Hubbry Logo
Effect of spaceflight on the human bodyEffect of spaceflight on the human bodyMain
Open search
Effect of spaceflight on the human body
Community hub
Effect of spaceflight on the human body
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Effect of spaceflight on the human body
Effect of spaceflight on the human body
Effect of spaceflight on the human body
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
American astronaut Marsha Ivins demonstrates the effects of microgravity on her hair in space

The effects of spaceflight on the human body are complex and largely harmful over both short and long term.[1] Significant adverse effects of long-term weightlessness include muscle atrophy and deterioration of the skeleton (spaceflight osteopenia).[2] Other significant effects include a slowing of cardiovascular system functions, decreased production of red blood cells (space anemia),[3] balance disorders, eyesight disorders and changes in the immune system.[4] Additional symptoms include fluid redistribution (causing the "moon-face" appearance typical in pictures of astronauts experiencing weightlessness),[5][6] loss of body mass, nasal congestion, sleep disturbance, and excess flatulence. A 2024 assessment noted that "well-known problems include bone loss, heightened cancer risk, vision impairment, weakened immune systems, and mental health issues... [y]et what's going on at a molecular level hasn't always been clear",[7] arousing concerns especially vis a vis private and commercial spaceflight now occurring without any scientific or medical research being conducted among those populations regarding effects.[8]

Overall, NASA refers to the various deleterious effects of spaceflight on the human body by the acronym RIDGE (i.e., "space radiation, isolation and confinement, distance from Earth, gravity fields, and hostile and closed environments").[3]

The engineering problems associated with leaving Earth and developing space propulsion systems have been examined for more than a century, and millions of hours of research have been spent on them. In recent years, there has been an increase in research on the issue of how humans can survive and work in space for extended and possibly indefinite periods of time. This question requires input from the physical and biological sciences and has now become the greatest challenge (other than funding) facing human space exploration. A fundamental step in overcoming this challenge is trying to understand the effects of long-term space travel on the human body.

In October 2015, the NASA Office of Inspector General issued a health hazards report related to space exploration, including a human mission to Mars.[9][10]

On 12 April 2019, NASA reported medical results from the Astronaut Twin Study, where one astronaut twin spent a year in space on the International Space Station, while the other spent the year on Earth, which demonstrated several long-lasting changes, including those related to alterations in DNA and cognition, after the twins were compared.[11][12]

In November 2019, researchers reported that astronauts experienced serious blood flow and clot problems while on board the International Space Station, based on a six-month study of 11 healthy astronauts. The results may influence long-term spaceflight, including a mission to the planet Mars, according to the researchers.[13][14]

Physiological effects

[edit]

Many of the environmental conditions experienced by humans during spaceflight are very different from those in which humans evolved; however, technology such as that offered by a spaceship or spacesuit is able to shield people from the harshest conditions. The immediate needs for breathable air and drinkable water are addressed by a life support system, a group of devices that allow human beings to survive in outer space.[15] The life support system supplies air, water and food. It must also maintain temperature and pressure within acceptable limits and deal with the body's waste products. Shielding against harmful external influences such as radiation and micro-meteorites is also necessary.

Some hazards are difficult to mitigate, such as weightlessness, also defined as a microgravity environment. Living in this type of environment impacts the body in three important ways: loss of proprioception, changes in fluid distribution, and deterioration of the musculoskeletal system.

On November 2, 2017, scientists reported that significant changes in the position and structure of the brain have been found in astronauts who have taken trips in space, based on MRI studies. Astronauts who took longer space trips were associated with greater brain changes.[16][17]

In October 2018, NASA-funded researchers found that lengthy journeys into outer space, including travel to the planet Mars, may substantially damage the gastrointestinal tissues of astronauts. The studies support earlier work that found such journeys could significantly damage the brains of astronauts, and age them prematurely.[18]

In March 2019, NASA reported that latent viruses in humans may be activated during space missions, adding possibly more risk to astronauts in future deep-space missions.[19]

Research

[edit]
Main article: Space medicine

Space medicine is a developing medical practice that studies the health of astronauts living in outer space. The main purpose of this academic pursuit is to discover how well and for how long people can survive the extreme conditions in space, and how fast they can re-adapt to the Earth's environment after returning from space. Space medicine also seeks to develop preventive and palliative measures to ease the suffering caused by living in an environment to which humans are not well adapted.

Ascent and re-entry

[edit]
See also: High-G training

During takeoff and re-entry, space travelers can experience several times normal gravity. An untrained person can usually withstand about 3g, but can black out at 4 to 6g. G-force in the vertical direction is more difficult to tolerate than a force perpendicular to the spine because blood flows away from the brain and eyes. First the person experiences a temporary loss of vision and then at higher g-forces loses consciousness. G-force training and a G-suit which constricts the body to keep more blood in the head can mitigate the effects. Most spacecraft are designed to keep g-forces within comfortable limits.

Space environments

[edit]

The environment of space is lethal without appropriate protection: the greatest threat in the vacuum of space derives from the lack of oxygen and pressure, although temperature and radiation also pose risks. The effects of space exposure can result in ebullism, hypoxia, hypocapnia, and decompression sickness. In addition to these, there is also cellular mutation and destruction from high energy photons and sub-atomic particles that are present in the surroundings.[20] Decompression is a serious concern during the extra-vehicular activities (EVAs) of astronauts.[21] Current Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) designs take this and other issues into consideration, and have evolved over time.[22][23] A key challenge has been the competing interests of increasing astronaut mobility (which is reduced by high-pressure EMUs, analogous to the difficulty of deforming an inflated balloon relative to a deflated one) and minimising decompression risk. Investigators[24] have considered pressurizing a separate head unit to the regular 71 kPa (10.3 psi) cabin pressure as opposed to the current whole-EMU pressure of 29.6 kPa (4.3 psi).[23][25] In such a design, pressurization of the torso could be achieved mechanically, avoiding mobility reduction associated with pneumatic pressurization.[24]

Vacuum

[edit]
See also: Uncontrolled decompression
This 1768 painting, An Experiment on a Bird in the Air Pump by Joseph Wright of Derby, depicts an experiment performed by Robert Boyle in 1660 to test the effect of a vacuum on a living system.

Human physiology is adapted to living within the atmosphere of Earth, and a certain amount of oxygen is required in the air we breathe. If the body does not get enough oxygen, then the astronaut is at risk of becoming unconscious and dying from hypoxia. In the vacuum of space, gas exchange in the lungs continues but results in the removal of all gases, including oxygen, from the bloodstream. After 9 to 12 seconds, the deoxygenated blood reaches the brain, and it results in the loss of consciousness.[26] Exposure to vacuum for up to 30 seconds is unlikely to cause permanent physical damage.[27] Animal experiments show that rapid and complete recovery is normal for exposures shorter than 90 seconds, while longer full-body exposures are fatal and resuscitation has never been successful.[28][29] There is only a limited amount of data available from human accidents, but it is consistent with animal data. Limbs may be exposed for much longer if breathing is not impaired.[30]

In December 1966, aerospace engineer and test subject Jim LeBlanc of NASA was participating in a test to see how well a pressurized space suit prototype would perform in vacuum conditions. To simulate the effects of space, NASA constructed a massive vacuum chamber from which all air could be pumped.[31] At some point during the test, LeBlanc's pressurization hose became detached from the space suit.[32] Even though this caused his suit pressure to drop from 3.8 psi (26.2 kPa) to 0.1 psi (0.7 kPa) in less than 10 seconds, LeBlanc remained conscious for about 14 seconds before losing consciousness due to hypoxia; the much lower pressure outside the body causes rapid de-oxygenation of the blood. "As I stumbled backwards, I could feel the saliva on my tongue starting to bubble just before I went unconscious and that's the last thing I remember", recalls LeBlanc.[33] A colleague entered the chamber within 25 seconds and gave LeBlanc oxygen. The chamber was repressurized in 1 minute instead of the normal 30 minutes. LeBlanc recovered almost immediately with just an earache and no permanent damage.[34]

Another effect from a vacuum is a condition called ebullism which results from the formation of bubbles in body fluids due to reduced ambient pressure. The steam may bloat the body up to twice its normal size and slow down circulation, but tissues are elastic and porous enough to prevent rupture.[35] Technically, ebullism is considered to begin at an elevation of around 19 kilometres (12 mi; 62,000 ft) or pressures less than 6.3 kPa (47 mm Hg),[36] known as the Armstrong limit.[20] Experiments with other animals have revealed an array of symptoms that could also apply to humans. The least severe of these is the freezing of bodily secretions due to evaporative cooling. Severe symptoms, such as loss of oxygen in tissue, followed by circulatory failure and flaccid paralysis would occur in about 30 seconds.[20] The lungs also collapse in this process, but will continue to release water vapour leading to cooling and ice formation in the respiratory tract.[20] A rough estimate is that a human will have about 90 seconds to be recompressed, after which death may be unavoidable.[35][37] Swelling from ebullism can be reduced by containment in a flight suit which is necessary to prevent ebullism above 19 km.[30] During the Space Shuttle program astronauts wore a fitted elastic garment called a Crew Altitude Protection Suit (CAPS) which prevented ebullism at pressures as low as 2 kPa (15 mm Hg).[38]

The only humans known to have died of exposure to vacuum in space are the three crew-members of the Soyuz 11 spacecraft; Vladislav Volkov, Georgi Dobrovolski, and Viktor Patsayev. During preparations for re-entry from orbit on June 30, 1971, a pressure-equalisation valve in the spacecraft's descent module unexpectedly opened at an altitude of 168 kilometres (551,000 ft), causing rapid depressurisation and the subsequent death of the entire crew.[39][40]

Temperature

[edit]

In a vacuum, there is no medium for removing heat from the body by conduction or convection. Loss of heat is by radiation from the 310 K temperature of a person to the 3 K of outer space. This is a slow process, especially in a clothed person, so there is no danger of immediately freezing.[41] Rapid evaporative cooling of skin moisture in a vacuum may create frost, particularly in the mouth, but this is not a significant hazard.

Exposure to the intense radiation of direct, unfiltered sunlight would lead to local heating, though that would likely be well distributed by the body's conductivity and blood circulation. Other solar radiation, particularly ultraviolet rays, however, may cause severe sunburn.

