This sleep accessory could really improve your sleep, experts say
Summary
Wearing socks to bed could help improve sleep by lowering core body temperature, according to Cleveland Clinic specialists.
The process of warming feet opens blood vessels, increasing heat loss through skin and cooling the body.
Men wearing socks fell asleep nearly eight minutes faster and slept 32 minutes longer, a small 2018 study found.
Sleep experts recommend keeping bedrooms around 65 degrees Fahrenheit to maintain optimal cool core temperature.
Taking warm showers before bed follows the same principle, creating a temperature drop that promotes sleepiness. Want to improve your chances for a good night's sleep? This idea could actually knock your socks on, says behavioral sleep disorders specialist Michelle Drerup.
'It sounds counterintuitive, I know, but by wearing socks to bed and warming your feet, you may actually lower your core body temperature and fall asleep faster,' said Drerup, director of the Sleep Disorders Center at Cleveland Clinic.
Here's how that happens. During the day, a typical adult's core temperature rises to between 97 and 99 degrees Fahrenheit (36.1 C and 37.2 C), with an average of 98.6 F (37 C) — children 10 and younger may run a bit cooler. As night approaches, core temperature begins to drop by one to two degrees, preparing the body for sleep.
A process called distal vasodilation helps with cooling by widening blood vessels in the extremities — primarily the hands and feet — thus increasing heat loss though the skin. As the skin warms, the core of the body cools, which is where those toasty socks come in handy.
'By making your feet warmer, you're opening up blood vessels to help cool down the rest of the body,' Drerup said. 'So increasing the blood circulation to your feet results in a lower core temperature.'
In fact, a small study published in 2018 found young men who slept in socks fell asleep nearly eight minutes faster and slept 32 minutes longer than those who didn't, with fewer awakenings during the night.
Keeping it cool
It's not just socks. Sleep experts suggest keeping the entire bedroom about 65 F (18.3 C) to keep your core temperature cool during the night. Of course, that can fluctuate, with some requiring a room closer to 60 F (15.6 C) and others preferring a warmer 70 F (21.1 C).
Another tip is to take a warm (not hot) shower or bath before bed. The principle is the same, Drerup said.
'If I'm slightly increasing my core body temperature a bit just before bedtime, then there's a bigger drop as it lowers, and that potentially helps with feeling sleepy,' she said.
This tip may not work for everyone. In my home, I'm addicted to fuzzy socks and wear them religiously to bed — if my tootsies are the slightest bit chilly, sleep is impossible. My husband, on the other hand, immediately kicks the covers off his feet, preferring what I view as popsicle toes.
To each their own, says sleep specialist Jennifer Mundt, an associate professor of family and preventive medicine at the University of Utah who sees patients at the school's Sleep Wake Center.
'If you wear socks to bed and you feel like your feet are too hot, by all means, take your socks off,' Mundt said. 'It's the same idea with room temperature. People can get really hung up — 'Oh, I heard from this podcast or this book that the bedroom should be this exact temperature.'
'That's just not really the way it works,' she added. 'Just use your own judgment of just what feels comfortable, because our bodies are good at telling us if we're too warm or we're too cold.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
New paper sheds light on experience of Black prisoners in infamous Stateville prison malaria experiments
Much has been said and written over the years about controversial malaria research conducted on inmates at Illinois' Stateville Penitentiary starting in the 1940s. But at least one part of that story has been largely ignored until now: the role of Black prisoners in that research, which helped lead to the modern practice of using genetic testing to understand how individual patients will react to certain medications, according to the authors of a newly published paper out of the University of Utah. 'We want to highlight the stories of Black prisoners that participated in this prison research in the 1950s onward and give them their due,' said Hannah Allen, a medical ethicist and assistant professor of philosophy at the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, and first author of the paper, which was published as an opinion piece Wednesday in the Journal of the American Medical Association. 'They haven't been properly acknowledged in the past, and their participation in these studies was really foundational in launching the field of pharmacogenetics and, later on, precision medicine,' said Allen, who recently completed her doctorate at the University of Utah. Starting in the 1940s, researchers infected inmates at the Joliet-area prison with malaria to test the effectiveness of drugs to treat the illness as part of a U.S. military-funded effort to protect American troops overseas, according to the paper. A University of Chicago doctor was the principal investigator. The inmates consented to being part of the studies and were paid for their participation. At first, the research was greeted with enthusiasm. In 1945, Life magazine ran a spread about it, featuring a photo of a Stateville inmate with cups containing malaria-carrying mosquitoes pressed against his bare chest. The first line of the story reads, 'In three U.S. penitentiaries men who have been imprisoned as enemies of society are now helping science fight another enemy of society.' But as the years passed, attitudes began to shift. Questions arose about whether inmates could truly, freely consent to participate in medical experiments or whether they felt coerced into them because of their often dire circumstances. At the Nuremberg trials, defense attorneys for Nazi doctors introduced text and images from the Life article about Stateville prison, though an Illinois physician argued at the trials that the prisoners in Stateville consented to being part of medical research whereas Nazi prisoners did not, according to the JAMA paper. In the mid-1970s, news broke about a study at Tuskegee, in which Black men with syphilis went untreated for years — news that raised awareness of ethical problems in medical research. News outlets also began publishing more stories about prison research, according to the JAMA