The three corollaries of the null hypothesis ['sleep is not required'] do not seem to square well with the available evidence: there is no convincing case of a species that does not sleep, no clear instance of an animal that forgoes sleep without some compensatory mechanism, and no indication that one can truly go without sleep without paying a high price. What many concluded long ago still seems to hold: the case is strong for sleep serving one or more essential functions. But which ones?
The excellent ‘Mind Hacks‘ website pointed me in the direction of this article on whether sleep is neccessary. Its a long held debate, mostly fueled through a lack of understanding as to what sleep is really for. If you’ve not read Mind Hacks, the book or blog, it is worth a visit, as they regularly have very interesting pieces on neuroscience.
Posted in Science
