Talk:Sleep debt

message: If this article is fixed up, I believe it should be merged with Sleep deprivation (but certainly not in its current state.)  If not, the title should perhaps be changed to "Sleep deficit."
: I think this is a sufficiently different topic to warrant a separate article.  Both sleep debt and sleep deficit are commonly used to describe it from my experience. --Sydius (talk) 15:36, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge when Fixed

message: Can you need more sleep if you've been awake longer? For example, a normal adult needs 8 hours of sleep for every 16 they've been awake (assuming normal casual activity, and not hard labor, etc) , but what if the adult had been awake, 30 or 40 hours straight, would they need more than 8? The snare (talk) 00:48, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Short term sleep debt

message: I've searched for "Sleep Debt" and found many online articles that mention it, but I haven't been able to find any scientific studies.  I think the validity of this article is in doubt without scientific references.  I have also heard that sleep debt doesn't exist, so if anyone has any information on studies and experiments I believe they would be of great use to this article.  Mixx 19:19, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scientific Studies? 

message: There is debate among researchers as to whether there is such a thing as sleep debt.  The Sept 2004 issue of the journal Sleep (not available on-line) contained dueling editorials from two of the world's leading sleep researchers: David F Dinges and Jim Horne.  The popular understanding that sleep debt can be accumulated indefinitely (over 20 hours) is clearly wrong and not accepted by the scientists.  However, some feel that there is a sleep debt that can amount to under 20 hours.  I think it is worth keeping this article in Wikipedia, but it should be apparent that sleep debt is not fully acknowledged by the medical establishment.   Carax June 25, 2005
*The article doesn't present this debate; it only gives one point of view, and presents as facts this set of ideas which as a whole do not seem to be very widely accepted. --Mysidia (talk) 03:00, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Certainly this is a joke. Evidence IS scientific or it isn't evidence at all. The article can sputter all day about what the widely-held belief is, but it shouldn't make the claim that anything it says is factual or proven, only that it is a widely-held belief. A scant few hundred years ago, most people believed the Sun went around the Earth, but that didn't make it true. NPOV doesn't mean you give up all your intellectual standards.
The link above to "a copy of Jim Horne's portion of the Sleep article" now gives a 404.  It would be valuable if someone could find the whole debate online!  Thanks --Hordaland (talk) 21:00, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scientific Acceptance of Sleep Debt 

message: I just read the article, looking specifically for NPOV and contradicting arguments, and found neither. Furthermore, both tags tell me to check the talk page, and there is NOTHING about it. Can someone remove these tags? Obviously nobody has cared enough to lodge their complaint about POV or Contradictory statements, so the tags should be removed.
: I don't think it needs the NPOV tag in its current state. --Sydius (talk) 15:37, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems to me that the POV issues of this article lie in the presentation of a clearly debatable topic as scientific fact. The article appears almost as an ongoing debate between a proponent and a critic of the theory. In short, this is just a poorlly written article. If someone want to undertake the task, I suggest a dramatic rewrite of the article as a whole, stressing citation of primary literature. Don't look at me though, I'm too lazy to even sign in right now. On that note, please sign your comments with "~~~~" - User:Shaggorama 09:24, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality and Contradiction 

message: "Some also suggest that the quality of sleep can have an effect on the level of one's sleep debt." was removed from the article today.  It is probably true, and a source should be found.  (The worse your apnea, the longer you sleep and the sleepier you are in the daytime.)  --Hordaland (talk) 23:40, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sentence removed 

message: In one study, subjects were tested using the psychomotor vigilance task (Von Dongen et al., 2003, as cited in Walker, 2009). Different groups of people were tested with variable sleep times for two weeks: 8 hours, 6 hours, 4 hours, and total sleep deprivation. Each day they were tested for the number of lapses on the PVT. The results showed that as time went by, each group's performance worsened, with no sign of any stopping point. Another observation was that even just 6 hours of sleep a night was detrimental; people who slept 6 hours a night for 10 days had similar results to those who were completely sleep deprived for 1 day. This study gives further evidence of sleep debt, where the negative effects are shown to accumulate over time with less sleep.
I think this section needs to be removed or have one or more additional citations added. The only citation on this entire paragraph is currently a lecture given to an undergraduate class at a university. However, there's no real way to actually verify the content. I think it would be much better if the actual study could be cited, rather than a lecture that purportedly included this information. Bobman52 (talk) 22:58, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Might it be this one?  http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1446-9235.2003.00006.x/full  --Hordaland (talk) 01:40, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Remove or Modify Section?