Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Medicine Science Technology

Is Lack of Sleep a Public Health Crisis? (washingtonpost.com) 109

Posted by BeauHD from the go-to-bed dept.
According to The Washington Post, "a growing number of scientists, not normally known for being advocates, are bringing evangelical zeal to the message that lack of sleep is an escalating public health crisis that deserves as much attention as the obesity epidemic." "We're competing against moneyed interests, with technology and gaming and all that. It's so addictive and so hard to compete with," said Orfeu Buxton, a sleep researcher at Pennsylvania State University. "We've had this natural experiment with the Internet that swamped everything else." From the report: The sleep research community, formerly balkanized into separate sleep disorders such as insomnia and sleep apnea, has begun to coalesce around the concept of "sleep health" -- which for most adults means getting at least seven hours a night. But time in the sack has been steadily decreasing. In 1942, a Gallup poll found that adults slept an average of 7.9 hours per night. In 2013, the average adult had sheared more than an hour off that number. In 2016, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that a third of adults fail to get the recommended seven hours. In the blink of an eye, in evolutionary terms, humans have radically altered a fundamental biological necessity -- with repercussions we are still only beginning to understand.

For years, animal studies have shown that learning activities are reactivated during sleep, a critical part of how lasting memories are formed. More recently, Princeton postdoctoral researcher Monika Schonauer asked 32 people to sleep in the lab after they had been asked to memorize 100 pictures of houses or faces. By analyzing their patterns of electrical brain activity, she found she could effectively read their minds, predicting which images they had been studying while awake -- because they were replaying them. [...] Sleep problems have long been recognized as a symptom of psychiatric and neurological disorders, ranging from depression to Alzheimer's. But increasingly, researchers are exploring the two-way street between disrupted sleep and disease. And researchers who started out interested in cognitive functions such as memory or brain development are finding themselves focused on sleep because it is so fundamental.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Is Lack of Sleep a Public Health Crisis? More

Is Lack of Sleep a Public Health Crisis?

Comments Filter:

  • But time in the sack has been steadily decreasing. In 1942, a Gallup poll found that adults slept an average of 7.9 hours per night. In 2013, the average adult had sheared more than an hour off that number.

    That's all very interesting, but was 1942 a typical year, comparable to, say, the norm for the last five centuries?

    Mind you, I grew up at a time when the "norm" (theoretically) was eight hours a night. And I generally get seven to eight these days. Or six, if the weather is bad and my dog is in panic m

    • Re:So, what's the baseline? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Actually, I do RTFA ( 1058596 ) on Thursday January 24, 2019 @11:42PM (#58018684)

      was 1942 a typical year,

      Not really. There were a lot of explosions keeping people up throughout Europe, Asia and the Pacific. Most factories were working three shifts.

    • I recall a study a few years ago about the affects of too much and too little sleep on weight in various patients of various ethnicities. And while it did vary some what the ideal range was and what was bad... generally the ok/good ones ranged from 7-9 hours before it was too little/much. So shaving an hour off of 8 doesn't seem too bad except for a few people. I'm assuming we're probably not worried about the 7 hour crowd.... but the 3-5 hour guys that just slam 200 Red Bulls a day instead.

    • And I generally get seven to eight these days. Or six, if the weather is bad and my dog is in panic mode due to thunder.

      There's a pretty good solution for this, it worked for our dogs: Anti-anxiety shirt for dogs [thundershirt.com]

  • ahemm... the new Church (Score:4, Insightful)

    by SirAstral ( 1349985 ) on Thursday January 24, 2019 @10:33PM (#58018420)

    "a growing number of scientists"..."are bringing evangelical zeal to the message"

    I think the new church of science has become well established. Research that cannot be duplicated, constant misrepresentation of facts or evidence, outright deception and money pandering.

    I am a big fan of science, but it has become more of a religion of late than the search for truth about our world.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by 110010001000 ( 697113 )
      I've noticed that too. The word "scientist" is meaningless. Who is a scientist? Some guy who wrote a paper? What is a sleep researcher going to say? "Yeah, everything is fine and everyone is getting enough sleep". No, everything is a "crisis" according to the "scientists" who get paid to make the claims.

      • Yea, it's a real shame that science progresses one funeral at a time [Max Planck]. First coffee was bad, then its good, eggs were bad then they were good, milk was bad then good and now bad again depending on who you ask, fat is bad and here recently it is becoming good again. The only minds that are made up about this are the unmade minds.

        Science definitely should have the ear of the people, but most of the time the people never check out who is signing the checks. Most of the time, most of the science

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by shess ( 31691 )

          Yea, it's a real shame that science progresses one funeral at a time [Max Planck]. First coffee was bad, then its good, eggs were bad then they were good, milk was bad then good and now bad again depending on who you ask, fat is bad and here recently it is becoming good again. The only minds that are made up about this are the unmade minds.