Radiation

[edit]
Main article: Health threat from cosmic rays
Comparison of Radiation Doses – includes the amount detected on the trip from Earth to Mars by the RAD on the MSL (2011–2013).[42][43][44]

Without the protection of Earth's atmosphere and magnetosphere astronauts are exposed to high levels of radiation. High levels of radiation damage lymphocytes, cells heavily involved in maintaining the immune system; this damage contributes to the lowered immunity experienced by astronauts. Radiation has also recently been linked to a higher incidence of cataracts in astronauts. Outside the protection of low Earth orbit, galactic cosmic rays present further challenges to human spaceflight,[45] as the health threat from cosmic rays significantly increases the chances of cancer over a decade or more of exposure.[46] A NASA-supported study reported that radiation may harm the brain of astronauts and accelerate the onset of Alzheimer's disease.[47][48][49][50] Solar flare events (though rare) can give a fatal radiation dose in minutes. It is thought that protective shielding and protective drugs may ultimately lower the risks to an acceptable level.[51]

Crew living on the International Space Station (ISS) are partially protected from the space environment by Earth's magnetic field, as the magnetosphere deflects solar wind around the Earth and the ISS. Nevertheless, solar flares are powerful enough to warp and penetrate the magnetic defences, and so are still a hazard to the crew. The crew of Expedition 10 took shelter as a precaution in 2005 in a more heavily shielded part of the station designed for this purpose.[52][53] However, beyond the limited protection of Earth's magnetosphere, interplanetary human missions are much more vulnerable. Lawrence Townsend of the University of Tennessee and others have studied the most powerful solar flare ever recorded. Radiation doses astronauts would receive from a flare of this magnitude could cause acute radiation sickness and possibly even death.[54]

A video made by the crew of the International Space Station showing the Aurora Australis, which is caused by high-energy particles in the space environment.

There is scientific concern that extended spaceflight might slow down the body's ability to protect itself against diseases.[55] Radiation can penetrate living tissue and cause both short and long-term damage to the bone marrow stem cells which create the blood and immune systems. In particular, it causes 'chromosomal aberrations' in lymphocytes. As these cells are central to the immune system, any damage weakens the immune system, which means that in addition to increased vulnerability to new exposures, viruses already present in the body—which would normally be suppressed—become active. In space, T-cells (a form of lymphocyte) are less able to reproduce properly, and the T-cells that do reproduce are less able to fight off infection. Over time immunodeficiency results in the rapid spread of infection among crew members, especially in the confined areas of space flight systems.

On 31 May 2013, NASA scientists reported that a possible human mission to Mars[56] may involve a great radiation risk based on the amount of energetic particle radiation detected by the RAD on the Mars Science Laboratory while traveling from the Earth to Mars in 2011–2012.[42][43][44]

In September 2017, NASA reported radiation levels on the surface of the planet Mars were temporarily doubled, and were associated with an aurora 25-times brighter than any observed earlier, due to a massive, and unexpected, solar storm in the middle of the month.[57]

Weightlessness

[edit]
Astronauts on the ISS in weightless conditions. Michael Foale can be seen exercising in the foreground.

Following the advent of space stations that can be inhabited for long periods of time, exposure to weightlessness has been demonstrated to have some deleterious effects on human health. Humans are well-adapted to the physical conditions at the surface of the Earth, and so in response to weightlessness, various physiological systems begin to change, and in some cases, atrophy. Though these changes are usually temporary, some do have a long-term impact on human health.

Short-term exposure to microgravity causes space adaptation syndrome, self-limiting nausea caused by derangement of the vestibular system. Long-term exposure causes multiple health problems, one of the most significant being loss of bone and muscle mass. Over time these deconditioning effects can impair astronauts' performance, increase their risk of injury, reduce their aerobic capacity, and slow down their cardiovascular system.[58] As the human body consists mostly of fluids, gravity tends to force them into the lower half of the body, and our bodies have many systems to balance this situation. When released from the pull of gravity, these systems continue to work, causing a general redistribution of fluids into the upper half of the body. This is the cause of the round-faced 'puffiness' seen in astronauts,[51][59] and may contribute to observations of altered speech motor control in astronauts.[60] Redistributing fluids around the body itself causes balance disorders, distorted vision, and a loss of taste and smell.

A 2006 Space Shuttle experiment found that Salmonella typhimurium, a bacterium that can cause food poisoning, became more virulent when cultivated in space.[61] On April 29, 2013, scientists in Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, funded by NASA, reported that, during spaceflight on the International Space Station, microbes seem to adapt to the space environment in ways "not observed on Earth" and in ways that "can lead to increases in growth and virulence".[62] In 2017, bacteria were found to be more resistant to antibiotics and to thrive in the near-weightlessness of space.[63] Microorganisms have been observed to survive the vacuum of outer space.[64][65]

Motion sickness

[edit]
Main article: Space adaptation syndrome
Bruce McCandless II floating free in orbit with a space suit and Manned Maneuvering Unit.

The most common problem experienced by humans in the initial hours of weightlessness is known as space adaptation syndrome or SAS, commonly referred to as space sickness. It is related to motion sickness, and arises as the vestibular system adapts to weightlessness.[66] Symptoms of SAS include nausea and vomiting, vertigo, headaches, lethargy, and overall malaise.[2] The first case of SAS was reported by cosmonaut Gherman Titov in 1961. Since then, roughly 45% of all people who have flown in space have suffered from this condition.

Bone and muscle deterioration

[edit]
Main article: Spaceflight osteopenia
Aboard the International Space Station, astronaut Frank De Winne is attached to the COLBERT with bungee cords

A major effect of long-term weightlessness involves the loss of bone and muscle mass. In a weightless environment, astronauts put almost no weight on the back muscles or leg muscles used for standing up. Those muscles then start to weaken and eventually get smaller. Consequently, some muscles atrophy rapidly, and without regular exercise astronauts can lose up to 20% of their muscle mass in just 5 to 11 days.[67] The types of muscle fibre prominent in muscles also change. Slow-twitch endurance fibres used to maintain posture are replaced by fast-twitch rapidly contracting fibres that are insufficient for any heavy labour. Advances in research on exercise, hormone supplements, and medication may help maintain muscle and body mass.

Bone metabolism also changes. Normally, bone is laid down in the direction of mechanical stress. However, in a microgravity environment, there is very little mechanical stress. This results in a loss of bone tissue approximately 1.5% per month especially from the lower vertebrae, hip, and femur.[68] Due to microgravity and the decreased load on the bones, there is a rapid increase in bone loss, from 3% cortical bone loss per decade to about 1% every month the body is exposed to microgravity, for an otherwise healthy adult.[69] The rapid change in bone density is dramatic, making bones frail and resulting in symptoms that resemble those of osteoporosis. On Earth, the bones are constantly being shed and regenerated through a well-balanced system which involves signaling of osteoblasts and osteoclasts.[70] These systems are coupled, so that whenever bone is broken down, newly formed layers take its place—neither should happen without the other, in a healthy adult. In space, however, there is an increase in osteoclast activity due to microgravity. This is a problem because osteoclasts break down the bones into minerals that are reabsorbed by the body.[citation needed] Osteoblasts are not consecutively active with the osteoclasts, causing the bone to be constantly diminished with no recovery.[71] This increase in osteoclasts activity has been seen particularly in the pelvic region because this is the region that carries the biggest load with gravity present. A study demonstrated that in healthy mice, osteoclasts appearance increased by 197%, accompanied by a down-regulation of osteoblasts and growth factors that are known to help with the formation of new bone, after only sixteen days of exposure to microgravity. Elevated blood calcium levels from the lost bone result in dangerous calcification of soft tissues and potential kidney stone formation.[68] It is still unknown whether bone recovers completely. Unlike people with osteoporosis, astronauts eventually regain their bone density.[citation needed] After a 3–4 month trip into space, it takes about 2–3 years to regain lost bone density.[citation needed] New techniques are being developed to help astronauts recover faster. Research on diet, exercise, and medication may hold the potential to aid the process of growing new bone.

To prevent some of these adverse physiological effects, the ISS is equipped with two treadmills (including the COLBERT), and the aRED (advanced Resistive Exercise Device), which enable various weight-lifting exercises which add muscle but do nothing for bone density,[72] and a stationary bicycle; each astronaut spends at least two hours per day exercising on the equipment.[73][74] Astronauts use bungee cords to strap themselves to the treadmill.[75][76] Astronauts subject to long periods of weightlessness wear pants with elastic bands attached between waistband and cuffs to compress the leg bones and reduce osteopenia.[5]

Currently, NASA is using advanced computational tools to understand how to best counteract the bone and muscle atrophy experienced by astronauts in microgravity environments for prolonged periods of time.[77] The Human Research Program's Human Health Countermeasures Element chartered the Digital Astronaut Project to investigate targeted questions about exercise countermeasure regimes.[78][79] NASA is focusing on integrating a model of the advanced Resistive Exercise Device (ARED) currently on board the International Space Station with OpenSim[80] musculoskeletal models of humans exercising with the device. The goal of this work is to use inverse dynamics to estimate joint torques and muscle forces resulting from using the ARED, and thus more accurately prescribe exercise regimens for the astronauts. These joint torques and muscle forces could be used in conjunction with more fundamental computational simulations of bone remodeling and muscle adaptation in order to more completely model the end effects of such countermeasures, and determine whether a proposed exercise regime would be sufficient to sustain astronaut musculoskeletal health.

Fluid redistribution

[edit]
The effects of microgravity on fluid distribution around the body (greatly exaggerated).
The Beckman Physiological and Cardiovascular Monitoring System in the Gemini and Apollo suits would inflate and deflate cuffs to stimulate blood flow to lower limbs
Astronaut Clayton Anderson observes as a water bubble floats in front of him on the Space Shuttle Discovery. Water cohesion plays a bigger role in microgravity than on Earth

In space, astronauts lose fluid volume—including up to 22% of their blood volume.[81] When the astronauts return to Earth, low blood volume can cause orthostatic intolerance or dizziness when standing.[82] Under the influence of the earth's gravity, when a person is standing, blood and other body fluids are pulled towards the lower body, increasing pressure at the feet. In a microgravity environment, hydrostatic pressures throughout the body are removed and the resulting change in blood distribution is analogous to an individual changing from standing up to lying down. The persistent change in the redistribution of blood volume may result in facial edema and other unwelcome side effects. Upon return to Earth, the reduced blood volume creates orthostatic hypotension.[83] Orthostatic tolerance after spaceflight has been greatly improved by fluid loading countermeasures taken by astronauts before touchdown.[84]

Disruption of senses

[edit]
Vision
[edit]

In 2013 NASA published a study that found changes to the eyes and eyesight of monkeys with spaceflights longer than 6 months.[85] Noted changes included a flattening of the eyeball and changes to the retina.[85] Space travelers' eyesight can become blurry after too much time in space.[86][87] Another effect is known as cosmic ray visual phenomena.

