![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 2005-02-13, Jorge R. Frank wrote:
Michael Smith wrote in : Incidently I see a connection here with the thread on emergency return from a stranded shuttle at ISS. Do some people fly on shuttle who could never fit into a Soyutz seat? Yes. Good point! Are there constraining features other than height, which is the one I seem to recall having been mentioned before? -- -Andrew Gray |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Andrew Gray wrote in
: On 2005-02-13, Jorge R. Frank wrote: Michael Smith wrote in : Incidently I see a connection here with the thread on emergency return from a stranded shuttle at ISS. Do some people fly on shuttle who could never fit into a Soyutz seat? Yes. Good point! Are there constraining features other than height, which is the one I seem to recall having been mentioned before? Torso length, and weight. -- JRF Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail, check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and think one step ahead of IBM. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Michael Smith wrote:
:On 12 Feb 2005 11:04:27 -0800 wrote: : : Working in a factory (like the ones where many Chinese female workers : work), sniping, living in micro-G enviroment and operating things do : no require a strong and resistant creature. : :But going to mars actually requires somebody physically small and able to live on smaller quantities of oxygen, food, etc. : :More women would satisfy this requirement than men, so using Grigoryev's own argument it should be women going to Mars. Think 'calcium loss'. I think this affects women much more severely than men. -- "Rule Number One for Slayers - Don't die." -- Buffy, the Vampire Slayer |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Fred J. McCall wrote:
Michael Smith wrote: But going to mars actually requires somebody physically small and able to live on smaller quantities of oxygen, food, etc. More women would satisfy this requirement than men, so using Grigoryev's own argument it should be women going to Mars. Think 'calcium loss'. I think this affects women much more severely than men. So now we're sending post-menopausal women to Mars? Seriously, women don't have a higher risk of osteoporosis until after menopause. Other risk factors include being Asian or Caucasian, taking certain drugs, smoking, alcoholism, bone structure and body weight, lack of weight-bearing exercise and heredity. rl |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote:
:Fred J. McCall wrote: : Michael Smith wrote: : : But going to mars actually requires somebody : physically small and able to live on smaller : quantities of oxygen, food, etc. : : More women would satisfy this requirement than men, : so using Grigoryev's own argument it should be : women going to Mars. : : Think 'calcium loss'. I think this affects women : much more severely than men. : :So now we're sending post-menopausal women to Mars? : :Seriously, women don't have a higher risk of ![]() That was not my understanding of what the space medicine studies indicated. Women under zero-g lose calcium more quickly than men do, as I recall it. Calcium loss is pretty much THE big problem we're aware of with prolonged exposure to zero-g. -- "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar territory." --G. Behn |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Fred J. McCall" wrote:
That was not my understanding of what the space medicine studies indicated. Women under zero-g lose calcium more quickly than men do, as I recall it. Calcium loss is pretty much THE big problem we're aware of with prolonged exposure to zero-g. For a trip the duration of the Mars expedition, does it make a difference ? Woudldn't they need to find way to deal with calcium loss even for men ? And if they do find a way to stabilize calcium level on men, wouldn't that also work for women with just different dosage of whatever they do ? And what about age ? Would younger crews have lesser problems with calcium and in fact less problems with exercising sufficiently to maintain good shape ? I find it interesting that in that "failed" russian study, they enclosed young adults whereas people of such age rarely get to go up to space. Younger adults would make the sexual tension issue more prevalent (this isn't taboo anymore, right ?), but their higher energy levels and better bodies might make the trip far more surviveable. Raising occupancy of the station should be made a very high priority in order to allow crews of varying ages to work there. This would not only allow proper experiemnts on age versus body depletion in 0g, but also personal relationships between younger and older crewmembers, issues of authority and of course the sexual issues and how to best deal with them. None of this has been tested yet with crews on Mir and Alpha having been too small. As far as the argument of sending only "professionals", this is ludicrous. You can't be "professional" 7/24 for over a