Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion GroupsSpace ScienceAstronomyAmateur AstronomySpace FlightSpace StationShuttleSpace HistorySpace PolicySETI
SpaceKB.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Space Forum / Shuttle / September 2007



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

"Germs taken into space return meaner than before" -- or DO they?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Jim Oberg - 25 Sep 2007 17:01 GMT
JimO: This doesn't make any sense to me. Germs have been hitchhiking
into space for almost fifty years, exposed to space conditions for months,
even
years aboard space stations, and no infectuous increase seems to have been
noticed -- far from it, long-term crewmembers see their immune systems
relaxing in
the absence of everyday earthside continual infectuous onslaughts. Is it
POSSIBLE
that these effect is due mostly, or entirely, to the procedure used?

Please help me understand.

Germs taken into space return meaner than before
By Randolph E. Schmid, Associated Press
  WASHINGTON - It sounds like the plot for a scary B-movie: Germs go into
space on a rocket and come back stronger and deadlier than ever.
  Except, it really happened.
  The germ: Salmonella, best known as a culprit of food poisoning.
  The trip: Space Shuttle STS-115, September 2006.
  The reason: Scientists wanted to see how space travel affects germs, so
they took some along - carefully wrapped - for the ride.
  The result: Mice fed the space germs were three times more likely to get
sick and died quicker than others fed identical germs that had remained
behind on Earth.
Brian Gaff - 26 Sep 2007 00:05 GMT
Sounds like only half the story to me.

I mean, was there a control bunch of these  germs )not a term really useded
by those who know bacteria etc) which stayed grounded while the others rode
to orbit?

Brian

Signature

Brian Gaff - briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
Blind user, so no pictures please!

>
> JimO: This doesn't make any sense to me. Germs have been hitchhiking
[quoted text clipped - 21 lines]
> sick and died quicker than others fed identical germs that had remained
> behind on Earth.
Jim Kingdon - 26 Sep 2007 15:33 GMT
> I mean, was there a control bunch of these  germs )not a term really useded
> by those who know bacteria etc) which stayed grounded while the others rode
> to orbit?

Yes, they did have a control.  Here is the university's own press
release, which has more details than the AP story:

http://www.biodesign.asu.edu/news/space-flight-shown-to-alter-ability-of-bacteri
a-to-cause-disease


I didn't find the actual paper at http://www.pnas.org/; neither the
asu.edu page nor the AP story seem to say which issue it was published
it (or will be published in).

Also note that they have been looking into this for a while.
There are papers which list Cheryl Nickerson as one of the authors
from 2000 and 2002, both of which concern Salmonella virulence and
microgravity (for the 2000 and 2002 papers, "modeled microgravity"
which seems to be some kind of ground-based analogue to true
weightlessness):

http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/99/21/13807
http://iai.asm.org/cgi/content/abstract/68/6/3147
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.