Sleep Optional

By | June 20, 2006
6 Comments

Very interesting:

Modafinil is just the first of a wave of new lifestyle drugs that promise to do for sleep what the contraceptive pill did for sex – unshackle it from nature. Since time immemorial, humans have structured their lives around sleep. In the near future, we will, for the first time, be able to significantly structure the way we sleep to suit our lifestyles.

“The more we understand about the body’s 24-hour clock the more we will be able to override it,” says Professor Russell Foster, a circadian biologist at Imperial College London. “In 10 to 20 years we’ll be able to pharmacologically turn sleep off. Mimicking sleep will take longer, but I can see it happening.” Professor Foster envisages a world in which it’s possible, or even routine, for people to be active for 22 hours a day and sleep for two.

I can see this having a lot of appeal. Sleeping only four hours per night could add an entire half workday of productive time to every day of your life. What would we do with the time if we had it?

I also like the idea of being able to turn sleep on when needed. If it were an option, I would always sleep through every flight I have to take.

  • MikeD

    If I am going to add half a day per day to my life I assure you it will be neither work nor productive. If medical technology gives me the leisure time that computers have promised, I don’t want to waste it on another computer or making more money for a boss or corporation. You know what I’d probably do if I had more time? Sleep. Oh wait…

    Next they’ll find a way to take away dream time to fuel our soul-sucking society. We’re already nearly robots, the implementation in silicon or meat is just semantics.

  • Karl Hallowell

    My concerns echo MikeD’s. After all, life is hard for people who aren’t coffee-swilling addicts. I’ve been approached at two jobs and half-seriously pushed to drink more coffee. I suspect that at one IT location, there were a number of amphetimine/ectasy users. Those people had something of an advantage as long as they weren’t too far gone.

    Imagine if you were one of the people with “normal” sleep patterns and 6 hours less a day than almost everyone else. There’d be some strong incentive for employers and fellow employees and friends to squeeze extra time out of you that you couldn’t give without drugs.

    Also, I value my dream time. I apparently dream rather more than usual at around 4-6 hours a night. If I’m only dreaming 2 hours a night then that’s a lot of missing time IMHO.

  • Kent_Geek

    Jeez. Seems odd to me that the first two comments are both hand-wringing over some theoretically possible coercion to use this technology to benefit employers.
    Historically, all trends seem to lead to humans spending LESS time at work, not more. Oh, and becoming MORE productive at the same time, I should add.
    With all the other changes that will be occurring in society between now and then, I think we can safely take a wait-and-see attitude towards this technology. If it’s really proven totally safe, I think it could be incredibly liberating.

  • Jake

    Many scientists believe that one function of sleep is to withdraw an animal from possible harm. If an animal is up and about when it does not need to hunt food, it is exposed to dangers from other predators.

    Similarly, I am not sure humans would have happier lives if they were active 22 hours a day. Would members of a family be able to stand being around each other that long? Would all that leisure make people bored and more apt to do dangerous things?

    I think a pill to give us more sleep with no side effects would be more useful.

  • http://www.feoamante.com visvivalaw

    Sleep on demand, like in The Fifth Element! Remember when Bruce Willis gets on the shuttle and the stewardesses put all the passengers to sleep for the flight at the push of a button?

  • Karl Hallowell

    Historically, all trends seem to lead to humans spending LESS time at work, not more. Oh, and becoming MORE productive at the same time, I should add.

    I don’t know how you get that impression. There are a number of trends going either way. For example of trends to more time in the workplace, the universal presence of caffeine and the prevalence of stimulants like amphetamines and cocaine in the workplace, long hours in the high tech industry, catered meals at work (so you don’t have to leave the workplace to find food), some sort of onsite sleeping room where you can take a quick nap rather than go home to sleep, etc. And of course, the two income family.

    The point is that there are already many ways businesses at the cutting edge of employment are making the labor of their workers more productive or making the companies more attractive to employees. Among these innovations is a subset that prolongs the amount of time that a worker actually works in a week. I see it as reasonable that a number of employers will actually use such technology on their employees.

    Further, I should note that at least in the US, a lot of people really are pressed for time, both due to work and social engagements.