Alpha Intrusions? Rapid EMS too much EMG? What?

jbn3boys wrote:

DreamDiver wrote:In the story of sleep, REM sleep is the most important. Without it, you die in days or weeks.

...I'm shocked that REM is THAT important! I mean, I knew it was important in terms of restorative sleep, but death without it? That part's new to me...and not reassuring!

While REM deprivation can be fatal in rats, humans do OK without it (REM, that is).

I must find the story of the Israeli soldier...

jbn3boys wrote: During this last sleep study, I had a total of 15% N3 and 4% REM sleep. Could be that this is why I'm feeling so lousy lately. I think I will have to go start looking at fibromyalgia and all it's symptoms. Maybe I'm actually showing some of the signs, but just not the pain? I'm also glad that my sleep doctor is a neurologist.

The fact that you can hold a reasonable conversation with other forum members might mean you're probably getting enough REM sleep. REM helps us process what our brains have learned throughout the day. It's less about physical restoration and more about helping us integrate what we learned whether it's dance steps, how to hold the door for the next person at the post office, or news about overseas. NR3 is all about sleep for physical restoration. You're in the best of hands to ask questions about alpha intrusions from your sleep doc if he's a neurologist. Excellent.

@NotMuffy - thanks for that clarification. I'd thought the same was true for humans when I'd read as much for rats. I hope you'll post the story if you find it. Still, just to be sure -- REM is probably the part of sleep our bodies can do least without, is it not?

EDIT: Thanks for posting that.

DreamDiver wrote:Still, just to be sure -- REM is probably the part of sleep our bodies can do least without, is it not?

I would say the least desirable would be NREM1.

In re: REM:

• People with pontine lesions may have reduced REM and do fine.
• People take REM-suppressing antidepressants (like zillions) and do fine.
• Proponents of the Memory Consolidation Function of REM have not proven their case - (No It Don't!).
• Studies that try to create REM deprivation usually generate sleep deprivation, confounding the study.
• REM is a needless waste of energy (literally. The brain is running a million miles an hour).
• The evolution theory makes no sense (the atonic state was necessary to prevent people from wandering out of the cave and getting eaten by saber-toothed tigers. Well that's great, except only 20% of the night is REM, and since sleepwalking occurs in SWS, overall, it doesn't help).

On the other hand, there's the rebound thing:

• People deprived of REM, once the suppressor is removed (like untreated OSA), will have large quantities of REM, trying to "make up" the deficit.

NotMuffy wrote: On the other hand, there's the rebound thing:

• People deprived of REM, once the suppressor is removed (like untreated OSA), will have large quantities of REM, trying to "make up" the deficit.

Is there a similar rebound effect for people deprived of SWS?

NotMuffy wrote:

DreamDiver wrote:Still, just to be sure -- REM is probably the part of sleep our bodies can do least without, is it not?

I would say the least desirable would be NREM1.

By 'least-desirable', do you mean humans deprived of NREM1 will die or get sick faster than those who do are deprived of other stages of sleep?

I'm finding this discussion very interesting, if not fascinating.

Would anyone care to help this ignorant woman out and give a brief summary of the difference between REM & NREM? And what is SWS? I went back through my sleep study summary and saw where my lowest oxygen level in REM was 76% and NREM was 75%, but have no real idea what the difference is there...

Edited to add: I just went and looked up this stuff for myself, and I understand the various stages. But in my situation, my doc has always said that my problems are during REM sleep, yet my initial study showed 75% oxygen in NREM...

Oh, I'm so confused....

robysue wrote:

NotMuffy wrote: On the other hand, there's the rebound thing:

• People deprived of REM, once the suppressor is removed (like untreated OSA), will have large quantities of REM, trying to "make up" the deficit.

Is there a similar rebound effect for people deprived of SWS?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slow-wave_sleep

The highest arousal thresholds (e.g. difficulty of awakening, such as by a sound of a particular volume) are observed in deep sleep. A person will typically feel more groggy when awoken from slow-wave sleep, and indeed, cognitive tests administered after awakening then indicate that mental performance is somewhat impaired for periods of up to 30 minutes or so, relative to awakenings from other stages. This phenomenon has been called "sleep inertia."

After sleep deprivation there is a sharp rebound of SWS, suggesting there is a "need" for this stage.

Madalot wrote:I'm finding this discussion very interesting, if not fascinating.

Would anyone care to help this ignorant woman out and give a brief summary of the difference between REM & NREM? And what is SWS? I went back through my sleep study summary and saw where my lowest oxygen level in REM was 76% and NREM was 75%, but have no real idea what the difference is there...

NREM includes all stages of sleep that are Not REM (NREM). Simple, but true. For some, the worst apneas are during REM. The fact that they distinguish REM from all other stages of sleep may emphasize its importance greatly. Someone else may offer insight about O2 saturation. I don't really know enough to comment, especially in your situation.

DreamDiver wrote:

NotMuffy wrote:

DreamDiver wrote:Still, just to be sure -- REM is probably the part of sleep our bodies can do least without, is it not?

I would say the least desirable would be NREM1.

By 'least-desirable', do you mean humans deprived of NREM1 will die or get sick faster than those who do are deprived of other stages of sleep?

STOP WITH THE DYIN' ALREADY!!

You're scarin' people!

NREM1 has one and only one purpose-- to get you to NREM2. The less NREM1 you got, the better. People with lots of NREM1 will inevitably have horrid sleep architecture, EDS, fall asleep while driving and get into auto accidents and di.....

Damn.

Now you got me doing it.

