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

Sleep regularity is a stronger predictor of mortality risk than sleep duration (2023)

academic.oup.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 427 posts

Re: Sleep regularity is a stronger predictor of mortality risk than sleep duration (2023)

#61

Post by dwattttt »

ambicapter wrote: post #59
aeonik wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Drag is a causitive input to speed though. nextCarSpeed(currentSpeed, wheelPower, dragForce, mass, deltaTime) = currentSpeed + ((wheelPower / currentSpeed - dragForce) / mass) * deltaTime Increase "dragForce", and the resulting car speed decreases. That is a causal input, not an association.

In this example you're determining the speed of the car based on the wind flow on your hand. Putting the book in front might slow down the car, and it will probably also slow down the flow on the hand. However, if you still try to determine the speed of the car from the air flow on the hand, you'll probably be off, because car speed and wind flow aren't linked like that when the book is in the picture.

I can't tell if this is germane to the analogy or not, but the air flow over your hand, even behind a book, is still a function of the car's speed. As an illustrative example, imagine the feeling when the car is at 0 compared to when the car is at 60.

Re: Sleep regularity is a stronger predictor of mortality risk than sleep duration (2023)

#62

Post by aeonik »

ambicapter wrote: post #59
aeonik wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Drag is a causitive input to speed though. nextCarSpeed(currentSpeed, wheelPower, dragForce, mass, deltaTime) = currentSpeed + ((wheelPower / currentSpeed - dragForce) / mass) * deltaTime Increase "dragForce", and the resulting car speed decreases. That is a causal input, not an association.

In this example you're determining the speed of the car based on the wind flow on your hand. Putting the book in front might slow down the car, and it will probably also slow down the flow on the hand. However, if you still try to determine the speed of the car from the air flow on the hand, you'll probably be off, because car speed and wind flow aren't linked like that when the book is in the picture.

It's a multivariate system, the dragforce is determined by the car geometry + book, hand, whatever.

They are both causes to speed.

In fact you don't even need flow to infer speed. You can just use pressure calculations and temperature, which is how airplanes measure their speed.

Controlling drag is a major component of the inputs to speed when flying an aircraft.

Re: Sleep regularity is a stronger predictor of mortality risk than sleep duration (2023)

#64

Post by AaronAPU »

elcritch wrote: post #5

Well that sucks, given I have a gene variant related to delayed sleep according to 23andme. Last year I did an experiment of sorts while unemployed for a time and found that if I just slept and woke when tired that my sleep time would naturally recess and eventually "flip" after about a month. My entire life I've wondered why I feel incredibly tired and found waking up so difficult. Turns out that if you follow your…

I had that my entire life, and then one day started having the strangest medical condition where it is literally impossible to sleep past ~6:30am.

It sounds unbelievable but you’d have to experience it to understand. But the end result is it “fixed” the delayed sleep issue.

I’d give just about anything to be able to just sleep and keep sleeping, but on the up side now I’m an early bird with extreme regularity and quite like it.

Re: Sleep regularity is a stronger predictor of mortality risk than sleep duration (2023)

#65

Post by sigbottle »

bitmasher9 wrote: post #18
xrisk wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

tfa: "Results were adjusted for age, sex, ethnicity, and sociodemographic, lifestyle, and health factors"

Sometimes it is a cause vs causation. Sometimes the scientist didn’t adjust for a variable that clearly would impact both fields they were measuring. To make such a claim, I think it’s appropriate to name that hypothetical third variable. Otherwise the comment is so general it applies to all statistical studies.

But you can just apply this to anything. I feel unlike unless you're an insider with skin in the game, your criticism doesn't land other than a generic surface one.

To be clear, I apply an equal deep skepticism to most fields that aren't math (in the sense of a priority) or physics (in the sense that you aren't trying to study the entire world, but a specific set of phenomena that you can reliably control enough + repeat to run intervention on), whether the results agree with me or not. Maybe a bit of intellectual closed-mindedness. But then that means that me, personally, I can't in good faith use the criticism as a proper 'debunk' argument - at best it's a heuristic to avoid spending cycles to evaluate it (which is 'rational' behavior, as much as I hate that word, IMO).

Re: Sleep regularity is a stronger predictor of mortality risk than sleep duration (2023)

#66

Post by Otterly99 »

sammy2255 wrote: post #47
xrisk wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

tfa: "Results were adjusted for age, sex, ethnicity, and sociodemographic, lifestyle, and health factors"

Did they explain how exactly they adjusted those results?

Do you even bother to click on links before asking a question?

There is a whole paragraph on "Statistical analysis" that even provides five supplementary methods (S1.5, S2.2 and S2.4-6) if you want detailed information.

Re: Sleep regularity is a stronger predictor of mortality risk than sleep duration (2023)

#67

Post by Schiendelman »

Zababa wrote: post #44
acron0 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My thought exactly. For people who struggle with this, and conventional wisdom doesn't seem to stick, what are we supposed to do?

Hard to answer precisely without knowing what conventional wisdom didn't stick. The common levers I know and that worked at least a bit for me: - start by having a fixed waking time, and get sunlight or bright light quickly after waking up. Normally relatively fixed sleep time is supposed to follow. For me waking up is the easy part, transforming that into getting up and going outside is harder. Another option here i…

"If I'm on my phone in bed" is throwing out a major, proven impactful piece of conventional wisdom.

Re: Sleep regularity is a stronger predictor of mortality risk than sleep duration (2023)

#68

Post by ptsneves »

martingoodson wrote: post #9
acron0 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My thought exactly. For people who struggle with this, and conventional wisdom doesn't seem to stick, what are we supposed to do?

Don't watch any kind of screen in the evening. Read a book instead. You'll fall asleep sooner.

With this [0] I find i read 2 pages and I fall asleep consistently and really with a will to sleep. My mind wanders into far away lands and empires and says, "I take it from here".

[0] https://www.amazon.com/dp/0691134952

Re: Sleep regularity is a stronger predictor of mortality risk than sleep duration (2023)

#69

Post by getnormality »

djoldman wrote: post #17

As always with a lot of these: it's not saying causation. You might measure the speed of your car by putting your hand out of the window and notice that the wind force on your hand is strong when the car goes fast. Putting your hand out of the window and then blocking the wind with a book doesn't make the car slow down. Keyword: "associated" EDIT: I meant to communicate that it doesn't make the car slow down as much…

> As always with a lot of these: it's not saying causation.

But what they are saying is, it would be valuable if it was causative wiggles eyebrows

Last sentence of the abstract:

> Sleep regularity may be a simple, effective target for improving general health and survival.

Re: Sleep regularity is a stronger predictor of mortality risk than sleep duration (2023)

#70

Post by sigbottle »

aeonik wrote: post #43
hobofan wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the point is that while it does act as negative acceleration there isn't a causal relationship with the actual speed of the car, which is mainly related to how far the gas pedal is pressed.

Drag is a causitive input to speed though. nextCarSpeed(currentSpeed, wheelPower, dragForce, mass, deltaTime) = currentSpeed + ((wheelPower / currentSpeed - dragForce) / mass) * deltaTime Increase "dragForce", and the resulting car speed decreases. That is a causal input, not an association.

Bertrand Russell objected to the notion of causation in the 1900s, because merely stating the updated dynamics of a system doesn't imply causation in any grand sense. Like hume, he dismisses causation, but not because of the problem of induction or anything, but because the concept seems incoherent to him. He especially emphasized this in physics - although maybe you can argue that for everyday human language, causation is good (Alice caused BCD to happen), in physics it doesn't belong.

Not that I entirely agree with his account but just some food for thought.

Post reply on HN