article. The Chicago Tribune published an article in 1973, in which an inmate participating in the Stateville malaria research said: 'I've been coerced into the project — for the money. Being here has nothing to do with 'doing good for mankind' … I didn't want to keep taking money from my family.' The experiments at Stateville came to a halt in the 1970s. A number of protections and regulations are now in place when it comes to research involving prisoners. Since the 1970s, the Stateville research has often been discussed and analyzed but little attention has been paid to its Black participants, said James Tabery, a medical ethicist and philosophy professor at the University of Utah who led the new research, which was funded by the federal National Institutes of Health. For a time, Black prisoners were excluded from the studies because of a myth that Black people were immune to malaria, Tabery said. Later on, once scientists had pinpointed the drug primaquine as an effective medication for malaria, they turned their attention to the question of why 5% to 10% of Black men experienced a violent reaction to the drug, according to the paper. Ultimately, the scientists were successful, finding that the adverse reaction was related to a specific genetic deficiency. 'There are people all over Chicago today that are getting tested, that clinicians are recommending they get a genetic test before they get prescribed a drug because they want to make sure that their patient isn't going to have an adverse reaction to the drug,' Tabery said. 'It's really sort of powerful and interesting that you can trace that approach to doing good clinical medicine right back to this particular moment and place and population.' But Tabery and Allen also found that the Black prisoners were not treated the same as the white prisoners who participated in research at Stateville. For one, they weren't paid as much as the white prisoners, the rationale being that the white prisoners were infected with malaria, whereas the Black prisoners were given the drug but not infected with the disease — though some of the Black prisoners got very ill after taking the medication, according to the paper. Also, researchers didn't protect the Black participants' privacy as well as they did for other participants. They published certain identifying information about the Black participants, such as initials, ages, heights and weights, whereas participants in the previous research were represented with case numbers, according to the paper. Researchers also recruited the Black prisoners' family members for the study, which they didn't do with earlier participants, according to the paper. 'You see them just doing things with the Black prisoners that they're not doing with the white prisoners,' Tabery said. Also, though scientists made an important discovery through the research on Black prisoners, the episode also highlights the difficulty that can occur in translating discoveries into real life help for patients. Though the World Health Organization now recommends genetic testing to protect people who are sensitive to antimalarials, many of the people who would benefit most from such testing still don't receive it because of financial barriers, supply chain issues and a lack of training, according to the paper. 'What we found is when you sort of shift to what was happening to the Black prisoners, these other lessons you hadn't thought of as being derivable from Stateville suddenly do become apparent,' Tabery said.
Chicago Tribune
2 hours ago
- Chicago Tribune
New paper sheds light on experience of Black prisoners in infamous Stateville prison malaria experiments
Much has been said and written over the years about controversial malaria research conducted on inmates at Illinois' Stateville Penitentiary starting in the 1940s. But at least one part of that story has been largely ignored until now: the role of Black prisoners in that research, which helped lead to the modern practice of using genetic testing to understand how individual patients will react to certain medications, according to the authors of a newly published paper out of the University of Utah. 'We want to highlight the stories of Black prisoners that participated in this prison research in the 1950s onward and give them their due,' said Hannah Allen, a medical ethicist and assistant professor of philosophy at the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, and first author of the paper, which was published as an opinion piece Wednesday in the Journal of the American Medical Association. 'They haven't been properly acknowledged in the past, and their participation in these studies was really foundational in launching the field of pharmacogenetics and, later on, precision medicine,' said Allen, who recently completed her doctorate at the University of Utah. Starting in the 1940s, researchers infected inmates at the Joliet-area prison with malaria to test the effectiveness of drugs to treat the illness as part of a U.S. military-funded effort to protect American troops overseas, according to the paper. A University of Chicago doctor was the principal investigator. The inmates consented to being part of the studies and were paid for their participation. At first, the research was greeted with enthusiasm. In 1945, Life magazine ran a spread about it, featuring a photo of a Stateville inmate with cups containing malaria-carrying mosquitoes pressed against his bare chest. The first line of the story reads, 'In three U.S. penitentiaries men who have been imprisoned as enemies of society are now helping science fight another enemy of society.' But as the years passed, attitudes began to shift. Questions arose about whether inmates could truly, freely consent to participate in medical experiments or whether they felt coerced into them because of their often dire circumstances. At the Nuremberg trials, defense attorneys for Nazi doctors introduced text and images from the Life article about Stateville prison, though an Illinois physician argued at the trials that the prisoners in Stateville consented to being part of medical research whereas Nazi prisoners did not, according to the JAMA paper. In the mid-1970s, news broke about a study at Tuskegee, in which Black men with syphilis went untreated for years — news that raised awareness of ethical problems in medical research. News outlets also began publishing more stories about prison research, according to the JAMA article. The Chicago Tribune published an article in 1973, in which an inmate