Live data from Hacker News

Eight hours a night isn’t enough, according to a leading sleep scientist

qz.com

71–80 of 163 posts

Re: Eight hours a night isn’t enough, according to a leading sleep scientist

#71
post #52

The article claims that catching up on sleep during the weekend doesn't work. This is most likely wrong information, as shown in this very recent study [0]. [0] https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/jsr.12712

The "very recent study" is just a recent study. It needs to be repeated, critiqued by other researchers and studies, and so on to be verified. Until then it's worth nothing.

The processor, on the other hand, summarized our research knowledge so far, in other words, tons of study results and a large body of knowledge.

Re: Eight hours a night isn’t enough, according to a leading sleep scientist

#72

Does anyone know much about the source, Daniel Gartenberg? The credentials in the article are not great for a "leading" scientist, but perhaps others know more: "assistant adjunct professor ... at Penn State" "one of the world’s most-talked-about sleep scientist" (emphasis added) - most talked about? "entrepreneur who has launched several cognitive-behavioral-therapy apps"

There's this place called Google, and it's literally a click on his name away:

http://danielgartenberg.com/resume/

http://danielgartenberg.com/publications/

http://danielgartenberg.com/patents/

>"assistant adjunct professor ... at Penn State" (...) "one of the world’s most-talked-about sleep scientist" (emphasis added) - most talked about? (...) "entrepreneur who has launched several cognitive-behavioral-therapy apps"

Basically: "someone we saw at TED and which has several videos of him attempting a career as a popularizer".

Re: Eight hours a night isn’t enough, according to a leading sleep scientist

#73

> Bose just released an earbud that you can sleep with, for example Wait, what? These are 249.95$. Why not just use simple earplugs? In Germany, we have Ohropax, made from wax, which sell for less than 3€ for a set of 12: http://www.ohropax.de/en.html

Because earplugs also tune out the sounds of an alarm clock. This isn't an issue if I never have to wake before 11 or noon. A 6am waking time means I continually run the risk of simply not hearing the alarm, even with good sleeping habits and not sleeping in on weekends.

Of course, most of the earbuds that say they are designed for sleep only hold a charge for an average of 6 hours, and at the most 8. These actually have 16 hours, but unfortunately it seems they won't stream music instead of their pre-set sounds.

Re: Eight hours a night isn’t enough, according to a leading sleep scientist

#74

> Bose just released an earbud that you can sleep with, for example Wait, what? These are 249.95$. Why not just use simple earplugs? In Germany, we have Ohropax, made from wax, which sell for less than 3€ for a set of 12: http://www.ohropax.de/en.html

Because earplugs also tune out the sounds of an alarm clock. This isn't an issue if I never have to wake before 11 or noon. A 6am waking time means I continually run the risk of simply not hearing the alarm, even with good sleeping habits and not sleeping in on weekends. Of course, most of the earbuds that say they are designed for sleep only hold a charge for an average of 6 hours, and at the most 8. These actually…

> Because earplugs also tune out the sounds of an alarm clock.

No criticism! I just find it funny in the context of this article. An alarm clock is the last thing one should use if natural and healthy length of sleep is a priority. I know that society creates the pressure, but just to stay in the context of the article...

Myself, I have not used an alarm clock in years and I would rather face huge pay cuts (which is exactly what is happening) or even worse rather than ever go back to forced wake-up, which I would now consider a direct violent attack on my person. Exceptions are fine, but no way I would let that be imposed on me as "normal part of life" ever again.

By the way, the brain, i.e. its zeitgebers are really good at waking you up.

I had to take a chelator (binds to heavy metals in the body and makes them excretable; details are in my recent comment history) regularly (keeping a low steady dose in blood instead of pulse-dosing). It meant waking up every 4 hours at the latest. I soon didn't need an alarm clock even for that any more! My brain would wake me up, and it would even take into account my overall health status. When according to my symptoms I had more metals circling I would wake up after maybe 1.5 or 2 hours, when I felt fine I would wake up after 3.8 hours or so, just before the scheduled 4 hour mark. I did that for years, it was completely automatic. Also, when I went off the chelator for a week I would instantly, starting that same following night, sleep through and not wake up! My brain (the zeitgebers) even took into account if I took the chelators and needed to wake up or not. Amazing thing, that brain.

After years of my not quite voluntary experiments I trust my brain a lot more when it comes to decisions such as the sleep schedule. It's far more fine-tuned and takes into account so much more, it's not a blunt regulation at all but highly sophisticated. In my experience, not just with sleep but there's more such "involuntary experiments" I got into through my heavy metal issue, the brain's regulatory circuits not connected to consciousness nevertheless actually do incorporate a lot of information most people might think are for our conscious self only, we just don't usually realize it (or trust it). My conclusion is that while the conscious part cannot (easily, directly) access information from the areas outside of consciousness, the opposite is not true and the rest of the brain uses all information. It's almost as if my brain always knows what I'm up to, spooky :-)

By the way, in my sleep experience much amplified by the health issues caused by heavy metal poisoning, the first 1-3 hours of sleep and the very last part - the one that many people are missing out on - stand out. When I was at the peak of my (mercury) problems I might be okay all day, but I would wake up between 2 and 3 am knowing with absolute certainty I had cancer, or something really bad. My conscious self knew that was nonsense, at least after a while of observing those patterns, but the feeling was there. Those first 2 or 3 hours also were the ones were my body had the most problems. Everything was fine and nice after that first part of sleep. The last part, hours 6-8 or even just 7-8, stand out because if you wake up just before that you feel fine and fresh, but if you wake up after that part you may actually feel a bit worse. However, and as I said I experienced the effects much amplified because of the specific issues I had at the time, without that last part of sleep something was missing, something.. essential. It was like - and that is not a literal description because I have no idea what my body did! - as if the body had thrown out a ton of "garbage" in that very last phase. So if you missed it you might feel better because that "garbage" wasn't in your blood, but long term it was better to not skip "garbage duty". That's only my "by feel" description!

