
Not getting enough deep sleep raises your risk of Alzheimer's disease, study finds
Summary
Insufficient deep sleep in slow-wave and REM stages may accelerate brain deterioration linked to Alzheimer's disease.
The brain's inferior parietal region shrinks with inadequate deep sleep, according to a new study.
During deep sleep, the brain removes toxins while REM sleep processes emotions and consolidates memories.
Adults should spend 20-25% of sleep in both deep and REM stages, which decrease with age.
Consistent bedtimes, optimal sleeping environments and relaxation routines can improve sleep quality without medication.
Need another reason to prioritize your sleep? Not spending enough time in the two deep stages of sleep — slow-wave and rapid eye movement, or REM, sleep — may hasten the deterioration of parts of the brain associated with Alzheimer's disease, a new study found.
Deficits in slow-wave and REM sleep appear to shrink parts of the brain known to be early indicators of cognitive deterioration and Alzheimer's disease, said lead study author Gawon Cho, a postdoctoral associate in internal medicine at the Yale School of Medicine in New Haven, Connecticut.
'We found the volume of a part of the brain called the inferior parietal region shrunk in people with inadequate slow and REM sleep,' Cho said. 'That part of the brain synthesizes sensory information, including visuospatial information, so it makes sense that it shows neurodegeneration early in the disease.'
Preventive neurologist Dr. Richard Issacson, who established one of the first Alzheimer's prevention clinics in the United States, said in an email that his clinical experience treating adults at risk for Alzheimer's supports the study's findings.
'We also found sleep metrics on deeper sleep predicted cognitive function, so between that plus brain volumes, it's real,' said Issacson, who is director of research at the Institute for Neurodegenerative Diseases in Florida. He was not involved in the study.
During deep sleep, the brain sweeps out toxins and dead cells while also repairing and restoring the body for the next day. While we dream during REM sleep, the brain is busy processing emotions, consolidating memories and absorbing new information. It makes sense that getting quality deep and REM sleep is key to our ability to function.
Adults need about seven to eight hours of sleep to be healthy, while teens and younger children need much more. However, data shows that more than 1 in 3 American adults don't get enough sleep, according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Experts say most adults should spend between 20% and 25% of their night in deep sleep, and the same goes for REM sleep. Older adults require less, while babies need much more — in fact, infants can spend about 50% of their sleep in REM.
To make matters worse, deeper stages of sleep decrease as you age, Cho said.
Deep sleep tends to come soon after we fall asleep, while REM sleep appears later in the night, toward morning. Therefore, if you go to bed late and get up early, you are cutting your chances of spending enough time in one or both stages.
'The more time you are in bed, the more a person sleeps, and generally speaking, the longer a person sleeps, the more REM and deep sleep they will get,' Isaacson said.
However, you have to do more than just lay in bed longer — you also need have to have an uninterrupted, restful sleep on a regular basis, experts say. If you do that, there's an additional payoff — a February 2023 study found good sleep habits added nearly five years to a man's life expectancy and almost 2.5 years to a woman's life.
To accomplish this, however, you can't wake up during the night or have trouble falling asleep more than two times a week, the study found. You also have to feel well rested at least five days a week when you wake up. And finally, you can't be using sleep medications to achieve your good slumber.
But don't lose hope. The good news is that you can easily train your brain to better sleep by following what is called 'sleep hygiene.' It's important to go to bed at the same time on most nights and get up at the same time most mornings — even on weekends and holidays.
Make sure your sleeping environment is optimal — cooler and darker is better — and block noise or try a sound machine. Avoid booze before bed — it may seem like you're falling asleep more easily, but when your liver finishes metabolizing the alcohol at 3 a.m., your body will wake up, experts say.
Set up a sleep routine, with no blue lights or distractions at least an hour before bedtime. Try meditation, yoga, tai chi, warm baths — anything that relaxes you is great.
