Thread: Sleep article

Originally Posted by thedogsmeow

For all you lucid dreamers that use techniques which require you to get up after a few hours of sleep, I thought you might find this article interesting: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080101/...sleep_diabetes

The article says that sleep disruptions may increase diabetes risk. Well, if this is true then having a baby represents a far greater negative impact on your health than doing WBTBs. A new baby typically results in 400-750 hours lost sleep for parents in the first year, and one of the best predictors of insomnia later in life is the development of bad habits from having sleep disturbed by young children.

Thor, good point and I know when my son was a baby, I stayed up alot longer than when I do WBTB!

You did WBTB whilst looking after a baby? Talk about difficulty.

Originally Posted by Jdeadevil

You did WBTB whilst looking after a baby? Talk about difficulty.

Nah.. I didn't know about lucid dreaming when my son was a baby.

I was just making an observation about how much time I was awake with a baby (easily an hour or more every night/morning) vs how much time I'm awake when I WBTB (20 minutes or less and only on the weekends).

Thanks thedogsmeow - that was interesting.

Perhaps we don't have to worry too much though. Most deep sleep is done in the first half of the night (or not, if you have a baby!) and most waking to provoke LDs is done well into the second half - after five hours or so.

I wonder if shift workers are at a higher risk of type 2?

I read this today on some blog. Crazy stuff.

The article refers to SW sleep which tends to occur earlier in the night. People tend to do WBTBs later in the night, when there is less SWS and more REM sleep. Perhaps the news is not that bad for lucid dreamers.


OOPs, I just saw Jourdemayne's post