“Exposure to short duration gravity load changes including microgravity, as sustained in a parabolic flight statistically significantly decreases the sperm motility and vitality of human fresh sperm samples,” the team found, adding that this may have huge importance for any prolonged human settlement missions in space.
“In the future, should humans remain in space for long periods of time with exposure to different microgravity and hypergravity peaks, which could range from months to a number of years, reproduction may pose a problem to be tackled.”
The mechanism by which sperm motility was decreased remains unknown, with further study needed.
After sparing this paper a fair bit of attention I feel I’ve wasted it.
Nowhere in the paper could i find in what conditions the test samples were kept during the experiment. This is pretty basic stuff. At this stage I’d wage sloshing was the issue.
Reading this part of the methodology:
"2.2 Initial sperm analysis
After liquefaction…
[Two paragraphs later, in the same section: ] After this first analysis, the 15 sperm samples were split into two fractions. All the samples were exposed to ‘Parabolic flight’ (split 1) and to…"
Did they liquefied the samples and tested like that? Whaa?
The “After this first analysis” should not be in the “2.2 Initial sperm analysis”. It just shouldn’t!
Then I think “15 sperm samples were split into two fractions”. … “the samples were exposed to ‘Parabolic flight’ (split 1)” — splits, fractions, what a mess!! At this stage I’ve wasted enough.
The paper should be retracted, the reviewers spanked and the editor fired.
A few seconds of microgravity? Something sounds off, that would probably be enough to be seen in parachutists and fighter pilots. I think I’m going to wait for the peer review on this one…
comparing an existing sample exposed to small doses of micro-gravity seems incredibly… useless… compared to sperm generated in space. how can they even begin to use it to make generalizations on ‘long term human space colonization’?
Especially considering the samples were exposed to supergravity as the plane came out of its dive. I feel like that would mostly invalidate whatever they were hoping to find.
Also, why do they dismiss asking ISS staff to participate in studies? Bodily autonomy doesn’t mean you can’t ask someone to conduct … uh… research with you. It just means you have to respect it they say no. Astronauts seem like the types who wouldn’t mind putting in a little extra effort for… science.
Also, why do they dismiss asking ISS staff to participate in studies? Bodily autonomy doesn’t mean you can’t ask someone to conduct … uh… research with you. It just means you have to respect it they say no. Astronauts seem like the types who wouldn’t mind putting in a little extra effort for… science.
Too many other introduced variables? Microgravity has a lot of other systemic effects on the astronauts that might affect sperm motility, even before effects to the sperm themselves. Or just individual variation/genetics on the part of the astronauts themselves.
They wouldn’t be able to get a sperm sample that wasn’t affected by microgravity from the astronauts to begin with.
Who’d have thought a headline could contain all those words
I find it very hard to believe this hasn’t been tested on the ISS.
Everything experiences zero g on the ISS. How would you test this there?
Called it
It’s about the changes in microgravity, extreme G and light. Pure guess, but it’s perhaps testing for travel as much as inhabitant.
gravity load
Literally (fiction) speaking, I’ve randomly gambled on ~10 generations max before the population crashes if a generation ship arrives and fails to complete an O’Neill cylinder on the other side.
Sound legit? 4am, going to bed, so no read.
Don’t worry I didn’t even see it until now
Jokes on you, that’s my kink
Why is creating more humans a good thing in a world with all this suffering?
I get you. But that’s life. Life wants to live and create more life. That’s what it’s about. The parts of life that ask why will be set aside and not used for the continuation of life.
Most of us aren’t suffering and spending time with my kids is amazing and I enioy it.
They are literally only talking about creating humans NOT on this world…
Not this planet, this universe
The universe has plenty of room for more humans. There’s a shit ton of matter out there, if you can get to it.
No, I meant to say by there being suffering in the world, I meant in the universe, rather than specifically referring to this planet and there would be no human suffering in off Earth colonies.
… Why not just say that then? It would save much confusion.
It’d be hard to say whether there would be no suffering in off-world colonies, but I should doubt it. Traditionally, colonisation has been a dangerous thing, and human nature is as human nature does. The best you can do is reduce it so that what suffering does occur is either minor, or ineffectual.