[a] NASA survey of 300 male and female astronauts, about 23 percent of short-flight and 49 percent of long-flight astronauts said they had experienced problems with both near and distance vision during their missions. Again, for some people vision problems persisted for years afterward.

— NASA[85]

Since dust can not settle in zero gravity, small pieces of dead skin or metal can get in the eye, causing irritation and increasing the risk of infection.[88]

Long spaceflights can also alter a space traveler's eye movements (particularly the vestibulo-ocular reflex).[89]

Intracranial pressure
[edit]
Main article: Visual impairment due to intracranial pressure

Because weightlessness increases the amount of fluid in the upper part of the body, it has been hypothesized that astronauts experience pathologically elevated intracranial pressure.[90] This would increase pressure on the backs of the eyeballs, affecting their shape and slightly crushing the optic nerve.[1][91][92][93][94][95] This was noticed in 2012 in a study using MRI scans of astronauts who had returned to Earth following at least one month in space.[96] However, direct evidence of pathologically elevated intracranial pressures in microgravity has yet to be obtained. Invasive measures of intracranial pressure on parabolic flights showed that pressures were actually reduced relative to supine levels and slightly higher than seated levels, meaning pressures were within normal physiological variation.[97] Without elevated intracranial pressures, a force that flattens the posterior of the eye is still created by the removal of hydrostatic gradients in the intracranial and intraocular spaces.[98]

Such eyesight problems could be a major concern for future deep space flight missions, including a crewed mission to the planet Mars.[56][91][92][93][94][99] If indeed elevated intracranial pressure is the cause, artificial gravity might present one solution, as it would for many human health risks in space. However, such artificial gravitational systems have yet to be proven. More, even with sophisticated artificial gravity, a state of relative microgravity may remain, the risks of which remain unknown. [100]

Taste
[edit]

One effect of weightlessness on humans is that some astronauts report a change in their sense of taste when in space.[101] Some astronauts find that their food is bland, others find that their favorite foods no longer taste as good (one who enjoyed coffee disliked the taste so much on a mission that he stopped drinking it after returning to Earth); some astronauts enjoy eating certain foods that they would not normally eat, and some experience no change whatsoever. Multiple tests have not identified the cause,[102] and several theories have been suggested, including food degradation, and psychological changes such as boredom. Astronauts often choose strong-tasting food to combat the loss of taste.

Additional physiological effects

[edit]

Within one month the human skeleton fully extends in weightlessness, causing height to increase by 2,5 cm (1 inch).[59] After two months, calluses on the bottoms of feet molt and fall off from lack of use, leaving soft new skin. Tops of feet become, by contrast, raw and painfully sensitive, as they rub against the handrails feet are hooked into for stability.[103] Tears cannot be shed while crying, as they stick together into a ball.[104] In microgravity odors quickly permeate the environment, and NASA found in a test that the smell of cream sherry triggered the gag reflex.[102] Various other physical discomforts such as back and abdominal pain are common because of the readjustment to gravity, where in space there was no gravity and these muscles could freely stretch.[105] These may be part of the asthenization syndrome reported by cosmonauts living in space over an extended period of time, but regarded as anecdotal by astronauts.[106] Fatigue, listlessness, and psychosomatic worries are also part of the syndrome. The data is inconclusive; however, the syndrome does appear to exist as a manifestation of the internal and external stress crews in space must face.[107]

Psychological effects

[edit]
See also: Psychological and sociological effects of spaceflight
Studies of Russian cosmonauts, such as those on Mir, provide data on the long-term effects of space on the human body.

Research

[edit]

The psychological effects of living in space have not been clearly analyzed but analogies on Earth do exist, such as Arctic research stations and submarines. The enormous stress on the crew, coupled with the body adapting to other environmental changes, can result in anxiety, insomnia and depression.[108]

Stress

[edit]

There has been considerable evidence that psycho social stressors are among the most important impediments to optimal crew morale and performance.[109] Cosmonaut Valery Ryumin, twice Hero of the Soviet Union, quotes this passage from "The Handbook of Hymen" by O. Henry in his autobiographical book about the Salyut 6 mission: "If you want to instigate the art of manslaughter just shut two men up in an eighteen by twenty-foot cabin for a month. Human nature won't stand it."[110]

NASA's interest in psychological stress caused by space travel, initially studied when their crewed missions began, was rekindled when astronauts joined cosmonauts on the Russian space station Mir. Common sources of stress in early American missions included maintaining high performance while under public scrutiny, as well as isolation from peers and family. On the ISS, the latter is still often a cause of stress, such as when NASA Astronaut Daniel Tani's mother died in a car accident, and when Michael Fincke was forced to miss the birth of his second child.[107]

Sleep

[edit]
Main article: Sleep in space

The amount and quality of sleep experienced in space is poor due to highly variable light and dark cycles on flight decks and poor illumination during daytime hours in the spacecraft. Even the habit of looking out of the window before retiring can send the wrong messages to the brain, resulting in poor sleep patterns. These disturbances in circadian rhythm have profound effects on the neurobehavioural responses of the crew and aggravate the psychological stresses they already experience. Sleep is disturbed on the ISS regularly due to mission demands, such as the scheduling of incoming or departing space vehicles. Sound levels in the station are unavoidably high because the atmosphere is unable to thermosiphon; fans are required at all times to allow processing of the atmosphere, which would stagnate in the freefall (zero-g) environment. Fifty percent of Space Shuttle astronauts took sleeping pills and still got 2 hours less sleep each night in space than they did on the ground. NASA is researching two areas which may provide the keys to a better night's sleep, as improved sleep decreases fatigue and increases daytime productivity. A variety of methods for combating this phenomenon are constantly under discussion.[111]

Duration of space travel

[edit]

A study of the longest spaceflight concluded that the first three weeks represent a critical period where attention is adversely affected because of the demand to adjust to the extreme change of environment.[112] While Skylab's three crews remained in space 1, 2, and 3 months respectively, long-term crews on Salyut 6, Salyut 7, and the ISS remain about 5–6 months, while MIR expeditions often lasted longer. The ISS working environment includes further stress caused by living and working in cramped conditions with people from very different cultures who speak different languages. First-generation space stations had crews who spoke a single language, while 2nd and 3rd generation stations have crews from many cultures who speak many languages. The ISS is unique because visitors are not classed automatically into 'host' or 'guest' categories as with previous stations and spacecraft, and may not suffer from feelings of isolation in the same way.

Future use

[edit]
Space colonization efforts must take into account the effects of space on the human body.

The sum of human experience has resulted in the accumulation of 58 solar years in space and a much better understanding of how the human body adapts. In the future, industrialisation of space and exploration of inner and outer planets will require humans to endure longer and longer periods in space. The majority of current data comes from missions of short duration and so some of the long-term physiological effects of living in space are still unknown. A round trip to Mars[56] with current technology is estimated to involve at least 18 months in transit alone. Knowing how the human body reacts to such time periods in space is a vital part of the preparation for such journeys. On-board medical facilities need to be adequate for coping with any type of trauma or emergency as well as contain a huge variety of diagnostic and medical instruments in order to keep a crew healthy over a long period of time, as these will be the only facilities available on board a spacecraft for coping not only with trauma but also with the adaptive responses of the human body in space.

At the moment only rigorously tested humans have experienced the conditions of space. If off-world colonization someday begins, many types of people will be exposed to these dangers, and the effects on the very young are completely unknown. On October 29, 1998, John Glenn, one of the original Mercury 7, returned to space at the age of 77. His space flight, which lasted 9 days, provided NASA with important information about the effects of space flight on older people. Factors such as nutritional requirements and physical environments which have so far not been examined will become important. Overall, there is little data on the manifold effects of living in space, and this makes attempts toward mitigating the risks during a lengthy space habitation difficult. Testbeds such as the ISS are currently being utilized to research some of these risks.

The environment of space is still largely unknown, and there will likely be as-yet-unknown hazards. Meanwhile, future technologies such as artificial gravity and more complex bioregenerative life support systems may someday be capable of mitigating some risks.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Effect of spaceflight on the human body

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The effects of spaceflight on the human body encompass adaptive and maladaptive physiological changes induced by microgravity, cosmic radiation, and spacecraft confinement, including musculoskeletal deconditioning, cardiovascular alterations, neuro-ocular impairments, and elevated cancer risk. In microgravity, the absence of gravitational loading leads to bone mineral density loss at rates of 1-2% per month in load-bearing sites such as the pelvis and spine, alongside skeletal muscle atrophy due to reduced mechanical stress and altered protein metabolism. Fluid redistribution shifts approximately 2 liters of blood volume cephalad, resulting in facial puffiness, decreased orthostatic tolerance upon reentry, and ventricular remodeling that diminishes cardiac output. Spaceflight-associated neuro-ocular syndrome (SANS), observed in about 70% of long-duration astronauts, manifests as optic disc edema, hyperopic shifts, and potential permanent visual acuity decline, likely from elevated intracranial pressure and vascular changes. Ionizing radiation from galactic cosmic rays and solar events penetrates spacecraft shielding, damaging DNA and increasing lifetime risks of carcinogenesis, central nervous system degeneration, and degenerative cardiovascular diseases. While countermeasures like daily aerobic and resistive exercise mitigate some losses—preserving up to 80% of muscle mass in responsive individuals—residual deficits persist, underscoring challenges for missions beyond low Earth orbit.

