Slashdot Mirror
Vision Problems For Some Returning Astronauts
astroengine writes "A newly discovered affliction has some doctors wondering if astronauts traveling to Mars could have problems with their eyesight by the time they got there. About one-third of U.S. crew members aboard the ISS return with impaired vision, one case of which was permanent. The reason for the late discovery of this mysterious affliction is the reluctance of astronauts on active service to come forward — the risk of being grounded after complaining of blurry vision is considered too great."
at NASA in General, No?
http://science.slashdot.org/story/11/09/23/031217/neil-armstrong-to-nasa-youre-embarrassing [slashdot.org]
help me fix this "Terrible" karma, please!
I wonder how many other minor 'afflictions' from space travel are ignored/explained away that we haven't heard about for the exact same fear of being grounded...
I'm pretty sure they require astronauts to have 20/20 vision, hence the risk of grounding.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
This is just another of the long list of maladies associated with weightlessness. Artificial gravity is going to be a must for long term stays in space.
I'm not letting a Lasik specialist with blurry vision point a laser at my eyes.
The visual degradation is from the optic nerve, not from a mishaped cornea, if you had RTFA.
Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
Given the effects were generally temporary, lasering them might be a slightly extreme reaction.
I would have thought 'vision' would be part of the standard medical exam when they return from space.
No sig today...
Because lasers are magic and can fix all vision problems.
I like how the concern is not that the astronauts will have to live the rest of their lives blind after getting home but that they migh not be able to do research.
I guess it does get pretty lonely up there
What is curious to me is that the flight doctors weren't catching it.
Given what we know about people's response to incentives(ie. in situations valuing the "right stuff", people generally under-report problems they can get away with concealing), and given the importance of having top-performing people in mission critical situations, I would have expected the post and pre flight medical checks to be good enough to detect vision issues. Visual acuity testing isn't the cutting edge of rocket surgery...
Laser eye surgery is ruined by high g-force.
The visual degradation is from the optic nerve, not from a mishaped cornea, if you had RTFA.
Not sure if he'd understand even if he read TFA. Most people these days assume that since we have laser, all eye conditions can be resolved. No, they can't. If the problem is the optic nerve (glaucoma for example), the clarity of the lens (cataracts) or a host of other problems, laser won't help you. It helps only for the case of a misshapen eye lens - and in case of e.g. keratoconus not even then.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Why would it be? Its a permanent ablation of the cornea, changing its shape - if it were ruined by high g-force, then so would normal sight.
Because lasers are magic and can fix all problems!
To paraphrase an old adage:
If lasers aren't solving your problem, then you just aren't using enough of them.
The enemies of Democracy are
Same reason why the older style of cutting it open with a scalpel would result in somebody being barred from being a fighter pilot. The technology they use is somewhat different, it's akin to grinding a lens down to change its shape.
The issue is that they cut a flap in the cornea to do the work, and there's a small chance that excessive g-forces could cause it to flap open.
... stop looking at it! Give your eyes a rest!
Pilots of commercial aircraft and military aircraft are not allowed to have lasik surgery. They instead have to have PRK surgery. Both are usually performed by the same specialist though.
It's not rocket science, but by the same token, with enough motivation it can be hard to detect. Even for those that aren't trying to cheat, but have good memory, the charts they typically use are somewhat less than helpful.
The eye is not all that mysterious in my mind. It's a liquid filled ball with a lens and a light sensitive surface. The focus of the lens is managed muscles which contract based on need for focus. But since this is a liquid filled ball, various other forces work against the eye such as gravity and atmospheric pressure.
I'm willing to bet that the cause of the problems have a great deal to do with changes in gravity and air pressure. To me this seems like an obvious thing which should have been considered and accounted for. We know how to create "artificial gravity" by spinning a zero-gravity vehicle and making everyone exist on the outer perimeter. To my knowledge, this isn't being done. Instead, we are still sending boxes into space with people in them.
We already know 0-g affects the body in all sorts of ways. Calling this vision problem a mystery seems kind of stupid.
I would have thought 'vision' would be part of the standard medical exam when they return from space.
Probably a 'blinded' ex-astronaut in the command chain had the 'insight' to enlighten the doctors to not include it anymore.
CC.
TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
You can have PRK, which doesn't involve a flap. LASIK, I believe, has better outcomes, but anyone without perfect vision already can't fly fighters - so if it's the only chance you have...
the hell out of them!
