Read any interview with an Olympian, A-lister or high-flying entrepreneur and they’ll likely reference rising at the crack of dawn, whether to train, meditate or start firing off emails.

The idea that ‘the early bird catches the worm’ has such a grip on society that getting up as early as 5am has become semaphore for good health and great success – even those of us who’d rather have a lie-in are lucky to set an alarm for much past 7am, thanks to the timing of the typical working day.

But in fact experts say as few as 5 to 10 per cent of people are true ‘larks’ (early to bed and early to rise) with most (myself included) preferring to both go to bed, and get up, later.

The bad news is that we night owls (late to bed and late to wake) could be at a serious disadvantage when it comes to long-term health.

A study published last week in the Annals of Internal Medicine suggested that late types could be 19 per cent more likely to develop type 2 diabetes than early birds.

The research, undertaken at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Massachusetts, looked at the health outcomes of almost 64,000 middle-aged female nurses over a period of eight years and also found that those who described themselves as night owls were 54 per cent more likely to have unhealthy lifestyle habits including smoking, inadequate sleep and low levels of physical activity.

The good news is that it could be possible to ‘retrain’ yourself to have a healthier sleep type.

Every one of us has a ‘chronotype’ – also known as a circadian preference – which refers to our preferred timing of sleep and waking.

This is mostly genetically determined, but can be dynamic as it’s also influenced by factors such as our hormones (more on that later). Our chronotype lies on a spectrum between being a lark and an owl. Inbetween types are known as doves.

As Russell Foster, a professor of circadian neuroscience and head of the Sleep & Circadian Neuroscience Institute at Oxford University, explains: ‘Our internal clocks – located within our suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN), an area deep within the brain – are set to a cycle of around 24 hours.

‘However, it is only around 24 hours: they tick a little faster or a little slower depending on the individual. These differences are due to changes in one or more of our clock genes.’

This wide spread of sleep-wake times is specific to humans, he says, and is thought to be adaptive: ‘In early human societies, it would have probably been very useful for tribes to have a certain number of their population vigilant at different times of the day.’

Today, however, being a night owl can be a burden. But it is possible to change your chronotype to better fit with modern life – within reason.

Experts say that it could take only a few days if you keep to a strict regimen. Our sleep-wake times have roughly two hours of ‘flex’ built in – so if you’re a night owl, heading to bed at midnight and waking around 8am, you could realistically become a lark happily bedding down by 10pm and rising at 6am.

Professor Foster says: ‘With a good routine and commitment to early light exposure, this degree of shifting your chronotype is realistic.’

But he adds: ‘Sleep is as fundamental [to our existence] as being awake. I can see that for many people today, having larkish tendencies would be much more convenient – but it mustn’t come at the expense of sleep duration.’

I certainly think I would be better off as a lark. I was born a late type and have always had a fractious relationship with sleep, having spent years unable to balance my inability to fall asleep in good time with the need to get up early for school and, later, work.

Now, added to the mix, I have a six-month-old who likes to begin the day anywhere between 4am and 6am – and I’d love to greet the morning with as much enthusiasm as he does.

But before you set about trying to shift your chronotype, it’s important to understand the factors that shape it.

‘The first is your genes,’ says Professor Foster. ‘There are subtle changes in the clock genes, Per and Cry1, which can speed up or slow down our internal master clock, the SCN.’

‘Second, our chronotypes change over time, from childhood to old age,’ he adds.

‘From about the age of ten, there’s a tendency to want to go to bed later and later.

‘Then from your 20s onwards there’s a slow shift towards becoming more of a morning type again, and by the time you’re in your late 50s, early 60s, you’re getting up and going to bed at about the time you did as a pre-teen.’

This amounts to a difference in ideal sleep and wake times of on average two hours – meaning if you enjoyed a midnight bedtime in your 20s, by your 60s around 10pm will feel more natural.

This change is associated with the alteration in hormonal levels associated with puberty: ‘The sex steroids – oestrogen in women and testosterone in men – interact with the master clock within the brain,’ says Professor Foster.

As I am breastfeeding, my oestrogen levels are likely to be quite low – so perhaps that would help make mornings easier for me at the moment, I wonder. Professor Foster hypothesises that it could well do.

Excellent news – this should make my journey from owl to lark easier.

The third, and most important factor to consider in altering your chronotype is light exposure.

Light helps keep our 24-hour body clock running to time, entering through the eyes and signalling, via the retina, to the SCN.

