Napping Patterns Tied to All-Cause Mortality Risk
SEATTLE — Timing, duration, and variability of daytime napping are associated with an increased risk for mortality in middle- to older-aged adults, new research showed.
An analysis of UK Biobank data, which included more than 86,000 non-shift workers, showed that longer naps, greater variability in daytime napping duration, and higher percentages of naps around noon and in the early afternoon are associated with an increased risk for all-cause mortality.
'Our study fills a gap in knowledge by showing that it's not just whether someone naps but how long, how variable, and when they nap may be meaningful indicators of future health risk,' lead investigator Chenlu Gao, PhD, with the Division of Sleep Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, told Medscape Medical News .
'However, it's important to emphasize that these are associations. Because the design of this study is observational, we cannot determine whether napping patterns cause higher mortality risk or simply reflect underlying health conditions,' Gao cautioned.
The findings will be presented on June 11 at SLEEP 2025.
An Early Indicator of Declining Health?
'While many studies have examined the links between sleep and mortality, they have largely focused on nighttime sleep, often overlooking daytime sleep. However, napping is an important component of the 24-hour sleep-wake cycle and may carry its own health implications,' Gao explained.
For the study, the researchers examined whether actigraphy-measured objective daytime napping behaviors predict all-cause mortality in 86,565 non-shift workers.
The cohort had a mean age of 63 years at baseline, and 57% were women. They were monitored by actigraphy for 7 days, and daytime napping was defined as sleep between 9 AM and 7 PM.
Median nap duration was 0.40 h/d, with 34% of naps taken between 9 and 11 AM, 10% between 11 AM and 1 PM, 14% between 1 and 3 PM, 19% between 3 and 5 PM, and 22% between 5 and 7 PM.
During a follow-up period of up to 11 years, 5189 (6.0%) participants died. Overall, as individuals aged, naps tended to become longer and more irregular, with timing shifting toward the afternoon.
After adjusting for potential confounders, including demographics, BMI, smoking, alcohol use, and nighttime sleep duration, longer nap duration was associated with an increased risk for mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.20 for 1 SD; P < .0001).
Greater intraindividual variability (HR, 1.14 for 1 SD; P < .0001) and a higher percentage of naps between 11 AM and 1 PM (HR, 1.07 for 1 SD; P = .0005) and between 1 and 3 PM (HR, 1.07 for 1 SD; P = .0002) were also associated with an increased risk for mortality.
'These findings highlight the potential importance of considering napping behaviors in risk stratification of mortality in middle- to older-aged adults,' the researchers noted in their abstract.
'Longer or more irregular naps may reflect poor nighttime sleep, circadian rhythm disruption, or underlying health conditions such as cardiovascular disease, metabolic disorders, depression, or early neurodegenerative changes. Our findings suggest that certain patterns of napping could serve as early indicators of declining health,' said Gao.
However, the researchers did not specifically test these mechanisms in this study, and further research is needed to clarify the biological pathways underlying these associations, Gao cautioned.
Ask About Napping
Commenting on the research for Medscape Medical News , James A. Rowley, MD, professor of medicine and program director, Sleep Medicine Fellowship, Rush University Medical Center in Chicago, said the 'major take-home message is that if physicians ask about a patient's sleep habits, they should also be asking about napping, not just the nocturnal sleep period. In other words, physicians should be asking their patients, 'do you nap during the day?''
'One cannot ignore daytime napping and an evaluation for the etiology of daytime napping is important,' said Rowley.
Rowley noted that the key questions to consider include whether the patient is obtaining sufficient nocturnal sleep. Could an underlying sleep disorder — such as sleep apnea or restless legs syndrome — be contributing? Might another medical condition, such as chronic heart failure or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, be disrupting nighttime sleep and prompting daytime napping?
