The DOI matches its Crossref record; 70 of the 70 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 93 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit
Open accessAbstract
Projecting a vision for space radiobiological research necessitates understanding the nature of the space radiation environment and how radiation risks influence mission planning, timelines and operational decisions. Exposure to space radiation increases the risks of astronauts developing cancer, experiencing central nervous system (CNS) decrements, exhibiting degenerative tissue effects or developing acute radiation syndrome. One or more of these deleterious health effects could develop during future multi-year space exploration missions beyond low Earth orbit (LEO). Shielding is an effective countermeasure against solar particle events (SPEs), but is ineffective in protecting crew members from the biological impacts of fast moving, highly-charged galactic cosmic radiation (GCR) nuclei. Astronauts traveling on a protracted voyage to Mars may be exposed to SPE radiation events, overlaid on a more predictable flux of GCR. Therefore, ground-based research studies employing model organisms seeking to accurately mimic the biological effects of the space radiation environment must concatenate exposures to both proton and heavy ion sources. New techniques in genomics, proteomics, metabolomics and other “omics” areas should also be intelligently employed and correlated with phenotypic observations. This approach will more precisely elucidate the effects of space radiation on human physiology and aid in developing personalized radiological countermeasures for astronauts.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This review argues that space radiation is the number one health risk for astronauts beyond low Earth orbit, driven by galactic cosmic radiation (GCR) and solar particle events (SPEs). It summarizes NASA’s four radiation risk areas—carcinogenesis, degenerative tissue effects, CNS decrements, and acute radiation syndrome—and calls for combined proton/heavy-ion exposures and integrated omics in ground-based research.
Key findings
- Space radiation beyond LEO combines GCR and SPEs; GCR is approximately 87% protons, 12% alpha particles, and 1%–2% HZE nuclei with charges from Z = 3 to about Z = 28. SPEs can produce fluences in excess of 10^9 protons/cm², with dose rates from zero to 100 mGy/h inside a space vehicle and zero to 500 mGy/h during EVA.
- NASA identifies four primary biomedical risks: carcinogenesis, degenerative tissue effects, CNS decrements, and acute radiation syndrome. ISS mission doses were typically greater than 70 mSv; career effective dose limits vary by age and sex, e.g., 520 mSv for a 25-year-old male astronaut and 370 mSv for a 25-year-old female astronaut.
- CNS studies report that 20 cGy of 1 GeV/u 56Fe particles impairs learning and memory in rodents, proton radiation causes neurocognitive deficits at doses as low as 25 cGy, and ferret emesis/retching occurs at doses as low as 50 cGy. SPE-like radiation suppressed immune system function at doses as low as 1.0 Gy in a mini-pig model.
- Shielding is effective against SPEs but ineffective against the biological impacts of fast-moving GCR HZE nuclei; the paper recommends concatenating proton and heavy-ion exposures in low-dose regimens and using omics techniques correlated with phenotypic observations.
Methods
- Narrative review synthesizing the space radiation environment, NCRP and National Research Council reports, NASA evidence reports, astronaut cytogenetic data, and animal studies including rodent, ferret, and mini-pig models.
- No systematic search strategy, inclusion criteria, or meta-analysis is described; the text presents no primary data collection or formal statistical analysis methods.
Limitations
- Stated: morbidity risk and unique toxicity profiles remain poorly understood, and uncertainties in dose toxicity plus complex SPE/GCR spectra limit dose projections.
- Stated: animal models have limitations for translating results to humans, and mono-energetic acute heavy-ion or proton exposures do not accurately model low-dose-rate space radiation effects.