          Science definitely should have the ear of the people, but most of the time the people never check out who is signing the checks. Most of the time, most of the science is mostly wrong. Of course the benefit of decent science is that it will correct for this and change how it researches and its claims when new evidence is presented or something new is learned that might be helpful to learn the truth. But today, its not that anymore, it's all confirmation bias. Evidence that does not support the pursuit is omitted or assailed when presented by the opposition. The opposition... constantly treating people that are looking for the truth as well as though they are opposition. How quaint!

          I feel like you're talking about science journalism, here, rather than actual science.

          I'll grant that scientists sometimes engage in that as a marketing tool, but I really don't feel like SCIENCE came to me and said "Butter is bad", any more than I feel like DEMOCRACY came to me and said "Guns are good" or "Cardi B is an excellent singer".

          Even if SCIENCE did make statements like that, I currently live in a country where a lot of people make arguments about how the world is flat, the earth was created in les

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by SirAstral ( 1349985 )

            "I feel like you're talking about science journalism, here, rather than actual science."

            No, talking about the real science. Sure journalism is also to blame but that is a red herring or straw-man argument. Just stick to the science parts keep the journalism out of it. You are pulling it in because you already know you are wrong and hate being called out on it.

            "I'll grant that scientists sometimes engage in that as a marketing tool, but I really don't feel like SCIENCE came to me and said "Butter is bad",

          • On the other hand, evaluating all research by "who is signing the checks" is politics, not science. We call it argumentum ad monsantium.

          • I feel like you're talking about science journalism, here, rather than actual science.

            Of course he is. Science the field has an unfortunate property of not giving a shit about what people feel or think. That puts it at odds with people who demand surety. Which is why the idea of "evangelical zeal" is unamalgamated bullshit.

            I'll grant that scientists sometimes engage in that as a marketing tool, but I really don't feel like SCIENCE came to me and said "Butter is bad", any more than I feel like DEMOCRACY came to me and said "Guns are good" or "Cardi B is an excellent singer".

            Scientists are people, and come with all of the foibles that normal people do. But the evangelical bullshit came from the word processor of the writer. It is true that science gets sidetracked by business interests from time to time depending on who the scientist is work

        • Re:ahemm... the new Church (Score:5, Insightful)

          by PopeRatzo ( 965947 ) on Friday January 25, 2019 @02:03AM (#58019090) Journal

          Most of the time, most of the science is mostly wrong.

          Science isn't "right" or "wrong". It's simply a model of how things work based on analysis of available data. Either the model accurately reflects observation or it does not. Either it helps predict or it does not.

          If you're on a search for "right" and "wrong", then maybe you're the one who's confusing science with religion.

          • "Science isn't "right" or "wrong". It's simply a model of how things work based on analysis of available data."

            There is still a context for it being right or wrong. Literally the entire reason they conduct tests... to you know... find out if the hypothesis cannot be dis-proven to become a theory. If a Hypothesis or theory can be proven, then it likely will become a Law or Fact which then makes it... right (correct) instead of wrong (incorrect). Additionally, you can still be right or wrong without havin

            • Literally the entire reason they conduct tests... to you know... find out if the hypothesis cannot be dis-proven to become a theory. If a Hypothesis or theory can be proven, then it likely will become a Law or Fact which then makes it... right

              Man, you have mistaken impression of what science is and does. A hypothesis can be supported by data and still be wrong.

              Scientists seldom deal in facts. Facts are for text books. Laws are for law books. Every scientist knows that his work is either supported by da

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by mjwx ( 966435 )

            Most of the time, most of the science is mostly wrong.

            Science isn't "right" or "wrong". It's simply a model of how things work based on analysis of available data. Either the model accurately reflects observation or it does not. Either it helps predict or it does not.

            If you're on a search for "right" and "wrong", then maybe you're the one who's confusing science with religion.

            This. Sadly there are a lot of non-scientist who call themselves scientists and manage to spew enough psudo-scientific babble to confuse idiots who want desperately to believe something. I think that the likes of Andrew Wakefield and Anthony Watts are the worst conmen of our generation.

            The difference between a scientist and a conman is that a scientist sets out test a hypothesis and looks at what the data tells them. A conman looks for the data that supports their hypothesis and ignores anything else.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Trogre ( 513942 )

            For better or worse, "Science" is often used as a term for the scientific community.

            And that community can be very, very, wrong when they build models on bad data, personal bias, or funding pressure.

