sleep

parents-give-kids-more-melatonin-than-ever,-with-unknown-long-term-effects

Parents give kids more melatonin than ever, with unknown long-term effects


More children are taking the hormone in the form of nightly gummies or drops.

Two years ago, at a Stop & Shop in Rhode Island, the Danish neuroscientist and physician Henriette Edemann-Callesen visited an aisle stocked with sleep aids containing melatonin. She looked around in amazement. Then she took out her phone and snapped a photo to send to colleagues back home.

“It was really pretty astonishing,” she recalled recently.

In Denmark, as in many countries, the hormone melatonin is a prescription drug for treating sleep problems, mostly in adults. Doctors are supposed to prescribe it to children only if they have certain developmental disorders that make it difficult to sleep—and only after the family has tried other methods to address the problem.

But at the Rhode Island Stop & Shop, melatonin was available over the counter, as a dietary supplement, meaning it receives slightly less regulatory scrutiny, in some respects, than a package of Skittles. Many of the products were marketed for children, in colorful bottles filled with liquid drops and chewable tablets and bright gummies that look and taste like candy.

A quiet but profound shift is underway in American parenting, as more and more caregivers turn to pharmacological solutions to help children sleep. What makes that shift unusual is that it’s largely taking place outside the traditional boundaries of health care. Instead, it’s driven by the country’s sprawling dietary supplements industry, which critics have long said has little regulatory oversight—and which may get a boost from Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who is widely seen as an ally to supplement makers.

Thirty years ago, few people were giving melatonin to children, outside of a handful of controlled experiments. Even as melatonin supplements grew in popularity among adults in the late 1990s in the United States and Canada, some of those products carried strict warnings not to give them to younger people. But with time, the age floor dropped, and by the mid-2000s, news reports and academic surveys suggest some early adopters were doing just that. (Try it for ages 11-and-up only, one CNN report warned at the time.) By 2013, according to a Wall Street Journal article, a handful of companies were marketing melatonin products specifically for kids.

And today? “It’s almost like a vitamin now,” said Judith Owens, a pediatric sleep specialist at Harvard Medical School. Usage is growing, including among children who are barely out of diapers. Academic surveys suggest that as many as 1 in 5 preteens in the US now take melatonin at least occasionally, and that some younger children consume it multiple times per week.

Store shelves stocked with sleep aids

Sleep aids, many of them melatonin, are displayed for sale in a Florida store in 2023. In the US, melatonin is available over the counter, but in many other countries the hormone is a prescription drug mostly used by adults.

Credit: Joe Raedle/Getty Images

Sleep aids, many of them melatonin, are displayed for sale in a Florida store in 2023. In the US, melatonin is available over the counter, but in many other countries the hormone is a prescription drug mostly used by adults. Credit: Joe Raedle/Getty Images

On social media, parenting influencers film themselves dancing with bottles of melatonin gummies or cut to shots of their snoozing kids. In the toxicology literature, a series of reports suggest a rise in melatonin misuse—and indicate that some caregivers are even giving doses to infants. And according to multiple studies, some brands may contain substantially higher doses of the hormone than product labels indicate.

The trend has unsettled many childhood sleep researchers. “It is a hormone that you are giving to young children. And there’s just very little research on the long-term effects of this,” said Lauren Hartstein, a childhood sleep researcher at the University of Arizona.

In a 2021 journal article, David Kennaway, a professor of physiology at the University of Adelaide in Australia, noted that melatonin can bind to receptors in the pancreas, the heart, fat tissue, and reproductive organs. (Kennaway once held a patent on a veterinary drug that uses melatonin to boost the fertility of ewes.) Distributing the hormone over the counter to American children, he has argued, is akin to a vast, uncontrolled medical experiment.

“It is a hormone that you are giving to young children. And there’s just very little research on the long-term effects of this.”

To others, that kind of language might seem alarmist—especially considering that melatonin appears to have mild side effects, and that sleep problems themselves can have consequences for both child and parental health. Many caregivers report melatonin is helpful for their children, and it’s been given for years to children with autism and ADHD, who often struggle to sleep. Beth Malow, a neurologist and sleep medicine expert at Vanderbilt University Medical Center who has consulted for a pharmaceutical company that manufactures melatonin products, raised concerns about a tendency to highlight “the evils of melatonin” without noting that “it’s actually very safe, and it can be very helpful.” Focusing just on the negatives, she added, “is to throw the baby out with the bathwater.”

All of this leaves parents navigating a lightly regulated marketplace while receiving conflicting medical advice. “We know that not getting enough sleep in early childhood has a lot of bad effects on health and attention and cognition and emotions, et cetera,” said Hartstein. Meanwhile, she added, “melatonin is safe and well-tolerated in the short term. So there’s a big question of, well, what’s worse, my kid not sleeping, or my kid taking melatonin once a week?”

As for the answer to that question, she said: “We don’t know.”

Mother’s little helper

The urge—the desperate, frantic, all-consuming urge—to get a child to fall sleep is familiar to many parents. So is the impulse to satisfy that urge through drugs. Into the early 20th century, parents sometimes administered an opiate called laudanum to help young children sleep, even though it could be fatal. Decades later, when over-the-counter antihistamines like Benadryl became popular, some parents began using them, off-label, as a sleep aid.

“Most people are pretty happy to resort to over-the-counter medication if their kids are not sleeping,” one mother of two small kids told a team of Australian researchers for a 2004 study. “It really saves the children’s lives,” she added, because “it stops mums from throwing them against the wall.”

Compared to other sleep aids, melatonin supplements have obvious advantages. Chief among them is that they mimic a natural hormone: The body secretes melatonin from a pea-sized gland nestled in the brain, typically starting in the early evening. Levels peak after midnight, and drop off a few hours before sunrise.

Artificially boosting melatonin helps many people fall sleep earlier or more easily.

“There’s a big question of, well, what’s worse, my kid not sleeping, or my kid taking melatonin once a week?”

When a child takes a 1 milligram dose of melatonin, the hormone quickly enters their bloodstream, signaling to the brain that it’s time for sleep. Melatonin reaches levels in the blood that can be more than 10 times higher than natural peak concentrations. Soon, many children begin to feel drowsy.

Children can generally tolerate melatonin. Known side effects appear to be mild, and, compared to antihistamines, people taking low doses of melatonin are less likely to wake up feeling groggy the next morning.

As early as 1991, some researchers began administering small doses of the hormone to children with autism, who sometimes have extreme difficulty falling and staying asleep. A series of trials conducted in the Netherlands in the 2000s found that melatonin could also have modest benefits for non-autistic children experiencing insomnia, and it seemed to be safe in the short-term—although the long-term consequences of regularly taking the hormone were unclear.

