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

The Economic Consequences of Increasing Sleep Among the Urban Poor

academic.oup.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 207 posts

Re: The Economic Consequences of Increasing Sleep Among the Urban Poor

#21

Post by sdenton4 »

throwawaysleep wrote: post #10
A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good grief. It almost makes me question what information is missing from the abstract since I don't know how one can consistently run on fumes without it affecting cognition, productivity or decision making.

Throwaway as I don't want to admit that I feel permanently cognitively impaired. Anecdotal, but I spent years not sleeping through university and sleeping in airports or on the train. Studied engineering and did a lot of hackathons and events and stuff. I figured out then that I didn't need full cognition or excellent decision making. I needed more hours cranking out work. I spent years sleeping just a few hours and…

Well, humans are also extremely error prone. Spell check, IDE helpers, delinters, automated testing, etc, all help check that things are correct automatically, which saves huge amounts of pain.

I personally would always put more faith in someone who carefully checks their work than someone who thinks they don't need to. The second person is making mistakes and just doesn't realize it.

Re: The Economic Consequences of Increasing Sleep Among the Urban Poor

#22

Post by gnopgnip »

schappim wrote: post #3

Those in the study were low-income adults in Chennai, India who sleep only 5.5 hours per night on average despite spending 8 hours in bed. The key takeaway was: > increased nighttime sleep had no detectable effects on cognition, productivity, decision-making, or well-being, and led to small decreases in labor supply. I find the result surprising. When I get under 6 hours I see a clear drop off in performance.

What does spending 8 hours in bed but only sleeping for 5.5 hours mean specifically, and how is this measured?

What is the expected amount of sleep for a healthy person that spends 8 hours in bed?

Re: The Economic Consequences of Increasing Sleep Among the Urban Poor

#23

Post by dijit »

tartoran wrote: post #11
throwawaysleep wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Throwaway as I don't want to admit that I feel permanently cognitively impaired. Anecdotal, but I spent years not sleeping through university and sleeping in airports or on the train. Studied engineering and did a lot of hackathons and events and stuff. I figured out then that I didn't need full cognition or excellent decision making. I needed more hours cranking out work. I spent years sleeping just a few hours and…

But why are you doing this to yourself? The impact of not getting minimum sleep will have all sorts of bad effects on your body, not just cognition. Try to find a balance and what you consider as permanent cognitive impairment may revert, but even if it doesn’t you don’t want to make it worse

The parent is not continuing the practice, and has not for 18 months.

It is noted in many sleep science studies that you cannot “recoup” lost sleep so this is plausible.

Re: The Economic Consequences of Increasing Sleep Among the Urban Poor

#24

Post by buu700 »

Scoundreller wrote: post #8
schappim wrote: post #3

Those in the study were low-income adults in Chennai, India who sleep only 5.5 hours per night on average despite spending 8 hours in bed. The key takeaway was: > increased nighttime sleep had no detectable effects on cognition, productivity, decision-making, or well-being, and led to small decreases in labor supply. I find the result surprising. When I get under 6 hours I see a clear drop off in performance.

The sentence before that is: "Contrary to expert predictions and a large body of sleep research". Was this study better science that disproved the existing body? Or poorer science? Or is there something problematic about sleep in Chennai? Or special about the people in Chennai? The full paper states: > An enormous body of research, mostly conducted in sleep labs in rich countries, documents severe negative impacts of…

It could also be a function of their jobs, which weren't specified in the abstract.

While insufficient sleep might cause physical discomfort and contribute to long-term health problems, if their job weren't highly physically or mentally demanding, I suspect that most people could get through the day with negligible detriment to their short-term economic output after having a cup of coffee.

Re: The Economic Consequences of Increasing Sleep Among the Urban Poor

#25

Post by hooande »

throwawaysleep wrote: post #10
A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good grief. It almost makes me question what information is missing from the abstract since I don't know how one can consistently run on fumes without it affecting cognition, productivity or decision making.

Throwaway as I don't want to admit that I feel permanently cognitively impaired. Anecdotal, but I spent years not sleeping through university and sleeping in airports or on the train. Studied engineering and did a lot of hackathons and events and stuff. I figured out then that I didn't need full cognition or excellent decision making. I needed more hours cranking out work. I spent years sleeping just a few hours and…

There's little evidence that this is sleep related. There are a lot of people who aren't detail oriented and rely on spell check, for a very wide variety of reasons.

