Sleep 'boosts brain cell numbers'
bbc.co.uk
bbc.co.uk
/s
[NB I know myself that I can do particularly silly things when tired so I will sometimes let myself spend a long time investigating a problem but I won't fix it until the next day.]
Personally I wanted to force people out of the office much earlier on one of them because pretty much nothing got done when people were staying late, but it left everyone more tired in the morning, but the CEO was of the "more hours == more work done" mentality and wouldn't listen.
http://www.inc.com/jessica-stillman/why-working-more-than-40...
The studies showed that there's a short term gain followed by a fall in productivity.
Another big lesson, which is more general and took a few more mistakes, was the value of stepping away from a problem after intense conscious focus on it. This may or may not mean sleep on it but just means taking your mind off it and let the back of your head tick away on it. I think this might actually be the source of "eureka" moments too, which means flashes of ingenuity are not exactly what they seem!
I have also read some accounts[5] of people who quit polyphasic, but go back to it in various forms when they have time constraints (and apparently adapting back is not very difficult once you've done it once; my guess is that the ability to nap efficiently is not lost, and is the main stumbling block to getting started).
So if by "not sustainable", you mean "very hard to fit into a monophasic sleeping world", then yes, that's true. If you mean "after a week or two, you'll feel exhausted", then yes, that's also true. It takes longer than that to adapt.
If you mean "it's not enough sleep even after you adapt", then where are the posts you're talking about?
[1] http://ohgodthechicken.com/sleep-discipline-experiment/
[2] http://www.stevepavlina.com/blog/2007/03/polyphasic-sleep-on...
[3] http://forum.polyphasicsociety.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1095
[4] http://forum.polyphasicsociety.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1060
Your "citations" are impressive, but at the end of the day they are just anecdotal evidence.
We also have many accounts of people who claim homeopathy works. Should we believe them?
But it doesn't take much evidence to refute an absolute claim like "polyphasic sleep is unsustainable". If someone is sleeping for 2 hours per night for a five months and says they feel energetic, that's damned compelling. That isn't "It really seemed to cure my headache!" It's "I am still functioning normally after 20 weeks with only 2 hours of sleep per night."
You also can't reasonably compare the priors of homeopathy and polyphasic sleep. If homeopathy worked, we'd have to toss out just about all of the theory behind physics and medicine and start over from scratch. Polyphasic sleep doesn't contradict current scientific knowledge.
You are terribly and hopelessly confused, dude. I didn't say anything of that nature.
I did not intend my statement as calling you an asshole. Rather, I perceived your comment as assholish. I assume that you are not an asshole, so I was requesting that you not act like one.
I tried out polyphasic sleep in 2006. I spent a lot of time before, during, and after reading all the research I could find. I found no research on long term polyphasic sleep (short naps). There is some short term research that shows it can work as a temporary solution when regular sleep is not possible (eg solo sailing competitions). Everything I've read from sleep researchers has said that they think it's completely unsustainable because you're constantly in sleep debt and you're probably negating sleep mechanisms they're not aware of yet (such as the original article here).
My personal anecdote agrees with the researchers. I was able to do it but I always felt about 80-90% normal, like I was functioning at a lower level. I felt cold all the time, possibly due to incorrect hormone levels from lack of sleep (pure speculation).
Eventually the sleep debt caught up to me. I started sleeping through my alarm. 25 minutes of sleep would turn into 2 hours. At least once I turned off an alarm on the other side of the room and went back to bed with no memory of doing it.
I recommend trying it if you can fit it in your schedule. It was a very interesting experience and taught me a lot about sleep. You need to dedicate at least a month, a week or two isn't enough to "adjust" (which never truly happens).
> I found no research on long term polyphasic sleep (short naps)
That is correct. The research doesn't exist. That's why I said "eh, maybe" in my original comment. Whether or not polyphasic truly can work in the long term for most people is not a settled question. It is completely possible that the anecdotes of people who are successful in the long term simply have an unusual genetic predisposition to needing less sleep. There is a plausible rationale for a selection bias on multiple levels to explain the anecdotes; people who need less sleep may be more interested in sleep hacking, and they would be far more likely to make it past the initial adaptation period.
It's also far more likely that polyphasic sleep schedules that include at least one period of "core sleep" are sustainable (e.g. Everyman) than nap-only schedules. And at the extreme end you have biphasic sleep, which gives 6-7 hours and actually has some historical evidence to back it up.
Of course, biphasic won't get you a 20 hour workday. Everyman can, if all you do is sleep and work. That's going to be unhealthy for other reasons, but whether or not it's unhealthy because of sleep deprivation is an open question.
Problems that I spend hours on the night before seem to solve themselves magically in minutes. After a while I got the hint: Just go to bed and sleep. You save time and feel better.
0: http://www.salon.com/2012/03/14/bring_back_the_40_hour_work_...
I doubt it would be sufficient in itself to reduce sleep needs, however. Our bodies are practically speaking modal organisms, and there's a lot we only do when sleeping.
Sleep helps replinsh brain cells - let's make a pill that does just that so we don't need to sleep as much! Vegitables are good for you - let's have a pill that has all their nutrients so we don't need to eat them! Exercise betters the mood - let's isolate those chemicals so we don't need to exercise! Being barefoot is good for you - let's all buy "barefoot shoes"!
I really don't get it. Why are people so averse to natural ways and ofetn simple moderation. I did not grow up in North America, so maybe it's just a cultural difference.
see http://www.sleepfoundation.org/article/white-papers/how-much... for details.
Assuming that polyphasic sleep schedules are at least as effective as monophasic sleep, one such nap should be worth about an 1h20m of normal sleep. If you can fit even one in, and stick to taking it every day, it could be hugely beneficial. If you can manage to slip three of them in, you might be able to totally counteract the effects of your situation (although people seem to have trouble adopting polyphasic schedules that are designed to fit their schedule, rather than their circadian rhythm).
seriously. why?
This is what my mother-in-law has to deal with every day.
Sometimes people "[do] so much" because they have no reasonable alternatives. Being overwhelmed is a fact of life for them.
my response was directed at him, not your hypothetical single mother with a special needs child.
OK, point taken and understood. My apologies for taking your comment out-of-context.
> not your hypothetical single mother with a special needs child
It wasn't hypothetical. That's an accurate description of the life my mother-in-law leads.