The timing of the research coincided with a move in the US to loosen regulations on dietary supplements, led by Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, a supplement-industry hub.

News reports suggest that, by the late 2000s, some parents were trying melatonin for older children.

It’s hard to know for sure who first decided to market melatonin specifically to children, but a key player seems to be Zak Zarbock, a Utah pediatrician and father of four boys who, in 2008, began selling a drug-free, honey-based cough syrup. In 2011, his company, Zarbee’s, introduced a version of its children’s cough remedy that contained melatonin. Soon after, Zarbee’s launched a line of melatonin supplements tailored to children. In a 2014 press release, Zarbock stressed that “a child shouldn’t need to take something to fall asleep every night.” But melatonin, he said, could act like “a reset button for your bedtime routine” when things got out-of-whack. (Zarbock did not respond to interview requests.)

More products followed, and usage rates have climbed. One possible reason for that is that American children are having more difficulty falling asleep. Some experts think screen use is causing sleep problems, and rising rates of anxiety and depression among children may also be affecting slumber. Clinicians report treating families that use melatonin to counteract the stimulating effects of caffeine.

Another possibility—and they’re not mutually exclusive—is that supplement makers sensed a market opportunity and seized it. Gummies have made melatonin more palatable to children; supplement makers now market widely to parents online. At least one company seems to have made overtures to parents via a pediatrics organization: Vicks ZzzQuil, a popular line of children’s melatonin products, sponsored a 2020 webinar on sleep hosted by the American Academy of Pediatrics.

How to anger sleep scientists

Is melatonin a harmless natural supplement or a sleep drug? The culture, at times, seems unsure: It’s easy to find parents fretting in online forums about whether the gummies are safe. Daycare workers have undergone criminal prosecution after providing melatonin to their charges without parental consent.

In their marketing, meanwhile, supplement companies consistently describe their melatonin products as drug-free, non-habit-forming, and safe. In one promotional video for Zarbee’s, Zarbock, wearing sky-blue scrubs, tells parents that “in recent short- and long-term studies, melatonin has been shown to be safe and effective for children.” Echoing language used across the industry, Zarbee’s melatonin gummies are marketed today as “safe and drug-free.”

Such claims raise hackles among sleep scientists. “That kind of advertising is unconscionable,” wrote Kennaway, the Adelaide professor, in an email. “Melatonin ingested whether in a gummy or a tablet is being administered as a drug,he wrote. (In a brief statement sent by Tyra Weeks, a spokesperson, Zarbee’s noted its melatonin products are “regulated as a dietary supplement ingredient by the FDA,” adding that they “do not contain active pharmaceutical ingredients.”)

What’s behind the growing use of melatonin to help children sleep? Some experts think screen use is causing sleep problems, and rising rates of anxiety and depression among children may also be affecting slumber.

Credit: Johner Images/Getty Images

What’s behind the growing use of melatonin to help children sleep? Some experts think screen use is causing sleep problems, and rising rates of anxiety and depression among children may also be affecting slumber. Credit: Johner Images/Getty Images

Among other things, Kennaway worries that long-term melatonin use could have unintended effects, including on the developing reproductive system. While it is known that melatonin can interact with lots of tissues, not just the parts of the brain responsible for initiating sleep, many experts note that there is little long-term safety data on supplemental use of the compound.

“Don’t be fooled by thinking that somehow, this is like a vitamin. It’s a drug,” said Owens, the Harvard sleep specialist. “It’s a medication. And there are no really long-term studies that have looked at things like impact on pubertal development.” (Jess Shatkin, a child psychiatrist at New York University’s medical school, noted that such gaps are common even for marquee prescription medications: “I don’t know of a safety study of Zoloft that goes more than two years,” he said, by way of an example.)

Owens has been in clinical practice for 35 years. The arrival of melatonin, she said, felt abrupt: Around 10 years ago, it suddenly seemed that every patient in her clinic was taking it. She is concerned now about inappropriate use, including caregivers using the hormone for children who do not have insomnia; she has heard reports of a summer camp nurse handing it out to campers at bedtime.

“One of the things that disturbs me the most is when I hear a parent say, ‘Oh well, she asks for her melatonin every night and she says she can’t sleep without it,’” Owens said. “You’re setting up a potential lifetime of dependence on sleeping medication.” (Owens has testified in a lawsuit against Zarbee’s, and she consults for AGB-Pharma, a Swedish firm that makes a prescription melatonin drug.)

Is melatonin a harmless natural supplement or a sleep drug? The culture, at times, seems unsure.

Owens and other researchers say melatonin can be helpful for children with neurodevelopmental disorders like autism and ADHD, who may otherwise be unable to establish a stable sleep routine. And they say it may be useful for other children who struggle to sleep—with certain safeguards.

Recently, teams of researchers in Europe and the United States have evaluated what melatonin can do. Edemann-Callesen, the Danish researcher, works at the Centre for Evidence-Based Psychiatry. She recently led a team to systematically collect and review published studies of melatonin in children. The evidence, she said, was mixed. Studies suggest that melatonin can help children fall asleep around 15 or 20 minutes earlier, on average. Whether that translates to a more rested kid is less clear: “When you look at the evidence,” she said, “melatonin doesn’t affect daytime functioning.”

Overall, she said, there just isn’t much research out there to draw on.

In both the US and Europe, experts are converging on certain recommendations: Families should consult a health care provider before use. They should try simple, non-pharmacological steps to improve sleep first, and only turn to melatonin if that fails. They should start with a low dose—typically around 0.5 mg. And they should only use melatonin for a few weeks as a kind of crutch, ideally dosing the hormone to help establish a better sleep routine and then weaning the child off the supplement.

Some families have been scared off by alarming reports about melatonin. Malow, the Vanderbilt sleep expert, began studying melatonin in the 2000s, as a sleep aid for children with autism. Recently, she said, some families who rely on the supplement to help their children have gotten jumpy: “I had a lot of families tell me in clinic, ‘I’m really worried about melatonin. I read this, I read that, is it safe?” She makes sure they’re using a brand that submits its products to external certification. “And I’d be like, you know, it’s working. It’s working for your kid. Why stop it?”

In 2021, Malow and several colleagues published a study of melatonin safety, looking at 80 children and adolescents who had taken the hormone over the course of two years. They did not flag any serious side effects, and the children’s puberty seemed to progress normally. (The study was funded by Neurim Pharmaceuticals, which manufactures a melatonin drug prescribed outside the US.)

Malow acknowledged the study was small, but she said the findings aligned with her own years of clinical experience. “At least it’s something,” she said. “And I have not, in my experience, had any kids where I was concerned, or the parents were concerned, that puberty was delayed because of melatonin use.”