- Stated/evident: no studies conclusively demonstrate increased cancer mortality versus the U.S. population, due to low LEO doses, variable time intervals, small sample size, individual variability, and insufficient statistical power; as a narrative review, it also provides no new experimental data or systematic synthesis.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Figures
![Figure 2 Relative abundance of GCR nuclei from hydrogen (Z = 1) to iron (Z = 26) [1].](/paper-figures/11bfc80acdfa4876a7085ebff2424bc2/space-radiation-the-number-one-risk-to-astronaut-health-beyond-low-earth-orbit-figure-2.jpg)
![Figure 5 Examples of two complex aberrations involving three or more chromosomes observed post-mission in astronauts. Chromosomes were hybridized with painting probes for chromosome 1 (red), chromosome 2 (green) and chromosome 4 (yellow). All other chromosomes were counterstained with DAPI (blue). Adapted from Cucinotta et al. [29] and republished with permission from Radiation Research.](/paper-figures/f40c39cd01324038a8f550707f06bff1/space-radiation-the-number-one-risk-to-astronaut-health-beyond-low-earth-orbit-figure-5.jpg)
![Figure 6 Acute radiation outcomes: (a) Blood cell counts (lymphocytes) following exposure to SPE-like gamma and proton radiation in a mouse model. Graph adapted from Romero-Weaver et al. [69]. (b) WBC counts in a mini-pig model following exposure to SPE-like electron and proton radiation. The WBC counts did not return to normal levels at the 30-day time point, with proton radiation exposure having the more detrimental effect. Graph adapted from Ann Kennedy [70] and reproduced with permission from Life Sciences in Space Research.](/paper-figures/27fa17be46be42839ea6d13bc86c73c2/space-radiation-the-number-one-risk-to-astronaut-health-beyond-low-earth-orbit-figure-6.jpg)
Verification
Claims the paper makes
53 Not checked yet · 31 Own interpretation · 10 No basis given · 1 Own result
In the paper
“For example, five SPE events were recorded during the recent transit of the MSL spacecraft from Earth to Mars [11].”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 2. The Pernicious Interplanetary Space Radiation Environment > 2.2. SPE Radiation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [11] Zeitlin, 2013, Measurements of energetic particle radiation in transit to mars on the mars science laboratory, Science source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This included the intriguing observation that the yield of chromosomal aberrations decreases some years after a first flight, but without reaching the un-irradiated values.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation > 3.1. Degenerative Tissue Effects from Radiation Exposure
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Hienz et al. demonstrated that proton radiation caused marked neurocognitive deficits at doses as low as 25 cGy.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation > 3.3. Acute and Late CNS Effects from Radiation Exposure
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
In the paper
“In 2008, using multi-color fluorescence in situ hybridization, Cucinotta et al. vividly showed complex chromosomal aberrations in lymphocyte cells involving three or more chromosomes, observed post-mission in ISS astronauts [29], (Figure 5).”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation > 3.1. Degenerative Tissue Effects from Radiation Exposure
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [29] Cucinotta, 2008, Physical and biological organ dosimetry analysis for international space station astronauts, Radiat. Res. source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Britten et al. have shown that doses as low as 20 cGy of simulated GCR radiation (1 GeV/u 56Fe particles) can significantly impair learning and memory in a rodent model.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation > 3.3. Acute and Late CNS Effects from Radiation Exposure
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [55] Britten, 2012, Low (20 cGy) doses of 1 GeV/u 56Fe-particle radiation lead to a persistent reduction in the spatial learning ability of rats, Radiat. Res. source
- Not checked yetcites [56] Lonart, 2012, Executive function in rats is impaired by low (20 cGy) doses of 1 GeV/u 56Fe particles, Radiat. Res. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Shavers et al. determined that the doses received by astronauts during extended ISS missions were typically greater than 70 mSv [31].”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation > 3.2. Radiation Carcinogenesis
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [31] Shavers, 2004, Implementation of alara radiation protection on the iss through polyethylene shielding augmentation of the service module crew quarters, Adv. Space Res. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In the mini-pig, it was demonstrated that high doses of SPE-like radiation resulted in adverse effects to the skin, as well as to deeper organs and tissues (e.g., decrease in circulating blood cells [63], lung damage [63] and impaired heart function [64]).”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation > 3.4. Radiation Syndromes Due to SPEs
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [63] Wilson, 2011, Acute biological effects of simulating the whole-body radiation dose distribution from a solar particle event using a porcine model, Radiat. Res. source
- Not checked yetcites [64] Sanzari, 2013, Acute hematological effects of solar particle event proton radiation in the porcine model, Radiat. Res. source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Immune system suppression occurred at doses as low as 1.0 Gy.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation > 3.4. Radiation Syndromes Due to SPEs
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the blood cell counts (e.g., platelets, lymphocytes, neutrophils) did not return to normal, pre-irradiation levels in the mini-pig model following exposure to simulated SPE radiation”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation > 3.4. Radiation Syndromes Due to SPEs
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, it is likely that crewmembers will be exposed to multiple SPEs during such missions.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 2. The Pernicious Interplanetary Space Radiation Environment > 2.2. SPE Radiation
