Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

helm t1_ix33ty3 wrote

The two strongest factors, however, were:

  1. Happiness (happy people are much more alert in the morning)
  2. Age (older people are more alert in the morning)
165

N8CCRG t1_ix3cvei wrote

For clarity, the results say those two factors are the strongest indicators for the set-point of daily alertness, i.e. how alert you will eventually be. Not how quickly you get to your set-point in the morning.

In other words, happier and older people will be the more alert than unhappier younger people. How they slept, how much exercise they get and their breakfast data will direct how quickly they get there.

77

helm t1_ix3f8yj wrote

Thanks, that’s clarifying!

12

DoneisDone45 t1_ix5d45i wrote

> Happiness (happy people are much more alert in the morning) >

that's because if you're unhappiness, you don't want to wake up. you gotta wake up and go through all that pain all over again.

10

Publius82 t1_ix5u2s3 wrote

I think you may be conflating

0

DoneisDone45 t1_ix7gczl wrote

well, i'm saying it from personal experience. when i'm depressed, it's very hard to get up. when i'm not, i get up immediately to start the day.

but yes, now that i read it over, it's about alertness and not willingness to get up. so mine has nothing to do with it.

2

MurderousMaraca t1_ix5ehq6 wrote

Maybe people who are alert in the morning are happy and not the other way around.

6

[deleted] t1_ix37esm wrote

[deleted]

−45

Fisher-Peartree t1_ix39o4l wrote

Have you read the article before sharing it? The researchers found what u/helm wrote: “Mood, specifically levels of daily happiness, together with the age of the individual, were the two most significant predictors of trait alertness (Fig. 5b, c), such that higher levels of happiness and increasing chronological age were each positively predictive of higher inherent levels of alertness (r = 0.67, p < 0.001 and r = 0.345, p < 0.001 respectively; Supplementary Figs. 3 and 4, with p-values adjusted for multiple comparisons using the Holm-Bonferroni method). Just below Figure 5.

27

InTheEndEntropyWins t1_ix3992o wrote

Interesting. I wonder how many people think they are night owls but aren't genetically night owls and are messing up their circadian rhythm through stuff like lack of exercise.

&#x200B;

>How people wake up and regain alertness in the hours after sleep is related to how they are sleeping, eating, and exercising. Here, in a prospective longitudinal study of 833 twins and genetically unrelated adults, we demonstrate that how effectively an individual awakens in the hours following sleep is not associated with their genetics, but instead, four independent factors: sleep quantity/quality the night before, physical activity the day prior, a breakfast rich in carbohydrate, and a lower blood glucose response following breakfast.

44

ObscureD_Lee t1_ix3im1z wrote

I was the first person in my family to break the night shift cycle. Both grandparents, parents and my siblings work night shift. I did for 10 years too but now I’m on days. 5yrs later I’m still waking up at 3am with a bedtime of 9pm and it feels weird everyday still. It is not hard for me to wake up, lastest I’ll get out of bed any day is about 5. Thankfully I can go to work whenever so I get to work about 430am and leave at 6pm and that keeps my brain happy. I feel like I wasted the day if I don’t stay on schedule.

17

blumdiddlyumpkin t1_ix4536p wrote

13.5 hour work days keep your brain happy?

15

ObscureD_Lee t1_ix46k81 wrote

Born and raised in it. It’s my hobby, it’s what I do. It doesn’t feel like work. That’s all besides the point. It’s always been night shift. Even after switching to days for years now I still very easily can pull off night shifts. I think night shifts really changes something in the brain and body. You want to be awake in the daylight naturally so you don’t sleep a lot as is.

2

Intensityintensifies t1_ix6deei wrote

What do you do for work? It sounds like you come from a family of vampire hunters. Or maybe you are the vampires…

1

ObscureD_Lee t1_ix6hwiv wrote

Food and medical carton mfg. It’s my families business.

4

2bunreal24 t1_ix3qyz2 wrote

What field are you in?

I’m picturing that you’re a descendent from snow white’s dwarves and your fam goes and mines jewels together.

12

ObscureD_Lee t1_ix3smhe wrote

Food/medical packaging. High volume contracts through brokers for companies like 3M, Unilever, Walmart or Conagra etc.

3

Drekalo t1_ix4pitm wrote

How do you control for a lower blood glucose response if not through genetics?

3

AnynameIwant1 t1_ix6viik wrote

I would like to disagree based on my own experience (I used to say I was a night owl). I have a genetic condition that causes me to have major problems with histamine (including too much in my body). The histamine causes me to have insomnia daily. If I didn't take my medications to treat it (can't be cured), I would fall asleep around 3-4am every day. Here is a study about it histamine's influence on sleep:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3016451/

Info about how my condition impacts sleep: https://mastcell360.com/fixing-sleep-challenges-in-mast-cell-activation-syndrome-and-histamine-intolerance/

2

d_phase t1_ix3fzt3 wrote

I'm actually quite surprised between the discrepancy between the OGTT results and the high carb breakfast. They basically produced opposite results in alertness.