Consult with your family doctor

Last year, the Council for Responsible Nutrition, a leading supplement industry group, published voluntary guidelines for its members. Among them: put products in child deterrent packaging; tell people to consult a pediatrician before using melatonin; and warn caregivers that melatonin is “for occasional and/or intermittent use only.”

Plenty of manufacturers aren’t part of CRN, and it’s not hard to find suppliers that aren’t in compliance with those recommendations. And whether parents follow the recommendations is something else entirely. User reviews and academic surveys indicate that some parents are dosing regularly for months or years on end, and the products themselves seem packaged for long-term use: For example, the company MaryRuth’s sells bottles of children’s melatonin gummies labeled “2 month supply.” Natrol, a popular brand that warns caregivers that the product is “for occasional short-term use only,” sells bottles containing 140 doses. (MaryRuth’s did not respond to requests for comment, and a spokesperson for Natrol declined to comment.)

Meanwhile, as melatonin sales climb, a growing body of evidence points to cases of misuse.

One issue: Children seem to be sometimes finding, and swallowing, gummies and other melatonin products. Calls to poison control centers for pediatric melatonin ingestion increased 530 percent between 2012 and 2021, according to one analysis published by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Mostly, nothing happened: Among small children, the large majority of the incidents were resolved without the child experiencing symptoms at all. When symptoms do appear, they tend to be mild—drowsiness, for example, or gastrointestinal upset. (Achieving a lethal dose of melatonin appears to be virtually impossible, said Laura Labay, a forensic toxicologist at NMS Labs, which provides toxicology testing services.)

Still, some experts have expressed concern that melatonin misuse might, in rare cases, contribute to more serious outcomes.

In 2015, Sandra Bishop-Freeman, now the chief toxicologist at the North Carolina Office of the Chief Medical Examiner, was called to review on a tragic case. A 3-month-old girl had died in her crib. More than 20 bottles of melatonin were found in the home, and an investigation showed that the girl and her twin sister had been given 5 milligram doses of melatonin multiple times per day to help them sleep. The infant’s blood levels of melatonin were orders of magnitude above the natural range.

“Oftentimes when I explore topics, it’s because we find things that were previously unknown or confusing to us,” Bishop-Freeman told Undark. She wasn’t sure if melatonin had contributed to the infant’s death. But as she read more about the hormone, she felt concerns, especially when her office received several more cases involving elevated levels of melatonin. “It was hard to just tell the pathologist, ‘Eh, no worries, everyone thinks it’s safe, so you’re fine,’” she said.

User reviews and academic surveys indicate that some parents are dosing regularly for months or years on end, and the products themselves seem packaged for long-term use.

In 2022, Bishop-Freeman and colleagues published a paper detailing seven cases of undetermined pediatric deaths where bloodwork revealed elevated levels of melatonin. (They’ve seen more since finishing the paper.) “We don’t want to overstate these findings,” she said: The causes of the deaths are unknown, and the presence of melatonin may just be a coincidence. But her team can’t rule out the hormone as a possible contributor, she said, and investigators should be alert to elevated melatonin levels, which may sometimes be overlooked.

Labay, the forensic toxicologist, said she found those concerns plausible. But, she added, “I think I’m still waiting for the paper that says, ‘This was a pure melatonin death and there was no other contributing cause to that death.'”

Melatonin gummies have made the drug more palatable to children, and supplement makers now market them widely to parents online. But data suggests that the widespread availability of the supplements, often resembling candy, can lead to misuse.

Credit: Joe Raedle/Getty Images

Melatonin gummies have made the drug more palatable to children, and supplement makers now market them widely to parents online. But data suggests that the widespread availability of the supplements, often resembling candy, can lead to misuse. Credit: Joe Raedle/Getty Images

As more children take melatonin, some experts want the supplement industry to do more to prevent them from taking too-large quantities. Pieter Cohen, an internist and a prominent critic of supplement industry practices, faulted regulators for not requiring childproof caps and questioned why companies sell what he describes as higher-than-necessary doses of the hormone.

Many products also have considerably more melatonin than is listed on the label. Last year, a US Food and Drug Administration team analyzed melatonin content in 110 products that appeared in online searches for things like “melatonin + child,” and found dozens of mismatches. In one case, a product contained more than six times the amount on the label.

The study was submitted to a journal in July 2024. So far, the agency has not taken any public action against those companies. “The FDA is not doing their job. They’re basically cowering to the industry,” Cohen said.

In a statement from the FDA, sent by spokesperson Lindsay Haake, the agency said that the products analyzed in the study were “individually evaluated to determine if any agency follow up was needed.” The statement added that “we do not discuss potential or ongoing compliance or enforcement matters with third parties.”

“The FDA is not doing their job. They’re basically cowering to the industry.”

Steve Mister, the president and CEO of the Council for Responsible Nutrition, said manufacturers often have to sell products with higher levels in order to make sure there’s melatonin available throughout a product’s shelf-life. Those so-called overages, he stressed, are modest and safe: “Whatever we put in, we still have confidence that it is safe on day one,” he said.

The supplement industry, Mister said, has taken ­steps to ensure that melatonin is used responsibly, including the guidelines his organization issued last year. “I think our voluntary program is an illustration that we want to step up and do some education of parents,” he said.

He pushed back against suggestions that the supplement industry was not a responsible steward of melatonin, or that it was unwise for the hormone to be sold as an over-the-counter supplement: “Look at the safety and look at the number of doses that are sold in this country every year, and how few adverse events there are, and how little evidence that there is a concern,” Mister said. Other countries, he added, may choose to limit melatonin to prescription-use only. “They like the way their system is set up. That doesn’t mean that it’s right for the US.”

Bedtime struggles take a toll on everyone

For parents whose children struggle to fall sleep, the costs of an interminable bedtime can feel high: exhausted children, burned-out parents, and family conflict that stretches into the night. In online videos and forums, parents disclose insecurity (“We are now at the stage in parenthood where we drug our kids,” one mother says in a TikTok) and gratitude (“It’s saved our sanity,” writes a parent on Reddit). Caregivers talk about their children getting better rest—but it can seem as if the supplement is as much for parents’ mental health as it is for children’s restful sleep.

From the vantage point of a chaotic bedtime, the safety concerns about melatonin can feel academic, privileging unknown or speculative harms (such as the possibility of long-term side effects) over the chance of immediate relief. In conversations, physicians and psychologists who devote their careers to children’s sleep stress the importance of a good night’s rest. But some worry melatonin is often used as a shortcut—and suggest there are more effective paths to improved sleep that families could take, especially if they had better support.

