NASA Advised To Rethink Astronaut Radiation Exposure Limits
Report: NASA Should Update Astronaut Radiation Exposure Limits, Improve Communication of Cancer Risks
“The report recommends that NASA proceed with its proposed single standard dose limit for all astronauts, which is based on “risk of exposure-induced death” (REID) calculations for a 35-year-old female (who is considered most susceptible to radiation-induced cancer risk). Currently, men and women astronauts have different allowable doses of radiation, based on their reported relative susceptibilities to different radiation-induced cancers. This means that women astronauts currently cannot fly as many days in space because they would reach the radiation limit sooner. Applying the same dose limits to all astronauts would create equality of opportunity, but the agency should also consider the trade-offs. A single standard for men and women would mean some astronauts, primarily women, would be subject to greater risk by the time they reach the exposure limit.”
Well, there’s equal opportunity and then there’s equal opportunity.
Specifically, what we have here is equal opportunity to get cancer (which means women must fly less total hours than men) vs. equal opportunity to fly (which would mean women would be able to fly the same total hours as men).
Interesting ethical dilemma
Nevertheless, it must be remembered that a male is less likely to die as a result of expose to radiation than a woman simply because male life expectancy is lower and the male, especially an older male, is statistically likely to die of something else before the radiation exposure ever has time to manifest itself as cancer
Speaking as a former radiation worker (30+ years), this is all bunch of hormone washing to justify equal doses (and therefore missions for both genders) when the real question should be “is Linear No Threshold valid”? That is highly debatable, and IMO it is not.
Also, whatever happened to “I know the risks, sign me up anyway”?
Don’t throw out the science in favor of political correctness, please.