Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The ISS Is a Cesspool of Bacteria and Fungi, Study Finds (gizmodo.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the petri-dish-in-space dept.

An extensive survey of bacteria and fungi on surfaces inside the International Space Station has revealed an astonishing number of microorganisms living among the astronauts -- the health impacts of which aren't entirely clear. Gizmodo reports: Since it was first established in 1998, the International Space Station has been visited by hundreds of astronauts (227 to be exact). These trips have invariably introduced an array of microbes to the orbital outpost, as have shipments of cargo. But while astronauts return to Earth, their germs stay behind. New research published today in Microbiome offers the most comprehensive catalogue to date of the bacteria and fungi living on the ISS, detailing the station's distinctive and ever-changing microbiological profile. This research will now be used by NASA and other space agencies to develop safety measures for the ISS and other long-term space missions.

NASA astronauts took swabs using sterile wipes at eight predefined locations on the ISS, on three different occasions during a 14 month period. The locations included both high and low traffic areas, including the viewing window, toilet, exercise platform, stowage rack, dining table, and sleeping quarters. NASA astronaut Terry Virts performed the first two sampling sessions on March 4, 2015 and then three months later on May 15, 2015. NASA astronaut Jeffrey Williams took the third sample a year later on May 6, 2016. The samples were returned to Earth for analysis. The ISS may seem like a cold, sterile place in space, but the analysis showed it's a veritable cornucopia for microbes. The most prolific bacteria, according to culture results, were Staphylococcus (26 percent of total samples), Pantoea (23 percent), Bacillus (11 percent), Staphylococcus aureus (10 percent) and Pantoea conspicua and Pantoea gaviniae (both at 9 percent). The fungal population was primarily comprised of Rhodotorula mucilaginosa. The authors warn that some strains of bacteria could form damaging biological sheets known as biofilms: "[B]iofilm formation on the ISS could decrease infrastructure stability by causing mechanical blockages, reducing heat transfer efficiency, and inducing microbial influenced corrosion..."

78 of 151 comments (clear)

  1. vs Earth by KiloByte · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The article would be drastically more informative if it gave a comparison to a similar building on Earth.

    Every piece of our surroundings is teeming with bacterial and fungal life, you'd need to go to extreme lengths to eliminate that.

    --
    The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    1. Re:vs Earth by Luckyo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not to mention, you'd have to kill all things that have a digestive tract. In humans, there's something like 10 times the amount of bacterial and viral cells inside us compared to our own cells. Then there are things like the benign microflora of our skin, without which opportunist pathogens become a significant problem very quickly.

      It's literally a critical part of our lives. We could not exist without our microbiomes. So the question isn't "is it a cesspool of microscopic lifeforms". That's a given as humans exist in that area. The question is "is this microflora harmful to people on the station and operations there". So far, the answer seems to be "we don't know", as everything discussed has been dressed as "it might cause problems" which is the framing often used by journalist class to make things that we don't know into things that are scary and hence sell clicks and shares.

    2. Re:vs Earth by keithdowsett · · Score: 5, Insightful

      From TFA:

      "Fascinatingly, the microbial profile on the ISS is fairly representative of what we see in other human-built environments on Earth, including gyms and hospitals."

      Not exactly surprising given the amount of time the astronauts have to spend in gyms and medical facilities before they are cleared to fly. As they say down here on Earth, "No S**t Sherlock"

    3. Re:vs Earth by reboot246 · · Score: 2

      I'm in a motel right now and I'm wondering which has more germs, the ISS or a typical motel room. The motel room has certainly had more visitors and I'd guess that a large percentage of them were not in the best of health. Plus, motel rooms are not exactly sanitized between guests. I'll be lucky to get out of here alive!

      The problem in space is that if something really virulent gets there, or evolves into something virulent there, the relatively small crew will be toast.

    4. Re:vs Earth by DethLok · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "The question is "is this microflora harmful to people on the station and operations there"."