For parents whose children struggle to fall sleep, the costs of an interminable bedtime can feel high: exhausted children, burned-out parents, and family conflict that stretches into the night.

Candice Alfano, a professor of psychology at the University of Houston, runs a center devoted to studying childhood sleep and anxiety. In 2020 and 2021, she and her team conducted a survey of sleep health among children in foster care, who struggle with insomnia at far higher rates than the general population. Pharmacological treatments, they found, were widespread: More than one in 10 foster parents reported receiving a prescription medicine to help the children sleep. And close to half were using melatonin at least occasionally—and often regularly—to help the children sleep.

Alfano’s team has recently developed a sleep treatment program for foster families that, she said, may offer an alternative intervention to drugs and supplements. The initial findings, from a small pilot, suggest it’s effective.

The appeal of melatonin, though, remains, both for caregivers and for the pediatricians who advise them, Alfano said: “It’s seemingly a quick and easy suggestion: ‘You know, here’s something you could go get over the counter. You don’t even need a prescription from me.’”

But the goal, she said, is something else: “to teach these children how to sleep, rather than just sleep.”

This article was originally published on Undark. Read the original article.

Parents give kids more melatonin than ever, with unknown long-term effects Read More »

sleep,-diet,-exercise-and-glp-1-drugs

Sleep, Diet, Exercise and GLP-1 Drugs

As always, some people need practical advice, and we can’t agree on how any of this works and we are all different and our motivations are different, so figuring out the best things to do is difficult. Here are various hopefully useful notes.

  1. Effectiveness of GLP-1 Drugs.

  2. What Passes for Skepticism on GLP-1s.

  3. The Joy of Willpower.

  4. Talking Supply.

  5. Talking Price.

  6. GLP-1 Inhibitors Help Solve All Your Problems.

  7. Dieting the Hard Way.

  8. Nutrients.

  9. Are Vegetables a Scam?.

  10. Government Food Labels Are Often Obvious Nonsense.

  11. Sleep.

  12. Find a Way to Enjoy Exercise.

  13. A Note on Alcohol.

  14. Focus Only On What Matters.

GLP-1 drugs are so effective that the American obesity rate is falling.

John Burn-Murdoch: While we can’t be certain that the new generation of drugs are behind this reversal, it is highly likely. For one, the decline in obesity is steepest among college graduates, the group using them at the highest rate.

In the college educated group the decline is about 20% already. This is huge.

This and our other observations are not easy to reconcile with this study, which I note for completeness and shows only 5% average weight loss in obese patients after one year. Which would be a spectacular result for any other drug. There’s a lot of data that says that in real world conditions you do a hell of a lot better on average than 5% here.

Here’s a strange framing from the AP: ‘As many as 1 in 5 people won’t lose weight with GLP-1 drugs, experts say.’

Jonel Aleccia: “I have been on Wegovy for a year and a half and have only lost 13 pounds,” said Griffin, who watches her diet, drinks plenty of water and exercises regularly. “I’ve done everything right with no success. It’s discouraging.”

Whether or not that is 13 more pounds than he would have lost otherwise, it’s not the worst outcome, as opposed to the 5 in 5 people who won’t lose weight without GLP-1 drugs. 4 out of 5 is pretty damn exciting. I love those odds.

Eliezer Yudkowsky offers caveats on GLP-1 drugs regarding muscle mass. Even if these concerns turn out to be fully correct, the drugs still seems obviously worthwhile to me for those who need it and where it solves their problems.

He also reports it did not work for him, causing the usual replies full of 101-level suggestions he’s already tried.

I presume it would not work for me, either. Its mechanism does not solve my problems. I actually can control my diet and exercise choices, within certain limits, if only through force of will.

My issue is a stupidly slow metabolism. Enjoying and craving food less wouldn’t help.

That’s the real best argument I know against GLP-1s, that it only works on the motivation and willpower layer, so if you’ve got that layer handled and your problems lie elsewhere, it won’t help you.

And also cultivating the willpower layer can be good.

Samo Burja: Compelling argument. Papers by lying academics or tweets by grifters pale in comparison.

This is the state of the art in nutrition science and is yet to be surpassed.

I’m embarking on this diet experiment, starting today. 💪

People ask me if I’m on Ozempic, and I say no.

Don’t you understand the joy of willpower?

How much should we care about whether we are using willpower?

There are three reasons we could care about this.

  1. Use of willpower cultivates willpower or is otherwise ‘good for you.’

  2. Use of willpower signals willpower.

  3. The positional advantage of willpower is shrinking and we might not like that.

Wayne Burkett: People do this thing where they pretend not to understand why anybody would care that drugs like Ozempic eliminate the need to apply willpower to lose weight, but I think basically everybody understands on some level that the application of willpower is good for the souls of the people who are capable of it.

This is concern one.

There are two conflicting models you see on this.

  1. The more you use willpower, the more you build up your willpower.

  2. The more you use willpower, the more you run out of willpower.

This is where it gets complicated.

  1. There’s almost certainly a short-term cost to using willpower. On days you have to use willpower on eating less, you are going to have less of it, and less overall capacity, for other things. So that’s a point in favor of GLP-1s.

  2. That short-term cost doesn’t ever fully go away. If you’re on a permanent diet, yes it likely eventually gets easier via habits, but it’s a cost you pay every day. I pay it every day, and this definitely uses a substantial portion of my total willpower, despite having pulled this off for over 20 years.

  3. The long-term effect of using willpower and cultivating related habits seems to have a positive effect on some combination of overall willpower and transfer into adjacent domains, and one’s self-image, and so on. You learn a bunch of good meta habits.

  4. If you don’t have to spend the willpower on food, you could instead build up those same meta habits elsewhere, such as on exercise or screen time.

  5. However, eating is often much better at providing motivation for learning to use willpower than alternative options. People might be strictly better off in theory, and still be worse off in practice.

My guess is that for most people, especially most people who have already tried hard to control their weight, this is a net positive effect.

I agree that there are some, especially in younger generations who don’t have the past experience of trying to diet via willpower, and who might decide they don’t need willpower, who might end up a lot worse off.

It’s a risk. But in general we should have a very high bar before we act as if introducing obstacles to people’s lives is net positive for them, or in this case that dieting is net worthwhile ‘willpower homework.’ Especially given that quite a lot of people seem to respond to willpower being necessary to not fail at this, by failing.

Then we get to a mix of the second and third objections.

Wayne Burkett: If you take away that need, then you level everybody else up, but you also level down the people who are well adapted to that need.

That’s probably a net win — not even probably, almost certainly — but it’s silly to pretend not to understand that there’s an element to all these things that’s positional.