‘The key thing to remember is that morning light advances the clock,’ says Professor Foster.

‘So if you want to train yourself to be a lark, get outdoors in the morning light as soon after dawn as you can for at least 30 minutes; you’ll find it easier to go to bed earlier and get up early the next day. Exposure to light at dusk has the opposite effect.’

And simply sitting by a window won’t do when it comes to becoming ‘more lark’ – nor will switching on the lights.

‘We have data to show that just 30 minutes of light at 10,000 lux can have an effect on our brains, but average domestic lighting conditions are about 100 lux, office lighting is maybe 400 lux, so we’re effectively living in dim, dark caves,’ says Professor Foster.

He suggests using a lux metre (around £15 online; free on an app on your phone) to assess the lighting conditions in your home. To really make you feel bright-eyed and bushy-tailed, add in some movement – ‘morning light exposure and exercise can act synergistically,’ says Professor Foster.

He adds: ‘There’s evidence that the timing of physical exercise will also shift the clock – as well as morning exercise being good for your metabolism.’

So would making these kinds of changes help me? I decided to try it out for a month. As it turns out, I had a secret weapon: my cocker spaniel Vincent.

‘There’s some data that suggests people who own dogs have better sleep-wake patterns,’ says Professor Foster.

One theory is that this is because you have to get up and get them out in the morning. ‘And that gives you a ‘photon shower’ [shower of light particles],’ he explains.

The first morning I took Professor Foster’s advice and threw open the curtains at daybreak: but the light on that cloudy day measured just 410 lux. Even outdoors on my patio it was just 3,426 lux.

This suggests that in the UK even a half-hour outdoor photon shower may not cut it – especially as we head into winter.

‘The answer may be to use a lightbox,’ says Professor Foster, ‘and have your breakfast in front of it.’ (Popular models will set you back around £60 to £90.)

As well as throwing open the curtains and hitting the patio first thing, I try to take an early dog walk – well before noon – and head to bed at a respectable 10pm (OK sometimes closer to 10.59, rather than my standard midnight-ish).

After a month, while my chronotype isn’t quite transformed – partly because a new baby makes my nights so unpredictable – on the days that I’m able to follow my ‘lark’ routine, I feel so much better, and find the following morning – and the next, and the next – considerably easier.

The key is consistency, says Professor Foster. But I know the darkening mornings will make it hard to keep up momentum. Time to look into that light box…

It’s often seen as a taboo subject, but a new study is finally lifting the lid on Britons’ sex lives. 

Researchers from the University of East Anglia surveyed more than 5,000 Brits to decipher what the average men and women’s sex lives looks like. 

And there’s good news if you haven’t been getting much action – you’re not alone. 

The results reveal that most Britons have either had zero or one sexual partner in the preceding three weeks. 

Dr Julii Brainard, who led the study from the University of East Anglia, said: ‘Often people assume everyone else is having lots of sex, but surveys like this show the real story is a lot more complicated.’

In the study, the researchers surveyed more than 5,000 people in Britain last year, asking if they had had sex in the previous three weeks.

Just 31 per cent of heterosexual women aged 45 to 49 said they had zero sexual partners in the past three weeks.

But that jumped to 47 per cent of women aged 50 to 54.

Among women in their early sixties, two-thirds had gone without sex for at least three weeks.

The figures will include women not having regular sex with their husband or partner, and those who are single – perhaps following a midlife divorce.

In contrast, among heterosexual men, the number reporting no sex in the previous three weeks did not rise dramatically with age.

Dr Brainard said: ‘These results could be viewed as good news for older women who are having less sex than when they were younger, as they can know they are normal.’

The findings come from a snapshot study seeking to understand the risk of infection from mpox, previously known as monkeypox, and looking at gay and bisexual men, heterosexual men and heterosexual women.

The authors conclude that everyone is less likely to have regular sex as they get older – but this shift happens at a younger age, and more dramatically, in heterosexual women.

Only about a quarter of women surveyed who were in their late twenties and early thirties had not had sex with any partner in the last three weeks.

This rose to about 37 per cent for those in their late thirties and early forties, and then stood at 31 per cent for those in their late forties.

But then came the jump to 47 per cent of women in their early fifties not having had recent sex, and 52 per cent of those in their late fifties.

By the time women hit their sixties, around two-thirds had not had sex in the previous three weeks, and in their seventies, more than three-quarters said they had not.