      Well, how many astronauts are getting infected by bacteria and fungi in ways that are affecting their performance, or lives?

      It seems that we don't hear of very many astronauts getting sick, so either there's a media blackout, or they don't often get very sick?

      Suggesting that the microflora is not that harmful. Yet. Maybe?

    5. Re:vs Earth by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it's almost like a species whose entire ecology and evolutionary history is built upon a foundation of microbial ecosystems, carries part of that ecosystem with them wherever they go...

      Multi-cellular life is the anomaly on Earth - our cells are hopelessly outnumbered by microbes even within our own bodies, and outmassed in the global ecosystem. The microbes were here for billions of years before we arose, and get many thousands of times more generations of evolution per year than we do. Wipe out all complex life, and the microbial world would be rocked, but soon continue on without trouble, though the species that coevolved closely with multicellular life might get wiped out. Wipe out all microbial life, and all multicellural life would go extinct within a few years at most, many within days or weeks.

      It never ceases to amaze me that we're starting to seriously consider colonizing another world, without having more than the vaguest idea of the microbiome we need to survive. We could thrive as the only multicellular organism in a microbial "slime world", so long as it was the right kind of slime, and would benefit from the fact that our ecosystem could expand almost instantly to fill any new space as it became available, or to recover from near-total extermination. A diet of only yeast and algae might not be the most appealing of existences, but it would be a deeply robust ecosystem that could easily support us. Establish and nurture the slime, and the rest of the ecosystem can thrive atop it. Treat it as an afterthought, or an enemy, and we'll be perpetually struggling to keep ourselves alive against impossible odds.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    6. Re:vs Earth by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 2

      "The question is "is this microflora harmful to people on the station and operations there"."

      Well, how many astronauts are getting infected by bacteria and fungi in ways that are affecting their performance, or lives?

      It seems that we don't hear of very many astronauts getting sick, so either there's a media blackout, or they don't often get very sick?

      Suggesting that the microflora is not that harmful. Yet. Maybe?

      Astronauts get a cocktail of anti-germ shit injected on them (on top of them being in excellent shape as a job requirement.) They aren't necessarily a good sample from which to deduct cause-and-effect.

      We just don't know. And it is not clear if the density/concentration of biota in the ISS is that different from what occurs naturally in the world. Think of the biota under a rotting log in the Amazons, the Russian Taiga, or the Pacific Northwest for instance.

      I'd say this: "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." It is possible that on a zero-grav environment, an abundance of those pesky lateral-gene-transferring bacteria and fungi (and thus viruses) exposed to humans super-juiced with anti-bacterial and anti-fungal cocktails could generate some awful shit.

      It seems... logical.

      It is a distinct possibility that needs to be investigated. But at this point, we simply do not know.

    7. Re:vs Earth by apoc.famine · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It seems that we don't hear of very many astronauts getting sick, so either there's a media blackout, or they don't often get very sick?

      Or HIPAA applies to astronauts too.....

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    8. Re:vs Earth by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

      or evolves into something virulent there

      I wouldn't be surprised if that's the most likely scenario. You're exposed to a lot more radiation up there, and given the short life-cycle of fungi and bacteria, that's a good environment to create a very diverse ecosystem.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    9. Re:vs Earth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Currently, 47/89 (53%) astronauts from shuttle-flights and 14/23 (61%) astronauts from ISS missions shed one or more herpes viruses in saliva/urine samples. Astronauts shed Epstein–Barr virus (EBV), varicella-zoster virus (VZV), and herpes-simplex-1 (HSV-1) in saliva and cytomegalovirus (CMV) in urine. Larger quantities and increased frequencies for these viruses were found during spaceflight as compared to before or after flight samples and their matched healthy controls. "

      https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2019.00016/full

    10. Re:vs Earth by Wulf2k · · Score: 1

      Without a huge supply of hosts to pass through they've probably reached homeostatis with everything up there.