Bukowski said it. I believe it. That settles it.
According to this NIH study an enormous amount of LEO astronauts have reported seeing phosphenes while in orbit. These are speculated to derive from background radiation in space. Clearly, more study is needed--and more shielding.
According to this they are caused (at least on Earth in the general population) by mechanical trauma to a damaged nerve. If they're already seeing damaged optic nerves in returning astronauts, it makes sense that the phosphenes in orbit are symptomatic.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Yes, i started wearing glasses about 6 years ago and have been getting worse eyes and needing new prescriptions about ever 2 years. The first couple of times I went to get tested I was trying hard to read as much as I could from the chart feeling that I was being tested on how well I could read the letters. later I realized it would go faster if I just told the doctor I could probably guess some of the letters right, but they were still too blurry to be considered correct vision. My pride in getting the right answer was getting in the way of my need to get a correct prescription. It is hell to get old.
Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
to send the astronauts on a one-way mission to mars. The idea of bringing them back is irresponsible. The reason is that we can send a mission to mars in less then 6 months. HOWEVER, returning them is a whole different matter. It will be at least a year. As such the better solution is to send the crew to Mars for at least 10 years, or possibly life.
There are other good reasons to make at least the first couple of trips be one-way. It allows the sending group to focus on keeping a crew alive. That is actually cheaper than coming up with a return vehicle and the fuel for it. By sending one-way, it gives them time to build a base out while doing research on the planet.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
No, the flap completely reseals permanently afterward - after a week or so there is no chance of the flap reoccuring because it no longer exists.
Yes, I have had laser eye surgery. Yes, I investigated such things thoroughly beforehand.
And yes, I fly aircraft.
The reason for the late discovery of this mysterious affliction is the reluctance of astronauts on active service to come forward
Highly relevant in the absence of a manned space program. Also it sums it up pretty well: I want to have millions of government dollars spent on me to train me, house me and feed me, but I would rather pass up a chance at actually doing the job I am supposed to do even though it's likely I will never get a chance to do it again, because 1 out of 3 (less than half) of my colleagues have had eye problems. Yep, that's "the right stuff" right there. Now tell me again why is it you wanted to be an astronaut?
No wonder the emphasis is on robots.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
The theory is that this is caused by an enlargement of the optic nerve. Lasik would not help in this case.
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
I stopped reading after "They're desire is to get back into space, so they are not complainers." OK not really, but still kind of a kick in the nuts to see that in a professionally written article...
weinersmith
PRK has been allowed by the USAF for all aviation positions since 2001, and Lasik was allowed in 2004 for particular aviation positions, and in 2007 this restriction was removed completely.
Fighter pilots can certainly fly after having laser eye surgery.
Also, you can fly in the USAF without having perfect vision - according to the following Air Force Times, 41% of active USAF pilots require corrective lenses to carry out their duties.
http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2011/02/air-force-eye-surgery-widens-pilot-pool-022811w/
The pool of American astronauts who this may apply to is small, but there's a number of Russians who've been in orbit for long periods.
My father was on submarines, and would come home from a 10-12 week patrol mildly short-sighted. He was ordinarily long-sighted, with a prescription to match.
We tell cube droids to 'rest their eyes' periodically during a 8 hour shift, by taking some time to focus on something that isn't 2 feet away (out the window, etc) exactly because this is a known issue. How did no-one assume that the same would happen on the ISS?
I'm pretty sure they require astronauts to have 20/20 vision, hence the risk of grounding.
Yes, but glasses are acceptable. The uncorrected vision requirements for non-pilot astronauts are pretty low; or were when I looked at the astronaut application process years ago.
If you look at pictures of John Young (first shuttle commander) in space you'll notice he was wearing glasses.
What about the red earth? It's an earth too!
laser eye surgery works, how can instantly improve vision not be on the top of thier to do list.
And is generally frowned upon by NASA due to concerns about pressure change effects. Or was as of a few years ago.
Lasik won't help much with the swollen optic nerve.
More knowledgable professionals have probably already asked this, but I'm still curious: how closely does the air mixture and atmospheric pressure on the ISS match typical earth conditions?
Eyes breath.
Operator, give me the number for 911!
The visual degradation is from the optic nerve, not from a mishaped cornea, if you had RTFA.