      • Re: ahemm... the new Church (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Evtim ( 1022085 ) on Friday January 25, 2019 @02:28AM (#58019124)

        https://youtu.be/pwaWilO_Pig [youtu.be]

        Start here if you prefer listening than reading. Otherwise buy his book which summarizes all we know about sleep.

        Having followed his advices in the last 8 months I started sleeping 7 to 9 hours per night. The effect is nothing short of miraculous...

        Why do I know so much (general culture) people often ask me. Could it be in part that I read hundreds of books while growing up, every day for hours, usually before sleep? I think so...

    • I think the new church of science has become well established. Research that cannot be duplicated, constant misrepresentation of facts or evidence, outright deception and money pandering.

      I am a big fan of science, but it has become more of a religion of late than the search for truth about our world.

      I bet you'll feel better about things after a good night's sleep.

      • lol, yea... but only for a little while. Until I open up a news site and read something like this again.

        It just amazes me that people stop acting like humans and their corrupting influences stops existing once you call them "Scientist's" or "Government Personnel" or by "Political Label" and then start acting like they are infallible or too good to be touched. Sounds more like the Catholic Church to me... I guess they are all jealous that the Pope beat them to the claim of being infallible and excommunicat

    • Research that cannot be duplicated, constant misrepresentation of facts or evidence, outright deception and money pandering.

      Those aren't features of science becoming a religion. Those are features of a capitalist society where science is increasingly limited to for-profit organizations. "Publish or perish" policies, biased studies funded by groups with an agenda to push, pandering to big corporations for research funds... all of that is capitalism.

      Now, if you want to argue that the belief that pure capitalism can actually work in real life is basically a religion based on no evidence whatsoever... well, there are a lot of good

    • I think the biggest part is the horrible news reporting for science.
      For it to be part of the news cycle to bring in advertising money, often the latest hypothesis being called a theory, which get people all excited and rialed up, only to become like a lot of science, shown to be a wrong path.

      Real science is not a good spectator sport. When something becomes classified a theory in science, actually a lot of strong evidence it going for it. But often when it gets to that level, there is a lot of peer review a

    • "a growing number of scientists"..."are bringing evangelical zeal to the message"

      I think the new church of science has become well established. Research that cannot be duplicated, constant misrepresentation of facts or evidence, outright deception and money pandering.

      I am a big fan of science, but it has become more of a religion of late than the search for truth about our world.

      It wouldn't be science media now would it?.

      I find the idea of combining Scientists and evangelical zeal together to be about as ludicrous and oxymoronic as you can get.

      This story is silly. Do people need more sleep? Some do. Some don't. How much? Differs by person.

      I like around 5 hours per night. Less than 4, and I start feeling the effects, and more than 5 simply doesn't happen unless I am ill.

      My wife likes 8 hours. Her sister likes 10.

      But none of the scientists I've known and worked with are eva

    • it's just hyperbole in the article. The scientists are still scientists.

      Go watch this [youtube.com] for some context and stop attacking science. You're undermining people's belief in science with what are right wing talking points used to cut funding (and therefore taxes) to scientific research.

      I don't think you're doing it on purpose and that's what makes it so awful. It's become insidious propaganda that folks are completely unaware of.

  • For a start... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by msauve ( 701917 ) on Thursday January 24, 2019 @10:43PM (#58018454)
    Just another reason to get rid of daylight "saving" time. (and, no, that doesn't mean go on it year 'round)

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Thursday January 24, 2019 @10:51PM (#58018480)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • If you make everything a public health issue (Score:5, Insightful)

    by guruevi ( 827432 ) on Thursday January 24, 2019 @11:27PM (#58018620)

    Then what are things going to be such as an outbreak of polio? If you can fix a 'disease' by changing your habits and lifestyle, it's not really a 'disease', it's slow, assisted suicide.

    A public health issue is something the CDC can fix with strategic quarantine, a vaccine or antibiotics/antivirals. Changing behaviors is not the job of the government.

    • It may not be a physical disease that can be treated with medication, but it is a problem that shows up in increased healthcare cost. You know, one of the biggest money sinks on any government's budget.
      Also, you're wrong. Addiction is a disease. It's a psychological problem that can't be treated by giving someone a pill, but still a disease.
      Dismissing it by saying "you should just change your lifestyle" is a massive disservice to everyone who's ever had a psychological problem.

      It's also an issue in which ou

    • But they already solved all the problems like polio. They have to continually invent new excuses to exist. Otherwise, their funding would be reduced, and that would be a tragedy above all.

    • Re:If you make everything a public health issue (Score:5, Insightful)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Friday January 25, 2019 @05:46AM (#58019558) Homepage Journal

      "Public health crisis" doesn't mean you have to set up white tents and guys in hazmat suits to deal with it. It means that you designate it something that gets significant resources directed to it as a matter of urgency, and hopefully everyone starts to take it seriously.