An element? Sure. If you look and feel better than those around you, and are healthier than they are, then you have a positional advantage, and are more likely to win competitions than if everyone was equal, and you signal your willpower and all that.

I would argue it is on net rather small portion of the advantages.

My claim is that most of being a healthy weight is an absolute good, not a positional good. The health benefits are yours. The physically feeling better and actually looking better and being able to do more things and have more energy benefits are absolute.

Also, it’s kind of awesome when those around you are all physically healthy and generally more attractive? There are tons of benefits, to you, from that. Yes, relative status will suffer, and that is a real downside for you in competitions, especially winner-take-all competitions (e.g. the Hollywood problem) and when this is otherwise a major factor in hiring.

But you suffer a lot less in dating and other matching markets, and again I think the non-positional goods mostly dominate. If I could turn up or down the health and attractiveness of everyone around me, but I stayed the same, purely for my selfish purposes, I would very much help everyone else out.

I actually say this as someone who does have a substantial amount of my self-image wrapped up in having succeeded in being thin through the use of extreme amounts of willpower, although of course I have other fallbacks available.

A lot of people saying this sort of stuff pretty obviously just don’t have a lot of their personality wrapped up in being thin or in shape and would see this a lot more clearly if a drug were invented that equalized everyone’s IQ. Suddenly they’d be a little nervous about giving everybody equal access to the thing they think makes them special.

“But it’s really bad that these things are positional and we should definitely want to level everybody up” says the guy who is currently positioned at the bottom.

This is a theoretical, but IQ is mostly absolute. And there is a reason it is good advice to never be the smartest person in the room. It would be obviously great to raise everyone up if it didn’t also involve knocking people down.

Would it cost some amount of relative status? Perhaps, but beyond worth it.

In the end, I’m deeply unsympathetic to the second and third concerns above – your willpower advantage will still serve you well, you are not worse off overall, and so on.

In terms of cultivating willpower over the long term, I do have long term concerns we could be importantly limiting opportunities for this, in particular because it provides excellent forms of physical feedback. But mostly I think This Is Fine. We have lots of other opportunities to cultivate willpower. What convinces me is that we’ve already reached a point where it seems most people don’t use food to cultivate willpower. At some point, you are Socrates complaining about the younger generation reading, and you have to get over it.

We can’t get enough supply of those GLP-1s, even at current prices. The FDA briefly said we no longer had a shortage and people would have to stop making unauthorized versions via compounding, but intense public pressure they reversed their position two weeks later.

Should Medicare and Medicaid cover GLP-1? Republicans are split. My answer is that if we have sufficient supply available, then obviouslyh yes, even at current prices, although we probably can’t stomach it. While we are supply limited, obviously no.

Tyler Cowen defends the prices Americans pay for GLP-1 drugs, saying they support future R&D and that you can get versions for as low as $400/month or do even better via compounding.

I buy that the world needs to back up the truck and pay Novo Nordisk the big bucks. They’ve earned it and the incentives are super important to ensure we continue doing research going forward, and we need to honor our commitments. But this does not address several key issues.

The first key issue is that America is paying disproportionately, while others don’t pay their fair share. Together we should pay, and yes America benefits enough that the ‘rational’ thing to do is pick up the check even if others won’t, including others who could afford to.

But that’s also a way to ensure no one else ever pays their share, and that kind of ‘rational’ thinking is not ultimately rational, which is something both strong rationalists and Donald Trump have figured out in different ways. At some point it is a sucker’s game, and we should pay partly on condition that others also pay. Are we at that point with prescription drugs, or GLP-1 inhibitors in particular?

One can also ask whether Tyler’s argument proves too much – is it arguing we should choose to pay double the going market prices? Actively prevent discounting? If we don’t, does that make us ‘the supervillains’? Is this similar to Peter Singer’s argument about the drowning child?

The second key issue is that the incentives this creates are good on the research side, but bad on the consumption side. Monopoly pricing creates large deadweight losses.

The marginal cost of production is low, but the marginal cost of consumption is high, meaning a rather epic deadweight loss triangle from consumers who would benefit from GLP-1s if bought at production cost, but who cannot afford to pay $400 or $1,000 a month. Nor can even the government afford it, at this scale. Since 40% of Americans are obese and these drugs also help with other conditions, it might make sense to put 40% of Americans on GLP-1 drugs, instead of the roughly 10% currently on them.

The solution remains obvious. We should buy out the patents to such drugs.

This solves the consumption side. It removes the deadweight loss triangle from lost consumption. It removes the hardship of those who struggle to pay, as we can then allow generic competition to do its thing and charge near marginal cost. It would be super popular. It uses government’s low financing costs to provide locked-in up front cold hard cash to Novo Nordisk, presumably the best way to get them and others to invest the maximum in more R&D.

There are lots of obvious gains here, for on the order of $100 billion. Cut the check.

GLP-1 drugs linked to drop in opioid overdoses. Study found hazard ratios from 0.32 to 0.58, so a decline in risk of between roughly half and two-thirds.

GLP-1 drugs also reduce Alzheimer’s 40%-70% in patients with Type 2 Diabetes? This is a long term effect, so we don’t know if this would carry over to others yet.

This Nature post looks into theories of why GPL-1 drugs seem to help with essentially everything.

If you don’t want to do GLP-1s and you can’t date a sufficiently attractive person, here’s a claim that Keto Has Clearly Failed for Obesity, suggesting that people try keto, low-fat and protein restriction in sequence in case one works for you. Alas, the math here is off, because the experimenter is assuming non-overlapping ‘works for me’ groups (if anything I suspect positive correlation!), so no even if the other %s are right that won’t get you to 80%. The good news is if things get tough you can go for the GLP-1s now.

Bizarre freak that I am on many levels, I’m now building muscle via massive intake of protein shakes, regular lifting workouts to failure and half an hour of daily cardio, and otherwise down to something like 9-10 meals in a week. It is definitely working, but I’m not about to recommend everyone follow in my footsteps. This is life when you are the Greek God of both slow metabolism and sheer willpower.

Aella asks the hard questions. Such as:

Aella: I’ve mostly given up on trying to force myself to eat vegetables and idk my life still seems to be going fine. Are veggies a psyop? I’ve never liked them.

Jim Babcock: Veggies look great in observational data because they’re the lowest-priority thing in a sort of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Foods. People instinctively prioritize: first get enough protein, then enough calories, then enough electrolytes, then… if you don’t really need anything, veg.

Eric Schmidt: Psyop.

Psyop. You do need fiber one way or another. And there are a few other ways they seem helpful, and you do need a way to fill up without consuming too many calories. But no, they do not seem in any way necessary, you can absolutely go mostly without them. You’ll effectively pick up small amounts of them anyway without trying.