participating in the Stateville malaria research said: 'I've been coerced into the project — for the money. Being here has nothing to do with 'doing good for mankind' … I didn't want to keep taking money from my family.' The experiments at Stateville came to a halt in the 1970s. A number of protections and regulations are now in place when it comes to research involving prisoners. Since the 1970s, the Stateville research has often been discussed and analyzed but little attention has been paid to its Black participants, said James Tabery, a medical ethicist and philosophy professor at the University of Utah who led the new research, which was funded by the federal National Institutes of Health. For a time, Black prisoners were excluded from the studies because of a myth that Black people were immune to malaria, Tabery said. Later on, once scientists had pinpointed the drug primaquine as an effective medication for malaria, they turned their attention to the question of why 5% to 10% of Black men experienced a violent reaction to the drug, according to the paper. Ultimately, the scientists were successful, finding that the adverse reaction was related to a specific genetic deficiency. 'There are people all over Chicago today that are getting tested, that clinicians are recommending they get a genetic test before they get prescribed a drug because they want to make sure that their patient isn't going to have an adverse reaction to the drug,' Tabery said. 'It's really sort of powerful and interesting that you can trace that approach to doing good clinical medicine right back to this particular moment and place and population.' But Tabery and Allen also found that the Black prisoners were not treated the same as the white prisoners who participated in research at Stateville. For one, they weren't paid as much as the white prisoners, the rationale being that the white prisoners were infected with malaria, whereas the Black prisoners were given the drug but not infected with the disease — though some of the Black prisoners got very ill after taking the medication, according to the paper. Also, researchers didn't protect the Black participants' privacy as well as they did for other participants. They published certain identifying information about the Black participants, such as initials, ages, heights and weights, whereas participants in the previous research were represented with case numbers, according to the paper. Researchers also recruited the Black prisoners' family members for the study, which they didn't do with earlier participants, according to the paper. 'You see them just doing things with the Black prisoners that they're not doing with the white prisoners,' Tabery said. Also, though scientists made an important discovery through the research on Black prisoners, the episode also highlights the difficulty that can occur in translating discoveries into real life help for patients. Though the World Health Organization now recommends genetic testing to protect people who are sensitive to antimalarials, many of the people who would benefit most from such testing still don't receive it because of financial barriers, supply chain issues and a lack of training, according to the paper. 'What we found is when you sort of shift to what was happening to the Black prisoners, these other lessons you hadn't thought of as being derivable from Stateville suddenly do become apparent,' Tabery said.
Newsweek
5 hours ago
- Newsweek
Map Shows States With the Worst Hospital Ratings
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. New data has revealed the states where hospital care is the worst ranked by patients. The study, led from the University of Utah, analyzed 3,286 hospitals across the country, using data from the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey, which ran from July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022. Patients were asked to rate ten specific aspects of their hospital stay, including how they felt about communication with doctors and nurses, how clean their rooms were, and whether they received adequate information upon discharge. States were given an average rating on a five-point scale, with five stars being the highest possible score. New York and South Carolina were rated the poorest—in New York, patients rated doctor communication and cleanliness a two, with all other rankings receiving a one; while South Carolina received a two on all rankings except for cleanliness, which received a one. South Dakota was the only state to receive a five-star rating, getting fives across the board apart except for "communications about medicines" and "care transition", which were both rated at four stars. While not displayed in the above map, Washington, D.C. and Puerto Rico also recieved poor rankings, particularly in critical areas such as staff responsiveness and discharge information to patients. According to the researchers, the Midwest was the region with the most satisfied patients on average, with high scores around staff communication and hospital cleanliness in particular. As the study was conducted on patient reviews during the COVID-19 pandemic and associated restrictions, it noted that the healthcare issues may have changed or improved in the years since. However, the findings may still guide policymakers in efforts to emulate the outcomes of the highest-performing regions. "While one might expect no significant differences in patient satisfaction among hospitalized patients across the U.S., our findings revealed small but statistically significant regional variations," the team said in a statement. They added that disparities between states may indicate a need for policy reform or increased investment—such as funding hospital improvements or staff training initiatives. "These variations could also reflect unequal access to healthcare or differences in care quality among diverse populations." Despite this, the team noted that overall satisfaction and willingness to recommend a given hospital were "consistently rated moderately high" across the U.S., but "satisfaction scores were lowest for communication about medications and discharge information." Do you have a tip on a science story that Newsweek should be covering? Do you have a question about health care? Let us know via science@ Reference Hung, M., Vu, S., Hon, E. S., Reese, L., Gardner, J., & Lipsky, M. S. (2025). Unveiling the drivers of patient satisfaction in the United States hospitals: Assessing quality indicators across regions. PLOS ONE, 20(6).