Microgravity-Induced Physiological Changes

Cardiovascular and Fluid Dynamics Alterations

In microgravity, the absence of hydrostatic gradients leads to a cephalic shift, where bodily redistribute from the lower extremities toward the head and thorax, resulting in increased and facial edema observed within hours of launch. This redistribution reduces plasma volume by approximately 10-20% within the first few days, primarily due to and triggered by unloading and hormonal changes, including elevated levels. Astronauts experience a transient increase in initially, followed by a decrease, reflecting adaptive vascular responses. Cardiac morphology undergoes remodeling, with right ventricular mass decreasing by up to 25% after prolonged missions, while left ventricular mass shows variable changes, often a slight reduction, as evidenced by echocardiographic studies on (ISS) crew members. This correlates with reduced preload and workload, leading to decreased and , which stabilize at lower levels during flight. Upon re-entry, affects over 80% of astronauts post-short-duration flights and nearly all after long-duration missions exceeding six months, manifesting as syncope or presyncope due to impaired and sensitivity. Vascular endothelial function is altered, with reduced nitric oxide bioavailability contributing to stiffening of central arteries, as measured by pulse wave velocity increases of 20-30% in carotid-femoral segments post-flight. Countermeasures such as lower body negative pressure (LBNP) training and fluid loading have been tested, but their efficacy remains limited, with LBNP during flight helping maintain orthostatic tolerance in some but not all subjects. Long-term data from NASA's Twins Study, comparing astronaut Scott Kelly's 340-day mission with his ground-based twin Mark, revealed persistent cardiovascular changes and length alterations suggestive of accelerated aging, though causality requires further validation. These findings underscore the need for advanced or pharmacological interventions to mitigate .

Musculoskeletal Deterioration

In microgravity, the absence of gravitational loading on the musculoskeletal system triggers rapid deterioration, primarily through bone demineralization and skeletal muscle atrophy, as mechanical stress is essential for maintaining tissue integrity via mechanotransduction pathways. Bone loss occurs predominantly in weight-bearing sites such as the lumbar spine, hips, and lower limbs, with astronauts experiencing a 1-2% reduction in bone mineral density per month without interventions, exceeding postmenopausal rates on Earth by up to 10-fold in the spine. This results from decreased osteoblast activity and elevated osteoclast resorption, leading to elevated urinary calcium excretion and potential nephrolithiasis risk. During typical 6-month International Space Station missions, lower limb bone density declines by approximately 0.8% (range 0.5-1.0%) monthly, with incomplete recovery post-flight contributing to elevated fracture risk. Skeletal muscle undergoes selective , particularly in antigravity muscles like the soleus and gastrocnemius, with losses up to 20% in mass during , accompanied by reduced generation and shifts toward fast-twitch predominance. Proteomic analyses of astronauts after 6-month missions reveal downregulated pathways for muscle protein synthesis and upregulated , mirroring disuse atrophy models on but accelerated by the persistent unloading. differences exacerbate vulnerability, with women showing greater muscle volume loss than men in simulations, potentially due to baseline hormonal and composition variances. These changes impair postural control and locomotion upon reentry, with partial reversibility but persistent deficits in some individuals after missions exceeding 300 days. Long-term implications include heightened osteoporosis-like fragility, as microgravity-induced remodeling favors cortical bone thinning over trabecular changes, increasing susceptibility to fractures that may not fully resolve terrestrially. Empirical data from over 20 astronauts on extended missions confirm that even with exercise protocols, net losses persist at 1% monthly in critical , underscoring the challenge for Mars-duration flights where models predict 33-100% of crew developing or worse.

Neurovestibular and Sensory Disruptions

In microgravity, the neurovestibular system, which integrates vestibular, visual, and proprioceptive inputs for spatial orientation and balance, experiences profound disruptions due to the absence of a consistent gravitational vector. The otolith organs in the , which normally detect linear acceleration including , become unloaded, leading to mismatched sensory signals that conflict with visual and somatosensory cues. This results in perceptual illusions, such as the sensation of tumbling or inversion, particularly during active head movements. Space motion sickness (SMS), also known as , manifests in approximately 60-80% of astronauts during the initial 72 hours of flight, with symptoms including , , , , cold sweating, , and . These arise from visual-vestibular conflicts exacerbated by self-induced head motions and atypical visual orientations in the environment. Incidence is higher in novice flyers and women, though typically occurs within 2-3 days, allowing symptom resolution without long-term impairment for most. Beyond acute SMS, chronic sensory alterations include degraded gaze stability, impaired eye-head coordination, and distorted perception of self-motion, stemming from central nervous system recalibration to microgravity. Cephalic fluid shifts further contribute by altering pressure dynamics around sensory organs, potentially intensifying disorientation. In-flight neurovestibular examinations reveal changes in vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials and reduced otolith-spinal reflexes, indicating both peripheral and central adaptations. Upon re-entry to Earth's , readaptation challenges emerge, with up to 70% of astronauts reporting post-flight balance disorders, illusory self-motion, and instability lasting days to weeks. These stem from residual mismatches as the readjusts to gravitational loading, often requiring rehabilitation to restore normal function. Long-duration missions, such as those on the , show evidence of structural changes, including ventricular enlargement and altered vestibular processing pathways, though causality with symptoms remains under investigation via MRI and functional assays.

Hematological and Immune System Impacts

Spaceflight induces significant hematological adaptations primarily through fluid redistribution and microgravity's influence on . Upon entering microgravity, astronauts experience a rapid cephalic fluid shift, resulting in a 10-15% decrease in plasma volume within hours, accompanied by a reduction in total . This initial hemoconcentration elevates (RBC) concentration, levels, and platelet counts transiently during early flight phases. However, over longer durations, production is suppressed, leading to diminished RBC production and mass loss of approximately 10-15%. A key mechanism of spaceflight-associated anemia involves , where newly released RBCs are preferentially destroyed at rates up to five times higher than on , contributing to persistently elevated markers of degradation such as alveolar and serum iron. This , observed in missions like those on the , results in reduced concentrations and RBC counts post-flight, with recovery taking weeks to months upon return to . Iron is also disrupted, with increased free iron potentially exacerbating , though supplementation strategies remain under evaluation for mitigating these effects in extended missions. Concurrent with hematological changes, microgravity impairs function, evolving under Earth's gravity, leading to dysregulation that mimics accelerated cellular aging and increases susceptibility to infections. T-cell activation is fundamentally altered, with reduced and proliferation, as demonstrated in experiments showing inhibited T-cell responses to mitogens during . Latent viruses such as herpesviruses reactivate more frequently, with over 50% of astronauts exhibiting varicella-zoster virus shedding post-mission, linked to diminished activity and imbalances favoring . In long-duration spaceflight, immune dysfunction persists, including elevated free light chains indicative of chronic low-grade and potential shifts toward or , though B-cell may remain relatively stable. Single-cell analyses reveal conserved alterations in pathways like signaling and innate immunity, underscoring microgravity's role in cytoskeletal disruptions that hinder immune and . These effects, compounded by and confinement, heighten risks for crew health during missions beyond , necessitating countermeasures like exercise and pharmacological interventions, though efficacy data from analog studies (e.g., ) show limited reversal.

Ocular and Endocrine Effects

Spaceflight Associated Neuro-ocular Syndrome (SANS) represents the primary ocular pathology observed in astronauts during long-duration missions, characterized by structural and functional changes including optic disc edema, posterior globe flattening, choroidal folds, hyperopic refractive shifts, and . These alterations, first systematically identified in 2005 as (VIIP) syndrome, affect up to 60% of astronauts exposed to microgravity for extended periods, with clinically significant manifestations in 15-20% of cases. The etiology is attributed to cephalad fluid shifts in microgravity, which elevate and distort ocular anatomy, potentially mimicking on . While no permanent vision loss has been documented to date, the cumulative nature of these changes poses risks for missions beyond , necessitating countermeasures such as lower body negative pressure devices. Endocrine responses to spaceflight involve disruptions in hormone regulation tied to fluid-electrolyte balance, stress adaptation, and metabolic homeostasis, with antidiuretic hormone (ADH), , aldosterone, and playing key roles in countering microgravity-induced fluid redistribution. (PTH) levels decrease during flight, correlating with altered calcium metabolism and , followed by a rebound increase within seven days post-landing. Spaceflight also induces changes linked to insulin and signaling pathways, particularly in hepatic tissues of rodents and humans, suggesting impacts on glucose regulation and reproductive . and exhibit variable responses, contributing to observed perturbations in mass and circadian rhythms, though like show no consistent elevation. In female astronauts, hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis function, including pulsatility, remains largely unperturbed in available data, with no reported disruptions to menstrual cyclicity despite fluid shifts affecting pituitary morphology. Overall, these endocrine shifts resemble accelerated but typically resolve within weeks to months after return to .

Radiation and Environmental Exposure Effects

Sources and Types of Space Radiation

Space radiation during originates from three primary sources: galactic cosmic rays (GCRs), solar energetic particle (SEP) events, and trapped radiation in Earth's . These consist predominantly of ionizing charged particles, including protons, electrons, nuclei, and heavier ions known as HZE (high atomic number and energy) particles. Unlike terrestrial radiation, space radiation lacks atmospheric and magnetic shielding, resulting in higher exposure levels that vary by mission and phase. Galactic cosmic rays are fully ionized atomic nuclei originating from supernova remnants and other extraterrestrial processes outside the solar system, traveling at near-light speeds with energies spanning from tens of MeV to beyond 10^20 eV. Their composition includes approximately 90% protons, 9% nuclei (alpha particles), and less than 1% heavier ranging from to , with iron being prominent among them. GCR flux is relatively constant but peaks during when the solar wind's modulation is weaker, making them the dominant chronic exposure source for deep-space missions beyond (). These high-energy particles produce dense ionization tracks that are difficult to shield against due to their penetrating nature. Solar energetic particle events arise from coronal mass ejections (CMEs) and solar flares, accelerating particles to relativistic speeds that reach in tens of minutes to hours. Primarily composed of protons with energies exceeding 10 MeV (often up to GeV levels during large events), SEPs also include electrons, alpha particles, and minor fractions of . Event frequency and intensity peak during in the 11-year , with large events capable of delivering fluences over 10^10 protons cm⁻² above 30 MeV in hours to days, posing acute radiation risks. In interplanetary space, SEP exposure can exceed annual limits for astronauts without adequate shielding. Trapped radiation, confined within the Van Allen belts by , features high fluxes of protons in the inner belt (energies >10 MeV, extending from about 1,000 to 6,000 km altitude) and relativistic electrons in the outer belt (up to 10 MeV, from roughly 13,000 to 60,000 km). The inner belt is stable and dominated by protons from interactions with the atmosphere, while the outer belt varies with solar activity and includes electrons from injection. In LEO, such as International Space Station orbits, exposure is significant but mitigated by the geomagnetic field; however, the allows deeper penetration, increasing doses during passes. Trapped particles contribute the majority of radiation for missions within Earth's vicinity but diminish beyond the .