      Everything dangerous their bodies have already killed off, and everything benign has no real selection pressure to change and become deadly. Sure, it could happen, but it's way more likely to happen on earth with a greater population than it is with a tiny population in space.

    11. Re:vs Earth by omfglearntoplay · · Score: 1

      It's probably more healthy for them to have most of this stuff up there. We have evolved to deal with microbes... remove them all, and problems probably will eventually arise.

    12. Re:vs Earth by rahvin112 · · Score: 1

      You can't eliminate bacteria and fungi from Humans. Out GI tract is totally dependent on a microbiological fauna. If you kill off that ecosystem you'll die. This isn't an exaggeration, those bacteria are absolutely essential to your ability to digest food and without them you'd either starve to death or die from diarrhea as your GI tract ecosystem collapsed.

      Our very lives are dependent on these ecosystems. And as the original author noted it's very very difficult to eliminate micro-biological life from stuff. It's actually a huge process to sterilize space probes so we don't drop microbes on other planetary bodies. The Cassini probe was dropped into Saturn to make sure it didn't contaminate Saturn's moons with microbes because it had not gone through the level of sterilization procedures necessary to guarantee sterility. Some of the Mars rovers didn't go through the level of sterilization that prior probes had and there is a fear in the astronomical community that we could have already contaminated mars with earth life.

      In a closed environment like the ISS you're going to end up with everything inside it covered in human bearing bacteria. Not just because of toilet facilities but because our very skin is covered in microbiological life We transfer this ecosystem to everything we touch. The issue is only if these bacteria are harmful, and that is a totally different issue than whether the bacteria exist.

      It's kind like the stories you hear on the news where they dramatize how many bacteria are on the sponge in your kitchen sink is higher than your toilet. Because they are trying to scare you into watching the segment they don't bother explaining that the number of bacteria doesn't matter, it's the type of bacteria that is far more important and the bacteria in your kitchen sink are vastly different than the ones in the toilet.

  2. ISS pays for itself in these ways by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Consider this: if we built a moonbase or a mars colony without realizing these sorts of things could happen so we could take steps to control it, it could cause a base or colony to fail completely.

    1. Re:ISS pays for itself in these ways by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      without realizing these sorts of things could happen

      People are covered in all kinds of micro-organisms, so it makes total sense that they would spread inside people's living and working spaces.

    2. Re:ISS pays for itself in these ways by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      if we built a moonbase or a mars colony without realizing these sorts of things could happen

      Bacteria and fungus are a normal part of our environment. Your skin, your hair are teaming with them. They are in your gut, your saliva, your sweat. There is nothing in TFA to indicate what they found is abnormal.

      The only way to eliminate bacteria and fungus is to eliminate humans, and do robotic missions instead.

    3. Re:ISS pays for itself in these ways by sydbarrett74 · · Score: 1

      What's interesting is to see if we can sequence the genomes of these organisms and find out how their evolution and gene expression are influenced by a microgravity environment.

      --
      'He who has to break a thing to find out what it is, has left the path of wisdom.' -- Gandalf to Saruman
    4. Re:ISS pays for itself in these ways by gravewax · · Score: 1

      We don't need a space station to test this. Every surface of your environment and your own body inside and out is completely covered in bacteria and micro organisms. I would have been far more shocked to find they had somehow created a relatively sterile environment that has humans inside, it simply isn't possible.

    5. Re:ISS pays for itself in these ways by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The point is that no-one has ever tried having an isolated, in-orbit habitat with decades of the stuff in it. Now we know nothing bad will happen if we set something similar up on the Moon or Mars, for example.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    6. Re:ISS pays for itself in these ways by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      What?
      You can't have a Moon colony without HUMANS. Do you really think we should just stay on Earth for as long as our species is alive? If so then we've got nothing to talk about.