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 24
- Probably not a substantial claim. 26
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This work showed that chromosome breaks were two-fold more frequent in the Apollo astronauts compared to the Gemini astronauts, suggesting for the first time a link between dose and flight duration.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation > 3.1. Degenerative Tissue Effects from Radiation Exposure
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“in the mouse model, high dose rate proton exposures resulted in comparable effects on the number of circulating white blood cells that subsequently returned to pre-irradiation levels within 30 days following exposure”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation > 3.4. Radiation Syndromes Due to SPEs
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The WBC counts did not return to normal levels at the 30-day time point, with proton radiation exposure having the more detrimental effect.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation > 3.4. Radiation Syndromes Due to SPEs
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In a mouse model, T-cells did not become activated following exposure to low doses of SPE-like proton radiation, and the animals were susceptible to a non-toxic bacterial challenge of organisms (Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Klebsiella pneumoniae) that are relatively innocuous and ubiquitous on Earth and have been detected aboard the ISS [65,66].”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation > 3.4. Radiation Syndromes Due to SPEs
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [65] Sanzari, 2013, Leukocyte activity is altered in a ground based murine model of microgravity and proton radiation exposure, PLoS One source
- Not checked yetcites [66] Li, 2014, Hindlimb suspension and spe-like radiation impairs clearance of bacterial infections, PLoS One source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“With respect to the different qualities of space radiation that may be encountered, the high LET radiation found in the GCR spectrum can directly or indirectly damage biomolecules (e.g., proteins, DNA, lipids), as well as organelles and cellular structures.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation > 3.1. Degenerative Tissue Effects from Radiation Exposure
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The large ionization power of GCR ions makes them a major health threat to astronauts and constitutes one of the most important barriers impeding plans for interplanetary travel by crewed spacecraft.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 2. The Pernicious Interplanetary Space Radiation Environment > 2.1. Galactic Cosmic Radiation
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“During transit outside of LEO, every cell nucleus within an astronaut would be traversed, on average, by a hydrogen ion every few days and by heavier HZE nuclei (e.g., 16O, 28Si, 56Fe) every few months [12].”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 2. The Pernicious Interplanetary Space Radiation Environment > 2.1. Galactic Cosmic Radiation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [12] Cucinotta, 1998, The effects of delta rays on the number of particle-track traversals per cell in laboratory and space exposures, Radiat. Res. source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Astronauts traveling on a protracted voyage to Mars may be exposed to SPE radiation events, overlaid on a more predictable flux of GCR.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > Abstract
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The fluence of ionized nuclei that make up GCR is inversely proportional to the solar cycle and decreases by a factor of two during solar maximum [10].”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 2. The Pernicious Interplanetary Space Radiation Environment > 2.1. Galactic Cosmic Radiation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [10] National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) (2000). Radiation Protection Guidance for Activities in Low-Earth Orbit, NCRP.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Exploration missions outside of LEO will include interplanetary transits, and shielding provided by the spacecraft may not be able to completely protect astronaut crews from the effects of an SPE.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 2. The Pernicious Interplanetary Space Radiation Environment > 2.2. SPE Radiation
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Ionized transition metals, such as iron (Z = 26), are biologically harmful, as no reasonable amount of spacecraft material can shield them (Figure 2).”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 2. The Pernicious Interplanetary Space Radiation Environment > 2.1. Galactic Cosmic Radiation
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The main radiation health risks to astronaut crews on exploration missions are degenerative vascular changes, genetic mutations and cancer [2].”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation > 3.1. Degenerative Tissue Effects from Radiation Exposure
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [2] National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) (2006). Information Needed to Make Radiation Protection Recommendations for Space Missions Beyond Low-Earth Orbit, NCRP.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“SPE dose rates are variable over the course of an event and range from zero to 100 mGy/h inside a space vehicle and from zero to 500 mGy/h for an astronaut exposed during an extravehicular activity (EVA) on missions outside of LEO [6].”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 2. The Pernicious Interplanetary Space Radiation Environment > 2.2. SPE Radiation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [6] Wu, H., Huff, J.L., Casey, R., Kim, M.H., and Cucinotta, F.A. (2013). Evidence Report: Risk of Acute Radiation Syndromes Due to Solar Particle Events, National Aeronautical and Space Agency.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Shielding is an effective countermeasure against solar particle events (SPEs), but is ineffective in protecting crew members from the biological impacts of fast moving, highly-charged galactic cosmic radiation (GCR) nuclei.”