That feeling is similar to what more people may know as what happens when yo have to sleep during the day, and instead of just superficially napping you actually fall into "real" sleep. When you wake up you may feel groggy for an hour. With my involuntarily gained experience I would now advise to go through with it, if your body does that it has a reason! I always felt worse short term but much better long term with that very last sleep phase.

I went through such phases over almost a decade of recovery, and the more I got better overall, with clinically proven (unexpected) successes, the less my body wanted any of that. I only had the desire to sleep during the day when I really needed it, it got less and less the farther I got overall. So I would not treat the body's desire to sleep at any time lightly, even during daytime. Most of your brain involved in regulating your body is not accessible to consciousness, but it has a lot more data and you should think twice if you really want to use the consciousness' ability to override some things. Instead, isn't it reasonable to hand over control to where the data is, i.e. to let such things like sleep pattern not be regulated by alarm clocks and social pressures but by your "inner self"? This reminds me, when I worked there (contractor) there was a "sleep room" in Oracle building 100 (Redwood Shores)...

Re: Eight hours a night isn’t enough, according to a leading sleep scientist

#75

If there is one thing in this world I'd like to see, it's the worker's right for an afternoon nap: I really would become highly anxious if deprived long-term of my siesta. I've been lucky in most of my environments to find somewhere to close my eyes and sleep for 10-15 minutes - I just need somewhere to lie down or recline and something to block the light: if I'm tired enough sound doesn't bother me. Some people tell…

Quite common in China, actually.

Not just China: in Vietnam it is completely normal to see people take a short nap at their desk after lunch.

Re: Eight hours a night isn’t enough, according to a leading sleep scientist

#76
post #3

Great article. Sleep is important. I liked that the article went out of its way to dispel several of the "but four hours is fine" myths. Two of my favorites: >some people are short sleepers: You can do a test to find out if you have genetic makeup that makes you a short sleeper. That’s rare, though, so by and large, people are not getting enough sleep. Blunt and effective. The outliers who really do fine with just a…

>Right. That’s like the fish and the fish bowl phenomenon: The fish doesn’t know that he’s in the fishbowl, nonetheless that he’s in water. Also, when you’re sleep deprived, research has shown that you’re really bad at being able to tell that you’re sleep deprived. 100% this. If you habitually get poor sleep it becomes your new normal and you forget what it's like to be well rested. I used to get between 3 and 6 hour…

If you habitually get poor sleep it becomes your new normal and you forget what it's like to be well rested.

And this can be deceptive if the whole effect happens more than once. Suppose you really need 8 hours of sleep but have habitually been getting only 6 for a long time, and that has become your baseline for reference. Then something happens and you're only getting 4 or 5 hours instead for a while, and you feel obviously worse. After some time that effect reverts and you're back to getting 6 hours, and relatively speaking, you feel great! See what a difference it makes when you get enough sleep in a night! But in reality, you still aren't...

Re: Eight hours a night isn’t enough, according to a leading sleep scientist

#77

> Bose just released an earbud that you can sleep with, for example Wait, what? These are 249.95$. Why not just use simple earplugs? In Germany, we have Ohropax, made from wax, which sell for less than 3€ for a set of 12: http://www.ohropax.de/en.html

Because earplugs also tune out the sounds of an alarm clock. This isn't an issue if I never have to wake before 11 or noon. A 6am waking time means I continually run the risk of simply not hearing the alarm, even with good sleeping habits and not sleeping in on weekends. Of course, most of the earbuds that say they are designed for sleep only hold a charge for an average of 6 hours, and at the most 8. These actually…

I've used Ohropax for the past couple of years, and they're absolutely amazing. None of the regular earplugs fit my ears, or are uncomfortable. Ohropax is just bees wax I think, and there's other brands that work just as well.

I also use an alarm if I have work to show up for, and I've never missed the alarm, the alarms on my phone are annoying as hell and never fail to wake me.

If you're so tired that you fall back asleep after your alarm, then you've messed up, and you probably were so tired that you could've fallen asleep without the earplugs anyway. I know I had many of those mornings during school/university.

Re: Eight hours a night isn’t enough, according to a leading sleep scientist

#78
>> Lightsabers?

>> Zeitgebers! It’s this weird German word. There’s a lot of cool words in sleep: like the photo receptors control the release of melatonin by sending signals to the suprachiasmatic nucleus, just like supercalifragilisticexpialidocious.

See kids? Science is this really cool thing with all those cool words. And stuff.

Science!

Re: Eight hours a night isn’t enough, according to a leading sleep scientist

#80

If there is one thing in this world I'd like to see, it's the worker's right for an afternoon nap: I really would become highly anxious if deprived long-term of my siesta. I've been lucky in most of my environments to find somewhere to close my eyes and sleep for 10-15 minutes - I just need somewhere to lie down or recline and something to block the light: if I'm tired enough sound doesn't bother me. Some people tell…

Since I've worked remotely (from home) for years I can't possibly conceive how most workers are forced into a chair through the entire day. I had the luxury to lay down pretty much any time I wanted. No wonder back problems are so common.

Now running a small office and I put a couch in a separate room specially for resting. Everyone seems to enjoy it for 10-15 minutes a day, nobody abuses it. Whoever thinks people can be productive in a chair 8+ hours a day is deluding himself in my opinion. At least take a decent break then.

Post reply on HN