Not sure if he'd understand even if he read TFA. Most people these days assume that since we have laser, all eye conditions can be resolved. No, they can't. If the problem is the optic nerve (glaucoma for example), the clarity of the lens (cataracts) or a host of other problems, laser won't help you. It helps only for the case of a misshapen eye lens - and in case of e.g. keratoconus not even then.
Speaking of reading TFA...
"..."Nobody knows why pseudotumor cerebri occurs..."
"With a relatively small pool of subjects to study -- around 30 U.S. astronauts have lived on the International Space Station -- doctors have not been able to determine if age, gender or previous spaceflight experience affect vision loss."
Hrm, sounds like a whole lot of statistics-by-dartboard if you ask me, since we seem to be clueless on Earth as to root cause, much less space. I guess it's good that we're identifying this now as a possible issue before sending people into deep space, but let's at least try and slow down the roll on the hype train. We have enough hype in the media already these days.
No, the flap completely reseals after a week or two, unless the surgery was botched and an air bubble was left under the flap - if the surgery is done correctly, there is no flap after several days, its completely connected with the underlying tissue. That is why you stop needing eye lubrication (fake tears) after several weeks - because the nerve endings reattach and grow back. They can't do that if the flap doesn't completely seal...
Multiple laser eye surgeons assured me that there was absolutely no chance of flap movement after 14 days when I researched it.
So your friend either had very badly botched surgery, or was simply invented as an argument point.
And yes, I really do fly aircraft - why do you feel you have to denigrate that, when pilots are something we are specifically talking about? I have both single engine and twin engine ratings, tail draggers and am about to finalise a DC-3 purchase. Its not exactly difficult to get a pilots license, so why the "I play aircraft simulator games" remark?
As someone who grew up wanting to be a Marine I can tell you I was willing to do anything to get in. When I was diagnosed with Crohn's disease I thought I was done; I had surgey at 15 and had a few section of my intestines removed; 12 inches, 8 inches, and 4 inches. Funny thing was after that I didn't really need meds anymore; not at all actually. Having gone into remission save for almost daily abdominal discomfort or pain, probably because I eat any damn thing I want even though I probably shouldn't.
I walked into recruiting stations over and over again; sometimes years apart until I found a recruiter with an immense tolerance for bullshit. Wouldn't you know it that with enough visits to doctors, MEPS, paperwork going up to Navy BUMED, and everything else I was able to get in. Waiver for Crohn's, waiver for my eyes since they're also complete crap, and moral waiver for being a naughty juvenile on one occassion. They make waivers for everything
Queue four years of active duty service; rank of Sergeant, Good Conduct Medal, NAM, etc., etc. I probably wasn't so much your most likely candidate for success in such an environment and was told lots of times buy lots of people that I couldn't. You're too sick. You're too smart. You're too weak. You can't listen to people telling you what to do...
So, some things to take away from my story:
1.) Fuck everyone who tells you you can't do something.
2.) Everyone is imperfect; make what you can of your lot.
3.) A lot of the general rules in our system just don't work in side cases (like say Crohn's being a permanent disqualifier from military service.)
4.) That's why there's a waiver for everything.
5.) Fuck everyone who tells you you can't do something.
Having been through all that though I can DEFINITELY understand where they are coming from; it is infuriating beyond words to be told you can't do something you know you are full well capable of. I could shoot, I could run, I could do the MOS that was assigned to me (went in open contract), I could swim, and I could do anything else that was asked of me. And I did. When I got out I had a job with a high tech company I am sure everyone here is familiar with as a System Administrator before I even finished my terminal leave and used the G.I. Bill to get my college degree as well.
Some people just don't want to make excuses. They don't want to be a statistic. They don't want to be one of the numbers. They don't want to have one of the myriad bullshit mental conditions 99% of America can be diagnosed with if they just see a doctor so that they can give up lay down and profess that they were willing but unable because of the lot they got in life. They don't want to go around for the rest of their life saying, I tried to join X branch of the military but couldn't because they had flat feet. Not everyone wants to be a charity case if you can believe it. Some of us want to earn our keep and make something of our selves. It is the idea that our country was born on. It's the idea that is lost and will be the cause of this countries demise as well. I feel for these people immensely when their vision starts to go and they have to deal with the possibility of some flight surgeon screwing with them.
Words to live by: Nothing. Will. Ever. Stop. Me.
Going to Mars on chemical rockets is never going to work very well. That's a job that needs nuclear power. That was known back in the 1950s. The US and the USSR both had major nuclear rocket development efforts in the 1950s in the 1970s.