- Also stated in: § 2.1. Galactic Cosmic Radiation · plain
“Shielding only partially reduces the doses experienced inside a spacecraft, given the penetrating ability of HZE ions [8].”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [8] Cucinotta, 2006, Evaluating shielding effectiveness for reducing space radiation cancer risks, Radiat. Meas. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § 2.1. Galactic Cosmic Radiation · plain
In the paper
“GCR nuclei originate from outside our solar system and are high-LET relativistic particles, possessing sufficient energies to penetrate any shielding technology used on current mission vehicles [8].”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 2. The Pernicious Interplanetary Space Radiation Environment > 2.1. Galactic Cosmic Radiation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [8] Cucinotta, 2006, Evaluating shielding effectiveness for reducing space radiation cancer risks, Radiat. Meas. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the morbidity risk and unique toxicity profiles remain poorly understood.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No studies to date have adequately assessed the possibility of synergism between high-LET radiation and the stresses of the space environment.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation > 3.1. Degenerative Tissue Effects from Radiation Exposure
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“lack of knowledge about the biological effects of, and responses to, space radiation is the single most important factor limiting the prediction of radiation risk associated with human space exploration”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 1. Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [3] Committee on the Evaluation of Radiation Shielding for Space Exploration, Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board, Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences, and National Research Council (2008). Managing Space Radiation Risk in the New Era of Space Exploration, National Academies Press.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It remains unclear how moderate to large magnitude SPEs, when combined with continuous GCR exposure, will affect the health and performance of astronaut crews during interplanetary transits.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Calculation of radiation exposures to astronauts in a detailed and realistic way is challenging because of the complexity of the radiation environment, the shielding effects of the vehicle and/or space suit and human anatomy and physiology.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Radiation outside of LEO is composed of a toxic milieu of GCR and particles (predominantly protons) expelled from the Sun during SPEs. This mixture of radiation modalities represents the most significant physical impediment to safe human space exploration.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 2. The Pernicious Interplanetary Space Radiation Environment
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Exposure to space radiation affects multiple organs and physiological systems in complex ways (Figure 4).”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Exposure to space radiation increases the risks of astronauts developing cancer, experiencing central nervous system (CNS) decrements, exhibiting degenerative tissue effects or developing acute radiation syndrome.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [4] Cucinotta, F.A., and Durante, M. (2013). Evidence Report: Risk of Radiation Carcinogenesis, National Aeronautical and Space Agency.
- Not checked yetcites [5] Cucinotta, F.A., Wang, H., and Huff, J.L. (2013). Evidence Report: Risk of Acute or Late Central Nervous System Effects from Radiation Exposure, National Aeronautical and Space Agency.
- Not checked yetcites [6] Wu, H., Huff, J.L., Casey, R., Kim, M.H., and Cucinotta, F.A. (2013). Evidence Report: Risk of Acute Radiation Syndromes Due to Solar Particle Events, National Aeronautical and Space Agency.
