+ Reply to thread
Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Sexual Reproduction unlikely in Space

  1. #1
    Administrator CatInASuit's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Coulsdon Cat Basket
    Posts
    10,342

    Default Sexual Reproduction unlikely in Space

    It seems that without enough effective shielding on a spacecraft, any embyro conceived in space would have problems and would be rendered infertile by space radiation. The same is also likely to occur with male fetuses as well.

    More on the story here.

    Is this more bad science or an actual important thing to consider if we ever want to branch out into the stars?
    In the land of the blind, the one-arm man is king.

  2. #2
    Prehistoric Bitchslapper Sarahfeena's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Chicagoland
    Posts
    5,891

    Default

    Hmmm. Well, I suppose it might be a consideration for people who might get sent to colonize other worlds. But if the radiation is that dangerous to fetuses, wouldn't they have to figure out a way to block it for everyone?

  3. #3
    Elen síla lumenn' omentielvo What Exit?'s avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Central NJ (near Bree)
    Posts
    10,071

    Default

    I don't even know, but is space radiation the same in deep space as it is around the Earth?

    Also if we're talking colonies, I don't see why the large ships we would assemble in space could not have a shielded crew area. Lead is heavy but we could get it up there to go into the ship. May even be able to mine it on the moon or from asteroids and avoid the lift issues. Another odd form of protection could possible be done by building a forward shield of a light but strong material like bamboo. The ship would be moving forward so the overwhelming percentage of radiation would strike and absorb into the light weight structure that will also help against micro-meteors. Thus the ship is cheaply though not perfectly protected from radiation. (I think this works, now we need a scientist to tell me why I am nuts.)
    Clearly the bamboo shield would need to be repaired regularly.

    If we're talking about a 3 year round trip to Mars, well don't have babies on the trip. What are you stupid?*


    *That is a NYC type of question, not expecting a response and not directed at any actually person but just at a hypothetical person.

  4. #4
    Elen síla lumenn' omentielvo What Exit?'s avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Central NJ (near Bree)
    Posts
    10,071

    Default

    Quote Originally posted by Sarahfeena View post
    Hmmm. Well, I suppose it might be a consideration for people who might get sent to colonize other worlds. But if the radiation is that dangerous to fetuses, wouldn't they have to figure out a way to block it for everyone?
    My understanding and it could be off base is that a developing fetus is far more vulnerable to radiation damage then adults or even kids. Though I would think kids would be at a measurably high risk also.

  5. #5
    The Queen Zuul's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    9,908

    Default

    Quote Originally posted by Sarahfeena View post
    Hmmm. Well, I suppose it might be a consideration for people who might get sent to colonize other worlds. But if the radiation is that dangerous to fetuses, wouldn't they have to figure out a way to block it for everyone?
    I'd imagine that fetuses are going to be more susceptible to damage just because there's a lot of cell division going on involving delicate structures. There's a big difference between radiation during the development of ovaries and radiation once everything is already developed. It might also be causing problems in adults, but that might manifest as cancer fifty years down the road rather than anything immediately obvious.

    I don't think this is bad science, but I think suggesting that because there would be problems with the current level of technology we'll never be able to breed off-planet is a bit premature. The researchers themselves are pointing out the problem is the shielding currently available, after all. It looks like this is another classic case of the popular press twisting science to make a good headline.

  6. #6
    Prehistoric Bitchslapper Sarahfeena's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Chicagoland
    Posts
    5,891

    Default

    True that fetuses are more vulnerable, but I still think that getting whole-body radiation exposure that could render a fetus infertile is not something I'd want to be exposed to over a period of years.

  7. #7
    Elen síla lumenn' omentielvo What Exit?'s avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Central NJ (near Bree)
    Posts
    10,071

    Default

    Quote Originally posted by Sarahfeena View post
    True that fetuses are more vulnerable, but I still think that getting whole-body radiation exposure that could render a fetus infertile is not something I'd want to be exposed to over a period of years.
    If and when we ever get to this point, there will be no shortage of people who will take this chance. An increased chance of dying of cancer is a small price to pay for the millions of Science and Sci-Fi geeks. I mean most of our immigrant ancestors took a higher risk making the trip to America that this risk would be from crowded conditions in the steerage of the boats from Europe and Asia. New opportunity and better opportunity for you kids is a big incentive to take risks with you're own life. Besides, how many people in their 20s just don't think about death yet?

  8. #8
    Prehistoric Bitchslapper Sarahfeena's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Chicagoland
    Posts
    5,891

    Default

    ha ha, well, you're talking to the one person on Mellophant who's too chicken to go to space, so point taken. Still, it seems like a problem that might have a workaround or solution. Not needed if people are going for a few years, but maybe more of an issue if we're talking about colonizing someplace and people staying there their whole lives.

  9. #9
    A Dude Peeta Mellark's avatar
    Registered
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Posts
    1,028

    Default

    It says nothing about whether or not the same problems would exist on a planet like Mars. Never having studied animal embryos on the planet, we can't be sure about that in the same way we can about space. If it is a problem, I imagine by the time we actually get there we'll have solved it. Unless we're looking to have sustainable space station societies right this second I don't see how "fetuses carried in space would be sterile with current technology" is an issue.

  10. #10
    For whom nothing is written. Oliveloaf's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    6,180

    Default

    I read this as an invitation to make crazy love on the moon. No?
    "I won't kill for money, and I won't marry for it. Other than that, I'm open to just about anything."

    -Jim Rockford

  11. #11
    Elen síla lumenn' omentielvo What Exit?'s avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Central NJ (near Bree)
    Posts
    10,071

    Default

    Mars has very little atmosphere so I would imagine it does a terrible job of filtering out radiation. It is our atmosphere that protects us.

    I recall there use to be a thought the Van Allen Belt helped protect us but I think that has been deemed wrong now.

    There are other concerns besides radiation anyway. What affect will low gravity have? A large vessel can induce spin to provide artificial gravity but any small vessel or a moon will have next to no gravity and this might have really adverse affects on fetus growth and childhood development. I imagine Mars will be OK but the Moon quite possibly would not.

  12. #12
    PixieBob
    Guest

    Default

    Damn...I never considered this. Now my plan to move all the intelligent people to Mars before the sub-humans on Earth wipe everything out is FOILED.

  13. #13
    For whom nothing is written. Oliveloaf's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    6,180

    Default

    So, my lunar fertility clinic franchise is going to fail, is that what I'm hearing?
    "I won't kill for money, and I won't marry for it. Other than that, I'm open to just about anything."

    -Jim Rockford

  14. #14
    Jesus F'ing Christ Glazer's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga. U.S.A. (Male)
    Posts
    1,485

    Default

    The Earth's magnetic field and atmosphere protect us from most solar radiation. A water jacket would help in any long term space habitat as well as generating a strong magnetic field. Lead shielding would help on space stations but would be too much mass to move around with a ship. And you would have to live underground on Mars or the Moon, and limit your time on the surface.
    Welcome to Mellophant.

    We started with nothing and we still have most of it left.

+ Reply to thread

Posting rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts