. Is working this much bad for me? I go to the gym three times weekly and still manage to socialize quite enough for me.
The thing about this is that people who stop working also die earlier.<p><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/may/02/early-earlier-retirement-retire-death-risk-data-research-jobs" rel="nofollow">https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/may/02/early-e...</a><p>Also, has anyone else felt the narrative pushing articles lately?