Acute Cellular and Genetic Responses

Galactic cosmic rays (GCR) and solar particle events (SPE) deliver high-linear energy transfer (LET) radiation, which acutely ionizes cellular components, primarily causing DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) and clustered oxidative lesions that overwhelm standard repair pathways compared to low-LET terrestrial sources. These damages occur within seconds to hours of exposure, with GCR iron ions, for instance, producing DSBs at doses as low as 0.1-1 Gy, leading to persistent γ-H2AX foci as markers of unrepaired damage. Indirect acute effects stem from radiolysis-generated reactive oxygen species (ROS), which amplify DNA base modifications and , triggering immediate responses in mitochondria and . At the cellular level, this activates ataxia-telangiectasia mutated () and ATM- and Rad3-related (ATR) kinases, phosphorylating checkpoint kinase 2 (Chk2) and initiating G2/M arrest to halt proliferation during repair attempts via (NHEJ) or homologous recombination (HR). Genetic responses involve rapid transcriptional upregulation of DDR genes, including TP53, BRCA1, and RAD51, within hours of exposure, as observed in human bronchial epithelial cells simulated with GCR particles. p53-mediated apoptosis ensues if DSBs exceed repair capacity, evidenced by elevated cleaved caspase-3 and DNA fragmentation in irradiated lymphocytes. Variability in baseline DNA integrity predicts response efficacy, with lower pre-exposure damage correlating to stronger ATM/ATR activation and reduced chromosomal aberrations post-irradiation. Spaceflight-specific data from simulated environments indicate that acute GCR exposure compromises HR fidelity, increasing oncogenic rearrangement risk through error-prone NHEJ dominance, though microgravity may modulate these by impairing DDR signaling in select cell types. ground-based analogs using particle accelerators confirm dose-dependent induction in human cells at 0.5-2 Gy equivalents, underscoring genotoxic immediacy without chronic latency.

Chronic Risks Including Cancer and Degeneration

Space radiation, particularly galactic cosmic rays (GCR) consisting of high-energy heavy ions, poses chronic health risks through persistent DNA damage that manifests years after exposure. These high linear energy transfer (LET) particles induce clustered DNA lesions, genomic instability, and oxidative stress, which are more difficult to repair than damage from low-LET terrestrial radiation, resulting in elevated relative biological effectiveness (RBE) values up to 50 for certain tumors like hepatocellular carcinoma in animal models. Bystander effects and microenvironmental changes further amplify carcinogenesis and tissue degeneration. Cancer risks from prolonged spaceflight exposure primarily involve epithelial malignancies such as lung, breast, colon, stomach, bladder, and leukemias, with effective doses accumulating to 0.072 Sv over six months on the (ISS) and up to 1.01 Sv for a round-trip Mars mission. NASA constrains astronaut exposures to a 3% risk of exposure-induced death () from cancer, though uncertainties in projection models can reach 500%, driven by limited human data and reliance on rodent studies showing higher tumor incidence from heavy ions compared to gamma rays. While early astronaut cohorts (1959–2017) exhibit some elevated cancer incidences, overall mortality from cancer remains comparable to the general population, potentially due to selection biases favoring healthier individuals and the long latency period exceeding 10 years for radiogenic tumors. Deep-space missions beyond low-Earth orbit exceed these limits without advanced shielding, as GCR penetration remains high. Degenerative effects include (CVD), (CNS) impairments, and cataracts, with radiation accelerating and evident at doses below 0.5 Gy in epidemiological analogs. For a Mars mission entailing 300–450 mGy, preliminary models estimate a ~40% increase in exposure-induced death risk from CVD, surpassing cancer risks in some projections, based on persistent and oxidative observed in irradiated tissues. CNS degeneration manifests as dementia-like cognitive deficits and Alzheimer's pathology, with studies demonstrating structural changes and at 5–30 cGy from GCR simulants, persisting lifelong and compounding with microgravity stressors. Limited data from lunar missions suggest elevated CVD mortality, though confounded by other factors, underscoring the need for mission-specific countermeasures like pharmacological radioprotectors.

Psychological and Neurological Impacts

Stress and Behavioral Adaptations

Astronauts experience multifaceted stress during , encompassing psychological, physiological, and operational dimensions arising from isolation, confinement, high workload, and environmental uncertainties. Physiological markers of stress, such as elevated urinary levels, have been observed inflight compared to preflight baselines, with averages rising from approximately 55 μg/day preflight to higher values during missions, indicating activation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis. However, plasma measurements in some simulated studies show no significant increase, suggesting variability influenced by individual factors or mission phase. Composite stressors, including microgravity and , contribute to neuroplastic changes linked to depression-like symptoms and cognitive impairments in animal models simulating long-duration exposure, though data remain correlative. Behavioral responses often manifest as mood fluctuations, irritability, and altered interpersonal dynamics within crews. Archival analyses of and (ISS) missions reveal patterns of increased crew tension at mission onset, mid-point (around the third quarter), and conclusion, correlating with demands, communication delays, and resource constraints. No overt psychiatric emergencies have occurred in U.S. crewed missions to date, but subclinical anxiety and mood disturbances are documented, with evidence from ground analogs like overwintering indicating low incidence yet high potential impact if escalated. Crew-ground interactions exacerbate tensions during multinational operations, as seen in Shuttle- collaborations where cultural differences and delayed feedback loops amplified perceptions of loss. Adaptations emerge through behavioral strategies such as enhanced autonomy-seeking and group cohesion mechanisms, though these can strain dynamics in small crews. Longitudinal ISS data highlight reweighting of sensory inputs and cognitive adjustments to microgravity, fostering resilience but occasionally leading to performance dips in vigilance tasks. Individual differences in adaptability, including personality traits like hardiness, predict better coping with monotony and isolation, as evidenced by predictive modeling from analog missions. Overall, while crews demonstrate capacity for without mission failure, third-quarter morale declines underscore vulnerabilities in extended missions beyond .

Sleep and Circadian Disruptions

Astronauts in commonly experience reduced sleep duration and quality compared to ground conditions, averaging 6.1 to 6.5 hours per night despite scheduled opportunities of 8.5 hours, with full-duration sleep achieved on only about 5.9% of nights. episodes shorter than 6 hours occur in 47.1% of nights, accompanied by decreased slow-wave (delta) sleep and increased reliance on hypnotic medications, used by 71-78% of crew members. These disruptions persist across missions, including on the (ISS), where fragmented rest cycles and subjective reports of poorer sleep quality are prevalent. Circadian rhythms are desynchronized due to the ISS's 90-minute , resulting in 16 daily sunrises and sunsets that misalign with the endogenous clock, causing circadian phase to fall outside scheduled 19% of the time or approximately once every five episodes. Microgravity exacerbates this by altering mechanisms, such as amplified oscillations of the Bmal1 gene in cells and broader changes in rhythmic , which disrupt physiological entrainment independent of light cues. Shift work schedules for 24-hour operations further compound misalignment, though artificial lighting protocols attempt to mimic Earth's 24-hour cycle. One analysis of long-duration missions reported unexpectedly improved quality, potentially linked to reduced gravitational stress, but this finding contradicts the preponderance of evidence from polysomnographic and actigraphic data. These disturbances lead to neurobehavioral deficits, including impaired cognitive performance and increased , with sleep deficiency directly correlating to degraded and error rates during tasks. Post-flight, astronauts exhibit rebounds in , indicating cumulative deprivation, while in-flight circadian misalignment heightens vulnerability to operational errors. Ground-based analogs simulating microgravity, such as studies, confirm these effects by showing desynchronized physiological rhythms and worsened sleep architecture.

Cognitive and Performance Changes

Spaceflight exposes astronauts to multiple stressors, including microgravity, fluid shifts, isolation, and disrupted sleep, which can influence cognitive functions such as , processing speed, and . These factors lead to transient alterations rather than uniform impairment, with evidence from (ISS) missions indicating slowed performance in early flight phases on tasks requiring processing speed, visual , and sustained . However, comprehensive assessments of astronauts during 6-month ISS expeditions reveal no systematic decline in overall cognitive performance across domains like executive function, memory, or problem-solving. Microgravity-induced cephalad fluid shifts, which elevate and alter morphology, correlate with measurable changes in cognitive task outcomes, including reaction times that may reflect rather than deficit. Ground-based analogs, such as head-down tilt simulating fluid shifts, suggest potential disruptions in sensorimotor integration and dual-tasking, though these may not fully replicate in-flight dynamics. Performance variability is also tied to individual factors like and mission phase, with predictive models using from ISS operations demonstrating dynamic fluctuations in neurobehavioral metrics over 6 months, but without progressive deterioration. Longer-duration missions pose uncertainties, as composite stressors (e.g., and confinement) could exacerbate risks of deficits or , per analog studies linking microgravity simulation to impairments in and . evaluations highlight that while acute decrements occur, behavioral adaptations and operational demands often mitigate impacts, with no observed mission failures attributable to cognitive lapses in . Countermeasures like scheduled cognitive training and workload management are employed to sustain performance, informed by pre- and post-flight baselines showing recovery upon return.

Acute and Transitional Hazards

Launch and Reentry Dynamics

During launch, astronauts experience sustained longitudinal primarily in the +Gx axis (head-to-foot), with peak forces typically ranging from 3 to 4 g for modern vehicles like the or SpaceX Crew Dragon atop , though historical Apollo missions reached approximately 4 g. These forces impose significant cardiovascular demands, including a transient increase in by 10-20 beats per minute at peak loading and elevated due to hydrostatic gradients along the body axis, though tolerance remains high in the or semi-reclined seating posture that minimizes venous pooling. Accompanying vibrations and acoustic noise levels exceeding 140 dB can induce transient discomfort, , or minor vestibular perturbations, but empirical data from over 150 U.S. crewed launches indicate no instances of G-induced loss of consciousness or severe physiological impairment when restraints and vehicle design align forces with the body's long axis. Musculoskeletal strains, particularly in the and shoulders from and interactions under , have been reported in a subset of cases, with incidence rates below 5% across missions, often mitigated by pre-flight conditioning and ergonomic adjustments. Reentry dynamics present higher peak decelerations, often in the +Gz axis (chest-to-back) for ballistic capsules, with forces up to 4-5 g in Crew Dragon splashdowns and historically 6-7 g in Apollo command modules, sustained for 5-10 minutes during atmospheric interface. This orientation challenges cerebral perfusion more than launch loads, potentially causing grayout or tunnel vision without countermeasures like anti-G straining maneuvers or pressure garments, though post-microgravity deconditioning can reduce +Gz tolerance by 20-30% after extended missions, necessitating abbreviated exposure profiles. Impact forces upon landing, including parachute deployment and water or ground contact, add transient spikes up to 10-12 g localized to the torso and spine, correlating with documented minor injuries such as spinal disc herniations or lower back pain in 10-15% of returning crew, as observed in Shuttle and Soyuz data. Overall, while human tolerance limits (approximately 12 g for brief durations) exceed operational peaks, the combination of deconditioning, off-nominal trajectories, and egress demands underscores the need for vehicle-specific profiling, with no fatalities attributed solely to reentry dynamics in U.S. or Russian programs through 2025.

