0
   

Elimination of Sleep.

 
 
fresco
 
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2003 01:54 pm
In a recent TV programme

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2003/narcolepsy.shtml

the claim was made that it might be possible shortly to take a drug which would eliminate the need to sleep, with no side effects. It then went on to speculate what effect such a drug would have on work patterns and society in general.

What do you think ?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 3,848 • Replies: 47
No top replies

 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2003 02:10 pm
Whoa. I can't imagine that there would truly be no side effects. I mean, maybe the drug itself doesn't cause nausea or impotency or whatever, but sleep happens for a REASON. I believe that, anyway. There's been a lot of research about how sleep helps our brains, assists with learning, etc. This goes for the body itself, too.

I also think that we Americans are way too workaholic anyway. If we didn't have to sleep anymore -- yoiks. The implications are rather mind boggling.
0 Replies
 
jespah
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2003 02:15 pm
What an odd thing - which I bet springs from some idea of making us all work as close to 24/7 as possible. Egad.

Can you imagine (I feel a sci-fi story coming on - soz, you feel like collaborating?) an entire society wherein this is pumped into the air, the water supply, the food they eat? And the only ones who sleep (and dream) are the very wealthy?

Hello, brave new world.
0 Replies
 
perception
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2003 02:29 pm
Fresco
Good to see you back on the forum---that was an interesting article but it could be a very dangerous route. On the other side of the coin they didn't seem to consider the obvious need for the brain to sleep. I believe this is caused by the fact that the brain needs time to consolidate and categorize the information with which it has been bombarded all day long by the senses. It is during sleep that this occurs. It is my belief that the brain must be free from that constant stream of information provided by the sensory apparatus. Of course it is never completely free from the sensory input but it is slowed considerably just by closing the eyes, then when sleeping most of the other sensory input is minimal.

I will attempt to provide some meaningful authoritative sources but I wanted to respond just briefly to your query with my suspicians.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2003 02:31 pm
Oooh, Jes, major sci-fi story material! Only problem is, I need one of those durned pills to have time to contribute. Shocked Still, lotsa potential, I'm interested.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2003 02:33 pm
I would be interested to read what you come up with, Perception, as this is exactly how i see the function of sleep. Many, many years ago, i read several works by Anne Faraday, on the subject of sleep research. Unfortunately, i don't recall enough to make a statement about it, but i do believe this was how Dr. Faraday viewed the need for sleep, as well. I look forward to what you may come up with.
0 Replies
 
perception
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2003 02:39 pm
This is one quickie from the Franklin Institure:

http://sln.fi.edu/brain/sleep/index.html
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2003 02:40 pm
Quote:


http://research.unc.edu/endeavors/win2000/sleep.htm
0 Replies
 
perception
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2003 02:46 pm
Ok Now try that link above
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2003 02:49 pm
I read it, but note it seems to be more about shifting patterns and staying awake when needed, not being awake ALL the time. That is a different kettle of fish.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2003 02:52 pm
All the links here work for me. I thought you were referring to fresco's original link. That's what my comments were about -- it's more about keeping pilots awake than keeping everyone up 24/7.
0 Replies
 
perception
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2003 02:56 pm
Go back and read the last two sentences in Fresco's post
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2003 02:58 pm
Re: Elimination of Sleep.
Here's the pertinent part of the article:

Quote:
Orexin has potential to become a lifechanging drug for narcoleptics. It could also alter all our lifestyles. Orexin, it seems, plays a vital role in waking us up. Without it we would be naturally asleep all the time. At night, your body clock stops the hypothalamus producing the neurochemical and we go to sleep. Could an orexin drug keep us awake all the time, without side effects?

The US Army is interested in the potential . Its pilots currently make use of amphetamine drugs to help them combat tiredness. Yet it is hard to think of an environment in which the drugs' downsides -twitchiness, panic attacks - could be more risky. Any drug that was able naturally to boost alertness would be a vast improvement for them. The 'voluntary' use of amphetamines by US Air Force pilots was raised as a factor in the friendly fire deaths of four Canadian soldiers killed in Afghanistan in April 2002.

It could be equally applicable for all of us as we increasingly move towards a round-the-clock society. Shiftworkers may one day benefit from drugs to ease their bodyclocks into alternative sleep patterns. The fear is that we could be starting down the road to a world of relentless pressure.


The sentence in red does indeed imply that it could be a 24/7 thing, but nothing else does, and that asks a question ("could it happen without side effects?") rather than answering it ("yes, it can".)

The more specific examples are about keeping awake or shifting body clocks.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2003 03:04 pm
More about sleep:

Quote:
Although no one knows for sure why we sleep, there are a number of theories. Sleep may have evolved to protect animals from their predators by reducing their activity during the times when they are most vulnerable.


Research has shown that REM and NREM sleep may serve specific biological functions. Sleep deprivation studies reveal that humans and other animals respond to sleep loss in the same way. When study subjects are deprived of REM sleep, they tend to spend longer periods in REM sleep during their next sleeping period to make up for the loss. REM sleep after deprivation is more intense, with more eye movements per minute than in normal REM sleep. Similarly, subjects deprived of NREM sleep usually spend more time in NREM sleep afterward. EEGs measuring brain activity show that this rebound NREM sleep also differs from normal NREM sleep. This research suggests that the body needs adequate levels of both REM and NREM sleep. This conclusion has led many sleep researchers to believe that the two kinds of sleep serve different biological purposes, although the exact functions remain unclear.


The relationship between maturity at birth and REM sleep suggests that REM sleep plays a role in the development of the brain. REM sleep may have a related function later in life as well. However, that function remains a mystery.


http://www.npi.ucla.edu/sleepresearch/encarta/Article.htm
0 Replies
 
Heeven
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2003 04:38 pm
Our bodies and minds are built for a certain amount of wear and tear over our lifetimes. As it is, lots of older people find one or the other not working as well as they would like. If we were to reduce or get rid of sleep altogether and be "active" 24/7 then I am sure our parts will wear out even sooner, either giving us less years to live or less faculties to live with as we get older. When we can make brain cells and body parts keep us afloat longer then maybe we can entertain a sleepless culture.
0 Replies
 
perception
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Jan, 2003 09:40 pm
Setanta

This link remotely supports my theory that you expressed interest in. http://www.csa.com/hottopics/sleep/biblio01.html

The title of the above link is: Origin and Evolution of Sleep

It is suggested that as the complexities of the brain increased, it led to conflicts between sensory input processing during resting wakefullness and the need to suppress the sensory input to allow dynamic stabilization of infrequently used circuitry encoding memories which can only occur during sleep.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jan, 2003 10:50 am
Ta, Boss, thanks fer the link . . .
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jan, 2003 01:04 pm
Good to see you all.

I too am skeptical of "no side effects". However this depends perhaps on definition. i.e. without sleep we may die "earlier" but will we have "experienced" less ?

BTW I recommend the programme transcript link for further discussion points.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jan, 2003 01:16 pm
Here's another thought: Animal life on this planet becomes acclimated to their environment. If the earth had 24 hours of sunlight, would not our bodies be awake 24 hours a day? What's the difference between living 50 years 24 hours every day vs 100 years living 18 hours every day? c.i.
0 Replies
 
perception
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jan, 2003 01:39 pm
Fresco

I think I see where you want to go with this---die young with a smile on your face!
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Elimination of Sleep.
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/16/2024 at 04:57:45