For heterosexual men, only about half said they had not had recent sex, with this percentage staying about the same for every age group from late forties to 75-plus.

Men may avoid a middle-aged sex slump by having partners younger than them, who are still more interested in sex.

But it may also be the case that male pride means men are less likely to admit or remember not having had sex in the past three weeks, while women are more likely to under-report the sex they are having.

The study, published in the journal PLOS One, interestingly found very few British heterosexual people have had two or more different partners in the past three weeks.

Having multiple recent sexual partners was most common in 18 to 24-year-olds, and reported by about 14 per cent of this age group.

Jennifer Garner braves the rain as she gets in an early morning jog near her Brentwood home

By Sam Joseph Semon For Dailymail.com

Updated: 03:05 EDT, 3 September 2023

• Researchers from Sweden analysed data from more than one million men 
• High fitness levels when young saw the risk of lung cancer lowered by 42% 

By Xantha Leatham, Deputy Science Editor For The Daily Mail

Published: 18:30 EDT, 15 August 2023 | Updated: 20:38 EDT, 15 August 2023

Scientists discover exact workout routine that lowers your risk of an early death by 50%

By Caitlin Tilley, Health Reporter For Dailymail.Com

Updated: 14:01 EDT, 7 August 2023

West Virginia man captures moment a giant fireball explodes in the early morning sky – and NASA says it came from a comet

By Stacy Liberatore For Dailymail.com

Updated: 14:18 EDT, 3 August 2023

By Lewis Browning and Kieran Lynch For Mailonline

Updated: 13:55 EDT, 31 July 2023

Donald Trump could announce his candidacy for the 2024 election as early as this month, it’s claimed, with the former president reportedly jealous of Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, and keen to distract from ongoing Capitol riot hearings.  

Most candidates for presidential elections announce their run the year before, so as to minimize the time on the campaign trail, where they’ll likely face scandals and embarrassing skeletons in their closets.

But Trump, 74, is agitating to declare his intentions much sooner, according to the New York Times. 

On Friday The New York Times reported that the former president has surprised some of his advisers by saying he may declare his intentions on social media, without even informing them in advance.

Trump remains banned from Twitter, Facebook and Instagram, and would have to make the announcement on his much smaller network, TruthSocial. 

He is said to be aggrieved by increasing attention and compliments heaped on Florida Governor Ron DeSantis.

Many Republicans believe DeSantis pushes the same policies that made Trump very popular – but without the divisive and unpredictable personality.  

Aides, the paper said, are scrambling to build a campaign infrastructure in time for an announcement that could come this month. 

‘Every day is different,’ one source told CNN. 

‘We get told he’s going to announce imminently, and by the afternoon that has changed.’

Another source, who previously said Trump would wait until after Labor Day, told CNN the September announcement was ‘up in the air’ and that if Trump does announce early, ‘it will be July.’

‘He’s sounding a lot more committed lately,’ added another person close to Trump.

Trump has repeatedly teased another run for the White House, even though he’d only be allowed to serve a single term. 

But the idea has been given added urgency by the surge in support for DeSantis, the 43-year-old governor of Florida.

Republican donors who have opened their wallets for Trump are now backing DeSantis as he bids to win a second term as governor of Florida , it has emerged.

Powerful GOP supporters hope DeSantis could serve two terms in office to the one Trump will have to make do with, giving him more time to push through his policies.  

New campaign filings obtained by Politico show that DeSantis has received $3.4 million from 10 donors who collectively spent $24 million on Trump’s reelection bid.

Many of those who donated had never contributed to state-level Florida elections before, and include Home Depot founder Bernie Marcus, 93, who gave DeSantis $500,000. In 2016, he was one of Donald Trump’s most generous donors, contributing $7 million.

The cash donations for a relatively small-fry election show just how seriously many big-hitting Republicans are taking DeSantis as a potential presidential candidate.

Trump told The New Yorker, in an article entitled: ‘Can Ron DeSantis displace Donald Trump as the G.O.P.’s combatant in chief?’, that he was responsible for DeSantis’s political career thanks to a 2018 endorsement credited with landing the Florida man the governor’s post. 

‘If I didn’t endorse him, he wouldn’t have won,’ Trump said.

The article said that DeSantis was sometimes described as ‘Trump with a brain’.

Asked again whether he would beat DeSantis in 2024, Trump told Newsmax: ‘I was very responsible for him getting elected.’

Big money is following DeSantis, however.