Extravehicular and Vacuum Exposure

Extravehicular activity (EVA), commonly known as spacewalking, exposes astronauts to the vacuum of space while protected by pressurized suits such as the U.S. (EMU) or Russian , which maintain an internal pressure of approximately 29.6 kPa (4.3 psi) of pure oxygen. These suits prevent direct vacuum exposure but introduce risks from potential leaks, punctures, or joint failures, which could lead to rapid decompression. Pre-EVA procedures include denitrogenation protocols, involving oxygen pre-breathing for 1-4 hours to reduce inert gas in blood and tissues, minimizing (DCS) risk during the transition to lower suit pressure. Unprotected exposure to vacuum causes immediate physiological distress primarily from hypoxia and decompression. Within 10-15 seconds, consciousness is lost due to lack of preventing effective oxygen uptake in lungs, leading to ; death from asphyxiation follows in 1-2 minutes without intervention. occurs as reduced pressure lowers the of , causing and exposed moist tissues to vaporize and swell, but the body does not freeze instantly or explode due to and tissue tensile strength containing internal pressures. Dissolved gases in blood and tissues can form bubbles, akin to DCS, potentially causing joint pain, neurological symptoms, and vascular issues if exposure exceeds survival thresholds. Human data on vacuum effects derive from accidental exposures and animal studies, as no orbital EVA fatalities have occurred from suit failures. In 1966, NASA technician Jim LeBlanc experienced near-vacuum exposure (<1 torr) during a suit test at Johnson Space Center; he reported tongue swelling from ebullism after 14 seconds, lost consciousness, and was repressurized after 27 seconds, recovering fully without long-term effects. Similar incidents, including two Soviet cases in the 1960s, involved brief exposures with rapid recovery upon repressurization. Chimpanzee tests by NASA in the 1960s demonstrated survival up to 3.5 minutes with no permanent damage if repressurized promptly, confirming a narrow window for rescue. These findings underscore that while brief exposures are survivable, prolonged vacuum contact exceeds human physiological tolerances, emphasizing suit redundancy and monitoring in EVA operations.

Thermal and Atmospheric Extremes

Astronauts encounter significant thermal regulation challenges in spaceflight due to microgravity's disruption of convective heat loss and spacecraft exposure to radiative extremes ranging from -150 °C in orbital shadow to over 120 °C in direct sunlight. Cabin environments are maintained at 20–24 °C via active systems like heat exchangers and radiators, yet physiological adaptations lead to elevated core body temperatures. Data from long-duration missions show a progressive rise of approximately 1 °C over 2–3 months, stabilizing at 37.5–38 °C or higher in early flight phases, correlated with increased plasma levels of interleukin-1 receptor antagonist, indicating inflammatory responses potentially exacerbating sleep disturbances and metabolic strain. This hyperthermic shift arises from factors including fluid redistribution impairing vasomotor control, reduced gravitational facilitation of sweat evaporation, and heightened workload during exercise, where heat dissipation relies heavily on forced-air ventilation rather than natural convection. In controlled experiments simulating microgravity, heat exposure elicits exaggerated core temperature increases compared to 1g conditions, with slower recovery times attributed to altered skin blood flow and sweating thresholds, heightening risks of heat stress during physical exertion or system malfunctions. External thermal gradients demand insulated suits and vehicles, but transient cabin fluctuations—such as during power outages or solar eclipses—can induce discomfort, elevated heart rates, and dehydration, compounding microgravity-induced orthostatic intolerance upon return. These effects underscore thermoregulation's reliance on integrated vehicle-crew systems, where failures amplify physiological burdens beyond nominal microgravity adaptations. Atmospheric extremes in spacecraft encompass deviations in pressure, gas composition, and humidity within nominally Earth-like cabins (101 kPa, 21% O₂, <0.5% CO₂). Hypercapnia from ventilation or scrubber inefficiencies elevates CO₂ partial pressures above 4–5 mmHg, triggering respiratory acidosis, dyspnea, headaches, and cognitive deficits via chemoreceptor stimulation and cerebral vasodilation. Hypoxia risks from leaks or O₂ supply failures reduce arterial oxygen saturation below 90%, causing impaired judgment, fatigue, and euphoria at partial pressures under 120 mmHg, while hyperoxia (>30% O₂ at reduced pressure) fosters pulmonary irritation and propagation, indirectly stressing respiratory through toxic byproducts. Pressure transients, such as during airlock operations, can induce if denitrogenation protocols lapse, manifesting as venous gas bubbles causing joint pain, , and risks due to supersaturation per . Humidity imbalances—above 70% promoting microbial proliferation and fogging or below 30% desiccating mucous membranes—exacerbate upper respiratory issues and infection susceptibility in closed-loop systems. These hazards, though rare under redundant controls, highlight causal vulnerabilities in , where empirical mission data reveal performance decrements from even marginal excursions, necessitating vigilant monitoring to avert acute decompensation.

Countermeasures and Mitigation Approaches

Exercise and Physical Conditioning Protocols

Astronauts on the (ISS) follow structured exercise protocols designed to mitigate microgravity-induced , bone density loss, and cardiovascular deconditioning, typically requiring 2 to 2.5 hours of daily activity divided into aerobic and resistive components. These regimens utilize specialized equipment such as the Combined Operational Load Bearing External Resistance Treadmill (COLBERT or T2) for running or walking with harnesses to simulate body weight, the Cycle Ergometer with Vibration Isolation and Stabilization (CEVIS) for cycling, and the Advanced Resistive Exercise Device (ARED) for that provides up to 90% of Earth's gravitational loading through pneumatic pistons and flywheels. Protocols emphasize high-intensity, individualized sessions tailored via pre-flight assessments and real-time monitoring, with resistive exercises targeting major muscle groups like the legs, back, and core to preserve lean mass and force production, while aerobic workouts maintain and vascular function. For instance, the Sprint Interval Training (SPRINT) program incorporates short bursts of high-intensity efforts on the ARED and to optimize efficiency for long-duration missions, demonstrating efficacy in maintaining fiber size and mitochondrial function comparable to ground-based analogs. Pre-mission conditioning involves analogous studies and Earth-based simulations to refine prescriptions, ensuring protocols evolve based on empirical data from missions like those analyzed in the Twins Study. Despite these countermeasures, exercise alone does not fully prevent density reductions, which can reach 1-2% per month in bones, prompting integration with nutritional and pharmacological aids; resistive training remains most effective for muscle preservation, attenuating by 20-50% compared to no intervention in analog studies. Post-flight recovery protocols extend conditioning with graded loading to rehabilitate residual deficits, informed by longitudinal showing partial reversibility of losses within 6-12 months on . Ongoing , including flywheel-based devices, aims to enhance compactness and efficacy for deep-space missions where resupply is limited.

Pharmacological and Nutritional Interventions

Pharmacological interventions for spaceflight-induced physiological deconditioning have centered on bisphosphonates to counteract loss, with clinical trials demonstrating their efficacy in reducing resorption when combined with resistive exercise. In a -sponsored study involving astronauts on the , administration of alendronate (70 mg weekly) alongside exercise protocols preserved trabecular density, limiting losses to approximately 1-2% over six months compared to 3-5% without the drug, as measured by (QCT). Similar analogs on replicated these findings, showing bisphosphonates suppress urinary calcium excretion and markers of bone turnover like N-telopeptide, though they do not fully restore formation rates diminished by microgravity. Emerging candidates include inhibitors, which target by blocking inhibitory signaling pathways; preclinical rodent models in simulated microgravity indicate up to 20-30% preservation of muscle mass, but human flight data remain limited. Pharmacokinetic alterations in space, such as reduced drug absorption due to fluid shifts and gastrointestinal changes, necessitate adjusted dosing, as evidenced by altered plasma levels of common medications in short-duration missions. Nutritional strategies emphasize supplementation to support bone health and mitigate from , though systematic reviews conclude they are insufficient as standalone countermeasures against microgravity-induced . diets typically include 1,000-1,500 mg of calcium daily and 800-2,000 IU of to offset and maintain serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels above 30 ng/mL, with missions reporting reduced markers when intake exceeds terrestrial norms. High-protein regimens (1.6-2.0 g/kg body weight) aid muscle protein synthesis, but ground-based analogs like hindlimb unloading show only partial attenuation of without exercise, as leucine-enriched formulas fail to fully counteract disuse signaling. For , antioxidant-rich —incorporating vitamins C and E, , and polyphenols—has demonstrated radioprotective effects in animal models, reducing (ROS) damage by 20-50% post-irradiation, though human efficacy in space remains extrapolated from terrestrial high-dose studies and requires further validation. Low energy intake exacerbates losses, prompting caloric monitoring to prevent deficits that amplify . Overall, these interventions show promise as adjuncts but highlight the need for integrated approaches, as isolated nutritional yields modest gains against multifactorial stressors.

Technological and Engineering Solutions

Technological solutions for mitigating spaceflight's physiological effects primarily involve and habitat designs that replicate gravitational forces or shield against environmental hazards. generated by addresses microgravity-induced issues such as , loss, and spaceflight-associated neuro-ocular syndrome (SANS) by applying sustained acceleration to the body. Short-arm human centrifuges, capable of producing 1g at the feet with intermittent sessions of 15-60 minutes daily, have shown potential to counteract these effects without requiring full rotation. NASA's research indicates that combining with exercise enhances countermeasures, as demonstrated in ground-based studies where subjects experienced reduced compared to exercise alone. Larger rotating habitats, such as toroidal structures, could provide continuous partial gravity for long-duration missions, though challenges include Coriolis effects on vestibular function and structural integrity under spin. Radiation exposure, a primary concern for deep-space travel, is mitigated through passive shielding materials like or layers integrated into walls, which fragment high-energy particles into less harmful secondary . Active shielding concepts, including superconducting magnets to deflect charged particles by mimicking Earth's , remain under development but face power and mass constraints. Wearable systems like the AstroRad vest, tested on the , target organ-specific protection during solar particle events by absorbing with multi-layer composites. Hybrid approaches, such as storm shelters with hydrogen-rich barriers, provide temporary high-protection zones during solar flares, reducing effective dose by up to 50% in simulations. Additional engineering innovations include gradient compression garments or "skinsuits" that apply mechanical pressure to simulate hydrostatic gradients, countering fluid shifts and upon reentry. Integrated habitat systems with vibration platforms or lower body negative pressure devices offer targeted loading to bones and muscles, complementing broader vehicle-level designs. These solutions prioritize passive, low-mass implementations for near-term missions, while conceptual large-scale rotations aim for Mars transit feasibility, pending validation from ongoing bed-rest and parabolic flight analogs.

Research Findings and Long-Term Outcomes

Historical and Empirical Data from Missions

Early short-duration missions, such as those in the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo programs from 1961 to 1972, primarily revealed acute effects like (SAS), which affected approximately 70% of astronauts within the first 72 hours of microgravity exposure, manifesting as , , and disorientation due to sensory conflicts. These flights, lasting from minutes to about 12 days, showed limited musculoskeletal changes, with muscle strength reductions of 5-10% in lower limbs post-flight and negligible bone density loss, as unloading effects were brief; however, Apollo lunar missions exposed crews to galactic cosmic rays and solar particle events, with total mission doses ranging from 0.16 to 1.14 millisieverts (mSv) per day, varying by solar activity and translunar transit. Cardiovascular data indicated initial fluid shifts causing facial puffiness and upon reentry, but recovery was rapid without persistent deficits. The missions (1973-1974), NASA's first long-duration flights averaging 28 to 84 days, provided foundational of microgravity's catabolic impact, with crews experiencing average total body mass loss of 2.7 kg, over 50% attributable to lean mass reduction from , particularly in antigravity muscles like the soleus (up to 20% cross-sectional area decrease). Bone mineral density (BMD) declined by about 1.3-1.5% per month in weight-bearing sites such as the , linked to reduced mechanical loading and calcium efflux into urine; post-flight recovery took months, with incomplete restoration in some cases. These observations, measured via and , underscored the need for countermeasures, as untreated impaired crew performance during extended extravehicular activities. Soviet Mir station missions (1986-2001), with durations up to 437 days (e.g., Valeri Polyakov's record stay), documented more severe losses, including BMD reductions of 2-9% across skeletal sites after average 170-day flights, with over 50% of cosmonauts showing at least 10% deficit in lumbar spine or pelvis despite exercise protocols. Vision impairments, precursors to spaceflight-associated neuro-ocular syndrome (SANS), emerged in long-stay crews, with elevations and edema reported in up to 20% of cases, attributed to cephalad fluid shifts flattening the globe. averaged higher than low-Earth orbit norms due to variable shielding, contributing to cumulative doses of 100-300 mSv over year-long missions, elevating stochastic risks like cataract formation. International Space Station (ISS) data since 2000, encompassing over 3,000 astronaut-days of cumulative exposure, confirm ongoing trends: BMD loss of 1-1.5% monthly in hips and spine despite 2-hour daily exercise, with partial recovery (50-70%) over 1-2 years post-flight; muscle volume decreases by 10-20% in lower extremities after 6 months. The Twins Study (2015-2016), comparing astronaut Scott Kelly's 340-day mission to his identical twin Mark on , revealed in-flight telomere lengthening (indicating cellular stress response), upregulated inflammatory pathways, and gut microbiome shifts, but most changes reversed post-flight except for minor persistent differences potentially linked to accelerated aging. SAS incidence stabilized at 40-50% with habituation, while SANS affected 15-25% of long-duration crew, with choroidal folds and refractive errors persisting in some. Radiation doses averaged 72 mSv for 6-month stays, primarily from protons and electrons in the Van Allen belts, with biological effectiveness factors amplifying risks beyond terrestrial equivalents.
Mission TypeDuration ExampleKey BMD Loss (%/month, weight-bearing bones)Muscle Atrophy ExampleRadiation Dose (mSv, typical mission)
Apollo8-12 daysNegligible (<0.5%)5-10% lower limbs1-12 total
Skylab28-84 days1.3-1.5%20% soleus20-50 total
Mir170-437 days1-2% (up to 10% total in >50% crew)15-25% legs100-300 total (long stays)
ISS180-340 days1-1.5%10-20% lower body50-150 total

Post-Flight Recovery and Persistent Effects

Upon reentry to Earth's gravity, astronauts typically undergo immediate rehabilitation protocols, including resistive and , fluid loading, and pharmacological support to mitigate . These measures address acute issues such as , where reduced sensitivity and lead to drops upon standing, affecting up to 80% of crew members and resolving within days to weeks through volume expansion and lower-body negative pressure devices. , which can reduce leg muscle volume by 20-30% after six months in space, recovers more rapidly with targeted exercise, often restoring strength to near-baseline within 1-2 months, though full lean mass regain may take longer without in-flight countermeasures. Skeletal recovery proves more protracted and incomplete, with bone mineral density (BMD) losses of 1-1.5% per month in weight-bearing bones during flight; post-mission rehabilitation recovers only about half the deficit in the first year, leaving residual deficits of approximately 2% at sites like the even after 12 months. Studies of (ISS) missions indicate trabecular microarchitecture and bone strength do not fully normalize one year post-flight, with recovery rates 5-6 times slower than loss rates, potentially elevating long-term risk despite no observed increase in fracture incidence. Four years after six-month missions, some microarchitectural parameters improve, but overall bone quality remains compromised compared to pre-flight levels. Spaceflight-associated neuro-ocular syndrome (SANS), observed in 60-80% of long-duration astronauts, involves optic disc edema, choroidal thickening, and refractive shifts due to intracranial pressure elevations; while edema often resolves within months post-flight, globe flattening and hyperopic shifts can persist for years, with some retinal changes enduring up to 630 days and choroidal folds up to seven years. Countermeasures like lower-body compression garments aid partial reversal, but axial elongation changes show limited recovery. Cardiovascular adaptations, including 17-30% increased arterial stiffness after six-month flights, contribute to persistent reduced exercise tolerance, though arterial structure remains disease-free up to five years post-mission. Left atrial remodeling may heighten atrial fibrillation risk transiently, normalizing within months, but long-term cardiac output enhancements contradict earlier deconditioning models. Brain structural changes, such as ventricular expansion and alterations, partially reverse post-flight—ventricles nearing pre-flight volumes within months—but increases and regional atrophy persist, potentially linked to fluid shifts and mission duration. These persistent effects underscore challenges for extended missions beyond , where incomplete recoveries in , vision, and neurovascular systems could compound with , though empirical data from ISS missions show no elevated or overt rates years later. Ongoing studies emphasize enhanced in-flight bisphosphonates and simulations to minimize irreversible deficits.

Debates on Feasibility for Extended Missions

The feasibility of extended human space missions, such as round-trip journeys to Mars spanning 2-3 years including 6-9 months of transit each way, is contested primarily due to cumulative physiological risks from microgravity, radiation, and isolation that exceed current mitigation capabilities. identifies space radiation, microgravity-induced deconditioning, and spaceflight-associated neuro-ocular syndrome (SANS) as "red" risks—those with high likelihood and severe consequences—for Mars missions, potentially leading to cancer, , , and vision loss without adequate countermeasures. Bone mineral density in areas declines by 1-1.5% per month in microgravity, with some astronauts failing to fully recover pre-flight levels even after extended rehabilitation on , raising concerns about skeletal integrity for missions demanding physical labor upon arrival. Muscle atrophy and cardiovascular deconditioning further complicate feasibility, as prolonged unloading leads to up to 20% loss of muscle mass and reduced orthostatic tolerance, impairing post-landing mobility and increasing injury risk on planetary surfaces with partial like Mars' 0.38g. SANS, characterized by optic disc edema and intraocular pressure changes, affects over 70% of long-duration (ISS) crew, with potential links to intracranial fluid shifts persisting post-flight and threatening operational performance. Radiation exposure during a Mars transit could deliver 600-1,000 millisieverts, elevating lifetime cancer risk by 3-5% according to models, compounded by galactic cosmic rays that penetrate shielding and damage DNA in ways terrestrial analogs cannot fully replicate. Empirical data from the NASA Twins Study, comparing astronaut Scott Kelly's 340-day ISS mission to his identical twin Mark on Earth, demonstrated epigenetic changes, telomere elongation followed by accelerated shortening, and microbiome shifts that largely reversed within months post-flight, suggesting human adaptability for durations up to one year. However, critics argue this resilience may not scale to multi-year exposures, as no human has exceeded 437 cumulative days in space, and animal models indicate potential for irreversible central nervous system damage from radiation at Mars-equivalent doses. Proponents of feasibility, including NASA and private entities like SpaceX, emphasize ongoing advancements in pharmacological interventions, resistive exercise, and habitat shielding, positing that integrated countermeasures could sustain crew health, though skeptics highlight gaps in evidence for reproduction, immune suppression, and psychological strain under true deep-space isolation without real-time Earth support. These debates underscore the need for lunar or orbital analogs to test scalability before committing to irreversible Mars transits.

