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

Engineering Sleep

minjunes.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 205 posts

Re: Engineering Sleep

#121

Post by mettamage »

thepuppet33r wrote: post #113

I did a lot of sleep hacking in college, trying to sleep as little as possible so that I could spend time with friends, play video games, and (ostensibly) study. Now that I'm working a job where I do overnight deployments, often work 12-14 hours days, and have a couple of kids who don't sleep well, I hate my past self for not sleeping while he could. You never know when circumstances will drive you into unplanned sle…

This is one of the bigger failures of modern society. This information should've been pervasive but back then it wasn't. It arguably still isn't, perhaps for the highly educated.

Back when I studied (15 years ago), if I knew that I'd have the short-term memory issues that I do now, I'd never have done what I did just in order to study longer.

Re: Engineering Sleep

#122

Post by shepherdjerred »

londons_explore wrote: post #73

It's notable that almost every animal sleeps in some way, even organisms that are away from sunlight (ie. creatures that live underground). If you sleep 30% of the time, that's 30% of the time you aren't eating, mating, etc. Also, during sleep you are more vulnerable to predators. One would expect evolution to get rid of sleep in creatures who don't rely on sunlight cycles. So, there must be some really good evolutio…

I don't think this is necessarily true. Is there some really important reason many animals have brains in their head (versus elsewhere in their body), or is it that many species happen to be derived from some ancestor who had that trait.

Another way to ask this would be how much of a benefit would be not sleeping? It's difficult to preserve food, but I guess there is no limit on how much energy you can expend pursuing a mate.

Re: Engineering Sleep

#123

Post by ein0p »

Yeah, optimize yourself to make every available dollar for your corporate / government masters. Or just sleep 8+ hours a night like you're supposed to according to decades of published research. Which way western man/woman?

Re: Engineering Sleep

#124

Post by pedalpete »

FooBarWidget wrote: post #117
pedalpete wrote: post #114

I work in the sleep space, particularly enhancing slow-wave sleep - the synchronous firing of neurons which define deep sleep, the most restorative and vital component of sleep. Only focusing on the amount of time asleep is a significantly limited viewpoint, but I believe this will change in the coming years as we gather more knowledge of sleep and access to EEG data about our brain activity during sleep increases. O…

Your /research link doesn't work. It seems your company produces a deep sleep headband. I'm interested in these sorts of products because I want more deep sleep (for myself, and for family) while lifestyle factors (mostly kids) make that very difficult. The last product I tried was the Philips deep sleep headband (which, unfortunately, never appeared in Netherlands, I had to import it from the US even though Philips…

Our headband uses bone conduction speaker within the headband which sits in the middle of your forehead. Absolutely ear plugs are compatible. Wearing headphones should be fine, there is nothing in, covering, or near your ears.

Sorry for the wrong link, the page is "science" not "research", I'll create a redirect, I often type that wrong. https://www.affectablesleep.com/science

I'd be keen to hear about your experience with the Philips product. We've spoken to some of their researchers, but I've never met a consumer who had one. We've spoken with many people who had the Dreem headband which had similar technology in some markets (not the US).

You can reach me at pete[at] you know the domain - if you're willing to share your experience.

Thanks

Re: Engineering Sleep

#125

Post by gavinray »

zkelvin wrote: post #75
exmadscientist wrote: post #30

Hey, discussion of orexin receptor stuff! As someone with clinically-diagnosed insomnia, I've been lucky enough to/unfortunate enough to have to try the orexin receptor antagonist sleep aids for a while. As recent, on-patent drugs, they are very, very expensive ($360/month was the number marked on the receipt slip, not that that means much in the US; I certainly wasn't paying that)... and they work. They really, real…

How long have you been taking them? I've heard that an almost universal side effect is terrifying night paralysis on occasion. Have you experienced that yet?

I've been prescribed both available Orexin antagonists (Daridorexant and Suvorexant) for insomnia.

They work very well for me and I've noticed no side effects.

I've been taking them about 2-3 years now.