- Not checked yetcites [7] Huff, J.L., and Cucinotta, F.A. (2013). Evidence Report: Risk of Degenerative Tissue or other Health Effects from Radiation Exposure, National Aeronautical and Space Agency.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“SPE radiation and the synergistic effects of spaceflight can place the crew at significant risk for prodromal effects (e.g., nausea and vomiting), skin injury, hematological changes and immune system dysfunction.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Current space radiation guidelines pertain only to missions in LEO and are not considered relevant for missions beyond LEO. The acceptable levels of risk for space exploration beyond LEO have not been defined at this time and need to be dealt with before sending manned missions to colonize the moon or to deep space, such as a mission to Mars”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 1. Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [2] National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) (2006). Information Needed to Make Radiation Protection Recommendations for Space Missions Beyond Low-Earth Orbit, NCRP.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, in spite of their low flux, HZE ions constitute a deleterious biological threat and contribute a significant amount to the cumulative GCR dose that astronauts will incur outside of LEO.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 2. The Pernicious Interplanetary Space Radiation Environment > 2.1. Galactic Cosmic Radiation
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Uncertainties with respect to dose toxicity and the complex variation in SPE and GCR spectra likely to be encountered in future exploration missions underscore the need for models that are capable of identifying particle energy and species on an event-by-event basis.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The resultant radiation-induced increase in oxidative stress levels has been shown to exacerbate some degenerative tissue changes that are normally associated with aging (e.g., cardiovascular disease and cataract formation).”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation > 3.1. Degenerative Tissue Effects from Radiation Exposure
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“GCR ions originate from outside our solar system and contain mostly highly energetic protons and alpha particles, with a small component of high charge and energy (HZE) nuclei moving at relativistic speeds and energies [1].”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 1. Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [1] Simpson, 1983, Elemental and isotopic composition of the galactic cosmic rays, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition to GCR, unpredictable and intermittent solar particle events (SPEs) can produce large plasma clouds containing highly energetic protons and some heavy ions that may cause a rapid surge of radiation both outside and within a spacecraft (Figure 1).”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 1. Introduction
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Created by passing through spacecraft shielding, these fission products can deliver a significant fraction of the total mission dose and have the ability to damage critical cellular components when passing through the tissues of the body.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 2. The Pernicious Interplanetary Space Radiation Environment > 2.3. Intravehicular Radiation
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The interaction of energetic SPE protons and heavy-charged GCR particles with the spacecraft structure can produce an additional, secondary intravehicular radiation hazard.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 2. The Pernicious Interplanetary Space Radiation Environment > 2.3. Intravehicular Radiation
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, the interpretation of animal-based CNS studies that model the space radiation environment is limited and confounds the development of mitigation strategies and countermeasures.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation > 3.3. Acute and Late CNS Effects from Radiation Exposure
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“However, interpretation of these studies is limited by significant individual variability and insufficient statistical power [37,38,39,40].”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation > 3.2. Radiation Carcinogenesis
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [37] Durante, 2003, Chromosome aberration dosimetry in cosmonauts after single or multiple space flights, Cytogenet. Genome Res. source
- Not checked yetcites [38] George, 2001, Chromosome aberrations in the blood lymphocytes of astronauts after space flight, Radiat. Res. source
- Not checked yetcites [39] George, 2004, Chromosome aberrations of clonal origin are present in astronauts’ blood lymphocytes, Cytogenet. Genome Res. source
- Not checked yetcites [40] Horstman, 2005, Space radiation does not induce a significant increase of intrachromosomal exchanges in astronauts’ lymphocytes, Radiat. Environ. Biophys. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“It still remains to be determined whether the higher doses of radiation incurred during future exploration class missions beyond LEO will increase the threat of cancer for astronaut crews [4].”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation > 3.2. Radiation Carcinogenesis
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [4] Cucinotta, F.A., and Durante, M. (2013). Evidence Report: Risk of Radiation Carcinogenesis, National Aeronautical and Space Agency.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“During long-duration exploration missions beyond LEO, it is anticipated that multiple SPEs will be encountered.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation > 3.4. Radiation Syndromes Due to SPEs
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Ionizing radiation can damage the CNS, causing changes to cognitive function, inducing fatigue, and generating performance decrements [2,30,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51].”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation > 3.3. Acute and Late CNS Effects from Radiation Exposure
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [2] National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) (2006). Information Needed to Make Radiation Protection Recommendations for Space Missions Beyond Low-Earth Orbit, NCRP.
- Not checked yetcites [30] National Research Council (1990). Health Effects of Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation: Beir V, The National Academies Press.
