Question

Lack of sleep puts you at higher risk for colds, first experimental study finds By Hanae ArmitageSep. 1, 2015, 11:00 AM Moms and sleep researchers alike have stressed the importance of solid shuteye for years, especially when it comes to fighting off the common cold. Their stance is a sensible one—skimping on sleep weakens the body’s natural defense system, leaving it more vulnerable to viruses. But the connection relied largely on self-reported, subjective surveys—until now. For the first time, a team of scientists reports that they have locked down the link experimentally, showing that sleep-deprived individuals are more than four times more likely to catch a cold than those who are well-rested.

“It’s very nice to see an experiment looking at sleep as an important regulator for specific antiviral immune responses,” says Michael Irwin, a psychoneuroimmunologist at University of California (UC), Los Angeles, who is not involved with the study. “In this particular case, there’s a hard clinical outcome showing [sleep deprivation] and susceptibility to the common cold.”

In a carefully controlled two-part experiment, scientists began by collecting nightly sleep data on 164 healthy individuals for 1 week. Participants were asked to record the times at which they went to bed and woke up. They also wore small watchlike devices that use a technique called wrist actigraphy to monitor movement (much like a Fitbit tracks activity) while they slept. Aric Prather, lead author of the study and a sleep researcher at UC San Francisco, says that he and his colleagues associate the wrist actigraphy data with being awake—if during a reported sleep period, the wrist band records movement, they take that as an indication of wakefulness, and subtract the time spent moving from the hours asleep.

SIGN UP FOR OUR DAILY NEWSLETTER Get more great content like this delivered right to you! Email Address * Click to view the privacy policy. Required fields are indicated by an asterisk (*)

Then came part two: the cold infections. Scientists quarantined participants in a hotel and gave them nose drops containing rhinovirus—the virus responsible for the common cold. They then closed off the hotel floor for 5 days, letting the hosts’ immune system do the rest. To ensure the most accurate results, researchers drew participants’ blood before the viral exposure to test for levels of rhinovirus antibody, a defensive agent in the immune system that recognizes and attacks rhinovirus. If they found high, preexisting levels of the protective protein, they removed the participant from the study so that prior immunity would not bias the infection rates of the group.

In order to officially register as “sick,” participants had to exhibit one “objective sign of illness” and one other immune response. Signs of illness revolved around mucus production. After viral exposure, scientists collected used tissues daily and, essentially, weighed the snot. Ten grams or more counted as a sign of illness. They also looked at congestion. The researchers dripped a harmless dye into participants’ noses and waited to see how long it took to reach the back of their throats; longer than 35 minutes tallied as a sign of illness. Valid immune response required one of two things: A mucus sample flushed from a participant’s nasal passage had to show signs of viral replication or blood work needed to show new levels of the rhinovirus-fighting antibody.

Of the 164 participants, 124 received the actual virus instead of the control, and 48 of them got sick. By checking the sleep duration of the sick participants, researchers report in the current issue of SLEEP that individuals who slept fewer than 5 hours a night were 4.5 times more likely to get sick than those who slept 7 hours or more. Those who slept 5 to 6 hours were 4.2 times more likely to get sick, but those who slept 6 to 7 hours per night were at no greater risk of catching a cold than those who slept 7 hours or more, suggesting that there’s a sleep threshold for potent immune defense.

“Sleep often takes a back seat to other health behaviors like nutrition and exercise,” Prather says. “I think this [experiment] provides some really clear evidence for those people who get less than 5 or 6 hours of sleep—there really is a clear biological cost.”

The question Is as follows:

What broad question is being addressed by the study?

• To what populations(s) does the question apply?

• Is the study experimental or observational?

• For an experimental study, what are the treatments and outcomes?

• What are the relevant variables in the study?

• What is the size of the sample in the study?

• How were the subjects in the sample selected?

• What are the parameters (means or proportions) of interest?

• What values of statistics (means or proportions) are reported?

• What are some interesting strengths or weaknesses of the study?

• What are the conclusions of the study and why?

Answer 1

1. Broad question: The broad question being addressed is that those who are sleep-deprived tend to get cold faster than other people who get normal sleep

2. Population: healthy individuals , all the healthy individuals form the complete population for this research study based on sleep deprivation and effect on cold

3. The study involves introducing controls and treatments on the subjects to observe the effect of sleep they take and their immunity system to see how fast they catch cold. Hence this study is purely experimental in nature. First part of sleep is observational , the second part is experimental. The treatments are: giving nose drops, locking them in hotel for 5 day period. outcomes are: sign of illness and other immune response

4. relevant variables are: sleep hours, registering as sick, objective sign of illness, congestion, valid immune response

5. size of sample is: 164 people, 124 got the treatment, out of which 48 got sick

6. no information about special selection of sample is mentioned in the study. 164 healthy individuals were chosen whose sleep patterns were observed at first

7. The proportions of those who slept less than 5 hrs, 5 ot 6 hrs and more than 5 hours are being compared to see which of them are more likely to get cold

8. 4.5 times for those who sleep less than 5 hours, 4.2 times for those who sleep for 5 to 6 hours these are the comparative ratio figures provided for different sleep categories

9. Strength of study: the control has been effective, it ensures that sleep is monitored accurately and the effect of cold is monitored and controlled by giving exclusive space to the subjects. Weakness may be : different age groups, different genders may have different rates of responses to cold virus, they may have different sleep patterns. considering them all to be same is an incorrect method of analysing the data

10. The conclusion is drawn in favor of the claim made that sleep deprivation makes you more vulnerable to cold, hence proper sleep patterns can ensure you better immune system and less chances of getting cold