DreamDiver wrote:NREM includes all stages of sleep that are Not REM (NREM). Simple, but true. For some, the worst apneas are during REM. The fact that they distinguish REM from all other stages of sleep may emphasize its importance greatly. Someone else may offer insight about O2 saturation. I don't really know enough to comment, especially in your situation.

That's what I was thinking it was and I did go and read up on it earlier today. But then I got confused when the report from my diagnostic summary said that lowest in REM was 76% and lowest in NREM was 75%. I guess I just don't understand that, considering how I keep being told my problems are mostly in REM sleep.

But heck -- nothing with me seems to make sense all the time anyway -- which is why I call myself an enigma.

I guess it doesn't matter as much right now about the oxygen levels because the current settings DO seem to be keeping me at 90% or higher most of the time...

NotMuffy wrote:

DreamDiver wrote:By 'least-desirable', do you mean humans deprived of NREM1 will die or get sick faster than those who do are deprived of other stages of sleep?

STOP WITH THE DYIN' ALREADY!!

You're scarin' people!

NREM1 has one and only one purpose-- to get you to NREM2. The less NREM1 you got, the better. People with lots of NREM1 will inevitably have horrid sleep architecture, EDS, fall asleep while driving and get into auto accidents and di.....

Damn.

Now you got me doing it.

Thanks for the clarification. That makes more sense.

Madalot wrote:

DreamDiver wrote:NREM includes all stages of sleep that are Not REM (NREM). Simple, but true. For some, the worst apneas are during REM. The fact that they distinguish REM from all other stages of sleep may emphasize its importance greatly. Someone else may offer insight about O2 saturation. I don't really know enough to comment, especially in your situation.

That's what I was thinking it was and I did go and read up on it earlier today. But then I got confused when the report from my diagnostic summary said that lowest in REM was 76% and lowest in NREM was 75%. I guess I just don't understand that, considering how I keep being told my problems are mostly in REM sleep.

But heck -- nothing with me seems to make sense all the time anyway -- which is why I call myself an enigma.

I guess it doesn't matter as much right now about the oxygen levels because the current settings DO seem to be keeping me at 90% or higher most of the time...

I'm glad your current settings work most of the time. I hope your docs will get your settings working just right with the next study.

DreamDiver wrote:I'm glad your current settings work most of the time. I hope your docs will get your settings working just right with the next study.

They work in that my oxygen levels stay fairly good most of the time, which is a big part of this battle. I still have occasional difficulty breathing before I fall asleep and occasionally wake up during the night gasping (not fun), wake up a LOT during the night (which my doctor said she has been able to see on the ventilator download but can't tell what is causing it) and I'm still tired, thus napping a lot during the day.

Are there settings that will address all of this? Who knows, but I am going to give the sleep study a try to see if SOMETHING (anything???) shows up that might make any of this a bit better.

I take a day or two off, and there is so much to catch up on when I come back!

Madalot wrote:I'm finding this discussion very interesting, if not fascinating.

me too!

Madalot wrote: I went back through my sleep study summary and saw where my lowest oxygen level in REM was 76% and NREM was 75%, but have no real idea what the difference is there...t in my situation, my doc has always said that my problems are during REM sleep, yet my initial study showed 75% oxygen in NREM...

Oh, I'm so confused....

and

Madalot wrote: I got confused when the report from my diagnostic summary said that lowest in REM was 76% and lowest in NREM was 75%. I guess I just don't understand that, considering how I keep being told my problems are mostly in REM sleep.

Maddie, I'm guessing that while you had a slightly lower oxygen in NREM, that the majority of your problems occur during REM. Say you had 100 "episodes" during the night, and 95 of them were in REM, with only 5 in NREM. Your doc may say then that your problem is in REM. Or, to look at it a bit differently, you may have had one or two desaturations to 75% in NREM, but you had many desats to 76% during REM. Also, the 75% in NREM may have been a very short time (say 10 seconds), while the 76% in REM may have been very long (say 45 seconds). Can you kind of see how your doc could then say that your problem is in REM? Also, if the REM "problem" is corrected, then most likely the NREM problems would also be corrected. (Did that make any sense at all? or am I just talking nonsense? Sometimes I can't tell. LOL)

NotMuffy wrote:NREM1 has one and only one purpose-- to get you to NREM2. The less NREM1 you got, the better. People with lots of NREM1 will inevitably have horrid sleep architecture, EDS, fall asleep while driving and get into auto accidents and di.....

Crum...I'm guessing 25% N1 is not good....

Anybody know what the average should be for each sleep stage? And when they only list N1, N2, N3 and REM, is N4 actually combined with N3?

jbn3boys wrote:Maddie, I'm guessing that while you had a slightly lower oxygen in NREM, that the majority of your problems occur during REM. Say you had 100 "episodes" during the night, and 95 of them were in REM, with only 5 in NREM. Your doc may say then that your problem is in REM. Or, to look at it a bit differently, you may have had one or two desaturations to 75% in NREM, but you had many desats to 76% during REM. Also, the 75% in NREM may have been a very short time (say 10 seconds), while the 76% in REM may have been very long (say 45 seconds). Can you kind of see how your doc could then say that your problem is in REM? Also, if the REM "problem" is corrected, then most likely the NREM problems would also be corrected. (Did that make any sense at all? or am I just talking nonsense? Sometimes I can't tell. LOL)

Absolutely makes total sense. If I had more than just the summary, I might have seen that for myself. But thank you for pointing that out to me as I really hadn't thought about that....

Glad I could help! (and glad my explanation actually made sense...you never know after a busy, busy day, and a night of not-the-best sleep!)