NASA Prepares For Space Surgery and Zero Gravity Blood 158
Hugh Pickens writes "Draining an infected abscess is a straightforward procedure on Earth but on a spaceship travelling to the moon or Mars, it could kill everyone on board. Now Rebecca Rosen writes that if humans are to one day go to Mars, one logistical hurdle that will need to be overcome is what to do if one of the crew members has a medical emergency and needs surgery. 'Based on statistical probability, there is a high likelihood of trauma or a medical emergency on a deep space mission,' says Carnegie Mellon professor James Antaki. It's not just a matter of whether you'll have the expertise on board to carry out such a task: Surgery in zero gravity presents its own set of potentially deadly complications because in zero gravity, blood and bodily fluids will not just stay put, in the body where they belong but could contaminate the entire cabin, threatening everybody on board. This week, NASA is testing a device known as the Aqueous Immersion Surgical System (AISS) that could possibly make space surgery possible. Designed by researchers at Carnegie Mellon and the University of Louisville, AISS is a domed box that can fit over a wound. When filled with a sterile saline solution, a water-tight seal is created that prevents fluids from escaping. It can also be used to collect blood for possible reuse."
Re:Are we on the wrong path? (Score:4, Insightful)
We dare not question the old paradigm of "wooden ships and iron men" because, well, drama.
We need robots on Earth, and since every task in space is dangerous and since humans are a burden to support, there is no functional reason for the desperate rush to send people.
We should perfect machines before sending tourists. We have time.
Re:Rotate the frakking spacecraft (Score:5, Insightful)
2) One solution - no windows. Or use cameras. Nuclear submariners do fine without windows. I bet they are better suited to space than pilots (so most of that NASA research into humans living in long term confined environments was probably a waste too - the nuclear submariners have been doing it for years).
And at least research into building space stations/ships with artificial gravity is going to be more useful in the long run. You're not going to have humans long term in space sustainably - reproducing, living etc without artificial gravity.
In contrast research into space surgery in zero g is a waste of time and resources- this and most zero g research is basically like researching into dealing with bad stuff because you keep doing things wrong in the first place.
Re:Are we on the wrong path? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Rotate the frakking spacecraft (Score:4, Insightful)
1) Moving the spinning thing is not a huge problem
The reason we haven't set up spinning habitats in space is because of weight.
If you want something to spin, it must be strong. Strength means weight and weight means cost and the cost is prohibitively high or we'd have done it already.
In contrast research into space surgery in zero g is a waste of time and resources- this and most zero g research is basically like researching into dealing with bad stuff because you keep doing things wrong in the first place.
The human body keeps doing things wrong in the first place.
Things like appendicitis, ingrown hairs/nails, wax build up in your ears, and a thousand other things that happen.
How did this nonsense get modded up?
Re:centrifuge (Score:0, Insightful)
"manageable nuisance"
Constant course corrections requiring fuel and very reliable thrusters.
"For space stations it's even easier - a couple small asteroids tethered together and spun up"
Oh, you're one of those