This contradicts recent information I have seen out there, re; Ms Huffington, Lisa Genova, et al.
3
The amount of sleep and nap time was self reported. Not a reliable way to measure sleep. (Especially over eight years of self-reporting!) And not a way to tell how much time was spent in each of the five stages of sleep.
Deep sleep is the most beneficial. The Oura tracker ring can determine the three major stages, most of the time. It isn't good at knowing when napping. From the amount of time spent in the stages, they produce a readiness score. Deep sleep time is the primary component.
A better study would be to use the Oura ring data and incorporate time spent in the sleep stages.
3
The third paragraph, summarizing the study, is confusing:
people who slept --
8-9 hours a night had a 5% increased risk
less than 6 hours a night had a 9% increased risk but that difference was not statistically significant.
5% is statistically significant , and 9% is not?
4
@Vera I noticed that too and thought exactly the same thing!!
2
@Vera Statistical significance is based on the variability of the data, not the result. So the dataset of people sleeping less than six hours a night had greater variability than the dataset of people sleeping more than eight hours.
9
@Concerned citizen Thank you for the clarification. If correct, it’s an important piece of information that should have been included in the article.
1
Repeat after me yet again: Correlation does not establish causation.
One plausible possibility reverses the direction of the article's speculations. People who have health problems, even if those have not been identified, may feel the need to sleep more. And we can control for all the variables we like without striking the right ones. That is why experimental studies are carried out where possible. And where they aren't, we avoid unjustified conclusions.
16
@ERP the article states “[t]he researchers controlled for age, body mass index, physical activity, diabetes, depression, smoking, alcohol consumption and many other health and behavioral characteristics.”
As for your speculation that “[p]eople who have health problems, even if those have not been identified, may feel the need to sleep more”, that which is raised without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
1
@ERP You hit the nail on the head. Correlation does not establlish causation. The headline writer and author ought to be send to remedial science camp. The title could read: Excess fatigue a harbinger of early death. Or: Your undiagnosed fatal disease makes you sleepy.
12
@Vlad I think you may have missed one of @ERP’s points, which is that, while the researchers did control for many variables, there may have been one or more critical variables which they did not consider.
2
Like so many of the studies on sleep or diet, this is overly simplistic and doesnt take variables in to account. During a week of professional activity, even with 7 to 8 hours of sleep per night, the mind and body can get drained. Many people need a healthy recharge sleep on the weekend of 10 or even 12 hours to restart the cycle. Many health professionals state that nothing, not diet, not exercise, is more important to health than sleep. Some health clubs go so far as to say, if you're facing a choice between sleep when very tired or a workout, choose sleep. The idea that a person should force themselves out of bed at 8 hours even if still needing sleep just because some study says it may increase risk factors is nonsense. Personally, I need 9 to 10 hours of sleep to feel great and fully sharp but rarely get that during the week. I will not also go the weekend with that same pace. Get the restorative benefits of sleep everybody, make no apologies for it, and don't worry about risk factors because being stressed and having high blood pressure due to lack of sleep carries its own risk factors.
24
@BruceE ~
Great comment. I also feel great when I can sleep as long as I need to feel restored.
4
A doctor ought to look into why a patient is sleeping more than 6–8 hours; it might be a symptom of something rather than Oblomovian lethargy.
5
Why is a 5% increased risk with more sleep, significant,
but a 9% increased risk with less sleep is not significant?
20
I thought the same thing, guessing it is because not enough people got less than 5 hours sleep.
1
Sleeping too much and sleeping too little are two different things, and each may result from a variety of different causes.
Sleeping less than 6-8 hours of sleep, which usually means chronically sleep deprived, causes well documented health effects, most notably relating to mood/temperament/cognition, blood sugar control, and cardiovascular. These effects frequently improve with more sleep.
But it is not established that sleep depriving unwell people who sleep more than 8 hours would improve their health or prolong their life, and it would be unethical to do so. It would probably also be impossible to know how the sleep deprivation affected their health outcome. It may be that unwell people’s illnesses cause them to require more sleep. In any case, these were cardiovascular researchers, and Ive yet to read any advice from a sleep researcher advising people to sleep less, though they often stress improving sleep quality. Another factor may be the many medications which interfere with normal sleep architecture (the waves measured in sleep testing), which is key to sleep quality.
17
They controlled for physical activity. i can say without a doubt when a person vigorously exercises regularly , say 2- 3 hours 5 day a week, you need more than 8 hours of sleep. I felt best after 9 hours of sleep, also taking into account 8 hours of work along with the exercising. A typical office worker or stay-at-home mom who doesn't exercise probably 7-8 hours will suffice.
3
@lou andrews
Why are you singling out stay-at-home moms? (I am not one.) Many are actually extremely active. Chasing kids, fetching items, and cleaning are pretty similar to performing manual labor.
29
@lou andrews
And contrary to the Op Ed piece the other day, many stay at home moms do find or make the time for physical activity for their own well being.
9
I have a job that on certain days is very demanding physically (we are speaking heavy lifting, bending, kneeling all in an cold and damp environment for 6 hours). On those days I fall into my bed at 9 pm and don't wake up until 6 am the next day. On days with a lighter work load I get by with 7-8 hours of sleep.
8
But correlation still does not equal causation, only the scientific method can prove causation. So these conclusions bother me.
24
Correlational research is scientific. But you are right that the type of quantitative research discussed in the article cannot show causation.
8
@R- study results are correlational, and I think all that means is that there may be many different reasons a particular person seems to need more sleep. I see that as meaningful and in each case worth asking why?, then addressing each persons particular situation...It is a not a judgement or even a definitive symptom of pathology , just a flag that may alert some people to health problems they can address, like for example, they may have undiagnosed sleep apnea...
2
@R Almost all correlation studies that reach conclusions are wrong. Correlation studies only give suggestions for further lines of investigations. They do not lead to
correct conclusions about causation.
7
From what's reported here, this sounds really stupid. They have no causation and not even a theory of causation?
I'd venture that people who sleep more already have health issues- but telling them to get less sleep isn't going to cure them. It's going to make them more tired and thus probably less healthy.
How about- get enough sleep, based on whatever your body is telling you?
39