In article . net, Carey
Sublette says...


wrote in message
oups.com...

[Arbitrary food selection for astronauts]

As their employer and outfitter, we have that responsibility.
Is that clear enough?

When the time comes that explorers of Mars can be self-employed, fine,
but until then...

There is a more hard-headed answer: the astronaut has agreed to serve as an
agent of exploration for the space program and some billions of dollars are
being invested per astronaut to carry out the exploration mission. The space
program will do everything possible to ensure that the astronaut will remain
capable of carrying out his/her duties to protect the mission (and
investment), and the astronaut will be *required* to comply with a dietary
program that space program nutritionists and psychologists believe will
ensure their continued ability to perform their duties.

That way, when it turns out that they are unable to perform their duties,
we can say, "See, it's *their fault*, because they *didn't follow the
requirements*", and absolve ourselves of blame.

This is indeed quite important to a lot of people, but some of us are more
interested in whether or not the astronauts can actually perform their duties.
In which case the relevant issue is what they *actually* do, not what they are
*required* to do.

Which are two different things, even for highly motivated people who agree to
the requirements.

You seem to be missing the point here. We know how to freeze or dehydrate
carbohydrates, proteins, fats, vitamins, and minerals sufficient to provide
a nutricious diet. But, food which is not eaten, provides no nutrition, no
matter what its chemical composition. Food which is eaten but not digested,
provides no nutrition, no matter what its chemical composition.

And there is empirical evidence that, even for highly motivated people who
agree to the conditions, the sorts of food most amenable to long-term
storage are the sorts of food least likely to be actually eaten, least
likely to be properly digested if they are eaten, exlusively over a period
of years. To the point of actual malnutrition or undernutrition of people
amply supplied with nutritious food.

There is *also* empirical evidence that, even for highly motivated people
who agree to the conditions, food which was chosen for them by others is
less likely to be eaten and properly digested than food which they chose
for themselves. Again, to the point of actual malnutrition or undernutrition
of people amply supplied with nutritious food.

The first is an intrinsic problem with long-duration spaceflight. Almost
certainly a problem that can be solved with relatively little effort, but
it makes things *harder* if we force the second problem into the proposed
solution of the first.


Fortunately, the nutritionists and psychologists already know this, and if
you ask them in general terms how best to deal with the issue will suggest
leaving most of the decisions to the people who are actually going to be
eating the stuff (or not). Unfortunately, there is a human instinct against
sharing power, so if not knowing any better you outright instruct the
nutritionists and psychologists to specify the diets of the astronauts, they
may not bother to correct you.


--
*John Schilling * "Anything worth doing, *
*Member:AIAA,NRA,ACLU,SAS,LP * is worth doing for money" *
*Chief Scientist & General Partner * -13th Rule of Acquisition *
*White Elephant Research, LLC * "There is no substitute *
* for success" *
*661-951-9107 or 661-275-6795 * -58th Rule of Acquisition *