1998PubMedRequires access

Insight into mechanisms of reduced orthostatic performance after exposure to microgravity: comparison of ground-based and space flight data.

Víctor A. Convertino

Open publisher page 7 citations

Abstract

Since the beginning of human spaceflight, the value of understanding mechanisms of physiological adaptation to microgravity became apparent to life scientists who were interested in maintining crew health and developing countermeasures agains adverse effects of the mission. However, several characteristics associated the the logistics of spaceflight presented significant limitations to the scientific study of human adaptation to microgravity. Because space missions are so infrequent and involve minimal numbers of crewmembers, meaninful statistical analysis of data are limited. Reproducibility of results from spaceflight experiments is difficult to assess since there are few repeated space missions involving the same crewmembers. Since the emphasis of space missions is placed on operations, experiments are compromised without adequate control over various factors (e.g., time, diet, physical activities, etc.) that can impact measured responses. With the mimimal opportunity to collect spaceflight data, there is a high risk of experiments that simultaneously interfere with other experiments by the increasing demand on the crewmembers to participate in mumerous experiments proposed by multiple investigators. The technology and ability to measure physiological functions necessary to test specific hypotheses can be severely limited by physical space and power constraints of the space enviroment. Finally, technical and logistical aspects of space missions such as launch delays, extended missions, and inflight operational emergencies can significantly compromise the timing and control of experiments. These limitations have stimulated scientists to develop ground-based analogs of microgravity in an effort to investigate the effects of spaceflight on physiological function in a controlled experimental setting. The purpose of this paper is to provide a selected comparison of data collected from ground-based experiments with those obtained from spaceflight in an effort to assess the adequacy of ground analogs of actual flight for the study of human physiological adaptation to microgravity. Specifically, results from ground and spaceflight will be used to provide insight into mechanisms underlying adaptations of blood pressure regulation and reduced orthostatic performance to the microgravity environment.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Since the beginning of human spaceflight, the value of understanding mechanisms of physiological adaptation to microgravity became apparent to life scientists who were interested in maintining crew health and developing countermeasures agains adverse effects of the mission. However, several characteristics associated the the logistics of spaceflight presented significant limitations to the scientific study of human adaptation to microgravity. Because space missions are so infrequent and involve minimal numbers of crewmembers, meaninful statistical analysis of data are limited. Reproducibility of results from spaceflight experiments is difficult to assess since there are few repeated space missions involving the same crewmembers. Since the emphasis of space missions is placed on operations, experiments are compromised without adequate control over various factors (e.g., time, diet, physical activities, etc.) that can impact measured responses. With the mimimal opportunity to collect spaceflight data, there is a high risk of experiments that simultaneously interfere with other experiments by the increasing demand on the crewmembers to participate in mumerous experiments proposed by multiple investigators. The technology and ability to measure physiological functions necessary to test specific hypotheses can be severely limited by physical space and power constraints of the space enviroment. Finally, technical and logistical aspects of space missions such as launch delays, extended missions, and inflight operational emergencies can significantly compromise the timing and control of experiments. These limitations have stimulated scientists to develop ground-based analogs of microgravity in an effort to investigate the effects of spaceflight on physiological function in a controlled experimental setting. The purpose of this paper is to provide a selected comparison of data collected from ground-based experiments with those obtained from spaceflight in an effort to assess the adequacy of ground analogs of actual flight for the study of human physiological adaptation to microgravity. Specifically, results from ground and spaceflight will be used to provide insight into mechanisms underlying adaptations of blood pressure regulation and reduced orthostatic performance to the microgravity environment.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 7 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Since the beginning of human spaceflight, the value of understanding mechanisms of physiological adaptation to microgravity became apparent to life scientists who were interested in maintining crew health and developing countermeasures agains adverse effects of the mission. However, several characteristics associated the the logistics of spaceflight presented significant limitations to the scientific study of human adaptation to microgravity. Because space missions are so infrequent and involve minimal numbers of crewmembers, meaninful statistical analysis of data are limited. Reproducibility of results from spaceflight experiments is difficult to assess since there are few repeated space missions involving the same crewmembers. Since the emphasis of space missions is placed on operations, experiments are compromised without adequate control over various factors (e.g., time, diet, physical activities, etc.) that can impact measured responses. With the mimimal opportunity to collect spaceflight data, there is a high risk of experiments that simultaneously interfere with other experiments by the increasing demand on the crewmembers to participate in mumerous experiments proposed by multiple investigators. The technology and ability to measure physiological functions necessary to test specific hypotheses can be severely limited by physical space and power constraints of the space enviroment. Finally, technical and logistical aspects of space missions such as launch delays, extended missions, and inflight operational emergencies can significantly compromise the timing and control of experiments. These limitations have stimulated scientists to develop ground-based analogs of microgravity in an effort to investigate the effects of spaceflight on physiological function in a controlled experimental setting. The purpose of this paper is to provide a selected comparison of data collected from ground-based experiments with those obtained from spaceflight in an effort to assess the adequacy of ground analogs of actual flight for the study of human physiological adaptation to microgravity. Specifically, results from ground and spaceflight will be used to provide insight into mechanisms underlying adaptations of blood pressure regulation and reduced orthostatic performance to the microgravity environment.

Key concepts: Spaceflight, Crew, Human spaceflight, Aeronautics, Space exploration, Weightlessness, Adaptation (eye), Computer science

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Insight into mechanisms of reduced orthostatic performance after exposure to microgravity: comparison of ground-based and space flight data. — Research Paper | ScholarLens