Did they control for the form of the breakfast, liquid or solid? I can't see it as I write this comment but I think some of the breakfast variants had a milkshake component, and I'm wondering if solid vs liquid actually has a large effect here. I didn't read the full paper so if someone did, please comment.

Also, it was weird when they said for people not to consume caffeine only when doing the OGTT. Even if caffeine consumption was low overall during the study, getting people who otherwise drink caffeine to not, surely would affect morning alertness.

32

LunarGiantNeil t1_ix3v4vd wrote

Here's the relevant section on morning caffeine:

"Moreover, caffeine intake was largely absent for the majority of observations (86% null + 12% missing = 98%), suggesting that most breakfast meals were not accompanied by any caffeinated drinks. Because of this low variance, breakfast caffeine intake was not included in the model. Nevertheless, including breakfast caffeine intake did not change the significance of the other predictors, and breakfast caffeine intake by itself was not a significant predictor of morning alertness — both with and without the OGTT (p = 0.11 and p = 0.605 respectively)."

Big Breakfast can take a flying leap though. I wake up before everyone in my family, make all their breakfasts and get people ready for school, motivating their slow-to-wake butts through the morning and I just skip breakfasts entirely, except for my double shot of black espresso, and then don't eat again until dinner.

Perhaps I am a mutant.

14

DrSuchong t1_ix4bx67 wrote

It's anecdotal, but I've noticed if I eat most things for breakfast it throws off my alterness for a while, and if it's a carby breakfast it kinda sets the pace for what kind of food I have that day. Almonds, cheese, and a lil dried fruit seems to be the perfect one for me that keeps me alert and eating better the rest of the day.

6

LunarGiantNeil t1_ix4cut2 wrote

That's an interesting idea to try!

I usually do intermittent fasting following my skipped breakfast because my workplace has no accommodations for lunches (ie, no fridge or kitchenette, no break room except a separate building a few minutes walk away through winter cold half of the year) and as long as I don't eat any breakfast I can avoid any feelings of hunger or sluggishness until dinner.

But on the weekends it might be fun to experiment with some early nuts and cheeses. I enjoy making shakshuka or stuff on those days, more for enjoyment than anything else, so I could run a little experiment and see how my alertness/hunger/QoL factors change on a day where I eat a mix of healthy fats and nutrient-dense foods.

1

LenokanBuchanan t1_ix3y0a8 wrote

I was trying to copy/paste some of the relevant parts for you on the macronutrient discussion but honestly there’s a LOT there and if you’re interested, it’s worth the read. If you scroll down to the Discussion portion of the paper, then scroll down a few more paragraphs, it goes into some detail about their mechanisms. Most notably I think it the distinction between glucose bs fructose, and also the overall macronutrient breakdown of the meal.

“First, unlike the OGTT, the High Carb breakfast a contained 23% proportion of other macronutrients, of which 16% was fat and 7% was protein. The ratio of carbohydrates-to-protein is known to modulate tryptophan availability in the brain and thus serotonin synthesis26. Specifically, pure carbohydrate (i.e., a ratio of 1:0, as seen in the OGTT) may drive the strongest sedative effect through a surge in serotonin synthesis and thus brain-available tryptophan associated with impaired alertness27. Our finding would therefore suggest that the combination of other macronutrients (e.g., protein, fat, fibre) paired with carbohydrate determines the true synergistic impact of the meal on subsequent alertness.”

Anyway, the discussion is really interesting tbh and worth the read.

4

blossomsofblood t1_ix535zk wrote

I don’t quite understand the biochemistry. How is the impact of glucose and fructose consumption different?

1

odd-42 t1_ix3y7zl wrote

Anyone else shocked by the high-protein vs. high carb effect on subsequent alertness? I have always assumed that the high protein would result in the best alertness for the longest period of time, but take a bit longer to peak.

7

bigjilm123 t1_ix49ega wrote

There’s something deeper in this. Lower BG post a high carb meal means high insulin sensitivity and a strongly functioning pancreas.

Would a high protein low carb meal resulting in a lower BG be better for someone diabetic or pre-diabetic? What about a high fat high carb meal that is easier for the insulin to work on?

9

GyrosCZ t1_ix4aaew wrote

I have D for 20 year. I simply cannot eat nearly anything with some carbohydrates in the morning. The spike up is insane.
So yeah insulin sensitivy is great.

3

bigjilm123 t1_ix4ax4l wrote

I used to love oats, blueberries and soy milk for breakfast. My Dexcom shows me spiking like I ate freakin sweet tarts and Mountain Dew.

