3 ms·
Studied and found to be non-damaging, or just studied and sucks to be them?
by JonChesterfield 2y ago
Studied and found to be non-damaging, or just studied and sucks to be them?
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> Studied and found to be non-damaging, or just studied and sucks to be them? Nothing permanent or serious [1][2]. (On the other hand, astronauts' telomeres lengthen during spaceflight [3]. We have no idea why.) [1] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-021-01496-9 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-021-01496-9 [2] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-49211-2 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-49211-2 [3] https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aau8650 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aau8650
- ChocolateGod 2y ago> On the other hand, astronauts' telomeres lengthen during spaceflight I wonder if this is partially the reason (along with great healthcare benefits) why so many Apollo astronauts have live passed the average life expectancy in the US.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> why so many Apollo astronauts have live passed the average life expectancy in the US The effect reverses within days of return to Earth. The reason astronauts live longer is their physical training more than compensates for the damage done to their bodies in space.
- peterfirefly 2y agoAstronauts should not be compared with normal people. They should be compared with other exceptional people. The Apollo astronauts were quite intelligent (which correlates nicely with lifespan and health) and accomplished... and selected to be healthier than most. Their physical training as astronauts was likely irrelevant to their lifespan.
- radicaldreamer 2y agoBesides muscle atrophy, doesn’t spaceflight reduce damage done to bodies?