56 comments

[ 2.4 ms ] story [ 108 ms ] thread
Why not just put ice in a bath tub?
Then you couldn't get the WSJ to write a puff piece about how challenging your life is
You can and people do but if you keep going you may want it to be colder and then ice won't be enough (or you need a very large ice maker.
Seems like the interesting part of this apparatus then is just the heat pump to cool the water. Would be nice to have that with an intake and outlet hose for arbitrary tubs
That's a lot of work to fill the tub and load the ice. Cold shower is easy and good enough.
(comment deleted)
That is how it started. People that were really into this would get an ice machine like at a hotel to throw ice in the tub.

It is just another fitness gimmick with limited use that most people will get and never use. Most people I know with hottubs barely use them once the novelty wears off let alone cold.

Most people's diet and sleep is not dialed in enough to worry about an ice bath.

Cold showers aren’t sufficient?
I'm not supporting this nonsense by any means, but water coming out of the cold side isn't always cold enough (e.g. in Austin in the summer it feels like the cold water is 70+ degrees).
Do people actually take cold showers? I would pass out. I've almost passed out from accidentally turning the water on cold just for a second lol
I do, yes, at least 3-4 times a week, depending on ym training schedule.

I also regularly fill a tub with cold tap water and add ice to soak my lower body after long runs or rucks (long here is north of 2.5-3 hours).

I worked up to it gradually over a period of months, maybe years, when I first got into marathon training.

A tub. They put a tub in their yard. My uncle uses a rain barrel, which works fine. But he's not the CEO of a charity organization.
But does it have customized zebrawood?
The author was careful to note that the water is "circulating at 1,400 gallons a minute". I suppose that if you used still water instead, your body heat might warm up the water next to your skin a tiny bit...but I have a hard time believing that it would make any difference.
If only human limbs could move, thereby stirring the water...
Mere mortals have no chance of achieving 1,400 gallons per minute, which everyone knows is the critical speed for ice baths. /s
It does. Even waving your arms in a still cold pool will feel much colder than staying still.
So it’s the tech bro equivalent of jumping into a mountain stream to cool off
That’s a pretty good idea, reminds me of my mom filling up a wheelbarrow with water as a crappy pool for me lol
What has people's experience with cold showers/ice baths been? Is it as positive as all the hype advertises?
Yes I found it helped train/improve my stress response along with wym hoff breathing. I found it makes me less likely to overreact and it apparently improves focus/attention.

The nordic countries have been doing polar plunges for a long time for similar reasons. They say it helps with depression too.

Chris Hemsworth, the actor who plays Thor did a mini series on National Geographic and one episode feature it.

Yeah it's great. Wakes you up, dopamine boost. Good immune system boost. Do the breathing exercises too but never near water or while driving.
Anecdotal but contrast therapy (using my pool as a cold plunge and my hot tub as the heated portion), alleviates the soreness of my muscles during my recovery days
This was covered in a recent Plain English podcast: https://www.theringer.com/2023/4/4/23668556/myth-busting-wel...

The evidence for the health benefits is extremely weak. It can help accelerate “recovery” from exercise, but at a cost of diminishing the benefits of the exercise in the first place. Your body gets sore when you workout for a reason. The only reason you’d want to stop that process is you’re in a multi day competition, which you’re not.

Most folks on HN are going to go straight to the physiological benefits, and zip past the psychological ones.

I'm a former Green Beret and combat diver. You know what cold plunges are good for? Practicing will power, and bravery.

It sucks. It's the worst thing ever. But it won't kill you. So you do it for the shock and the pain and the fact that you can safely push yourself to do something you and your body realllllly hates, and you can do it without becoming David Goggins or Jocko or whatever.

Just run a cold bath, dump some ice in, and practice being brave.

Do your balls practically go up into your body at that temperature? I feel like an ice bath would just make them zoom up right inside you.
Too heavy, solid brass.
The benefits I keep hearing about in podcasts are physiological and building mental resilience, which does make a lot of sense on paper. I was curious if average HNers have had positive results putting it in practice.
Yes - making yourself do something unpleasant is a valuable thing to acclimatize to.
hard enough just running a cold water shower and then putting your back under it.
If you want to do something that requires bravery and is unpleasant, I'd like to suggest giving blood instead? You have to get stabbed at least twice (once to test your red blood count, the other to actually stick the needle in) and then sit still with a needle in you until a bag of your blood fills. It's overall pretty unpleasant. But also, you save lives, unlike jumping into a cold pool.
I do a flash of cold water at the end of a hot shower for about a minute. It seems to kickstart my metabolism and wakes me up like a coffee.
it's just micro optimization. i shower cold every morning. it provides a little shock that get's me awake. but i have never found that this provides any noticeable health benefit. to me this obsession seems rather like an ersatz religion for people whose life is physically so comfortable that they seek ways to experience discomfort.

louis ck complained about it quite eloquently on joe rogan.

Getting rich seemed so much more worth the effort when the upper class lifestyle was lavish and decadent. Now that we have this self righteous, abstemious class of tech overlords it really cured me of envy.

Zuckerberg spends his free time trying to outrun his demons with insane workouts posted on social media, but I can be broke and pretty much do that.

That is because lavish-ness and decadence is cheap.

Being disciplined is a step above, and spending time working on yourself rather than working for someone else is even more upper class.