'How do you make your sleep better? I think people really have to do their part to improve their own sleep,' Cho said. 'There's no one medicine that improves overall sleep.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Big Data Can Make America Healthier. How to Do It Right
Credit - Ezra Bailey—Getty Images Big data can help make Americans healthier, and the Trump Administration has stated—in its recently released Make America Healthy Again report and elsewhere—that building a national big-data platform is one of its primary goals. As scientists who use large data sets to study health, we're excited about its potential and the willingness of the federal government to invest in it, particularly since big data has been underutilized in the U.S. compared with other developed countries—and since the number of ways it can be used grows nearly daily. It's a huge opportunity. But there are lots of concerns when assembling sensitive health data and combining it with other sensitive data, like credit scores, tax records, employment, educational records, and more. Some of those concerns with the Administration's plans have already surfaced. The Administration's first goal of assembling big data to studying autism has left some worried that if used inappropriately, such data could lead to harm, rather than help, for those with autism. Others worry that big data could be used to perform and justify shoddy research that supports predetermined conclusions without adhering to rigorous scientific methods—a concern reinforced by the discovery that the Make America Healthy Again report cited non-existent sources to support its claims. So how can we reap the benefits of big data while minimizing its risks? Here are some guiding principles: The health care system already possesses health data on millions of Americans. Medical records are now almost always digitized, permitting doctors' notes, medical imaging, laboratory tests, insurance claims, and more to be linked (in theory) across doctors' offices, hospitals, nursing homes, and any other place people receive care. However, data collected about a patient in one setting often doesn't get connected to data from other settings—making it hard for researchers to get a full picture of what, exactly, is happening to each of us within the larger health care system. Read More: Gun Injuries of All Kinds Go Up During Hunting Season The federal government also has data on us that can be connected to health care data to answer important questions. For example, comprehensive and detailed data on Americans' occupations linked with health, insurance, and other data could help shed more light on relationships between our work and our health—helping to better answer curious questions like why taxi drivers are less likely to die from Alzheimer's disease or why female physicians don't outlive their male colleagues. The first step of making big data more helpful is to simply link the data—which, while possible, is difficult to accomplish without centralized effort. Once linkages have been made, data can be anonymized so that those studying sensitive questions aren't privy to confidential information about specific individuals. In addition to governmental data, many other sources of data can provide insights into our health. For example, smartwatches not only have data on how our hearts are beating (e.g., they can identify abnormal heart rhythms like atrial fibrillation), but they can also identify subtle changes in mobility that might be predictive of early neuromuscular diseases like Parkinson's disease. Meanwhile, grocery stores have data on the foods we eat, and with increasing interest in how diet affects our lives, these data could be linked to detailed measures of health. Read More: Could the Shingles Vaccine Help Prevent Dementia? Similarly, social-media platforms possess data that can offer insights into changes in our mental health, and through large-scale analysis of online photos could even identify, in real time, early visible markers of disease. These are moonshots, of course, and whether we want to use data in this way is an open question. But the potential to improve health could be large. Creating a way for scientists to link outside data to existing government and health data—while responsibly maintaining individual anonymity after the linkage—could open many novel research opportunities. Keeping all of these data sources organized, secure, and accessible to scientists is a tall order. Researchers who use big data often dedicate substantial resources to finding the data they need, organizing it, and ensuring its accuracy; the better the database is maintained, the easier it is for researchers to actually perform their analyses. The secure online platform where Medicare and other government health care data are currently accessed has been described by researchers as 'tedious and prone to system errors' and in need of major improvements. Meanwhile, security concerns have led the government to stop letting researchers store the data on their own secure servers, the easiest and most cost-effective way to actually work with the data. Access to Medicare data by researchers has become prohibitively expensive, costing about $30,000 a year or more for a single user to work on one project using the online platform. Read More: Why We Can't Rely on Science Alone to Make Public Health Decisions Proposals to drastically cut medical research funding have been reported, and if passed, these research funding cuts will come at the cost of discoveries to improve health that will never be made. High-quality research of any kind requires investment, whether it's in a biology lab under a microscope or working with data on powerful computers. A new data platform is only as valuable as researchers' ability to access it in a functional and cost-effective way. Any roadmap to designing a national data platform that links together health care and other sensitive data must consider the many valid concerns about collecting data in the U.S., including privacy concerns and how data will be used. The Pew Research Center finds that large majorities of Americans say they are concerned about how the government uses data collected about them (71%), while also admitting that they have little to no understanding of what the government even does with such data (77%). Here are some strategies—in addition to many of the cybersecurity and privacy safeguards already in place—to both protect the data and help earn the public trust: Mistrust and unease with government data collection is readily traceable to historical abuse of Americans' data (as well as recent allegations of improper access), so it's not surprising that many are wary of the Trump Administration's plans. Ensuring data cannot be weaponized by the government against individuals is perhaps the single biggest barrier to creating a useful database, but it can be done. Those currently using federal health care data must already undergo training and comply with very high data-security standards. Misuse of the data—such as even attempting to figure out the identity of an anonymous individual in the data—or failure to protect patient privacy can lead to criminal penalties. A platform of sensitive data without well-delineated restrictions on who can use it and what they can use it for is a recipe for problems. Other ongoing efforts by the