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
38 minutes ago
- CBS News
Chevron Richmond refinery, Air District reach agreement on hazardous gas monitoring
The Bay Area Air District (BAAD) reached an agreement with Chevron on a new air pollution monitoring system at its Richmond refinery that will bring enhanced monitoring for hydrogen sulfide, a smelly and potentially dangerous gas previously not properly monitored according to the Air District's standards. Chevron is the first of the five oil refineries in the nine-county BAAD to reach an agreement with the Air District after all the refineries' fenceline monitoring programs were deemed insufficient and were "disapproved" in October 2023. The agreement announced by the Air District Tuesday will implement a new, more robust monitoring system for hydrogen sulfide, increased data sharing, and more community outreach from the company. Chevron also agreed to pay a penalty of $100,000 to the Air District and agreed to pay further penalties if it violates the settlement agreement, according to the Air District. Hydrogen sulfide, or H2S, is a colorless, hazardous gas that is heavier than air and is a biproduct of the refining process. It can smell like rotten eggs in low concentrations and is also referred to as sewer gas, swamp gas, stink damp, and sour damp, according to the U.S. Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA). Health effects can occur even at low levels and include tearing eyes, headaches, nausea and vomiting. Exposure to sulfur dioxide can cause loss of consciousness or death, according to OSHA. The Air District previously required refineries in the Bay Area to monitor the gas with an "open line" monitoring system, which uses a beam of light to measure the presence of hydrogen sulfide over a large area. But in 2022 it told Chevron and others that their fenceline monitoring plans, which detect pollutants at the properties' edge, or fenceline, were deficient and needed to be remade. When the companies submitted their new plans the following year, they were each deemed out of regulatory compliance. Chevron's deficiencies, and necessary corrections, centered around the number of data points that would be created by the monitoring technology, which are supposed to hit a certain threshold both hourly and quarterly. Other issues revolved around how the data was formatted and transmitted to regulators and retained for public review. Under the settlement agreement, Chevron will install a network of four "point monitors" which will have a lower detection threshold for hydrogen sulfide. They detect the gas at certain points rather than over large areas and are said to be more accurate than the open line system currently being used. They are also more reliable in bad weather conditions, such as dense fog, that hampered the open line monitors, according to the BAAD. "This settlement goes beyond what's required, and it reflects the Air District's commitment to transparency, enforcement and public health," said the Air District's executive officer, Philip Fine. "It raises the bar for transparency and community access to air quality data, setting a positive example for the industry." The website maintained by Chevron to report air quality data to the public, will now maintain data for five years, rather than the current three months, and make the data downloadable. A spokesperson for Chevron said the agreement would essentially enhance the monitoring the company was already doing at the refinery. "We know data and transparency are important to our community and are proud to be the first refinery in the Bay Area to move forward with these improvements," the company said in a statement. Chevron will also hold a community meeting to discuss its monitoring program sometime before the end of the year, but it was not yet scheduled as of Wednesday.
WIRED
40 minutes ago
- WIRED
Congress Demands Answers on Data Privacy Ahead of 23andMe Sale
Jun 12, 2025 12:08 PM House Democrats sent letters to the potential buyers of the genetic testing company, asking how they plan to protect customer genetic data under a change of ownership. US Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Jan Schakowsky on Thursday sent letters to the two potential buyers of troubled genetic testing firm 23andMe demanding details about consumer data privacy should either of them acquire the company. Signed by 20 other Democratic members of Congress, the letters were sent to Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and TTAM Research Institute, which have put forth separate bids to buy 23andMe. In the letters, they ask Regeneron and TTAM if they will continue to give customers the option to delete their data and withdraw consent for their data to be used in medical research. They also want to know if 23andMe's current policy of not sharing genetic data with law enforcement without a warrant will be upheld, and whether both entities intend to proactively notify 23andMe customers about the sale. After struggling for years to turn a profit, 23andMe filed for bankruptcy protection in March and put its assets up for sale. Shortly after, its CEO Anne Wojcicki resigned. Wojcicki had tried unsuccessfully to take the company private but her proposals were rejected by a special committee formed by 23andMe's board of directors. In May, biotech company Regeneron announced that it was named the successful bidder in a bankruptcy auction, offering $256 million to acquire 23andMe. 'We believe we can help 23andMe deliver and build upon its mission to help those interested in learning about their own DNA and how to improve their personal health, while furthering Regeneron's efforts to use large-scale genetics research to improve the way society treats and prevents illness overall,' said George Yancopoulos, cofounder and chief scientific officer of Regeneron, in a company statement last month. But after the auction closed, Wojcicki put in a bid of her own—offering $305 million through a newly formed nonprofit, TTAM Research Institute. The offer prompted a federal judge to reopen the sale process, and now both Regeneron and TTAM will have a chance to put in a final bid. Founded in 2006, 23andMe pioneered the field of personal genomics with its DNA test kits, which allow customers to learn about their ancestry, family connections, and certain medical risks after submitting a spit sample. Despite selling more than 12 million of its DNA testing kits, the company never achieved profitability and struggled to diversify its revenue streams after going public in 2021. In another blow to the company, a major data breach in 2023 exposed the personal data of millions of customers, including a leak that targeted users with Chinese and Ashkenazi Jewish heritage. The new owner of 23andMe would acquire its vast trove of genetic data, raising questions about how that data would be used. Under 23andMe's current policy, customers can choose to make their genetic data and other personal information available for medical research. They also have the option of deleting all of their data and directing 23andMe to destroy their saliva sample. The members of Congress who sent the letters on Thursday are seeking clarity from Regeneron and Wojcicki on whether they plan to continue those practices. The signees are also concerned about genetic data being shared with law enforcement and immigration authorities and the possibility of genetic and other personal data being used to train AI models. They're also asking Regeneron and TTAM to disclose a full list of all third parties who currently have access to 23andMe data and the steps both entities will take to ensure transparency of third-party access in the future. 23andMe previously had a multi-year research collaboration with pharma giant GlaxoSmithKline. The representatives are asking Regeneron and TTAM to respond by June 26. Wojcicki and 23andMe's interim CEO Joe Selsavage testified during a House Oversight Committee hearing this week on the privacy and national security concerns surrounding 23andMe's sale. During that hearing, Selsavage told lawmakers that 1.9 million people, or about 15 percent of its customer base, have asked for their genetic data to be removed from the company's servers since the company filed for bankruptcy protection in March. This week, more than two dozen states and the District of Columbia filed a lawsuit against 23andMe, arguing that the company cannot auction 15 million customers' highly sensitive personal genetic information without their consent or knowledge.
