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

New connections between circadian rhythm and muscle repair

feinberg.northwestern.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 25 posts

Re: New connections between circadian rhythm and muscle repair

#11

Post by elevaet »

miguelrochefort wrote: post #9
paavoova wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interestingly the article says: Peek and her team found that muscle repair after injury was greater when mice were active or awake compared to when they were inactive or resting. It seems sleep alone isn't the most important factor. Otherwise more sleep would linearly be beneficial to health and recovery, but, from a courtesy look into it, it appears sleep above 9 hours is inversely correlated with negative health.

> sleep above 9 hours is inversely correlated with negative health So positively correlated with positive health?

That must have been a typo. From what I have read, sleep for more than 9hr is negatively correlated with good health:

https://www.webmd.com/sleep-disorders/physical-side-effects-...

Re: New connections between circadian rhythm and muscle repair

#12

Post by thenerdhead »

paavoova wrote: post #8
thenerdhead wrote: post #4

One of the major premises in the book "Why We Sleep" by Matthew Walker is precisely this phenomenon. We know that sleep helps to repair and restore organ systems, and it can also boost memory. This is exciting to see more connections as evidence supporting sleep as one of the most important things we do.

Interestingly the article says: Peek and her team found that muscle repair after injury was greater when mice were active or awake compared to when they were inactive or resting. It seems sleep alone isn't the most important factor. Otherwise more sleep would linearly be beneficial to health and recovery, but, from a courtesy look into it, it appears sleep above 9 hours is inversely correlated with negative health.

I suppose another way to phrase it is sleeping and being awake on your body's natural circadian rhythm is ideal.

The BMAL1 studies are fascinating in themselves.

https://academic.oup.com/nsr/article/6/1/87/5290357

Re: New connections between circadian rhythm and muscle repair

#14

Post by wpietri »

thenerdhead wrote: post #6
argella wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://guzey.com/books/why-we-sleep/

I’ve read this years prior. I don’t see how it’s relevant to this article. But if a whole book’s premise is invalid because of some bored dude wrote an article, then so be it.

When somebody cites a source, it's always relevant to point out that it's a bad source.

I also found useful this discussion of the topic: https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2020/03/24/why-we-sle...

Re: New connections between circadian rhythm and muscle repair

#15

Post by Nick87633 »

thenerdhead wrote: post #12
paavoova wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interestingly the article says: Peek and her team found that muscle repair after injury was greater when mice were active or awake compared to when they were inactive or resting. It seems sleep alone isn't the most important factor. Otherwise more sleep would linearly be beneficial to health and recovery, but, from a courtesy look into it, it appears sleep above 9 hours is inversely correlated with negative health.

I suppose another way to phrase it is sleeping and being awake on your body's natural circadian rhythm is ideal. The BMAL1 studies are fascinating in themselves. https://academic.oup.com/nsr/article/6/1/87/5290357

These monkeys showed higher nocturnal locomotion and reduced sleep, which was further exacerbated by a constant light regimen.

This sounds like borderline torture

Re: New connections between circadian rhythm and muscle repair

#16

Post by upsidesinclude »

tsol wrote: post #13

>Peek and her team found that muscle repair after injury was greater when mice were active or awake compared to when they were inactive or resting. This isn't the result I was expecting. That's very counterintuitive

If you consider it fully, you may change your mind.

The bodies natural cycle in sleep is not intended for muscle repair. So it makes sense that it does not suddenly become the prime concern during sleep.

Muscles get better oxygenation and fluid exchange when they are being used, pumped, and this helps remove lactic acid and deliver nutrients.the same can be said of the lymphatic system which you can look into.

Looking at top teir athletes, cool-down excersizes are standard practice after intense workouts...

All of these lead to this conclusion, though in hindsight, of course, it's easier to stitch together

Re: New connections between circadian rhythm and muscle repair

#17

Post by loh »

tsol wrote: post #13

>Peek and her team found that muscle repair after injury was greater when mice were active or awake compared to when they were inactive or resting. This isn't the result I was expecting. That's very counterintuitive

Yeah this is really interesting to me. I work out 4+ times per week, and I've noticed that when I go at it harder than usual, my body basically forces me to sleep twice per day until it's repaired itself, and when I sleep it's usually unintentionally 4-5 hours at a time. I'll wake up and can't go back to sleep, so I get up and do things for a few hours until it's time to sleep for another 4-5 hours. But when I take it easy with my workouts, I'll sleep a solid 7-9 hours uninterrupted. I wonder if my body does this because it needs nutrition and bloodflow to heal and doesn't want to wait for it.

Re: New connections between circadian rhythm and muscle repair

#19

Post by norswap »

thenerdhead wrote: post #6
argella wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://guzey.com/books/why-we-sleep/

I’ve read this years prior. I don’t see how it’s relevant to this article. But if a whole book’s premise is invalid because of some bored dude wrote an article, then so be it.

It's hard to trust a conclusion if three quarters of the argument offered in support are inaccurate. At least, it should invite a healthy dose of skepticism.

Calling the author of the article "some bored duded that wrote an article" is not a really strong argument against considering the points it made.

Re: New connections between circadian rhythm and muscle repair

#20

Post by brigandish »

wpietri wrote: post #14
thenerdhead wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve read this years prior. I don’t see how it’s relevant to this article. But if a whole book’s premise is invalid because of some bored dude wrote an article, then so be it.

When somebody cites a source, it's always relevant to point out that it's a bad source. I also found useful this discussion of the topic: https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2020/03/24/why-we-sle...

The source of an argument irrelevant to the soundness of an argument, otherwise it's an example of the genetic fallacy, a form of ad hominem, a fallacy of relevance.
Post reply on HN