References

  1. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9818606/
  2. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8820585/
  3. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12467004/
  4. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41526-020-0097-9
  5. https://www.nasa.gov/reference/risk-of-spaceflight-associated-neuro-ocular-syndrome-sans/
  6. https://www.nasa.gov/missions/analog-field-testing/why-space-radiation-matters/
  7. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4206856/
  8. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41526-021-00158-4
  9. https://www.esa.int/Enabling_Support/Preparing_for_the_Future/Space_for_Earth/Space_for_health/Musculo-skeletal_system_Bone_and_Muscle_loss
  10. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20240005190/downloads/2024%2520FINAL%2520HRP-F07-ERft%2520R2%2520Fracture.pdf?attachment=true
  11. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8123809/
  12. https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/56/4/196
  13. https://test-kjasem.inforang.com/journal/view.html?doi=10.46246/KJAsEM.240020
  14. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41526-024-00406-3
  15. https://www.physiology.org/detail/news/2023/12/19/women-lose-more-muscle-than-men-in-spaceflight-additional-sex-specific-research-needed
  16. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8449769/
  17. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9369243/
  18. https://www.nasa.gov/missions/station/iss-research/counteracting-bone-and-muscle-loss-in-microgravity/
  19. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0226434
  20. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/systems-neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnsys.2016.00096/full
  21. http://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022hsp..book..273C/abstract
  22. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neural-circuits/articles/10.3389/fncir.2023.1150233/full
  23. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41526-025-00478-9
  24. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19850012345
  25. https://www.e-rvs.org/journal/view.php?number=980
  26. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41526-021-00133-z
  27. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20200001316
  28. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6239149/
  29. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neural-circuits/articles/10.3389/fncir.2021.760313/full
  30. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5610662/
  31. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0899900702009127
  32. https://bmchematol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12878-017-0083-y
  33. https://journals.physiology.org/doi/abs/10.1152/jappl.1996.81.1.98
  34. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/physiology/articles/10.3389/fphys.2024.1321468/full
  35. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-021-01637-7
  36. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8897403/
  37. https://www.longdom.org/open-access/hematological-changes-in-astronauts-during-spaceflight-1103166.html
  38. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10615652/
  39. https://www.nasa.gov/missions/station/space-station-leads-to-breakthroughs-in-human-health-on-earth/
  40. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41526-024-00446-9
  41. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6038331/
  42. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6397409/
  43. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-42013-y
  44. https://immunityageing.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12979-024-00449-w
  45. https://eyewiki.org/Spaceflight-Associated_Neuro-Ocular_Syndrome_%28SANS%29
  46. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41526-022-00228-1
  47. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaophthalmology/fullarticle/2821259
  48. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10359702/
  49. https://researchexperts.utmb.edu/en/publications/the-effect-of-microgravity-on-ocular-structures-and-visual-functi
  50. https://www.houstonmethodist.org/leading-medicine-blog/articles/2023/jul/spaceflight-associated-neuro-ocular-syndrome-are-any-answers-in-sight/
  51. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/ophthalmology/articles/10.3389/fopht.2024.1487992/full
  52. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11537094/
  53. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19890044941
  54. https://jofem.org/index.php/jofem/article/view/849/284284619
  55. https://www.nature.com/articles/s42003-023-05213-2
  56. https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article/97/1/270/2833511
  57. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41526-024-00351-1
  58. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20220015095/downloads/IEEE%2520Aeropace%2520_female%2520astronaut_%2520strock%25202022_pubpress.docx.pdf
  59. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1569257408600088
  60. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/6282/chapter/11
  61. https://srag.jsc.nasa.gov/spaceradiation/what/what.cfm
  62. https://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/science/toolbox/cosmic_rays1_orig.html
  63. https://osdr.nasa.gov/bio/repo/data/payloads/Heavy_Ion_HZE_Irradiation
  64. https://three.jsc.nasa.gov/articles/hu-spes.pdf
  65. https://science.nasa.gov/biological-physical/stories/van-allen-belts/
  66. https://blogs.esa.int/orion/2022/12/10/the-van-allen-belts-are-they-dangerous/
  67. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41526-017-0019-7
  68. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7168699/
  69. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-29350-5
  70. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8508777/
  71. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211124720314236
  72. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0170358
  73. https://osdr.nasa.gov/bio/repo/data/payloads/High_Dose_Irradiation
  74. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9340504/
  75. https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/esdmd/hhp/risk-of-radiation-carcinogenesis/
  76. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41526-020-00124-6
  77. https://journals.physiology.org/doi/abs/10.1152/ajpendo.1999.276.1.E155
  78. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/physiology/articles/10.3389/fphys.2024.1284644/full
  79. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41398-023-02638-5
  80. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11762441/
  81. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20100026549/downloads/20100026549.pdf
  82. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20250001454
  83. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15943198/
  84. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15943205/
  85. https://academic.oup.com/cercor/article/32/4/755/6355466
  86. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Paul-Bartone/publication/314135206_Individual_differences_in_adaptability_for_long_duration_space_exploration_missions/links/58b6d4baaca27261e51a0813/Individual-differences-in-adaptability-for-long-duration-space-exploration-missions.pdf
  87. https://academic.oup.com/sleep/article/45/3/zsac006/6505235
  88. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20030068197/downloads/20030068197.pdf
  89. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590142723000204
  90. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9615283/
  91. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5975626/
  92. https://www.nasa.gov/humans-in-space/science-in-space-week-of-sept-15-2023-sleep-on-station/
  93. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4571538/
  94. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12155433/
  95. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-94478-w
  96. https://spj.science.org/doi/10.34133/space.0251
  97. https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1042038
  98. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0149763422001658
  99. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39633651/
  100. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11614644/
  101. https://web.musc.edu/about/news-center/2019/10/30/brain-changes-in-space-missions
  102. https://www.ajnr.org/content/early/2019/10/17/ajnr.A6249
  103. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/physiology/articles/10.3389/fphys.2022.1008508/full
  104. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-14456-8
  105. https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/26/19/9521
  106. https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/esdmd/hhp/behavioral-health-risk/
  107. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20240012742/downloads/CTA_Manuscript_final.pdf
  108. https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/tm-20205008196.pdf
  109. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/19930020462/downloads/19930020462.pdf
  110. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20250001391/downloads/Physiologic%2520Changes.pdf?attachment=true
  111. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19198198/
  112. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/spacex-capsule-and-nasa-crew-make-1st-splashdown-in-45-years
  113. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19930020462
  114. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11977270/
  115. https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/avs/III.4.1.7_Returning_from_Space.pdf
  116. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/364995735_Sixty_Years_of_Manned_Spaceflight-Incidents_and_Accidents_Involving_Astronauts_between_Launch_and_Landing
  117. https://www.nasa.gov/reference/risk-of-injury-and-compromised-performance-from-extravehicular-activity-eva/
  118. https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/esdmd/hhp/eva-operations-risk/
  119. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10896920/
  120. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/survival-in-space-unprotected-possible/
  121. https://www.livescience.com/human-body-no-spacesuit
  122. https://www.thoughtco.com/human-body-in-a-space-vacuum-3071106
  123. http://www.geoffreylandis.com/vacuum.html
  124. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-15560-w
  125. https://www.nasa.gov/missions/station/heat-safety-in-space-keeps-infants-and-patients-safe-on-earth/
  126. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5701078/
  127. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2214552425000380
  128. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/19800007528/downloads/19800007528.pdf
  129. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/009457659190116M
  130. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK470190/
  131. https://www.nasa.gov/missions/station/iss-research/astronaut-exercise/
  132. https://www.asc-csa.gc.ca/eng/astronauts/living-in-space/physical-activity-in-space.asp
  133. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/physiology/articles/10.3389/fphys.2022.928313/full
  134. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41526-023-00256-5
  135. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38328821/
  136. https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/sp-20250000273.pdf?emrc=
  137. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41526-020-00111-x
  138. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41526-019-0073-4
  139. https://physoc.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1113/EP091737
  140. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20090041838
  141. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S875632821930287X
  142. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11352369/
  143. https://bpspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/bph.15822
  144. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9699067/
  145. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S089990070200905X
  146. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7282646/
  147. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41526-021-00162-8
  148. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12361786/
  149. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7282646
  150. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10311550/
  151. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4470275/
  152. https://bhp.engr.tamu.edu/research/artificial-gravity/
  153. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0094576511002311
  154. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/19980137598/downloads/19980137598.pdf
  155. https://www.mdpi.com/2673-592X/3/1/5
  156. https://stemrad.com/blocking-space-radiation-in-deep-space/
  157. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214552423000391
  158. https://www.draper.com/media-center/news-releases/detail/23360/new-technology-could-keep-nasa-astronauts-stable-healthier-in-space
  159. https://news.mit.edu/2015/exercise-artificial-gravity-space-0702
  160. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41433-024-03178-y
  161. https://journals.lww.com/neur/fulltext/2019/67002/space_motion_sickness__a_common_neurovestibular.22.aspx
  162. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20070010704/downloads/20070010704.pdf
  163. https://www.nasa.gov/humans-in-space/the-human-body-in-space/
  164. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41526-022-00194-8
  165. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20140012751/downloads/20140012751.pdf
  166. https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/ochmo-tb-030-bone-loss.pdf
  167. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20020073167/downloads/20020073167.pdf
  168. https://www.nasa.gov/humans-in-space/nasas-twins-study-results-published-in-science-journal/
  169. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aau8650
  170. https://www.nasa.gov/human-space-travel-research/
  171. https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/esdmd/hhp/space-radiation/
  172. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41526-020-0103-2
  173. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6436655/
  174. https://www.reuters.com/lifestyle/science/astronaut-study-reveals-effects-space-travel-human-bones-2022-07-02/
  175. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-13461-1
  176. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41526-025-00511-x
  177. https://www.aao.org/education/editors-choice/some-ocular-changes-in-astronauts-are-reversible-u
  178. https://www.physiology.org/detail/news/2025/07/24/good-news-for-astronauts--arteries-remain-normal-years-after-long-duration-spaceflight
  179. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCEP.117.005959
  180. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/hsr2.2305
  181. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-33331-8
  182. https://www.nasa.gov/reference/risk-of-spaceflight-induced-bone-changes/
  183. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33298950/
  184. https://universetoday.com/articles/many-astronauts-never-recover-all-of-their-bone-density-after-returning-to-earth
  185. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00654-7
  186. https://www.nasa.gov/hrp/hazards/
  187. https://newsroom.wakehealth.edu/news-releases/2017/03/research-uncovers-potential-health-risks-of-travel-to-mars
  188. https://www.nasa.gov/humans-in-space/twins-study/about/
  189. https://www.nasa.gov/humans-in-space/bridging-the-gap-nasa-studies-the-human-body-in-space-for-one-year-to-extrapolate-for-missions-to-mars/
  190. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-54012-0
  191. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8696290/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.