Too much debate and discussion on health care reform ignores a singularly important fact about the advent of alternative medicine; namely, it was not fostered by the government, insurance carriers, the pharmaceutical industry, or trial lawyers. Its exponential growth is largely due to the actions of people (both patients and practitioners) living in a land of liberty and opportunity who were looking for new choices to better health. It is without caveat one of the finest examples of the free enterprise system in the United States—a place where the market worked its magic by offering that which is now perceived by much of the public as an affordable, safe, and potentially higher-quality service or product than that provided through conventional fields of medicine.

Read more

The flaw shows up in two related ways. First, she only discusses sleep in the context of “quantity,” based on the so-called need for more hours of sleep. But that model itself is flawed, because what people really need is greater “quality” in their sleep, because “sleep quality drives sleep quantity.”

The second flaw derives from the first. By focusing on sleep quantity, she avoids the most important advances in the field of sleep medicine–advances that have already saved lives and dramatically increased quality of life.

For example, she reports on the connection that sleeping more hours might prevent car accidents, and as a sleep specialist I concur that it might. But, a much more powerful way to prevent accidents would be to find out why the individual is sleeping less than they supposedly should be sleeping.

The answer to this question, more than 70% of the time is that the person suffers from undiagnosed and untreated sleep apnea. The author may believe she is not dissuading someone from doing something about their sleep deprivation. But, the tone of the article dismisses a lack of sleep as another thing we needn’t worry about.

In fact, a lack of sleep is an excellent marker for people suffering marked sleep fragmentation caused by physical sleep disorders such as sleep apnea.

Thus, a very useful and cost-effective approach to healthcare in the case of sleep disturbance strongly supports a proactive stance to diagnose sleep disorders early to avoid not just accidents but also to reduce morbidity associated with strokes, depression, diabetes, heart disease and daytime fatigue and sleepiness.

To do so requires going well beyond the superficialities embedded within this author’s commentary.

Furthermore, as I propose on my site, “aggressive treatment of a sleep disorder is one of the cheapest health insurance policies you can buy!”

This author’s misleading commentary about sleep will steer people in the wrong direction and lead to greater health care costs and worse outcomes.

Maybe after a good night’s sleep, she’ll reconsider!