back
8 comments
That is an excellent book. However, it doesn't contain a lot of practical advice (other than the 12 points at the end of the book, which were released already by National Sleep Association)

Somewhat tangetial, check out "The Circadian Code" as well - a lot of more practical advice in this one. They actually disagree on couple of delicate points, so not sure how can one make up one's mind as to which one's correct (e.g. one thinks there are night owls , one thinks it's a myth; one thinks we need 7 hours of sleep, one thinks that less than 8+ hours of sleep is devastating).

But in general, the message is the same - sleep well, try to fit into your circadian rhythm because all organs have internal clocks and being in rhythm benefits them all; some of them are interconnected, some are dependent on SCN, etc

In particular, the clinical trials with TRE (Time-Restricted eating, as in putting all calories in 8-12 hour intervals daily) seem amazing. Not a single side-effect, and all health markers seem to be improving under it.

One important study on mice concluded that mice that ate their high-fat, high-sugar food in 8 hour intervals (lets say, 8AM -> 4PM) compared to the control group of regular mice that had high-fat, high-sugar food all the time, ate more or less the same amount of calories daily, but the TRE-group had no increase of blood sugar or body fat.

Seems too good to be true, but apparently the study has been replicated..

I think I'm a night Owl with DSPS. For the past few weeks I have been trying to shift my schedule to wake at 4:30AM, go running, eat within 6 hours (Time Restricted Eating), and repeat - but my body is rejecting this like an allergy - I just feel awful.

I felt best running in the evening a little before sunset, getting back and eating within 6 hours, and going to bed around 2-3AM.

I had to change my schedule because we have bad Ozone problems in Phoenix AZ, so O3 around sunset was terribad — not worth running (if it was for health, anyhow).

Which book do you recommend? I feel like I'm fighting my body; since I began "waking" at 4AM (I think I'm already kinda awake) I can't sleep for more than 1-2 hours and get tired around 2PM. If I fall asleep at 2PM then I REALLY sleep, for many hours, and wake around 8PM.

Its a total mess.

I'm doing everything I know how: be in the sun early, melatonin, activity early, calories early, TRE, avoid blue light before bed, but my body still seems to reject the early bird protocol.

I recommend you to read "Why We Sleep", however try not to be discouraged when you think about your sleeping pattern and what the science says it damages, and how it is devastating, detrimental to your health and so on. It can be overwhelming a little. If I had to choose one, this is the book I'd recommend.

I've only got my experience with sleep deprivation and the methods I use to fix it. I had severe sleep deprivation and now I sleep 8 hours on average, with quality sleep.

I am a very light sleeper, on top of having problems falling asleep. This is what I did:

1) limiting the noise - I installed new windows and added new door that leads to my bedroom; I have a fan that I put next to me, put it on the highest speed and it absorbs any noise left. You can achieve this with a "white noise app", too.

2) completely dark room - I cover the windows outside, and then inside too (just in case any light escapes).

3) I fit my meals within 8 or 9 window as a part of TRE (Time-Restricted Eating) - my first meal is around 9AM. It does not have to be perfectly accurate (8:45, 9:15 acceptable)

4) strength training every day (assuming you are cardiovascularly fit); I do sprints as well (twice a week or so)

5) zero alcohol - it is one of the strongest REM suppressors

6) zero caffeine - very important. The average half-life of caffeine is 6 hours. That means that after 6 hours, you still have 50% caffeine in your body.

7) write down the following, and try to look at them from time to time: when you eat, what you eat, calories/macros breakdown, when you go to bed, when you fall asleep (approximately), when you wake-up, and a summary of the previous afternoon and night time - what you think is the reason for the sleep (or lack of) on the day of

8) try to fit in with your circadian rhythm. On average: we are at our peak 10AM-3PM - try to fit strenuous activities in this period (including heavy strength training - since I am a remote developer, I can do this).

9) I walk around 8-10 km every day, part of it in the morning, part of it around 20:00

10) try to limit blue light at night - some ideas: dim lights, orange/red glasses filter, orange/red light bulbs.

----- These were the major things that I did, and some combination of them seem to work. I don't know which ones precisely. Some things that didn't work for me:

1) some natural remedies like valerian tea, etc. - it made me worse, actually. 2) meditation - just doesn't work (for me). A lot of people swear by it.. 3) nothing of this sort: https://www.artofmanliness.com/articles/fall-asleep-fast/

Try to learn something from what you eat - but be brutally honest with yourself and write down everything that contains calories that you eat. I noticed that I sleep worse on the day I eat more sugars (and I hardly eat sugar at all!).

Hope this helps someone.. I know how hard it is without sleep.

Does anyone have links to solid studies that provide some better answers if there is a significant share of people who can live on little sleep? As they tell you that you won’t recognize yourself if you’ve slept enough, I don’t quite trust my instincts
Mice have very fast metabolism. Converting mouse models to humans requires adjustment.

There is some evidence that for humans eating all calories within 4 hour window might have similar effects.

I don’t really think it works in the same way for humans. I have been doing it for decades and I can assure you that my body fat increases if I overeat.
Have you been doing TRE in 8 hour intervals? There was a study on this as well, and it turns out a lot of people simply think they are doing TRE, but once they start writing down exactly what they eat and exactly when, turns out it's far away from TRE.