2

tornpentacle t1_ix4s0tk wrote

What do you mean by saying "that is easier for the insulin to work on"? Fat and carbs, when eaten together, produce vastly higher spikes in blood glucose levels, so wouldn't that be much more difficult for a diabetic?

Edit: also, be careful with all that rollin' and a wheelin'.

0

bigjilm123 t1_ix4tn8l wrote

I’m Type 1, and fat slows down the absorption of carbs for me. Example is pizza - I could eat a pizza crust and sauce and dose it pretty easily. Add in the cheese and it results in delaying the BG spike causing the classic pizza rollercoaster. It’s quite maddening as it’s my favourite food and one of the most difficult for me to eat.

3

iHateReddit_srsly t1_ix6avtq wrote

I wish someone would summarize this. I want to know what the outcomes were but I don't want to go through a 3000 page study

1

odd-42 t1_ix6dkg6 wrote

Sleep a little later than normal, go to bed slightly later than normal, eat a high carb breakfast and you will never alert for 3-4 hours. Being depressed and anxious are kind of bad, alcohol and caffeine had surprisingly little influence.

1

Sunflowers_Happify t1_ix4dyck wrote

*How effectively a man awakens in the hours following sleep, since no women were included in the study.

3

tornpentacle t1_ix4stx6 wrote

Where are you getting that? The methodology doesn't specify sex at all, and the word "male" only occurs once in the entire document, in the title of one of the references. Would you mind please pointing to the section where you got that?

11

AltAcc4545 t1_ix60m8g wrote

I think that the person you replied to is referring to the term ‘individual’ in the title.

2

AutoModerator t1_ix30j5e wrote

Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our normal comment rules apply to all other comments.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

Kike328 t1_ix3y4uj wrote

What I find interesting, is how morning alertness is unaffected by a morning coffee

0

DopeDetective t1_ix3a5p8 wrote

I think there is probably a genetic component as well

im very unhealthy as far as food/exercise & I only seem to need 6-7hrs of sleep

I wake up instantly in the morning with no grogginess & I'm immediately out of bed

−12

ExploratoryCucumber t1_ix3cxwl wrote

> How people wake up and regain alertness in the hours after sleep is related to how they are sleeping, eating, and exercising. Here, in a prospective longitudinal study of 833 twins and genetically unrelated adults, we demonstrate that how effectively an individual awakens in the hours following sleep is not associated with their genetics, but instead, four independent factors: sleep quantity/quality the night before, physical activity the day prior, a breakfast rich in carbohydrate, and a lower blood glucose response following breakfast.

19

DopeDetective t1_ix3dj2y wrote

sure but I guarantee sleep quality/quantity/ability & glucose response are both effected by genetics if not defined by it.

−16

ExploratoryCucumber t1_ix3dz58 wrote

Please provide a peer reviewed study backing up your opinion you're trying to pass off as a guarantee.

19

DopeDetective t1_ix3eye8 wrote

it's common sense imo. diabetes is genetic. circadian rythm is genetic. insomnia & sleep apnea are genetic.

https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2019/08/415261/after-10-year-search-scientists-find-second-short-sleep-gene

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3734884/

−13

odd-42 t1_ix3xxvc wrote

We do research to find out if common sense is correct, sometimes it isn’t. In this case, nwhat you view as common sense was found to be incorrect.

8

DopeDetective t1_ix3zpdc wrote

no, i think it mostly says that if you are healthy & therefore genetically predispositioned for good sleep then you can still disrupt it by not following these 4 things

but if you are predispositioned for bad sleep then these 4 things probably won't help

"Study participants were healthy individuals aged 18–65 years, who were able to provide written informed consent. Exclusion criteria included ongoing inflammatory disease; cancer in the last three years (excluding skin cancer); long-term gastrointestinal disorders including irritable bowel disease or Celiac disease (gluten allergy), but not including irritable bowel syndrome; taking immunosuppressants or antibiotics as daily medication within the last three months; capillary glucose level of >12 mmol l–1 (or 216 mg dl–1), or type 1 diabetes mellitus, or taking medication for type 2 diabetes mellitus; currently experiencing acute clinically diagnosed depression; heart attack (myocardial infarction) or stroke in the last 6 months; pregnancy; and vegan or experiencing an eating disorder or unwilling to consume foods that are part of the study. "

4

odd-42 t1_ix3zyrc wrote

Are you saying that those people who were excluded were predisposed to poor sleep or predisposed to poor sleep because of underlying conditions which typically cause poor sleep?

2

DopeDetective t1_ix40v3h wrote

right they excluded a bunch of people who are genetically predisposed to poor sleep due to underlying conditions and then claimed there's no genetic relationship.

like if you cant eat high carb due to a genetic condition then you're never going to be able to meet those 4 requirements & therefore genetically predisposed to poor sleep.

