• Comment (6)

Study: Human Body Might Not Be Able to Survive for Long in Space

New study has implications for longer space missions and potential space colonies

March 13, 2012 RSS Feed Print
Astronaut John Grunsfeld in the final space walk to repair the Hubble Space Telescope.

Astronaut John Grunsfeld in the final space walk to repair the Hubble Space Telescope.

For now, forget buying a pod on Newt Gingrich's moon colony—besides the technological hurdles, new research suggests that the human body might not have what it takes to cut it in space for long periods of time.

A study of 27 astronauts found that nearly all of their eyes and brains showed abnormalities after returning from space. Lead researcher Larry Kramer of the University of Texas Medical School at Houston, says the abnormalities are caused by increased pressure in the brain that's consistent with idiopathic intercranial hypertension, a disease on earth without a known cause. Astronauts who were in space for longer periods of time showed the worst symptoms, which include altered vision, displaced pituitary gland, and swelling of the optic nerve.

[Spectacular Snapshots of Space]

Kramer and NASA scientists believe the astronauts' exposure to the low-gravity environment in space is causing the condition.

"We have indications that the severity and incidence goes up with time," Kramer says.

The findings are the latest biological hurdle humans will have to clear before leaving earth behind—previous studies have found that astronauts experience muscle atrophy and loss of calcium from their bones while in space. Richard Williams, chief health and medical officer for NASA, says those two conditions can be partially mitigated with exercise aboard the space station and dietary supplements, but increased brain pressure is a tougher nut to crack.

"We've put a lot in motion in an effort to understand [increased brain pressure] and to try to mitigate it," Williams says. "It's a high priority."

The symptoms experienced by astronauts can often be treated on earth, but Americans' relatively short stints in space—the longest was 215 days—seem to be enough to prevent serious harm.

"How big a risk it poses for longer term missions of 18 months, two years, we haven't gone to at this point. It's hard to say," Williams says. NASA has set a 2025 target for a manned "exploration" mission to Mars or another solar system spot, which would presumably be some of the longest manned space flights attempted. "We don't see this as precluding those missions."

[Solar Flares to Continue Pounding Earth Until 2014]

But longer or permanent missions could be out of the question, Kramer says. When it comes to longer-term space travel or planetary colonies, he says "we may be limited by our own biological makeup."

Both Kramer and Williams note that some astronauts have no ill effects from prolonged space exposure. Genetics and anatomical makeup may play a role in certain humans being better adapted for space travel, but Williams says it's impossible to tell which astronauts will be better protected. With very few humans taking trips to space, and the canceled space shuttle program, research in the area is likely to continue to be slow.

"I'd like to be able to identify what are the differences in physiology that allow astronauts to resist these changes," Kramer says. "We're not sending up astronauts as fast as we used to, so there's a much longer timeline to really study these kinds of things."

Tags:
space,
NASA

Reader Comments Read all comments (6)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

In response to JOJOBA's question "...Also, how do we know these side-effects are not the result of the massive acceleration needed to get to orbit..." The answer is that we know because the people who are in space longest, have the most severe problem. If it was launch and landing issues, there wouldn't be a difference.

Larry of FL 8:29PM April 01, 2012

Where are the heroes who will volunteer for a one-way trip? Most of history's great explorers and pioneers did just that. Many thought they'd never return - this is a requirement for real exploration: the ability to accept that risk or certainty. Were you the first human to land on Mars, they would be naming continents after you there, or on the next, habitable planet.

I am amazed by the lack of vision, courage and grasp of this as an option. Especially in America, a nation of 300 million people, I am sure there are thousands of people who would volunteer. Call me inhuman. I call it extraordinarily human.

Barry of MA 10:57PM March 26, 2012

Generating artificial gravity is no big deal, you just have to design the craft to spin fast enough to create artificial gravity.

Check out the space station / hotel in the movie "2001 a Space Odyssey". It is spinning to generate artificial gravity.

We've always known that was the right way to do it, we just got lazy or cheap.

Also, how do we know these side-effects are not the result of the massive acceleration needed to get to orbit, or the stresses of returning to earth, or both? Newer "launch from aircraft" technology should reduce the g-forces somewhat.

Besides that, who would let a little thing like the health risks and death stop them from traveling to another planet? Nobody who wants to explore space would let something like a shortened life span stand in the way.

jojoba of CA 6:43PM March 26, 2012

Photo Galleries

History of U.S. Bombings, Failed Attempts

A look at some of the worst bombings in the U.S. and infamous failed attempts.

advertisement

Latest Videos