__/ [ Simon Templar ] on Tuesday 23 May 2006 14:16 \__
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> I thought that this following new article on sleep would be interesting to
>> some.
>>
>>
http://www.economist.com/intelligentlife/wellbeing/displayStory.cfm?story_id=6909483
>>
>> ,----[ Snippet ]
>> | But a new, contrarian school of thought is emerging. The eight-hours
>> | mantra has no more scientific basis than the tooth fairy, says Neil
>> | Stanley,
>> | head of sleep research at the Human Psychopharmacology Research Unit at
>> | the University of Surrey in Britain. He believes that everyone has their
>> | own individual "sleep need" which can be anywhere between three and 11
>> | hours. "If you're a three-hour-a-night person, you need three; if you're
>> | 11, you need 11". To find out, he says, simply sleep until you wake
>> | naturally, without the aid of an alarm clock. Feel rested? That's your
>> | sleep need.
>> `----
>
> Works for me! :-)
No more guilt waking up after 5 hours in bed, I suppose. *smile* The body
senses its needs. The article provides a nice backing to one approach and
smashes the arguments of those who advocate 7 hours, saying they are the
least, as well as a necessity. Some time ago I read that oversleeping can
lead to a shorter life (not necessarily life as measured while one is
awake). I don't know if it's true though.
> --
> The views I present are that of my own and NOT of any organisation I may
> belong to.
>
> 73 de Simon, VK3XEM.
>
http://web.acma.gov.au/pls/radcom/client_search.client_lookup?pCLIENT_NO=157452
--
Roy S. Schestowitz
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
2:50pm up 25 days 21:29, 11 users, load average: 0.46, 0.77, 0.74
http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine
|
|