FWIW, I found Dayvigo to work better than Quviviq but they both do the job.

Re: Engineering Sleep

#126

Post by exmadscientist »

zkelvin wrote: post #75
exmadscientist wrote: post #30

Hey, discussion of orexin receptor stuff! As someone with clinically-diagnosed insomnia, I've been lucky enough to/unfortunate enough to have to try the orexin receptor antagonist sleep aids for a while. As recent, on-patent drugs, they are very, very expensive ($360/month was the number marked on the receipt slip, not that that means much in the US; I certainly wasn't paying that)... and they work. They really, real…

How long have you been taking them? I've heard that an almost universal side effect is terrifying night paralysis on occasion. Have you experienced that yet?

I did not experience night paralysis while using lemborexant.

I can think of a few reasons I might have avoided it, but who knows for sure. I wasn't on it that long (about a year? not going to look it up), I as a general rule do not remember my dreams unless I'm interrupted, the underlying cause of my total insomnia was pharmalogical, I've always had some level of sleep disorder, I've been on every other sort of sleep aid, I used it with melatonin... who really knows.

Re: Engineering Sleep

#127

Post by botanical76 »

ajsisbckjx wrote: post #79
londons_explore wrote: post #73

It's notable that almost every animal sleeps in some way, even organisms that are away from sunlight (ie. creatures that live underground). If you sleep 30% of the time, that's 30% of the time you aren't eating, mating, etc. Also, during sleep you are more vulnerable to predators. One would expect evolution to get rid of sleep in creatures who don't rely on sunlight cycles. So, there must be some really good evolutio…

> So, there must be some really good evolutionary reason for sleep. Is this how evolution works? Might it be that animals sleeping is good on the macro level but bad for the animal?

[dead]

Re: Engineering Sleep

#128

Post by exmadscientist »

smallnix wrote: post #45
0xDEAFBEAD wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>(And for the record, I'm off them now due to other stuff clearing up such that I don't need this level of sleep assistance anymore. Not because I can't afford them.) If it was available over the counter for, say, $50/month -- do you think you would be taking it just for the improved sleep quality? Also, what was the specific name of the drug you had such a good experience with?

Afaiu exmadscientist said their sleep quality improved in the context of their condition, but still worse than a healthy person's sleep: > Sleep quality was not perfect (maybe 80% of "normal"? I don't know)

Yes, it was noticably lower quality than "good normal sleep" (80%?). Better than I got on eszopiclone (60%?) or zolpidem (40%??), worse than trazodone (90+%, but woke up every day like I'd been hit in the head with a frying pan) or temazepam (150%! amazing! but tolerance within a month and then addiction soon after if one is stupid enough to push back on a benzo, so no good).

Re: Engineering Sleep

#129

Post by jvanderbot »

iterateoften wrote: post #66
jvanderbot wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might make sense to just drop the term optimization when discussing natural selection. It's not like "Natural Selection" was given an ecological niche and optimized from scratch the being for that niche. That mental model implies there's not much to be done and any changes would produce a less useful product. A more apt term would be "Refactored" or even "Patched". It's more like a giant ugly legacy software syste…

> "Natural Selection" was given an ecological niche and optimized from scratch the being for that niche I think you are conflating natural selection the process with organisms that are a result of natural selection. Natural selection isn’t a process that is intentionally made by anyone, but a way we describe a simplified model slew of complex processes. Also conflated is what you are optimizing for. The only thing na…

You're right about the mechanism of course, but the language and mental model I see over and over is that it a bespoke optimization that ignores the fact that it was incremental changes, and that some adaptations are no longer beneficial because they were created for an environment that no longer exists.

I'd like to deprecate that mental model.

Re: Engineering Sleep

#130

Post by iancmceachern »

The best advice I ever received, and will give again. It has really served me well.

In the words of John Lennon, let it be.

Sleep when you're tired, work and play when you're not. The constrination and worrying about it, how much time you have for what, etc. is the single biggest driver for the stress and loss of sleep. Let go of that, let if flow, it will.

Post reply on HN