If you feel this has impacted your life to the point where you need to hide your identity, maybe you should try therapy or a medical examination. Or just get more sleep

Re: The Economic Consequences of Increasing Sleep Among the Urban Poor

#26

Post by eurasiantiger »

buu700 wrote: post #24
Scoundreller wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The sentence before that is: "Contrary to expert predictions and a large body of sleep research". Was this study better science that disproved the existing body? Or poorer science? Or is there something problematic about sleep in Chennai? Or special about the people in Chennai? The full paper states: > An enormous body of research, mostly conducted in sleep labs in rich countries, documents severe negative impacts of…

It could also be a function of their jobs, which weren't specified in the abstract. While insufficient sleep might cause physical discomfort and contribute to long-term health problems, if their job weren't highly physically or mentally demanding, I suspect that most people could get through the day with negligible detriment to their short-term economic output after having a cup of coffee.

The same can be said for other drugs that raise monoamine neurotransmitter levels, such as amphetamines.

Re: The Economic Consequences of Increasing Sleep Among the Urban Poor

#27

Post by astrange »

alfiedotwtf wrote: post #15
llamataboot wrote: post #2

Just imagine what we'll do to the labor supply if we can figure out a way to keep the poors working 24/7 and have them not suffer any ill effects from it!

Britain’s Factory Laws were created to prevent 8 year olds from working 16 hours per day with only a single break, but weren’t really enforced until automation made child labour obsolete. If we had the technology to force people to work 24/7 but proved to it was detrimental to people’s health, somehow I know deep down that society would just bite the bullet and people would burn the midnight oil for a few more dollar…

It probably wouldn't be a good idea because demand would collapse, and there's no work without customers.

This is actually why economics is called the "dismal science", it's not because everyone hates economists, a slave-owner gave it that name because he was mad economists didn't like slavery.

Re: The Economic Consequences of Increasing Sleep Among the Urban Poor

#28

Post by Guthur »

llamataboot wrote: post #2

Just imagine what we'll do to the labor supply if we can figure out a way to keep the poors working 24/7 and have them not suffer any ill effects from it!

This sort of inflammatory mind set is not helpful, and in this case the abstract describes they are actually getting adequate time in bed, just having interrupted sleep.

The causes of the interruptions could be manifold but i would hazard a guess that the primary cause would be interruption from young children in small domiciles and lack of could social responsibility within the neighbourhood.

I've experienced both having a young family and currently living in relatively low social economic neighbourhood. Just last night I was disrupted by someone deciding to burn something rather noxious at 0100 in the morning.

Re: The Economic Consequences of Increasing Sleep Among the Urban Poor

#29

Post by alfiedotwtf »

astrange wrote: post #27
alfiedotwtf wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Britain’s Factory Laws were created to prevent 8 year olds from working 16 hours per day with only a single break, but weren’t really enforced until automation made child labour obsolete. If we had the technology to force people to work 24/7 but proved to it was detrimental to people’s health, somehow I know deep down that society would just bite the bullet and people would burn the midnight oil for a few more dollar…

It probably wouldn't be a good idea because demand would collapse, and there's no work without customers. This is actually why economics is called the "dismal science", it's not because everyone hates economists, a slave-owner gave it that name because he was mad economists didn't like slavery.

Weird... maybe he was also mad at economists because they proved again and again that slavery was more expensive than paying people a wage!

Re: The Economic Consequences of Increasing Sleep Among the Urban Poor

#30

Post by lifeisstillgood »

eurasiantiger wrote: post #26
buu700 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It could also be a function of their jobs, which weren't specified in the abstract. While insufficient sleep might cause physical discomfort and contribute to long-term health problems, if their job weren't highly physically or mentally demanding, I suspect that most people could get through the day with negligible detriment to their short-term economic output after having a cup of coffee.

The same can be said for other drugs that raise monoamine neurotransmitter levels, such as amphetamines.

I doubt that a study 'Economic Benefits of Meth use on the Urban Poor' would be looked upon so well by the Ethics Board.
Post reply on HN