[extropy-chat] (health) risks and benefits along a bell curve ?
russell.wallace at gmail.com
Mon Mar 20 19:24:24 UTC 2006
On 3/18/06, Lee Corbin <lcorbin at tsoft.com> wrote:
> On a closely related note, I was very impressed with an article
> in a recent Scientific American on cosmic ray dangers in space.
> (A great exposition of the science and history of the phenomenon.)
> Astronauts out of Earth's atmosphere for up to months are okay,
> but without extensive shielding, trips to Mars (i.e., space exposure
> on the order of a year or more) will be hazardous or fatal.
That one's been debunked over on sci.space.policy. Radiation will be a
hazard, yes, but not at the top of the list of exploration hazards by any
So I wonder, Do cellular repair mechanisms totally compensate for
> the radiation damage done to, say Neil Armstrong when he was in
> space for a week or so? (In the ensuing years, perhaps he's no
> worse by now than he would have been anyway.) Or is he simply
> stuck with a certain amount of permanent damage?
Stuck with a certain amount of permanent damage, but it's small potatoes
compared to what you get from spending a year in zero gravity, climbing
Everest without oxygen etc.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat