The Standing Desk: Separating Evidence from Enthusiasm

The science is real: extended sedentary behaviour — sitting for six or more hours per day without meaningful movement breaks — is independently associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease, metabolic syndrome, and musculoskeletal disorders. This association holds even when controlling for exercise habits; the person who runs 5km each morning but sits still for eight hours at work still faces elevated risk relative to someone who moves regularly throughout the day.

From this evidence, the case for height-adjustable desks appears straightforward. But the pathway from "sitting is harmful" to "standing desks are beneficial" involves several inferential steps, each of which deserves scrutiny.

What the studies actually measure

Most sit-stand desk interventions measure self-reported sitting time, musculoskeletal discomfort, and short-term energy levels. The results are generally positive: sit-stand desk users report reduced sitting time (typically 45-60 minutes less per day in the first month), lower back discomfort, and increased afternoon energy. However, the evidence on actual cognitive performance outcomes — the thing most employers presumably care most about — is considerably thinner.