Also, there is still expensive real estate (more than Austin for sure), private jets, boats, servants, etc if you want to strive for “lavishness and decadence”.

It helps that the “upper class” is mostly faux, and driven by fashion more than anything innate.

Zuckerberg is not upper class in the classical sense. He doesn’t have the resources or molding to truly be able to fuck off, live in the woods in a centuries-old mansion, rolling in debauchery and in complete disassociation from humanity.

I.e. if you know about them, they’re not upper class, but very high upper middle class (they still “work” and participate in vulgar activities like business, rather than utterly “worthless” activities that are driven by innate desire, not glorified peer pressure).

Mitt Romney is upper middle class. The Bushes are upper middle class. The Sacklers, the Clintons, the Kochs, Buffett, Gates, the Siemens, the Onassis’, the Waltons — all relatively new players, and haven’t yet been aged by centuries of absolute apathy and detachment. Ellison is definitely getting there.

I think the biggest difference between him and the rest are upbringing. Ellison was not raised upper middle class, and had little regard for his family and circle. He did not have countless other upper middle class people around him in his formative years to mold his soul into conforming with upper middle class sensibilities (make money, gain influence, be interesting, important, play the image game, etc.). And now he’s fucked off to Lanai.

The only thing that man values is himself and his capricious desires — that is what the upper class is. There is no internal need within him to conform to external pressures. The man is a cunt.

What about the rest of the list? They grew up in relative affluence, and the upper middle class sensibilities have been imprinted onto them. To use a pop-culture example, none of them are Logan Roys. They care how people view them — especially their intimates. They might feign thoughtless excellence, but deep down they’re driven by the external forces that molded them.

If there’s any amusing note it’s that the true upper class has more in common with the lower class than it does with the middle. The middle lives on lies and self-deceptions, while the upper and lower only care about themselves and their authentic desires.

For example, compare Roedean to Philips Exeter. The people are utterly different — and the wealth and money is but a surface measure.

Isn’t your distinction just a choice though? You’re saying, if I am reading correctly, that the upper class is restricted to those who don’t work / care for external validation and instead choose to live a life of leisure.
I'd say there's nuance to be had here. They don't just choose leisure, they, through generational practice and upbringing, can do so without completely becoming undone in the process.

See: what happens to most people who win the lottery, not having been first acclimated to that sort of wealth and leisure.

Look at the sorts of things the Victorian aristocracy indulged in. It's not that they couldn't instead have been diving face first into mountains of cocaine and very top shelf booze. They just also had the ability to pace themselves and find forms of leisure that weren't debaucherous, but nor were they work.

New money typically goes one way or the other -- it's that middle path that the old upper class manages to find a way to travel.

I appreciate your take on all this. It seems well reasoned from direct experience, though I may be wrong. Thanks for sharing.
I basically agree, with defining upper class as able to live on interest on inherited income and not having to work. The super rich tech founders don’t neatly fit into this class system because they have sometimes even more money than the old rich, but worked and still work and don’t have the upper class cultural attitudes.
I think the one big perk I would like from being very rich is being able to fly by private jet.

Being able to drive up the aircraft right before takeoff without having to worry about tickets and security screenings and delays and gate changes would make travel so much nicer.

Careful, or you'll get a social media account that documents your plane's location, or have people without private planes shame you about your contribution to global warming. But if you have that kind of money, you can just pay someone to then create some PR campaign that shows you doing "good" for other causes to make people not care about the other things
> But if you have that kind of money

Or if you have that kind of money, you could simply not care about what other people think.

Or, you can have that much money, buy the platform the person tracking your plane uses, then go after that account
Honestly I'd just want to fly the jet myself. After flying a few business jets on MSFS it's really a blast.
So what you really want is for the TSA to do its actual job instead of maximizing security theater.... The only real reason you can't arrive at the airport and be in the air a half hour later is because the things that aren't that effective at security but look effective waste a lot of time.
What's might he do instead? He could make lots of posts about the expensive getaways he goes on, the lavish meals he eats, the high end private school he sends his kids to. I don't doubt that he does all that stuff. But if he made a point of posting about it, people would hate him even more than they already do. The only parts of his life he advertises publicly are the ones that don't make him look like a rich asshole. Going off that, you might well think all he does is try to seem like a good person all the time. Which is largely the goal.
This article is pure bait and I've totally fallen for it.
I am curious. Doesn't a cold shower really serve the purpose? Is it really have to be a plunge? What's the sciebtific reason?
Depends on the temperature of the tap water, which varies a lot by place and season.
My understanding is that a cold shower gives some of the benefits but due to incomplete coverage it simply isn’t as cold or effective. But still, if it’s all you’ve got it’s worthwhile.
I live in Northern Europe, and next to our community is a large lake that people like to swim in at all times of year. During the middle of summer the water can get up to maybe 25c, and during winter there is a 10cm+ layer of ice and it's full of fishermen. At that time people cut a hole in the ice where you can take a plunge or go for a quick swim.

I haven't tried it myself but people who do it regularly say that if you do it every day - say starting in the summer and continuing until winter - you don't notice the temperature dropping so much.

We also have the same rumours about health benefits, but I'm not sure what the science says. I'd guess if there are any, it's more from being somewhat active (locals usually walk to the lake) than the temperature. We also like to roll in the snow after sauna. Our life expectancy isn't any better than warmer climates.