Entrepreneur
41 minutes ago
- Entrepreneur
Your 'Culture' is a Lie Until You Fund Mental Health
Mental health should be treated as a core component of your company's infrastructure, not an afterthought or perk. Neglecting it leads to diminished productivity, burnout and high employee turnover. Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own. When we think about business infrastructure, we typically envision things like servers, supply chains, office furniture and even our workforce — the tangible things that, in our minds, are essential to keep a company running effectively. But there's another, often overlooked, part of the business infrastructure: mental health. Ignoring the mental health of yourself and your employees comes at a high cost, including burnout, high turnover, low morale and in extreme cases, teams or even entire companies falling apart. The numbers speak for themselves. Depression and anxiety cost the global economy over $1 trillion in lost productivity. More than 55% of workers in North America show signs of burnout. Mental health concerns are particularly prevalent in younger employees. Sixty-one percent of Generation Z respondents said they would strongly consider leaving their current job if they found one that took mental health seriously. But it's not just the younger generations that value workplace well-being: 92% of all employees reported that working for an organization that values their emotional and psychological well-being is important. Mental health should not be treated as a luxury. If you care about sustainable growth and strong leadership, it has to be part of the plan from day one, not as a perk, but as something built into how your company operates. The old model is broken, and everyone knows it Let's be honest. Traditional approaches to mental health are largely performative and ineffective. You've likely seen or done it: a mindfulness app no one uses, a #selfcare Slack channel full of quotes or a quiet mention of an Employee Assistance Program. Maybe even a designated "Mental Health Day" filled with lofty promises. But once the day passes, it's back to business as usual. Nothing meaningfully changes. These quick fixes might look good on the surface, but they don't solve the root of the problem. Mental health is not just about managing stress. It's about addressing boundary breakdowns, organizational culture and unhealthy work habits — challenges an app won't fix. Reacting after the fact doesn't work and certainly doesn't scale. No founder waits for their website to crash before buying reliable hosting. So why wait for burnout before checking in with your people? Mental health must be part of the foundation, not a last-minute add-on. Related: How Following These 5 Practices Saved My Mental Health Rethinking the foundation of well-being at work How do we move beyond performative solutions? Start by listening. One tech startup I worked with enhanced its mental-health-related benefits — not on a consultant's advice, but because they engaged their team directly. They offered monthly therapy sessions and an on-demand mental health platform. It didn't solve everything, but it showed they cared. More importantly, they asked: What's draining our team? That question led to big shifts: fewer back-to-back Zoom/Teams calls, mental health check-ins in performance reviews and an end to glorifying 12-hour workdays. Instead, they celebrated focus and prioritization. None of this happened by accident. It took intention. Leaders had to recognize mental health not as a perk but as part of the company's operating system. That means budgeting for it, maintaining it and staying committed to continual improvement. Culture isn't what you say — It's what you fund In my work with entrepreneurs and social impact leaders, I've seen one truth again and again: real culture change starts with investment. There's no one-size-fits-all formula. It might mean small budgets for peer support circles, journaling sessions or rest periods. It could be schedule changes to support parents, caregivers or neurodiverse work styles. Sometimes, it means partnering with clinics or nonprofits, especially to reach marginalized employees who are often overlooked by traditional benefits. Ultimately, leaders must take ownership of mental health. Do not hand it off to HR. Do not treat it as optional. But lead it with the same seriousness as cybersecurity, product strategy or sales. Modeling mental health as a priority The other key is understanding that your team takes its cues from you. If you say mental health matters but never take a vacation, your employees won't either. If you set the expectation that you are never really "off" – checking and sending emails on the weekend or when on holiday, your employees will never feel comfortable logging off. I've lived that. In my first organization, I wore burnout like a badge of honor. I worked nonstop, ignored the signs and paid the price with my family and my own mental health. And when leaders burn out, the team usually follows. Now, I treat rest and reflection like maintenance, not a reward. I do it for myself and to show others it's okay to do the same. Related: 5 Ways to Protect Your Mental Health as an Entrepreneur Mental health as a long-term strategy Building a business means creating an ecosystem. Your team is a vital part of that. If your people aren't doing well, neither is your company. Businesses that invest in mental health see stronger ideas, smarter decisions and better retention. So ask yourself: What would you do differently if mental health were as critical as cybersecurity or logistics? What systems would you build? What investments would you make? What culture would you lead? Your future doesn't just depend on funding rounds; it depends on whether you and your people are well enough to build what comes next.