Administration to compile data under the vague goal of 'increasing government efficiency' have been met with pushback and lawsuits from organizations concerned about data being used against members of the public. Current use of federal health data also requires researchers to provide the government detailed plans to justify the use of specific data. This allows the government to ensure that no more data than is needed to answer the specific question is provided to researchers. Read More: Why Do Taxi Drivers Have a Lower Risk of Alzheimer's? Researchers must also obtain ethical approval from an Institutional Review Board prior to accessing and analyzing data, a second checkpoint. These boards, which exist in light of egregious failures of medical research ethics in the 20th century, help ensure that analyses are designed to minimize risk to patients—even if it is only their data, and not their bodies, at risk. Transparency into who is using this sensitive data and what exactly they are doing with it can engender trust between researchers and the American public. Just like researchers already do for clinical trials, those accessing the data platform should specify their plans in advance, and those plans should be easily and publicly available. Transparency around which data were accessed and what computer code was used to analyze it not only promotes trust, but such data- and code-sharing practices among researchers make it easier to appraise the quality of the work, identify mistakes, and root out misconduct. We can only assume that Americans' unease with governmental data use stems from knowledge that, as with all powerful tools, linked data has the potential to be used in potentially harmful ways. But when in the hands of qualified scientists using rigorous scientific methods and privacy safeguards, a robust real-world data platform like this could lead to new discoveries about how all of us can lead healthier lives. Contact us at letters@


New York Times
27 minutes ago
- New York Times
Trump Budget's Caps on Grad School Loans Could Worsen Doctor Shortage
President Trump's proposed budget would make deep cuts in government health plans and medical research, and, critics say, could also make finding a doctor more difficult: It restricts loans that students rely on to pursue professional graduate degrees, making the path to becoming a physician harder even as doctor shortages loom and the American population is graying. The domestic policy bill, which passed in the House last month, would cap direct federal unsubsidized loans at $150,000 — far less than the cost of obtaining a medical education — and phase out the Grad PLUS loans that help many students make up the difference. Medicine, dentistry and osteopathic medicine are among the most expensive graduate programs. Four years of medical education costs $286,454 at a public school, on average, and $390,848 at a private one, according to the Association of American Medical Colleges. Medical school graduates leave with an average debt of $212,341, the association found. The price of a four-year program in osteopathic medicine is $297,881 at a public school, on average, and $371,403 at a private school, according to the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine. The average indebtedness of their graduates is $259,196. The proposed loan caps 'will either push students and families into the private loan market, where they take on more risk and have less consumer protection, or simply push people out of higher education altogether,' said Aissa Canchola Bañez, policy director at the Student Borrower Protection Center, a nonprofit advocacy group. Private student loans are also not eligible for Public Service Loan Forgiveness programs, which many students rely on to manage their debt. Students from low-income families may have difficulty qualifying for private loans. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Yahoo
43 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Oscar Health, Inc. (OSCR): A Bull Case Theory
We came across a bullish thesis on Oscar Health, Inc. (OSCR) on FJ Research's Substack. In this article, we will summarize the bulls' thesis on OSCR. Oscar Health, Inc. (OSCR)'s share was trading at $14.15 as of 4th June. OSCR's trailing and forward P/E were 35.38 and 19.84 respectively according to Yahoo Finance. A female doctor using the latest healthcare IT technology in her medical practice. Oscar Health represents a bold attempt to overhaul the dysfunctional infrastructure of the $4.5 trillion American healthcare industry, which is plagued by inefficiencies, misaligned incentives, and staggering administrative costs. Unlike traditional insurers or consumer-facing telehealth startups like Hims and Hers, Oscar is rebuilding the backend—the core logic layer that powers healthcare transactions. It's a fully integrated, tech-driven insurance stack spans claims processing, risk scoring, provider networks, and member engagement, all powered by proprietary software and increasingly AI. This infrastructure is not only used internally but is also being licensed externally, giving Oscar the potential to become the AWS of health insurance. The company is especially well-positioned in the rapidly evolving Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplace, which has expanded beyond low-income households to include a broader swath of middle-income Americans, thanks to enhanced subsidies under recent legislation. As legacy insurers retreat from this complex segment, Oscar's low admin costs, member engagement capabilities, and tech adaptability put it in pole position to seize market share. Currently active in 20 states, Oscar is on a clear growth trajectory. Despite its compelling fundamentals, the market still undervalues the company, with its stock trading below IPO levels. However, Oscar's long-term vision is backed by Thrive Capital and Josh Kushner, investors with a track record of identifying transformative platforms. Their continued involvement signals deep conviction and a willingness to drive strategic execution. With structural tailwinds, scalable infrastructure, and a highly engaged investor base, Oscar Health offers a mispriced opportunity in one of America's most essential yet broken industries. Previously, we covered a on Oscar Health (OSCR) by convexititties in March 2025, focusing on political overhangs and insider buying. FJ Research's June 2025 thesis complements this by highlighting Oscar's AI-powered backend platform and ACA market leadership, reinforcing the long-term upside case. Oscar Health, Inc. (OSCR) is not on our list of the 30 Most Popular Stocks Among Hedge Funds. As per our database, 41 hedge fund portfolios held OSCR at the end of the first quarter which was 43 in the previous quarter. While we acknowledge the risk and potential of OSCR as an investment, our conviction lies in the belief that some AI stocks hold greater promise for delivering higher returns and have limited downside risk. If you are looking for an extremely cheap AI stock that is also a major beneficiary of Trump tariffs and onshoring, see our free report on the best short-term AI stock. READ NEXT: 8 Best Wide Moat Stocks to Buy Now and 30 Most Important AI Stocks According to BlackRock. Disclosure: None. This article was originally published at Insider Monkey. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data