year without any break. Also remember that interactive communications with a spouse will not be possible once far enough from earth, and that is something which has not really been tested much so far. And it isn't just the person is space one much consider, but also the spouse and possibly kids who won't see their parent for such a long time. And all this is contingent on a decision on how many cremembersw are to be sent to Mars and back. It defines the size of the ship, the type of crew and crew training necessary, and the crew selection (sex, marital status, education etc). It also requires setting up a training schedule to find out how soon prior to the trip you need to start the mission specific training, and how much of it can be done during the trip. And that also means skills based training. Another issue is how much personal space is required for a mission of that duration, and whether the amount of personal space varies with age and/or sex. Would you need duplicate lounges/gyms in case the crew splits into two groups that don't get together well during off-duty times ? This isn't Star Trek. You can't ignore toilets and sexual issues, and you can't garantee that all crew members will get along wonderfully and constantly sport smiles and never complain about workload or food for 1.5 years in closed quarters. There are issues and they need to be dealt with. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Am Mon, 14 Feb 2005 06:04:45 GMT schrieb "Fred J. McCall":
: Think 'calcium loss'. I think this affects women : much more severely than men. :[...] That was not my understanding of what the space medicine studies indicated. Women under zero-g lose calcium more quickly than men do, as I recall it. Calcium loss is pretty much THE big problem we're aware of with prolonged exposure to zero-g. The answer, WHY women lose more body calcium in zero-G is the basic solution to find a way to overcome that problem. We should find it - if it isn't already obvious - and use it for our advantage. Even males would surely profit (If I were on a multi-year space trip, I would like "close misses":-) ... cu, ZiLi aka HKZL (Heinrich Zinndorf-Linker) -- "Abusus non tollit usum" - Latin: Abuse is no argument against proper use. mailto: http://zili.de |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Fred J. McCall wrote:
"Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote: Fred J. McCall wrote: Think 'calcium loss'. I think this affects women much more severely than men. So now we're sending post-menopausal women to Mars? Seriously, women don't have a higher risk of osteoporosis until after menopause. That was not my understanding of what the space medicine studies indicated. Women under zero-g lose calcium more quickly than men do, as I recall it. Where would I find those studies (or even a reference to women experiencing greater bone loss)? Because I'm not finding them. Calcium loss is pretty much THE big problem we're aware of with prolonged exposure to zero-g. From what I've read, it's as big a roadblock for men as it is for women. rl |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
John Doe wrote:
:"Fred J. McCall" wrote: : That was not my understanding of what the space medicine studies : indicated. Women under zero-g lose calcium more quickly than men do, : as I recall it. Calcium loss is pretty much THE big problem we're : aware of with prolonged exposure to zero-g. : :For a trip the duration of the Mars expedition, does it make a :difference ? I suspect the best answer anyone has right now is 'maybe'. :Woudldn't they need to find way to deal with calcium loss :even for men ? Yes. :And if they do find a way to stabilize calcium level on :men, wouldn't that also work for women with just different dosage of :whatever they do ? That doesn't necessarily follow. Women are not men, a fact for which I am perpetually grateful. :And what about age ? Would younger crews have lesser problems with :calcium and in fact less problems with exercising sufficiently to :maintain good shape ? I doubt anyone has a definitive answer here, either, so once again the answer is 'maybe'. -- "Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute." -- Charles Pinckney |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Rand Simberg wrote: I can go that long without forcing my unwanted tongue on a woman. I'm going to resist the temptation. I'm going to resist the temptation. I'm going to resist the temptation. (497 more times) :-P Pat |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Space Calendar - November 26, 2003 | Ron Baalke | Astronomy Misc | 1 | November 28th 03 09:21 AM |
Space Calendar - August 28, 2003 | Ron Baalke | History | 0 | August 28th 03 05:32 PM |
Space Calendar - August 28, 2003 | Ron Baalke | Misc | 0 | August 28th 03 05:32 PM |
Mars Looms Big & Bright as It Nears Record-Breaking Close Approach | Ron Baalke | Amateur Astronomy | 3 | August 10th 03 08:15 AM |
Space Calendar - July 24, 2003 | Ron Baalke | History | 0 | July 24th 03 11:26 PM |