    7. Re:ISS pays for itself in these ways by F.Ultra · · Score: 2

      They have conducted lots of such tests with e-coli: https://www.nasa.gov/mission_p...

    8. Re:ISS pays for itself in these ways by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      *sigh*
      You're just not getting it are you? In order to build closed, self-contained enviroments that are sustainable, we need to know the effects of these things so we can design lifesystems and procedures that can deal with it effectively. That's the whole point of my comment, which apparently you completely missed.

    9. Re:ISS pays for itself in these ways by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      Such studies have been done (over 2000) for decades, here is one: https://mic.microbiologyresear...

    10. Re:ISS pays for itself in these ways by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      You can't have a Moon colony without HUMANS.

      A human colony on the moon is pointless as long as it is dependent on supplies from earth, and we are a long long way from building a self-sustaining colony.

      In the meantime, robot missions are the way to go.

    11. Re:ISS pays for itself in these ways by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      When you live in a totally closed environment you have to consider many many more factors than you would in an 'open' environment, like your house or office or the Earth for that matter. When you have to scrub air and water and convert waste in order to recycle them in a closed loop (like the ISS) things that normally would be self-regulating or easily handled may become a major deal-breaking issue. I don't even have to be an Environmental Engineer with PhDs to see that.

    12. Re:ISS pays for itself in these ways by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Exactly, precisely this. :-)

    13. Re:ISS pays for itself in these ways by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      See: https://slashdot.org/comments.... also-reread my original comment: https://slashdot.org/comments....

    14. Re:ISS pays for itself in these ways by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Congrats, you're the 2nd person in this thread to totally get what I'm talking about. :-) You ACs are cleaning up on this one. ;-)

    15. Re:ISS pays for itself in these ways by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      -1, Off-topic. :-(

    16. Re:ISS pays for itself in these ways by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      If you say so, Luddite Troll. Do be sure to run around waving your arms and yelling about how it's going to fail and everybody is going to die, when they actually start building a Moon colony, we wouldn't want you to be bored. ;-)

    17. Re:ISS pays for itself in these ways by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      *sigh* See 2nd line (1st line doesn't apply to you) of this: https://slashdot.org/comments....

    18. Re:ISS pays for itself in these ways by strikethree · · Score: 1

      There is nothing in TFA to indicate what they found is abnormal.

      What is abnormal is the ecosystem surrounding all of this. On the planet, the entire planet is essentially the ecosystem. Checks and balances are already built in.

      The ISS is an entirely different ecosystem than the planet. The checks and balances found here on the planet do not apply to that ecosystem.

      That leads us to the supreme question regarding all of this:

      How do these very common and normal bacteria behave when the normal checks and balances are no longer present?

      TL;DR, that bacteria are normal, but the environment is abnormal.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
  3. Periodic venting to vacuum? by OldMugwump · · Score: 1

    Can't they just vent sections of the station to vacuum to (semi-) sterilize things? Move everybody to other sections, close the hatches, vent. Wait 48 hours. Then restore air pressure and come back. Repeat every so often with each section.

    --
    "Shoot, a fella could have a pretty good weekend in Vegas with all that stuff."
    1. Re:Periodic venting to vacuum? by mentil · · Score: 1

      Microbes stuck to surfaces wouldn't all be pushed out into the vacuum, because there's no air in-between them and the surface, and they may hide in a crevice/scratch that air rushes past. Furthermore, there are plenty of surfaces that move and are only exposed when in certain positions (say, a headphone jack when not plugged in).

      A more effective solution might be to have moveable radiation shielding, have the crew move to a shielded section and fry the other sections enough to kill the microbes, then repeat for the section they were holed up in.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    2. Re:Periodic venting to vacuum? by religionofpeas · · Score: 2

      A more effective solution might be to have moveable radiation shielding, have the crew move to a shielded section and fry the other sections enough to kill the microbes, then repeat for the section they were holed up in.

      That sounds like an excellent way to deteriorate all the materials inside the ISS.

    3. Re:Periodic venting to vacuum? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A more effective solution might be to have moveable radiation shielding, have the crew move to a shielded section and fry the other sections enough to kill the microbes, then repeat for the section they were holed up in.

      That sounds like an excellent way to deteriorate all the materials inside the ISS.

      ... and to select for radiation-resistant fungi and bacteria

    4. Re:Periodic venting to vacuum? by Hodr · · Score: 2

      Would be easier to put up UVC lighting for occasional sterilization, or shut off a room and turn on an ozone generator for a bit and wait for it to break down to acceptable levels before going back in.

    5. Re:Periodic venting to vacuum? by v1 · · Score: 1

      and to select for radiation-resistant fungi and bacteria

      Well, anything you do to try to kill bacteria that's not 100% effective will do that.

      The only response we really have for that right now is to use "multispectral" antibiotics - using several things at a time to kill them, to get the odds as close to 100% as possible by killing bacteria that have evolved a resistance to one of the included methods.

      Sadly, this just means that we are selecting for superbugs now. (microbes that are resistant to all of the common treatments at once) The odds of getting one is very low since they have to spontaneously develop immunity to multiple attacks, but the odds are not zero, and we're starting to see them as a result.

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    6. Re:Periodic venting to vacuum? by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Will never kill the fromundacheese.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    7. Re:Periodic venting to vacuum? by freeze128 · · Score: 1

      If we have learned ANYTHING from SciFi movies, it's that alien bacteria *LOVES* radiation.

    8. Re:Periodic venting to vacuum? by rahvin112 · · Score: 1

      Ozone is highly corrosive, if would be a very bad thing to be making it on the space station.

      The appropriate response to this issue is simply to examine the colonies of microbiological life and determine if any of them are a threat to the station or it's occupants. You can't sterilize anything humans interact with on a daily basis. It would be an utterly pointless action because the first human back in would immediately recontaminate everything. We are covered in microbiological life, its all over us and we transfer it to everything we touch and with every breath we take, not to mention the toilet transfer issue.

    9. Re:Periodic venting to vacuum? by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      Can't they just vent sections of the station to vacuum to (semi-) sterilize things?

      Wouldn't work. Not only that that probably wouldn't sterilize anything, but last time they did this test, they even found bacteria on the outside of the ISS.

  4. Mir went the same way by SpinyManiac · · Score: 2

    After 15 years Mir had 140 known micro-organisms. It also stank.
    The ISS has been up for 20 years with another 11 to go. It's going to get pretty foul up there!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    --
    It's never too late to have a happy childhood.
    1. Re:Mir went the same way by DickBreath · · Score: 1

      This problem was well known on Mir. I think the ISS took precautions being aware of it. Yet the problem develops, albeit more slowly.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
  5. Vacuum cleaner needed! by LordHighExecutioner · · Score: 1

    ESA should ask iRobot to develop a Roomba model for the ISS.

    1. Re:Vacuum cleaner needed! by darkain · · Score: 5, Funny

      If they need a vacuum cleaner, I'm sure all they have to do is open the door to find one

  6. Who says you can't take it with you? by Humbubba · · Score: 1

    90% of the cells in our bodies aren't human, and with people coming to ISS from around the world, who's surprised that some of this micro-biodiversity gets spread around? Think micronauts hitching rides with astronauts they were hanging around with at the time.

    1. Re:Who says you can't take it with you? by DickBreath · · Score: 1

      In "The Andromeda Strain" (movie, book) there was some fictional regimen for cleaning humans.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
  7. Steam vapor cleaner for ISS by steveha · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The article suggests that formation of biofilms could lead to problems.

    The ISS needs a good way to kill biofilms and leave surfaces really clean. However, as a closed system, the ISS needs to be careful about chemicals, and it's expensive to ship anything up there.

    Therefore I suggest the ISS should use a steam vapor cleaner. The ISS has plenty of water, and its environmental system already has to be able to remove water vapor from the air. I commented about steam vapor cleaners in another story from last August, and cited studies about their effectiveness:

    https://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12424966&cid=57052404

    I found a link to a study showing that a particular model of commercial steam vapor cleaner was effective against biofilms, but I don't know if other good models are equally effective or if there was something specific about that one.

    I wonder if it would be feasible to simply take an off-the-shelf steam vapor cleaner to the ISS. I don't know what their power budget is... the steam vapor cleaner I bought (a Vapamore MR-100) has a 1500 Watt heater, according to its manual. I know the ISS has a lot of solar cells but I don't know whether 1500 Watts would be a problem or not. Also, filling the water tank in microgravity might be a problem.

    --
    lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    1. Re: Steam vapor cleaner for ISS by ToTheStars · · Score: 1

      That's the maximum power capacity of the solar panels in direct sunlight; take into account that the station can spend up to 40% of its orbit in eclipse, and the power budget is more like 70 kW at best. Still not impossible to accommodate 1.5 kW for a steam-cleaner, but it's something that should only be used as needed.

    2. Re:Steam vapor cleaner for ISS by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Steam cleaning a steel can that has humans and electronics in it. Possibly the most retarded idea I will encounter today.

      It's actually an Aluminum can, but sadly, they did have to use high strength steel for structural members. Consequently, there is the risk of corrosion, although I'd imagine that the steel members were treated aggressively for corrosion resistance. Even in the mundane world of terrestrial vehicles, that is a fairly well-solved problem when one is willing to throw money at it. Powder coating, epoxy coatings, metallic passivation, sacrificial anodes...

      They just need a UV lamp.

      The surfaces actually have to be cleaned, and the UV itself will have a deleterious effect on plastic elements. They would have to have been designed for steam cleaning, though. The astronauts aboard the ISS currently use a spray biocide to clean surfaces, but these organisms have other places to live — such as on (and in) the astronauts themselves.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Steam vapor cleaner for ISS by steveha · · Score: 1

      [Surfaces in the ISS] would have to have been designed for steam cleaning, though.

      I'm not sure of that. My house wasn't particularly designed for steam cleaning and it works quite well.

      My biggest concern would be whether plastics might outgas some vapors when steam cleaned. In a house one needn't worry too much; one can just open a window. Obviously not an option in the ISS.

      NASA being NASA, they won't just ship up a cleaner, they will run tests and studies for a long time. This is bad because they take forever to do things, but this is good because they can avoid risks.

      In principle a steam vapor cleaner ought to work as well in microgravity as on Earth, once the tank is filled. The one I bought doesn't have any pumps, it just uses steam pressure to spray out the steam.

      --
      lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
  8. The world is a dirty place, get over it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    There are bacteria everywhere, on every surface. There is no such thing as a sterile environment, anywhere. The instant you wipe down anything, floating things that landing on it.

  9. no difference by sad_ · · Score: 1

    so no difference between earth or space station?

    --
    On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
    1. Re:no difference by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      More precisely, no difference between the space station and the bathrooms of a fast-food joint.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
  10. That's...pretty slow by argStyopa · · Score: 1

    The last set of samples was taken 3 YEARS ago and they're only publishing now?

    That's slow even for government labs.

    Well, we wanted "life in space"...

    --
    -Styopa
  11. Why.... by MerlTurkin · · Score: 1

    ....is this such a surprise? If astronauts can live in the ISS so can bacteria and fungi. IIRC bacteria was found on the surveyor spacecraft by the Apollo astronauts on the Moon back in the day as well.

  12. Open the doors for a few hours by jfdavis668 · · Score: 1

    Sounds like it could use a good airing out. Literally.

  13. Communication problem by Dunbal · · Score: 1

    They're still waiting for the cleaning lady to show up.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    1. Re:Communication problem by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      No... no... Me stay home.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
  14. Re:Steam vapor? Really? by Gilgaron · · Score: 1

    The other standard methods of decontaminating an arbitrary surface are bleach, or vaporized peroxide, so if the steam works it might actually be less harsh. The trouble with decontaminating stuff in space is that you're already selecting for extra hardy organisms. Thinking about hardy organisms living in NEO, I wonder if water bears would eat the biofilm on the ISS...

  15. Pull a "portable sun" through it? by ZoomieDood · · Score: 1

    Doesn't the various spectrums of light disinfect and remove various nasties?

    Perhaps install very bright lights throughout the space station, throw open the windows and air out the place.

    That always worked back on the farm!

  16. Hundreds of astronauts by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    Since it was first established in 1998, the International Space Station has been visited by hundreds of astronauts (227 to be exact).

    So, exactly 2.27 hundred astronauts.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  17. Re:So is every single human being by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  18. UV? Ozone? by Gabest · · Score: 1

    How well could these sterilize the rooms?

  19. UV works. by OwP_Fabricated · · Score: 1

    Strong UV kills basically everything- it doesn't clear the organisms themselves (that still requires elbow grease) but if airborne/surface pathogens are an issue maybe sealing a room with some VERY strong UV lights for an hour or so would KO everything in the air and a majority of what is on the surfaces that are actively touched by the astronauts, which could then be manually cleaned.

    Now stuff that's buried in whatever's behind the walls, that's another trick entirely.

    1. Re:UV works. by rahvin112 · · Score: 1

      Do you believe the ISS is basically a bare room or do you think UV light penetrates into compartments, computers, and the various layers of the station?

  20. Congratulations, AC! You just invented a new word! by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    Did you mean: hydronaut

    No results containing all your search terms were found.

    Your search - hundronaut - did not match any documents.

    Suggestions:
    * Make sure that all words are spelled correctly.
    * Try different keywords.
    * Try more general keywords.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  21. UV exposure by DrYak · · Score: 1

    But UV does.

    ...only those bacteria that are exposed directly to the UV radiation.

    Bacteria ('s spores) could be hidden in small recesses, cracks on surface, etc.
    Bacteria ('s spores) could be hidden beneath a sheat of biofilm that would absorb some part of the UV light.

    That will cause some of the spores to survive, and once atmosphere is re-established, to grow back into live bacteria colonies.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  22. BEAM by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    BEAm is Bigelow inflatable. I would be curious to see how that is doing.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  23. What else would anyone expect? by Kreplock · · Score: 1

    Basically, anything that humans or animals come into physical contact with ultimately becomes covered in a thin veneer of bacterial feces. The fact that the ISS is floating in space does nothing to halt this process in the environmentally controlled areas.

  24. bug phun by thunderclees · · Score: 1

    Its all of that dirty space sechs.

  25. "microbial influenced corrosion..." by ItsJustAPseudonym · · Score: 1

    It's like some kind of...molecular acid.

  26. Re:Steam vapor? Really? by rahvin112 · · Score: 1

    You don't think the ISS is actually made of steel or iron based products do you?

    The ISS is constructed of plastic and aluminum. I'd be surprised if there was more than 100lbs of steel on the whole station.

  27. Awesome - send ISS to Mars by BeerMilkshake · · Score: 1

    Life begins simply - send the space station to Mars and colonize it, with fungi

  28. Hmm by Snufu · · Score: 1

    Seems like putting meat bags into space comes with some complications.

  29. Mars landers must be cooked well over 100 deg C by aberglas · · Score: 1

    In order to make them sterile, so we do not contaminate Mars. If we do find life there, we want to know that we did not bring it with us.

    It might be difficult to find astronauts that are willing to go through that procedure...

  30. Re:As stated elsewhere: by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

    Congrats, you're the 3rd person to 'get it'. :-)
    Right, all the data we get from things like this will go into designing better, more robust, comprehensive lifesystems in space and for offworld colonies.