With nuclear rockets, a trip to Mars should take about a month.
As long as you're not straining your eyes to try to figure out exactly what each letter is, you're fine. Get enough of them wrong and it's obvious that you can't see them well at that size and distance. Just say what it looks like and keep going until the doctor tells you to stop. It's unlikely that you'll guess enough letters correctly to trick the doctor into thinking you can see them if you really can't.
LASIK doesn't have better outcomes; the success rates for PRK and LASIK are just about identical. However LASIK does give you faster healing. I opted to do PRK for my surgery. Even though it was about a month before I was back to perfect vision, IMHO it was worth it. Since there was no flap cut into my cornea, my eyes are now 100% healed (in fact the eye doctor couldn't even tell that I had had surgery). With LASIK, even though the flap does heal well, it is never 100% as strong as before. As another poster pointed out, though, even the USAF has authorized LASIK surgeries for their pilots for some years, so the differences are minimal. Cheers
...into space. We have a thousand years, two thousand, ten if we like.
Send few humans and many probes. Our supporting, non-space-exploration tech will progress too.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
I always wondered how "Noisy" Rhysling lost his sight.
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
Multiple laser eye surgeons assured me that there was absolutely no chance of flap movement after 14 days when I researched it.
Funny--my father in law, an ophthalmologist, makes a great living fixing the corneas of people who believed exactly what you were told.
This is why I still wear glasses. My vision is too important to leave to surgeons who say "absolutely no chance" just as I wouldn't like to fly with people who say "absolutely no chance"
Wouldn't this be solved by building a ring ship with artificial gravity?
By the time the U.S. OK's another Mars mission those astronauts are going to be in their 80's.
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
Its not really funny, the flap has nothing to do with cornea damage - and I never said there were no risks to the procedure itself (there are), I just heavily dispute the claim that it was possible for the flap to move after a significant amount of time (its not).
And after research, I would agree with their "absolutely no chance" of a correctly repositioned flap being moveable again after a week, let alone a year - and as my treatment involved five appointments during the first month (one later the same day, one the next day, one at the end of the first week, one at the end of the second week and one at the end of the first month), where the flap was checked for movement and bubbling, an incorrectly positioned flap would have been spotted well before a year had passed.
But "absolutely no chance" of any issues in the procedure? Well, I never said that, and it was never said to me - I was told the percentage rates of secondary treatment being required, and I was given a huge pamphlet with all of the possible side effects and problems (with likelihood of occurance), and both the consultant and the surgeon asked me prior to the procedure if I was aware that this was not a risk free procedure.
So you took that statement to mean a lot more than was intended or inferred.
As someone married to a doctor (check my posting history, I've made several medical orientated posts in the past month or two - mostly criticising the British NHS and its treatment of doctors), and who has as a result many medical friends including ophthalmologists, I have to say that with regard to laser eye surgery there seems to be a split in consensus of opinion on its safety, with that split generally being based on the age of the doctor concerned, with younger doctors being exposed to more recent papers and studies which have a different conclusion than older papers.
Go and ask your father-in-law what the actual issue rate is with the various laser eye surgeries - its actually extremely low, with most issues being corrective with a second treatment (regardless of what initial treatment you go for, one of the first things most laser eye surgeons do today is map your entire eye pattern, so if you go for the more expensive treatment they can treat each portion of the eye individually - this allows them leeway with treatments, so if something does happen they have a detailed 'before" picture with which to work toward corrections).
And after research, I would agree with their "absolutely no chance" of a correctly repositioned flap being moveable again after a week, let alone a year
Not enough research, apparently. Try up to seven years.
Yeah, we can debate the meaning of "correctly repositioned" and due diligence. Also no permanent damage to any of the patients in the study, which is good. Overall low chance of it happening makes for a relatively safe procedure. Still, it's most certainly not "absolutely no chance."
Hrm, sounds like a whole lot of statistics-by-dartboard if you ask me, since we seem to be clueless on Earth as to root cause, much less space.
Well, I assume astronauts have been through all sorts of health tests before they go on missions so they almost certainly had good vision going up there. And they report these symptoms as happening after being on the space station. That 10 out of 30 healthy young people develop eye conditions at the same time is a bit too much of a coincidence. There's just not statistical grounds to say why that 1/3rd was affected and the other 2/3rd not, but the main conclusion seems valid enough.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Thanks for the info.
Or you are the target, try moving around.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?