- Not checked yetcites [42] Butler, 2006, Neurocognitive effects of treatment for childhood cancer, Ment. Retard. Dev. Disabil. Res. Rev. source
- Not checked yetcites [43] Castro, 1985, Current considerations in heavy charged-particle radiotherapy: A clinical research trial of the university of california lawrence berkeley laboratory, northern california oncology group, and radiation therapy oncology group, Radiat. Res. Suppl. source
- Not checked yetcites [44] Fabrikant, 1985, Heavy charged-particle bragg peak radiosurgery for intracranial vascular disorders, Radiat. Res. Suppl. source
- Not checked yetcites [45] Napolitano, 1998, Neurological complications of radiotherapy and chemotherapy, J. Neurol. source
- Not checked yetcites [46] Kjellberg, 1983, Bragg-peak proton-beam therapy for arteriovenous malformations of the brain, N. Engl. J. Med. source
- Not checked yetcites [47] Levy, 1989, Stereotactic heavy-charged-particle bragg peak radiosurgery for the treatment of intracranial arteriovenous malformations in childhood and adolescence, Neurosurgery source
- Not checked yetcites [48] Schultheiss, 1995, Radiation response of the central nervous system, Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. source
- Not checked yetcites [49] Steinberg, 1990, Stereotactic heavy-charged-particle bragg-peak radiation for intracranial arteriovenous malformations, N. Engl. J. Med. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Moreover, a second spaceflight apparently does not proportionately increase the yield of aberrations, suggesting a non-additive or even an infra-additive effect, raising the possibility of a radio-adaptive response in crewmembers (i.e., “radiation hormesis”).”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation > 3.1. Degenerative Tissue Effects from Radiation Exposure
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, there is only a small probability that low-LET radiation from SPEs will reach high enough doses to cause degenerative tissue effects.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation > 3.1. Degenerative Tissue Effects from Radiation Exposure
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The linkage between DNA lesions (including point mutations, insertions and deletions, as well as intra- and inter-chromosomal rearrangements) and carcinogenesis is well-established [27].”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation > 3.1. Degenerative Tissue Effects from Radiation Exposure
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [27] National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) (2010). Potential Impact of Individual Genetic Susceptibility and Previous Radiation Exposure on Radiation Risk for Astronauts, NCRP.
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The veracity of data obtained and the reliability of conclusions drawn from ground-based studies using model organisms will benefit substantially from accurately simulating combined exposures to both protons and heavy ions sources.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 6. Conclusions
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Space radiation is the number one risk to astronaut health on extended space exploration missions beyond the Earth’s magnetosphere.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 6. Conclusions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In general, animal experiments have contributed significantly to our understanding of the mechanisms of disease, but their value in predicting the effectiveness of treatment strategies has limitations [80,81,82].”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 5. Research Considerations > 5.2. Selection of Appropriate Animal Models
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [80] Hackam, 2006, Translation of research evidence from animals to humans, JAMA source
- Not checked yetcites [81] Perel, P., Roberts, I., Sena, E., Wheble, P., Briscoe, C., Sandercock, P., Macleod, M., Mignini, L.E., Jayaram, P., and Khan, K.S. (2007). Comparison of treatment effects between animal experiments and clinical trials: Systematic review. BMJ, 334. source
- Not checked yetcites [82] Hackam, D.G. (2007). Translating animal research into clinical benefit. BMJ, 334. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The ability of humans to realize our potential by becoming a multi-planet species will hinge on, to a large extent, our ability to appropriately understand, manage, mitigate and overcome the significant dangers and health effects of space radiation.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 6. Conclusions
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the selection of a single animal model for specific organ system studies may prove inadequate due to physiological interactions between organ systems that modify specific radiation toxicities.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 5. Research Considerations > 5.2. Selection of Appropriate Animal Models
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Animal studies performed using a ferret model indicate that retching and vomiting occur at doses as low as 50 cGy and can be expected from SPE radiation exposure at doses up to 2 Gy [67,68].”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 3. Biomedical Consequences of Exposure to Space Radiation > 3.4. Radiation Syndromes Due to SPEs
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Astronauts performing EVAs have compromised shielding that can leave them vulnerable to the effects of unpredictable SPEs.
In the paper
“The group concluded that animal models are applicable to the following two stages of radiation research: (1) mechanisms/discovery; and (2) validation.”
§ Space Radiation: The Number One Risk to Astronaut Health beyond Low Earth Orbit > 5. Research Considerations > 5.2. Selection of Appropriate Animal Models
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [79] Augustine, 2005, Animal models for radiation injury, protection and therapy, Radiat. Res. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper relies on this without support.
The biological effects of space radiation observed in animal models can be extrapolated to human astronauts.
“These research data demonstrate that important changes to the CNS can be expected to occur at mission-relevant dose and dose rate levels.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Ground-based research studies employing model organisms can accurately mimic the biological effects of the space radiation environment if they concatenate exposures to both proton and heavy ion sources.
“ground-based research studies employing model organisms seeking to accurately mimic the biological effects of the space radiation environment must concatenate exposures to both proton and heavy ion sources.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Astronauts performing EVAs have compromised shielding that can leave them vulnerable to the effects of unpredictable SPEs.
