Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Weekend ‘catch-up sleep’ is a lie

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 257 posts

Re: Weekend ‘catch-up sleep’ is a lie

#31

Post by welly »

freddie_mercury wrote: post #12
ferros wrote: post #8

I can’t speak for scientific analysis, but I can say that if I have had a disrupted week of sleep, a weekend catch up ‘resets’ me and serves its intended purpose (for me)

To push back some, how do you see your statement as different from post-modernist ("subjectivism is all that matters") or anti-intellectualist ("I don't care what science has to say") arguments in other subjects?

Surely in this example, it doesn't matter what science concludes. If the OP feels better after a weekend of sleep, then simply they feel better? Science can't demand that they're either lying or disillusioned. I say this as someone who has a strong belief in science.

Re: Weekend ‘catch-up sleep’ is a lie

#32

Post by baddox »

bgentry wrote: post #9
ferros wrote: post #8

I can’t speak for scientific analysis, but I can say that if I have had a disrupted week of sleep, a weekend catch up ‘resets’ me and serves its intended purpose (for me)

While it may feel this way, the science strongly indicates this is not the case. The study in the linked article is one proof point. Many others are summarized in Matthew Walker’s “Why We Sleep”.

Sure, if there are some long-term negative effects, then I’d like to see them. But this article doesn’t claim or show that. So if that commenter feels like the weekend catchup works, then I would say that it does in fact work, by definition.

Re: Weekend ‘catch-up sleep’ is a lie

#33

Post by wilg »

kuu wrote: post #15

I think the research behind this news is quite weak: only 9 days and not that many participants (18 men and 18 women).

"9 days" really undersells that this is a study about the effect of weekends on sleep and they only tested one weekend.

Re: Weekend ‘catch-up sleep’ is a lie

#34

Post by baddox »

freddie_mercury wrote: post #13
dasanman wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if it "feels that way", doesnt that have something to say as well?

In the absence of any actual evidence? Generally we take self-reported feelings as not especially strong evidence. Maybe all it says is they grew up thinking that "weekend sleeping helped catch-up" and now they only remember the confirming evidence and discard the disconfirming evidence to support their confirmation bias?

Wait, what? Why would self-reported feelings not be taken as strong evidence? It seems to me like self-reported feelings are great evidence, and need particularly strong evidence (e.g. evidence of long-term damage that isn’t felt in the short term, like for smoking cigarettes) to contradict.

Re: Weekend ‘catch-up sleep’ is a lie

#35

Post by baddox »

freddie_mercury wrote: post #12
ferros wrote: post #8

I can’t speak for scientific analysis, but I can say that if I have had a disrupted week of sleep, a weekend catch up ‘resets’ me and serves its intended purpose (for me)

To push back some, how do you see your statement as different from post-modernist ("subjectivism is all that matters") or anti-intellectualist ("I don't care what science has to say") arguments in other subjects?

Seems to me like subjectivism is fine when you’re only talking about one subject: yourself.

Re: Weekend ‘catch-up sleep’ is a lie

#36

Post by gdfasfklshg4 »

krageon wrote: post #24
gdfasfklshg4 wrote: post #2

Is this model actually GDPR compliant? EDIT Either way I definitely don't want to trigger another conversation on the ethics of script/tracking/ad-blocking. I am wondering if this subscribe-with-your-data model is legally compliant with the GDPR. This is not a moral question (or at least I am not interested in a moral answer).

No, it is not legally compliant. It maybe has lost a little bit of value to actually discuss this as it's been done so, so much. If you are very interested in what is and what is not compliant, you can read the resources published by the EU on the GDPR. They are very legible and relatively easy to understand.

Thank you for answering. I assume you are a subject matter expert qualified to interpret the legal documents?

I have actually read some of the resources AND been there whilst customers received advice from lawyers. From what I had understood this model looked dubious.

I have not seen a discussion of this that didn't just end up in talking about morals. Even excluding this I really only wanted input from experts - answers from actual lawyers about GDPR have surprised me compared to what developers had assumed about it...

NB If I had a customer that proposed this model I would still insist that they consulted with their own legal advice before proceeding!

Re: Weekend ‘catch-up sleep’ is a lie

#37

Post by benj111 »

For UK viewers, there was an episode of Twinstitute on iplayer that looked at sleep banking v power naps. The results of that seemed to suggest that sleep banking worked better than power naps, so I'm a bit confused why that works, but catch-up sleep doesn't?!

Re: Weekend ‘catch-up sleep’ is a lie

#39

Post by sarbaz »

welly wrote: post #31
freddie_mercury wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To push back some, how do you see your statement as different from post-modernist ("subjectivism is all that matters") or anti-intellectualist ("I don't care what science has to say") arguments in other subjects?

Surely in this example, it doesn't matter what science concludes. If the OP feels better after a weekend of sleep, then simply they feel better? Science can't demand that they're either lying or disillusioned. I say this as someone who has a strong belief in science.

This person's feelings are evidence that good science should be able to explain. Dismissing them just because they don't line up with our theory is precisely what anti-intellectualism is all about.

Re: Weekend ‘catch-up sleep’ is a lie

#40

Post by yoz-y »

wilg wrote: post #33
kuu wrote: post #15

I think the research behind this news is quite weak: only 9 days and not that many participants (18 men and 18 women).

"9 days" really undersells that this is a study about the effect of weekends on sleep and they only tested one weekend.

Yeah, I haven’t read the article and after seeing this there is really no point. If one data point is what it gets to publish a study...
Post reply on HN