The key missing element in public health discussions of food, and also discussions of everything else, of course joy and actual human preferences and values.

Stian Westlake: I read a lot of strategies and reports on obesity and health, and it’s striking how few of them mention words like conviviality or deliciousness, or the idea that food is a source of joy, comfort and love.

Tom Chivers: this is such a common theme in public health. You need a term in your equation for the fact that people enjoy things – drinking, eating sweets, whatever – or they look like pure costs with no benefit whatsoever, so the seemingly correct thing to do will always be to reduce them.

Anders Sandberg: The Swedish public health authority recommended reducing screen usage among young people in a report that carefully looked at possible harms, but only cursorily at what the good sides were.

In case you were wondering if that’s a strawman, here’s Stian’s top response:

Mark: Seeing food as a “source of joy, comfort and love?” That mindset sounds like what would be used to rationalize unhealthy choices with respect to quantity and types of food. It sounds like a mantra for obesity.

Food is absolutely one of life’s top sources of joy, comfort and love. People downplay it, and some don’t appreciate it, but it’s definitely top 10, and I’d say it’s top 5. And maybe not overall but on some days, especially when you’re otherwise down or you put in the effort, it can absolutely 100% be top 1.

If I had to choose between ‘food is permanently joyless and actively sad, although not torture or anything, but you’re fit and healthy’ and ‘food is a source of joy, comfort and love, but you don’t feel so good about yourself physically and it’s not your imagination’ then I’d want to choose the first one… but I don’t think the answer is as obvious as some people think, and I’m fortunate I didn’t have to fully make that choice.

One potential fun way to get motivated is to date someone more attractive. Women who are dating more attractive partners had more motivation for losing weight, in the latest ‘you’ll never believe what science found’ study. Which then gets described, because it is 2024, as ‘there might be social factors playing a role in women’s disordered eating’ and an ‘ugly truth’ rather than ‘people respond to incentives.’

Carmen claims that to get most of the nutrients from produce what matters is time from harvest to consumption, while other factors like price and being organic matter little. And it turns out Walmart (!) does better than grocery stores on getting the goods to you in time, while farmers markets can be great but have large variance.

This also suggests that you need to consume what you buy quickly, and that buying things not locally in season should be minimized. If you’re eating produce for its nutrients, then the dramatic declines in average value here should make you question that strategy, and they he say that on this front frozen produce does as well or better on net versus fresh. There are of course other reasons.

It also reinforces the frustration with our fascination over whether a given thing is ‘good for you’ or not. There’s essentially no way to raise kids without them latching onto this phrase, even if both parents know better. Whereas the actual situation is super complicated, and if you wanted to get it right you’d need to do a ton of research on your particular situation.

My guess is Mu. It would be misleading to say either they were or were not a scam.

Aella: I think vegetables might be a scam. I hate them, and recently stopped trying to make myself eat them, and I feel fine. No issues. Life goes on; I am vegetable-free and slightly happier.

Rick the Tech Dad: Have you ever tried some of the fancier stuff? High quality Brussels sprouts cooked in maple syrup with bacon? Sweet Heirloom carrots in a sugar glaze? Chinese broccoli in cheese sauce?

Aella: Carrots are fine. The rest is just trying to disguise terrible food by smothering it in good food.

I have been mostly ‘vegetable-and-fruit-free’ for over 30 years, because:

  1. If I try to eat most vegetables or fruits of any substantial size, my brain decides that what I am consuming is Not Food, and this causes me to increasingly gag with the size and texture of the object involved.

  2. To the extent I do manage to consume such items in spite of this issue, in most cases those objects bring me no joy at all.

  3. When they do bring me any joy or even the absence of acute suffering, this usually requires smothering them such that most calories are coming from elsewhere.

  4. I do get exposure from some sauces, but mostly not other sources.

  5. This seems to be slowly improving over the last ~10 years, but very slowly.

  6. I never noticed substantial ill-effects and I never got any cravings.

  7. To the extent I did have substantial ill-effects, they were easily fixable.

  8. The claims of big benefits or trouble seem based on correlations that could easily not be causal. Obviously if you lecture everyone that Responsible People Eat Crazy Amounts of Vegetables well beyond what most people enjoy, and also they fill up stomach space for very few calories and thus reduce overall caloric consumption, there’s going to be very positive correlations here.

  9. All of nutrition is quirky at best, everyone is different and no one knows anything.

  10. Proposed actions in response to the problem tend to be completely insane asks.

People will be like ‘we have these correlational studies so you should change your entire diet to things your body doesn’t tell you are good and that bring you zero joy.’

I mean, seriously, fthat s. No.

I do buy that people have various specific nutritional requirements, and that not eating vegetables and fruits means you risk having deficits in various places. The same is true of basically any exclusionary diet chosen for whatever reason, and especially true for e.g. vegans.

In practice, the only thing that seems to be an actual issue is fiber.

Government assessments of what is healthy are rather insane on the regular, so this is not exactly news, but when Wagyu ground beef gets a D and Fruit Loops get a B, and McDonald’s fries get an A, you have a problem.

Yes, this is technically a ‘category based system’ but that only raises further questions. Does anyone think that will in practice help the average consumer?

I see why some galaxy brained official might think that what people need to know is how this specific source of ground beef compares to other sources of ground beef. Obviously that’s the information the customer needs to know, says this person. That person is fruit loops and needs to watch their plan come into contact with the enemy.

Bryan Johnson suggests that eating too close to bed is bad for your sleep, and hence for your health and work performance.

As with all nutritional and diet advice, this seems like a clear case of different things working differently for different people.

And I am confident Bryan is stat-maxing sleep and everything else in ways that might be actively unhealthy.

It is however worth noticing that the following are at least sometimes true, for some people:

Bryan Johnson:

  1. Eating too close to bedtime increases how long you’re awake at night. This leads you to wanting to stay in bed longer to feel rested.

  2. High fat intake before bed can lower sleep efficiency and cause a longer time to fall asleep. Late-night eating is also associated with reduced fatty acid oxidation (body is less efficient at breaking down fats during sleep). Also can cause weight gain and potentially obesity if eating patterns are chronic.

  3. Consuming large meals or certain foods (spicy or high-fat foods) before bed can cause digestive issues like heartburn, which can disrupt sleep.

  4. Eating late at night can interfere with your circadian rhythm, negatively effecting sleep patterns.

  5. Eating late is asking the body to do two things at the same time: digest food and run sleep processes. This creates a body traffic jam.

  6. Eating late can increase plasma cortisol levels, a stress hormone that can further affect metabolism and sleep quality.