“Astronauts performing EVAs have compromised shielding that can leave them vulnerable to the effects of unpredictable SPEs.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Fatigue has been observed in radiotherapy patients receiving therapeutic radiation doses as low as 2 Gy.
“it has been observed in radiotherapy patients receiving therapeutic radiation doses as low as 2 Gy.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Individual differences in responses to radiation exist at all levels of biological organization (molecular, cellular and tissue).
“Previous radiobiology research has shown individual differences in responses to radiation at all levels (i.e., molecular, cellular and tissue) of biological organization.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Only limited testing has occurred to study the efficacy of medical countermeasures and pharmaceuticals when radiation exposure is a concomitant and aggravating factor.
“only limited testing has occurred to study the efficacy of these measures and pharmaceuticals when radiation exposure is a concomitant and aggravating factor.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Space radiation exposures at the dose rates expected for a mission to Mars may not induce significant acute or sub-acute biological responses.
“This is tempered by evidence that space radiation exposures at the dose rates expected for a mission to Mars may not induce significant acute or sub-acute biological responses.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Some commonly-used animal models do not accurately reflect the pathologies and pathologic response (outcomes and endpoints) seen in humans.
“Some commonly-used animal models do not accurately reflect the pathologies and pathologic response (i.e., outcomes and endpoints) seen in humans”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Exposure to the ionizing radiation of cosmic rays during transit as well as while on the Martian surface is also of great concern as it can result in carcinogenesis, tissue degeneration, and potentially acute radiation syndrome (Chancellor et al., 2014; Pavleti ´ c et al., 2022).”
From Cyanobacteria and microalgae in supporting human habitation on Mars (2022) · cites this paper as Chancellor et al., 2014
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Research related to the radio-susceptibility of cyanobacterium species is complicated by the fact that ionizing radiation (IR) in space is complex, temporal, and comes in many wavelengths and particle sizes [103].”
From Biologically-Based and Physiochemical Life Support and In Situ Resource Utilization for Exploration of the Solar System—Reviewing the Current State and Defining Future Development Needs (2021) · cites this paper as [103]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Although this program represents a major step forward in human space exploration, the fact remains that the shielding provided by Earth’s atmosphere and magnetic field is not available beyond low Earth orbit (LEO) and astronauts will have to contend with exposure to the compositionally complex, spatially and temporally variable space radiation environment, introducing critical risks to crew health”
From First evaluation of wearable radiation protection for human deep space exploration, as flown on Artemis I (2026) · cites this paper as [2]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The secondary spectrum reaching the Martian surface includes high LET low energy protons, neutrons and α-particles as well as penetrating high energy γ-rays (Chancellor et al., 2014).”
From Medical countermeasures for the hematopoietic-subsyndrome of acute radiation syndrome in space (2022) · cites this paper as Chancellor et al., 2014
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“On the other hand, the atmosphere layer is thick enough to generate secondary particles from nuclear interactions of energetic protons from solar events and heavy-charged GCR particles with atmospheric atoms and molecules.”
From Medical countermeasures for the hematopoietic-subsyndrome of acute radiation syndrome in space (2022) · cites this paper as Chancellor et al., 2014
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The Moon has neither a protective magnetic field nor an atmosphere; therefore, particles of solar or galactic origin reach the lunar surface unattenuated (Chancellor et al., 2014).”
From Medical countermeasures for the hematopoietic-subsyndrome of acute radiation syndrome in space (2022) · cites this paper as Chancellor et al., 2014
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Citations
Cites
Sleep Deprivation and Vigilant Attention
Lim, J., & Dinges, D. F. (2008) · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1196/annals.1417.002 · Cited by 1,213
Preston, D. L., Shimizu, Y., Pierce, D. A., Suyama, A., & Mabuchi, K. (2003) · Radiation Research · doi:10.1667/rr3049 · Cited by 1,172
Darby, S. C., McGale, P., Taylor, C. W., & Peto, R. (2005) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(05)70251-5 · Cited by 1,049
Comparison of Treatment Effects between Animal Experiments and Clinical Trials: Systematic Review
Perel, P., Roberts, I., Sena, E., Wheble, P., Briscoe, C., Sandercock, P., Macleod, M., Mignini, L. E., Jayaram, P., & Khan, K. S. (2007) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.39048.407928.be · Cited by 827
Translation of Research Evidence From Animals to Humans
Hackam, D. G., & Redelmeier, D. A. (2006) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.296.14.1731 · Cited by 733
Elemental and isotopic composition of the galactic cosmic rays
Simpson, J. A. (1983) · Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science · doi:10.1146/annurev.ns.33.120183.001543 · Cited by 724
Radiation response of the central nervous system
Schultheiss, T. E., Kun, L. E., Ang, K. K., & Stephens, L. C. (1995) · International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics · doi:10.1016/0360-3016(94)00655-5 · Cited by 653
Measurements of energetic particle radiation in transit to Mars on the Mars Science Laboratory
Zeitlin, C., Hassler, D. M., Cucinotta, F. A., Ehresmann, B., Wimmer-Schweingruber, R. F., Brinza, D. E., Kang, S., Weigle, G., Böttcher, S., Böhm, E., et al. (2013) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1235989 · Cited by 641 · cited 9×
“Future human spaceflight missions potentially include Moon bases, rendezvous with a near-Earth object (NEO), such as an asteroid, and, eventually, habitations on the surface of Mars.”
BackgroundInfluentialBragg-peak proton-beam therapy for arteriovenous malformations of the brain
Kjellberg, R. N., Hanamura, T., Davis, K. R., Lyons, S. L., & Adams, R. D. (1983) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm198308043090503 · Cited by 540
The Radioresponse of the Central Nervous System: A Dynamic Process
Tofilon, P. J., & Fike, J. R. (2000) · Radiation Research · doi:10.1667/0033-7587(2000)153[0357:trotcn]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 527
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Committee on the Evaluation of Radiation Shielding for Space Exploration, Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board, Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences, and National Research Council (2008). Managing Space Radiation Risk in the New Era of Space Exploration, National Academies Press.
- National Research Council (1973). Hze-Particle Effects in Manned Spaceflight, The National Academies Press.
- National Research Council (1996). Radiation Hazards to Crews of Interplanetary Missions:Biological Issues and Research Strategies, The National Academies Press.
- Davis, C.M., Roma, P.G., Brady, J.V., and Hienz, R.D. (2011, January 11–15). Neurobehavioral effects of space radiation on choice impulsivity. Proceedings of the 18th Biannual Meeting of the International Academy of Astronautics’ Humans in Space Symposium, Houston, TX, USA.
- Hienz, R.D., Davis, C.M., Weed, M.R., Guida, P.M., Gooden, V.L., Brady, J.V., and Roma, P.G. (2011, January 11–15). Neurobehavioral effects of space radiation on psychomotor vigilance and reaction time tests. Proceedings of the 18th Biannual Meeting of the International Academy of Astronautics’ Humans in Space Symposium, Houston, TX, USA.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Fundamental Biological Features of Spaceflight: Advancing the Field to Enable Deep-Space Exploration
Afshinnekoo, E., Scott, R. T., MacKay, M. J., Pariset, E., Cekanaviciute, E., Barker, R. J., Gilroy, S., Hassane, D. C., Smith, S. M., Zwart, S. R., et al. (2020) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2020.10.050 · Cited by 496
Tinganelli, W., & Durante, M. (2020) · Cancers · doi:10.3390/cancers12103022 · Cited by 279
Delp, M. D., Charvat, J. M., Limoli, C. L., Globus, R. K., & Ghosh, P. (2016) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep29901 · Cited by 232
Limitations in predicting the space radiation health risk for exploration astronauts
Chancellor, J. C., Blue, R. S., Cengel, K. A., Auñón-Chancellor, S. M., Rubins, K. H., Katzgraber, H. G., & Kennedy, A. R. (2018) · npj Microgravity · doi:10.1038/s41526-018-0043-2 · Cited by 183
Self-citationHodkinson, P. D., Anderton, R. A., Posselt, B. N., & Fong, K. J. (2017) · British Journal of Anaesthesia · doi:10.1093/bja/aex336 · Cited by 173
The effects of real and simulated microgravity on cellular mitochondrial function
Nguyen, H. P., Tran, P. H., Kim, K., & Yang, S. (2021) · npj Microgravity · doi:10.1038/s41526-021-00171-7 · Cited by 134
Donaubauer, A.-J., