Slashdot Mirror


Final Results of NASA Twins Study Show How Scott Kelly Changed After a Year In Space (gizmodo.com)

The final findings of the NASA Twins Study, which compared 50-year-old astronaut Scott Kelly, who spent a year aboard the International Space Station in 2015, and his identical twin brother, who stayed on Earth, were published in Science. Gizmodo reports: NASA found that Scott Kelly was about as mentally, physically, and genetically healthy as his brother during his trip to space, and that the vast majority of small changes spotted in Scott (relative to himself before the mission) went back to normal within six months time. But the differences seen in Scott while up in space and after his return home could provide NASA important leads on how to keep astronauts safe during longer missions to Mars and beyond.

Preliminary results from the study were released in 2017. But it was the second round of findings, released in January 2018, that really caught the attention of media outlets, some of which misrepresented what was found. In particular, outlets like Newsweek reported that a whopping "seven percent of [Scott Kelly's] genes did not return to normal after he landed." Others implied that Scott Kelly had become a different person from his twin brother. But the researchers were never talking about a seven percent difference between the twins' genes. They were saying that some of Scott Kelly's genes had changed in their expression -- the carrying out of instructions in a cell's genome -- during his time up in space. And that roughly 7 percent of this overall change in gene expression could still be seen six months after he returned home.
The remaining change in gene expression six months out was actually closer to 10 percent, but NASA clarified that this was still a relatively tiny change in his epigenetics. "Given that the majority of the biological and human health variables remained stable, or returned to baseline, these data suggest that human health can be mostly sustained over this duration of spaceflight," said NASA in a statement.

43 comments

  1. space faring us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why are we only just doing this now? There's so much still to learn and yet here we are, living in the future and we're stuck here wondering what a lousy year in orbit does with a control sample. Get your goddamn act together, humanity, for fucks sake we need to leave before we finish destroying this place and rendering it uninhabitable.

    1. Re:space faring us by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      we need to leave

      And go where?

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    2. Re:space faring us by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      for fucks sake we need to leave before we finish destroying this place and rendering it uninhabitable.

      What makes you think we wouldn't make any other place uninhabitable just as quickly ?

    3. Re: space faring us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If less than a week outside the magnetosphere quadruples atherosclerosis, what will years do?

  2. Don't Panic. by geekmux · · Score: 3, Funny

    "... these data suggest that human health can be mostly sustained..."

    That description sounds so familiar...

    (Ford Prefect expands entry for Earth in the Guide)

    Ah, yes. No wonder my confidence level is still a bit low regarding intergalactic travel.

    1. Re:Don't Panic. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, yes. No wonder my confidence level is still a bit low regarding intergalactic travel.

      Gee, how about if we figure out interstellar travel first, and then work on intergalactic?
      /me thinks there's plenty of places to go in this galaxy first.

    2. Re:Don't Panic. by geekmux · · Score: 1

      Ah, yes. No wonder my confidence level is still a bit low regarding intergalactic travel.

      Gee, how about if we figure out interstellar travel first, and then work on intergalactic? /me thinks there's plenty of places to go in this galaxy first.

      Fair point, but either distance is irrelevant and will be for a very long time.

      We're damn good at talking about how "places" are "only" light years away. We're nowhere near solving the travel problem. We can't even travel the distance of a single light minute efficiently.

  3. Not so much by TimothyHollins · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If 10% of genes show different expression levels from his twin brother, that's pretty much meaningless from a biological standpoint. Sitting vs standing will alter expression levels, eating vs fasting. The differing levels here (according to the report) include both those created by natural variation and those attributed to space-time (which would also include things like extended sitting vs standing or however the body treats long-term weightlessness). Twins aren't perfect copies of each other, they are still affected by life just like everyone else; stress, physical fitness, eating habits, infections, and all the rest, will still affect them and create differences. A persistent infection (something slow and lowkey, such as HPV16) could easily cause a longterm difference in gene expression as immune-response related genes would continuously need to be expressed.

    We all have natural variation in gene expression. Compare yourself to your sibling and you will find it. Some of it comes from genetic variance (mutations or extra copies of genes either inherited from your parents or developed as you are exposed to things like sunlight, viruses, radiation etc), some of it comes from epigenetic variance (what you eat, what you put in your bloodstream, stress levels, exposure to unpleasant things, viruses, etc), and some of it comes from royally fudged gene regulation (when either of the two earlier factors localizes in the "anchor" sites of the DNA which will affect a large cluster of genes in interesting ways).

    In short, no one is turning into a mutant, no one is getting any super powers.

    1. Re:Not so much by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      OTOH if 7% of his genes had changed then he'd be a chimpanzee.

      What kind of clueless journalist would publish that 7% of somebody's DNA could change?

      --
      No sig today...
    2. Re: Not so much by illiac_1962 · · Score: 1

      Whoops. Didn't know the recovery would be asymptotic to the inverse of log(n) effects. Sorry. The longer you are weightless the faster you die. Effects infinite.

    3. Re:Not so much by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Researchers now know that 93% of Scott’s genes returned to normal after landing. However, the remaining 7% point to possible longer term changes in genes related to his immune system, DNA repair, bone formation networks, hypoxia, and hypercapnia.

      I agree that having been doing certain physical behaviors could alter gene expression. It shows that human bodies attempt to adjust to the environment around us. Though, the 7% or 10% they were talking about is NOT the number differences compared to his twin brother but HIS OWN gene expression BEFORE A FLIGHT. Your point, even though is valid, is not actually directed to what NASA article mentioned by TFA is talking about.

    4. Re:Not so much by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even though Gene and DNA are directly related, Gene != DNA.

  4. Lamarck Space Station by m.alessandrini · · Score: 1

    So according to newspapers Lamarck rules in space? That would be his final revenge.

    1. Re:Lamarck Space Station by religionofpeas · · Score: 2

      No, the actual DNA is not changed, but it is tagged in certain places, so the cells can adjust the amount of proteins they generate depending on requirement. This happens all the time. If you go exercising or change your diet, then your gene expression is also modified.

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

    2. Re:Lamarck Space Station by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      No, the actual DNA is not changed, but it is tagged in certain places, so the cells can adjust the amount of proteins they generate depending on requirement. This happens all the time. If you go exercising or change your diet, then your gene expression is also modified.

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

      Yeah, While they write gene expression, probably 75 percent of us think "gene mutation".

      I was impressed that after that period in space, that Kelly is back to normal.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  5. Newsweek isn't the old Newsweek anymore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Newsweek went out of business a few years back and a scummy publisher bought the rights to the name "Newsweek" and started publishing "news" more appropriate to the Weekly World News. It's no longer a weekly source of high-class journalism. It's now a daily source of sensationalism and throw-away click-bait articles.

    1. Re:Newsweek isn't the old Newsweek anymore by ItsJustAPseudonym · · Score: 1

      News Weak

  6. over this duration of spaceflight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... in this low earth orbit and behind this space station shielding.

  7. 7% change in Genes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "7% change in Genes, that is like: His is still a mammal, Right?"

    1. Re:7% change in Genes by IwantaWaffleIron · · Score: 1

      A chimp shares 96% of our DNA. a cat 90%. a banana 60%.

    2. Re: 7% change in Genes by illiac_1962 · · Score: 1

      Middle aged male in lycra? Likely.

  8. Hard Facts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Humans will never live on another planet on a permanent basis. We will never even live on the moon on a permanent basis. Space is so big that we can travel for so long that every one of your ancestors could live and die again and we will not reach another solar system.

  9. Seemed to damage his spine... by dfenstrate · · Score: 2

    Astronaut Scott Kelly was bold enough to strap himself into a rocket, take a ride into space and stay on the ISS for a year....
    But after he came back, he lacked the fortitude to tell some angry cranks to go pound sand when they got upset that he quoted Winston Churchill. He even bowed and scraped trying to get back in their good graces. That's some significant deterioration that may have been outside the scope of NASA's health research.
    https://www.washingtonexaminer...

    --
    Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
    1. Re:Seemed to damage his spine... by Jzanu · · Score: 0, Troll

      Churchill was not worth respecting. For propoganda and use in defeating Nazism he was useful, but as a person he was a horrible man. Outside of Europe he was a horrible person and very nearly himself a war criminal.

    2. Re:Seemed to damage his spine... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lol you linked to an opinion piece.

    3. Re: Seemed to damage his spine... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Check the mentioned events yourself, there are dozens if not actually hundreds or thousands by day easily found that show Churchill was Hitler for the British. Putin in contrast IS a war criminal.

    4. Re:Seemed to damage his spine... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Churchill was not worth respecting. For propoganda and use in defeating Nazism he was useful, but as a person he was a horrible man. Outside of Europe he was a horrible person and very nearly himself a war criminal.

      Sometimes the hero is not a saint.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    5. Re:Seemed to damage his spine... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The "hero" was a genocidal mass murderer who actually killed thousands with banned chemical weapons, indiscriminate aerial bombing, and old-fashioned burning, raping, and pillaging - but it somehow didn't count because it was all brown people.

      Not a saint for certain. But he was the guy you wanted when old Adolph and his lads came calling.

      Of course, that isn't the case if you would rather be under national socialist rule now.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    6. Re:Seemed to damage his spine... by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      Outside of Europe he was a horrible person and very nearly himself a war criminal.

      So, like both Bushes, or like Obama? Or Trump, of course, drone strikes have actually increased under Trump, to a secret extent. Obama promised the most transparent administration in history, and delivered the least; Trump's is even more opaque.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    7. Re:Seemed to damage his spine... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, that isn't the case if you would rather be under national socialist rule now.

      It's looking better and better every day. We traded everything for cheap Chinese trinkets and imported people to replace us.

    8. Re:Seemed to damage his spine... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great hatchet job. I'd stack up Churchill against you or any other human being for accomplishments, integrity, education, oration, and simply being an interesting person.

      If you had said he wasn't a perfect person, OK I'd support that. Instead you said "Churchill was not worth respecting."

      Your opinion isn't worth respecting, in this instance.

  10. But the most interesting bit was the telepathy. by sabbede · · Score: 1

    Little weird though that he came back and married his grand-niece.

  11. Initial Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As I have yet to read much up on this, yet, are these affects solely due to the lack of gravity exhibited on the body?

    If the same experiment were performed, yet the whole year in space was in a centrifuge supplementing artificial gravity, would we still see the same outcome?

    I'd really like to know if that alone, limits quit a bit of the alterations being seen on the body from this outcome.

  12. Different person! by fanblade · · Score: 1

    âoeOthers implied that Scott Kelly had become a different person from his twin brother.â

    How ridiculous. /s

  13. Heart Disease by Zorro · · Score: 1

    Pretty sure Nasa found that space does cause some heart disease.

    They think it is radiation.

  14. wait, we can't trust newsweek? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We can't trust Newsweek ... ?!

    Next they're going to be telling me that the Washington Post is a questionable news source or that Hillary might lose the 2016 election !

  15. He was cranky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...because his wife got pregnant while he was in space.

  16. They forgot the most detrimental change. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He BECAME A POLITICIAN ! Clearly this needs to be looked into for some sort of cure.