What to do:

  1. Experiment with eating earlier. Start with your last meal of the day 2 hours before bed and then try to 3, 4, 5, and 6 hours.

  2. Experiment with eating different foods and build intuition. For me, things like pasta, pizza and alcohol are guaranteed to wreck my sleep. If I eat steamed veggies or something similarly light hours before bed sometimes, I usually don’t see any negative effects.

  3. Measure your resting heart rate before bed. After years of working to master high quality sleep, my RHR before bed is the single strongest predictor of whether I’ll get high quality or low quality sleep. Eating earlier will lower your RHR at bedtime.

  4. If you’re out late with friends or family, feel free to eat for the social occasion. Just try to light foods lightly.

I’ve run a natural version of this experiment, because my metabolism is so slow that I don’t ever eat three meals in a day. For many years I almost never ate after 2pm. For the most recent 15 years or so, I’ll eat dinner on Fridays with the family, and maybe twice a month on other days, and that’s it.

When I first wrote this section, I had not noticed a tendency to have worse sleep on Fridays, with the caveat that this still represents a minimum of about four hours before bed anyway since we rarely eat later than 6pm.

Since then, I have paid more attention, and I have noticed the pattern. Yes, on days that I eat lunch rather than dinner, or I eat neither, I tend to sleep better, in a modest but noticeable way.

I have never understood why you would want to eat dinner at 8pm or 9pm in any case – you’ve gone hungry the whole day, and now when you’re not you don’t get to enjoy that for long. Why play so badly?

The other tendency is that if you eat quite a lot, it can knock you out, see Thanksgiving. Is that also making your sleep worse? That’s not how I’d instinctively think of it, but I can see that point of view.

What about the other swords in the picture?

  1. Screen time has never bothered me, including directly before sleep. Indeed, watching television is my preferred wind-down activity for going to sleep. Overall I get tons of screen time and I don’t think it matters for this.

  2. I never drink alcohol so I don’t have any data on that one.

  3. I never drink large amounts of caffeine either, so this doesn’t matter much either.

  4. Healthier food, and less junk food, are subjective descriptions, with ‘less sugar’ being similar but better defined. I don’t see a large enough effect to worry about this until the point where I’m getting other signals that I’ve eaten too much sugar or other junk food. At which point, yes, there’s a noticeable effect, but I should almost never be doing that anyway.

  5. Going to bed early is great… when it works. But if you’re not ready, it won’t work. Mostly I find it’s more important to not stay up too late.

  6. But also none of these effects are so big that you should be absolutist about it all.

Physical activity is declining, so people spend less energy, and this is a substantial portion of why people are getting fatter. Good news is this suggests a local fix.

That is also presumably the primary cause of this result?

We now studied the Total energy expenditure (TEE) of 4799 individuals in Europe and the USA between the late 1980s and 2018 using the IAEA DLW database. We show there has been a significant decline in adjusted TEE over this interval of about 7.7% in males and 5.6% in females.

We are currently expending about 220 kcal/d less for males and 122 kcal/d less for females than people of our age and body composition were in the late 1980s. These changes are sufficient to explain the obesity epidemic in the USA.

What’s the best way to exercise and get in shape? Matt Yglesias points out that those who are most fit tend to be exercise enjoyers, the way he enjoys writing takes, whereas he and many others hate exercising. Which means if you start an exercise plan, you’ll probably fail. And indeed, I’ve started many exercise plans, and they’ve predictably almost all failed, because I hated doing them and couldn’t find anything I liked.

Ultimately what did work were the times I managed to finally figure out how to de facto be an exercise enjoyer and want to do it. A lot of that was finding something where the benefits were tangible enough to be motivating, but also other things, like being able to do it at home while watching television.

Unlike how I lost the weight, this one I do think mostly generalizes, and you really do need to just find a way to hack into enjoying yourself.

Here are some related claims about exercise, I am pretty sure Andrew is right here:

Diane Yap: I know this guy, SWE manager at a big tech company, Princeton grad. Recently broke up with a long term gf. His idea on how to get back in the dating market? Go to the gym and build more muscles. Sigh. I gave him a pep talk and convinced him that the girls for which that would make a difference aren’t worth his time anyway.

ofir geller: it can give him confidence which helps with almost all women.

Diane Yap: Ah, well if that’s the goal I can do that with words and save him some time.

Andrew Rettek: The first year or two of muscle building definitely improves your attractiveness. By the time you’re into year 5+ the returns on sexiness slow down or go negative across the whole population.

As someone who is half a year into muscle building for health, yes it quite obviously makes you more attractive and helps you feel confident and sexy and that all helps you a lot on the dating market, and also in general.

The in general part is most important.

Whenever someone finally does start lifting heavy things in some form, or even things like walking more, there is essentially universal self-reporting that the returns are insanely great. Almost everyone reports feeling better, and usually also looking better, thinking better and performing better in various ways.

It’s not a More Dakka situation, because the optimal amount for most people does not seem crazy high. It does seem like not a hard decision.

Exercise and weight training is the universal miracle drug. It’s insane to talk someone out of it. But yes, like anything else there are diminishing returns and you can overdose, and the people most obsessed with it do overdose and it actively backfires, so don’t go nuts. That seems totally obvious.

A plurality of Americans (45%) now correctly believe alcohol in moderation is bad for your health, versus 43% that think it makes no difference and 8% that think it is good.

It was always such a scam telling people that they needed to drink ‘for their health.’

I am not saying that there are zero situations in which it is correct to drink alcohol.

I would however say that if you think it falls under the classification of: If drinking seems like a good idea, it probably isn’t, even after accounting for this rule.

I call that Finkel’s Law. It applies here as much as anywhere.

My basic model is: Exercise and finding ways to actually do it matters. Finding a way to eat a reasonable amount without driving yourself crazy or taking the joy out of life, whether or not that involves Ozempic or another similar drug, matters, and avoiding acute deficits matters. Getting reasonable sleep matters. A lot of the details after that? They mostly don’t matter.

But you should experiment, be empirical, and observe what works for you in particular.

Discussion about this post

Sleep, Diet, Exercise and GLP-1 Drugs Read More »

sleeping-more-flushes-junk-out-of-the-brain

Sleeping more flushes junk out of the brain

Better sleep on it —

Rhythmic activity during sleep may get fluids in the brain moving.

Abstract image of a pink brain against a blue background.

As if we didn’t have enough reasons to get at least eight hours of sleep, there is now one more. Neurons are still active during sleep. We may not realize it, but the brain takes advantage of this recharging period to get rid of junk that was accumulating during waking hours.