I've always believed in the law of thermodynamics myself - counting just the calories, but I keep an open mind for now until someone can refute it. The blood sugar thing makes sense to me with what I know about melatonin suppressing the insulin - that's a fact. But the rest of the conclusion.. who knows.

>I've always believed in the law of thermodynamics myself - counting just the calories

Counting just the calories ignores second order effect, and diet is all about second order effects.

If one could absolutely stick to counting the calories and eating the specified amount, of course one would lose weight.

But e.g. a diet of only having 1500 calories of broccoli for 1 year, and one would be ill from lack of tons of nutrients and vitamins (and they'd have stopped much earlier anyway).

E.g. if one eats certain kinds of foods, your appetite increases and it's more likely to overeat. Not giving one's self some foods they like, also makes it easier and more tempting to break a diet. And lots of other factors (exercise, hydration, nutrition, and so on) unrelated with counting calories, that still affect what we eat and how we process it.

One / your / it / we: make up your mind on pronoun and stick with it!
Maybe focus on the content?

Any disparity is just on this single sentence: "your appetite increases" (as opposed to "their" or "one's").

"Their" as used across the comment is not meant as the plural possessive. It's instead used as a gender-neutral pronoun (a common use) to avoid repeating "one's" or using "his/hers".

It, in "your appetite increases and it's more likely to overeat" etc., refers to the situation/possibility (as in "If they sky's cloudy it's more likely to rain"). It is normal to use different pronouns to refer to different entities.

Finally, the "we" at the end is perfectly fitting. It's a generalization, beyond what each individual does.

It was really distracting to read. The mix - and there was a they in there too - broke focus. Sorry.
End of the day you still have to burn more calories than you take in and also eat less carbs and sugars. I think once you do that any benefits are marginal(based on my personal experience)
Kevin Rose also did a podcast with Matthew Walker shortly after the book came out https://www.kevinrose.com/single-post/matthew-walker
I think lots of people reading hn have picked it up in recent weeks, I just finished the first two chapters myself :)
+1 was recommended to me a couple of weeks ago on HN. Most useful book I’ve read this year, easy.
I am reading this right now as a chronically sleep deprived person and it is terrifying - no less than 7 hours for me from now on.
According to the author, with 7 hours of quality sleep, you are still sleep deprived; after 24 days, you would be sleep deprived in amount equivalent to someone not sleeping 1 full night.
Most of the "oh crap this is really bad" examples provided so far (I'm not done with the book) seem to have been for 6 hours or less, I figured 7 hours is a reasonable absolute minimum. I will aim for eight. However at this rate I'm afraid the more paranoid I get about not getting enough sleep the more difficult it becomes for me to fall asleep. I've never had issues sleeping, but this book coupled with having just moved to an apartment with a train nearby that's taking some getting used to is making me lie in bed and think about needing to sleep for longer before actually drifting off to sleep.
Seconding this. His data on agents of sleep disruption/degradation of sleep quality were eye-opening.
Thanks. Saw this book being recommended multiple times here so just bought it :)
Joe Rogan is one of the biggest propagators of pseudoscience. It's not a good sign when a guest appears on his show. Joe usually tries to rope them into talking about his two favorite health topics: cholesterol and testosterone.
I completely disagree, at the very least it is not intentional. He's interested in a lot of topics and explores a wide range of topics, he's not going to get everything right. What I will say is that he brings on a ton of interesting guests and they should not be judged because they participate in Joe's podcast.

> It's not a good sign when a guest appears on his show

Why does this matter? I find this line of reasoning corrosive and hypo-critical. Each guest should be judged on the basis of their merits, character, not who they choose to have a conversation with.

Eh, I've listened to hundreds of his episodes. Some are good for a laugh, some have interesting guests and I learn a thing or two, some I can't make it through. Not everything has to be a text book. What exactly is the problem? I find the unedited, uncensored, long form, 1 on 1, conversational style very appealing - Joe is just a chatter box to keep the guest talking.
I presented the problem clearly.
You must not listen to him recently. I've listened to maybe 15 episodes and haven't heard either of those yet. He's been a pretty level headed host. It could be that he's better than he used to be because I've only listened to recent episodes, but it's been great so far.
I haven't listened to a lot of Joe Rogan but from what I have listened (maybe last 6-7 episodes) and wearing my Dr hat I feel he fluctuates. He seems to walk a pretty level line but then occasionally drops things that are demonstrably false. More out of ignorance than malice I believe
Hi atomical, that's an interesting claim. Can you explain more why you believe that? I have listened through a couple of episodes and those made for interesting discussions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4LtdUC14hY

edit: I get that he makes fun of him in later episodes, but that's only gonna pop up if you're watching youtube. for people listening on a podcast app, or with adblocking, or whatever else, they don't see the disclaimers. he's not a journalist and is rarely informed enough to challenge his guests, which totally counteracts his "open-minded" reason for having alt-right, pseudo-scienctific, snake oil salesmen, and bigoted people on his show. he's a dunce for giving his platform over to such obvious hucksters so often, which is only bolstered every time eddie bravo comes on (an idiot if there ever was one).