2

odd-42 t1_ix44wau wrote

Ah, i think I see where we are not agreeing: I think they are saying that there is not a genetic factor for poor sleep that is “pure”. As in not secondary to other factors, but a primary genetic factor.

2

candykissnips t1_ix725yt wrote

Yep, you have been correct this entire time. This sub is sometimes insufferable.

2

narrill t1_ix5kj6n wrote

This is an incredibly weak argument. They excluded a number of conditions that can affect sleep quality, only some of which are exclusively genetic. And even then, "you're genetically predisposed to a condition that may affect your sleep quality" is a very different statement than "you're genetically predisposed to poor sleep," which is essentially what your initial comment of "I'm unhealthy but I still feel alert in the morning, therefore genetics" was saying.

1

DopeDetective t1_ix5u94a wrote

there's a gene that allows people to be fully rested after 4hrs. so clearly sleep quantity is influenced by genetics. circadian rythm is influenced by genetics.. theres just so much that is influenced by genetics that it just seems misleading to say there is no genetic connection the way they claim

0

narrill t1_ix67hkw wrote

> This study has to be wrong, it's just common sense

1

DopeDetective t1_ix8sjw4 wrote

the study says that alertness requires a high carb breakfast & glucose response. some people have a genetic predisposition that makes this impossible & these people were excluded from the study. what am I missing.

1

wigg1es t1_ix3aqvo wrote

I wake up the same way, but I've been in the same routine for so long I don't think I can actually say whether I'm in the best routine or not.

I do watch what I eat and am fairly active though.

2

DopeDetective t1_ix3b9ek wrote

I change up my sleeping routine somewhat often. I was previously doing 12-7 but now I'm doing 9-4 which I actually really enjoy for the peaceful alone time in the morning

might not have any relation but I only sleep on my back as well

1

InTheEndEntropyWins t1_ix3kky8 wrote

While you think you are bad, I suspect that many people are way worse when it comes to messing up their circadian rhythm.

2

DopeDetective t1_ix3lc4t wrote

well sure but they're saying there's no genetic component yet we know that sleep is strongly influenced by genetics & so is liver function such as diabetes and glucose response

0

InTheEndEntropyWins t1_ix3nueq wrote

> we know that sleep is strongly influenced by genetics

I'd argue that very little is genetic compared to environmental factors.

This study used identical twins, so they were able to control for the genetic factor and measure the impact of environment.

So, while they say there was no genetic component, I think was it means is the genetic component has no material impact compared to environment.

3

DopeDetective t1_ix3ogzc wrote

well for example, a person could eat well, exercise daily, and go to bed with time for 8hrs of sleep but if they have sleep apnea or insomnia (genetic conditions) theyre still not going to wakeup feeling rested.

on the other hand, there are people with a gene that allows them to only need 4hrs of sleep so they would be just fine staying up super late

people with diabetes (genetic) can't have high carb breakfasts and their glucose response doesn't work so they will never achieve all 4 of these important things & that's caused by genetics

3

InTheEndEntropyWins t1_ix3sog9 wrote

>well for example, a person could eat well, exercise daily, and go to bed with time for 8hrs of sleep but if they have sleep apnea or insomnia (genetic conditions) theyre still not going to wakeup feeling rested.

OK I agree there may be some people with genetic diseases, but I think they would be in the minority. I would also class type 2 diabetes and apnoea as primarily environmental issues, due to them being overweight/obese rather than purely being a genetics issue.

I think for most people the above is impossible. In that for the vast majority of people if they have a regular routine, exercise, get the right amount of light at the right time, etc. then they won't have insomnia.

4

DopeDetective t1_ix41g8p wrote

what about type 1 diabetes? type 2 diabetes is also genetic

i guess my issue is that they really only looked at healthy people. if you exclude a bunch of people who have a genetic predisposition then of course youre not going to find a genetic relationship

"Study participants were healthy individuals aged 18–65 years, who were able to provide written informed consent. Exclusion criteria included ongoing inflammatory disease; cancer in the last three years (excluding skin cancer); long-term gastrointestinal disorders including irritable bowel disease or Celiac disease (gluten allergy), but not including irritable bowel syndrome; taking immunosuppressants or antibiotics as daily medication within the last three months; capillary glucose level of >12 mmol l–1 (or 216 mg dl–1), or type 1 diabetes mellitus, or taking medication for type 2 diabetes mellitus; currently experiencing acute clinically diagnosed depression; heart attack (myocardial infarction) or stroke in the last 6 months; pregnancy; and vegan or experiencing an eating disorder or unwilling to consume foods that are part of the study. "

2