Sleep is something like a soft reboot. We knew that slow brainwaves had something to do with restful sleep; researchers at the Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis have now found out why. When we are awake, our neurons require energy to fuel complex tasks such as problem-solving and committing things to memory. The problem is that debris gets left behind after they consume these nutrients. As we sleep, neurons use these rhythmic waves to help move cerebrospinal fluid through brain tissue, carrying out metabolic waste in the process.

In other words, neurons need to take out the trash so it doesn’t accumulate and potentially contribute to neurodegenerative diseases. “Neurons serve as master organizers for brain clearance,” the WUSTL research team said in a study recently published in Nature.

Built-in garbage disposal

Human brains (and those of other higher organisms) evolved to have billions of neurons in the functional tissue, or parenchyma, of the brain, which is protected by the blood-brain barrier.

Everything these neurons do creates metabolic waste, often in the form of protein fragments. Other studies have found that these fragments may contribute to neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s.

The brain has to dispose of its garbage somehow, and it does this through what’s called the glymphatic system (no, that’s not a typo), which carries cerebrospinal fluid that moves debris out of the parenchyma through channels located near blood vessels. However, that still left the questions: What actually powers the glymphatic system to do this—and how? The WUSTL team wanted to find out.

To see what told the glymphatic system to dump the trash, scientists performed experiments on mice, inserting probes into their brains and planting electrodes in the spaces between neurons. They then anesthetized the mice with ketamine to induce sleep.

Neurons fired strong, charged currents after the animals fell asleep. While brain waves under anesthesia were mostly long and slow, they induced corresponding waves of current in the cerebrospinal fluid. The fluid would then flow through the dura mater, the outer layer of tissue between the brain and the skull, taking the junk with it.

Just flush it

The scientists wanted to be sure that neurons really were the force that pushed the glymphatic system into action. To do that, they needed to genetically engineer the brains of some mice to nearly eliminate neuronal activity while they were asleep (though not to the point of brain death) while leaving the rest of the mice untouched for comparison.

In these engineered mice, the long, slow brain waves seen before were undetectable. As a result, the fluid was no longer pushed to carry metabolic waste out of the brain. This could only mean that neurons had to be active in order for the brain’s self-cleaning cycle to work.

Furthermore, the research team found that there were fluctuations in the brain waves of the un-engineered mice, with slightly faster waves thought to be targeted at the debris that was harder to remove (at least, this is what the researchers hypothesized). It is not unlike washing a plate and then needing to scrub slightly harder in places where there is especially stubborn residue.

The researchers also found out why previous experiments produced different results. Because the flushing out of cerebrospinal fluid that carries waste relies so heavily on neural activity, the type of anesthetic used mattered—anesthetics that inhibit neural activity can interfere with the results. Other earlier experiments worked poorly because of injuries caused by older and more invasive methods of implanting the monitoring hardware into brain tissues. This also disrupted neurons.

“The experimental methodologies we used here largely avoid acute damage to the brain parenchyma, thereby providing valuable strategies for further investigations into neural dynamics and brain clearance,” the team said in the same study.

Now that neurons are known to set the glymphatic system into motion, more attention can be directed towards the intricacies of that process. Finding out more about the buildup and cleaning of metabolic waste may contribute to our understanding of neurodegenerative diseases. It’s definitely something to think about before falling asleep.

Nature, 2024.  DOI: 10.1038/s41586-024-07108-6

Sleeping more flushes junk out of the brain Read More »

stress-busting-technology-enables-a-portable-sleep-and-meditation-device-to-improve-concentration-in-just-five-minutes

Stress-busting technology enables a portable sleep and meditation device to improve concentration in just five minutes

November 19, 2022 by

(Visited 2 times, 2 visits today)

Morphée, globally acclaimed for elegantly designed audio devices that deliver impactful meditation and sophrology techniques, today announces Morphée Zen. The ultra-portable spa-like “pebble” device that provides mental wellness sessions throughout the day to reduce anxiety and boost concentration and mental focus.

Designed with sleep professionals and sophrologists experts, Morphée devices are screen-free non- digital solutions to manage anxiety, stress, and insomnia. They provide users with themed sessions comprised of soothing sounds, music and voice therapies.

Morphée Zen is the latest device in the Morphée range and is highly portable, ready whenever someone needs a mental wellness break. From the morning commute to the office to day-care to the home, it discreetly aids anxiety management and improves concentration anytime, anywhere. Bringing the possibility to de-stress and calm down in only five minutes, Morphée Zen contains 72 sessions based on six themes: Dynamic Relaxation (known as Jacobson), Deep Relaxation, Immersive Journeys, Nature Sounds, Relaxing Music and “Chrono Zen” – some quick two-minute sessions available for instant relief.

Combining the best meditation and sophrology techniques within a minimalist design, Morphée Zen carries on the company’s vision of curating an unconnected environment for ultimate relaxation and overall mindfulness – completely screen-free. Users simply plug in a pair of headphones, turn on the Morphée Zen and select a session, then sit back, relax and de-stress.

Morphée Zen joins the Morphée, and My Little Morphée, the fantastic sleep and meditation aids designed for adults and kids aged 3-10yrs. Holding the key to a great night sleep, these non-digital devices contain hundreds of audio sessions to improve wellness and launched in the US in Q4 2021.

“Following the successful launch of Morphée and My Little Morphée, we are confident that Morphée Zen will bring the same level of deep well-being experience to American consumers” said Charlie Rousset, co-creators of Morphée, “Our sessions have been proven to help people calm down and relax at home as well as to fall asleep with ease at night. Now, Morphée Zen is a portable solution for a quick meditation and refocus during the day wherever the user may be.”

Morphée Zen features:

100 % non-digital

Ultra-portable / Intuitive & easy to use

Expertise & efficiency: 72 sessions designed by relaxation experts: sophrologists, hypnotherapists, psychologists

Dimensions: 7,5 x 7 x 1,5 cm (2.95 x 2.76 x 0.6 in)

Weight: 75g (2.65 oz)

Battery life: 3 hours on play mode, turns off automatically after 5 min

Audio: through wired headphones jack

The meditations and visualizations also help children develop their confidence, improve concentration and focus, and foster emotional versatility. You can see My Little Morphée in action here!

Availability

Morphée Zen will be available in Q3 2022, priced at $79.99. Morphée and My Little Morphée are currently available for purchase at us.morphee.co, Amazon, and selective retailers priced $99.99. For further information visit us.morphee.co

(Visited 2 times, 2 visits today)

Last modified: November 26, 2022

About the Author:

Tom is the Editorial Director at TheCESBible.com

Stress-busting technology enables a portable sleep and meditation device to improve concentration in just five minutes Read More »