      At the moment people tend not to even think of sleep as a major problem that affects many people, or something that we can tackle on more than an individual basis. This designation will help with things like getting companies to consider employee's sleep needs when setting schedules.

    • it's been shown in more than one study that a major flag for a long, healthy life is people who can still sleep in their old age. The meme of the tired granpa is because grandpa is unable to get REM sleep and it's killing him.

      You're not watching a suicide, you're watching somebody slowly waste away while you make fun of them.

  • Take a break from the media (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    A lot of people lose sleep because they think political bogey men and women are personally gunning for them amid a grand web of conspiracy theories and evil minions. Other people think the world may not be around in the morning because it's a few degrees warmer or colder than whatever "normal" is. Still others need to win arguments on the Internet no matter the cost.

    Well guess what: There are real problems to lose sleep over like not making ends meet, or worrying over very ill relatives. Don't let fearmonge

  • Working hours... (Score:3)

    by b0s0z0ku ( 752509 ) on Friday January 25, 2019 @01:07AM (#58018968)

    Working hours: 50+ hours a week in white-collar jobs is now the norm. No vacay time to catch up.

    Electronic connectivity: workers are expected to respond to emails outside of working hours. Yeah, 50 years ago, people had home phones, but calling someone outside of work was seen as more intrusive, and there had to be a damned good reason.

    Overscheduling: if you're running around with your sprogeny in the evening, taking them to extracurricular bullshit activities, you still need time for yourself and to make love to your spouse. Sleep suffers.

    • Working hours: 50+ hours a week in white-collar jobs is now the norm.

      Back in 1942, people worked even longer hours [wikipedia.org].

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • I've actually proposed trimming working hours to 4 days of 7 hours. That's in response to an economic policy that severely-overheats the economy as a side-effect (it ends all poverty, but causes hyperinflation by making the middle- and lower-classes too rich), the correction for which is to make people poorer by reducing their productive labor time (working hours).

      It's not TV and video games. I've done that: I stayed up until 5am reading books before. The metronome is employment, and employment sucks

  • An alarming new line of research suggests poor sleep may increase the risk of Alzheimer’s, as even a single night of sleep deprivation boosts brain levels of the proteins that form toxic clumps in Alzheimer’s patients ... even modest sleep reductions are linked to increased feelings of social isolation and loneliness.

    Sleep problems have long been recognized as a symptom of psychiatric and neurological disorders

    Sounds important. Let's check with the man that has his finger on the nuclear and

  • you got work, you got family requirements, other stuff you must do, etc.
    add some of that important me-time/down-time (even if it is just only an hour), and there is little time left to sleep.

  • "It is also known, that the hippocampus acts as a memory buffer. Once it is full, you need to sleep to empty its contents to the rest of your brain (through sleep spindles during REM sleep); this might be why babies sleep so much and so irregularly —once their learning buffer is full, they sleep to quickly clear their buffer in order to learn more after they wake. You can still learn when this memory buffer is full, but retention is much worse and new memories might wrangle with other memories in the
  • I've noticed that I struggle to get enough sleep. I have to force myself to go back to bed for a couple of hours more. There seems to be two things: the human brain, and the human mind. They constantly struggle with each other to control sleep time. The human brain needs a certain amount of time to reset its biochemistry. The human mind demands the waking state because it craves input (think of a young child fighting desperately to stay awake (search youtube). Our technology and the growing pace of society
  • I can't speak for other countries but we do know that over the past 10 years in the United States there has been an alarming increase in diagnosed depression and anxiety disorders. Suicide rates have also gone up. We also know that due to deteriorating work conditions largely due to The Great Recession people are sleeping less and less able to take care of their health due to increased "employee productivity".

  • I moved into a place where there is this crazy hum 24/7. I don't know if some neighbor is running off a diesel genset or what but I can't find it on the property and it happens even when the power is out. During the day I rarely notice it (although sometimes it is more intense than others) but it's really destroying my ability to sleep through a night, which is definitely having a noticeable effect on my ability to function during the day. Since it's not very loud and I moved in after it did, I have no reco

  • Having worked for a Baby Bell back in the mid-nineties, and having heard stories from before that time, how many of *you* slashdotters have heard the infamous phrase "whatever it takes", meaning no sleep, no life, and no, you're never going to be given "comp time"?

    But we don't need unions. I have no idea why our grandparents and great grandparents objected to jobs that required 12 and 16 hour days, with no benefits. Back then was the *real* "gig economy".

Slashdot Top Deals

Never test for an error condition you don't know how to handle. -- Steinbach

Close