DeSantis has amassed a campaign war chest of $100 million, setting new records, and leaving him well positioned to turn those funds to 2024. 

Trump himself has already amassed a $100 million fund, through his Super PAC.

But that money is not allowed to be able to directly support a candidate, under campaign finance laws.

Some aides are urging Trump to wait, so he can use the cash freely before his official declaration. 

One R.N.C. official also pointed out that when Trump officially launched his bid, the Republican party would have to stop paying his legal bills related to an investigation by the New York attorney general. 

Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr, is encouraging him to wait so he has a more complete campaign team ready to go, The New York Times said. 

Others are concerned about the impact of the January 6 hearings.

Trump himself has been watching them avidly, and giving commentary on his Truth Social network.

Lindsay Graham, the South Carolina senator, said Trump should declare swiftly, to keep him focused on policy.

‘It’s up to him if he runs or not,’ Graham told The New York Times. 

‘But the key to him being successful is comparing his policy agenda and policy successes with what is going on today.’ 

The FBI search of former Donald Trump‘s Florida home has triggered feverish speculation that he will soon announce a 2024 run – exciting supporters but worrying party leaders and donors that he could ruin hopes of retaking the House and Senate in November’s midterms.

‘I think he’s running,’ said Eric Levine, an attorney and longtime Republican fundraiser. ‘The only question is whether he announces before the midterms, which would be a disaster.’

Multiple party insiders told DailyMail.com they fear an early announcement would divert fundraising away from candidates and towards the Trump war chest. 

And it would turn the midterms from being a winnable referendum on Joe Biden‘s presidency – its economic crises and foreign policy missteps – to a Trump versus Biden beauty pageant.

Trump grabbed the initiative by posting a campaign-style video on his Truth Social platform after midnight on Tuesday. He calls America ‘a nation in decline’ and slams Biden before ending with the slogan: ‘The best is yet to come.’

At the same time, he has upped the number of fundraising emails sent to his distribution list.

‘Mar-a-Lago was raided,’ said one sent on Wednesday. ‘The radical left is corrupt.

‘We must return the power to the people.’

FBI agents entered Trump’s home as they investigated the removal of classified records from the White House when his term ended in 2021. 

The result was outrage among Republicans, who accused the Biden administration of politicizing the FBI and the Justice Department.

Allies have been urging Trump to jump straight into the campaign to retake the White House. 

John Fredericks, radio host and chair of the Trump Virginia campaign in 2016 and 2020, said he should announce ‘today’ and launch a tour of swing districts immediately.

‘It leads him to a landslide victory in November 2024, it leads to a massive 50-70 House gain and three in the Senate,’ he said.

‘This has activated the Trump MAGA base like nothing I’ve ever seen. It has activated independents and this is going to backfire on the administrative state and the leftwing Marxists who are now in charge.’

Trump insiders have been divided for months on when to announce. Some have pushed for weeks to announce quickly in order to head off possible opponents, particularly Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis who has been making headline and gaining ground.

Others prefer a more conventional route, announcing after November’s midterms.

But Trump himself has floated the idea of announcing ahead of this year’s elections in order to create the biggest splash. 

That fills Republicans working on fall campaigns with dread. 

A senior strategist, working on several midterm campaigns, said an early announcement would be a disaster for hopes of winning back the House and the Senate, diverting fundraising from candidates to Trump. 

‘By taking this action, the FBI has greatly increased the likelihood that Trump will announce his candidacy before November, which Democrats would absolutely love to see,’ said the source, who worked on the 2020 Trump campaign and asked for anonymity to avoid drawing fire on his candidate.

‘If Democrats retain control of the House, the FBI will remain safe from oversight and accountability.’

There is also horror on the Hill that it would let Biden off the hook. He is deeply unpopular and, if the elections follow the usual historical pattern of thumping the party in power, Democrats can expect to lose seats in both the House and Senate.

‘That would be a significant gift to Democrats. he would suck up so much oxygen and remind voters of why he lost last time, instead of thinking about the multiple failures of Joe Biden.’ 

For his part, Levine said the raid on Mar-a-Lago was outrageous. 

‘But the fact that this was outrageous doesn’t necessarily qualify Trump to become president,’ he said.

‘So I don’t think it changed the landscape for running for president at all, but it may change the landscape for when he announces.’

Trump’s grip on the activist base remains tight.

At the weekend, the Conservative Political Action Conference in Texas revealed that 69 percent of attendees want Trump as their candidate in 2024.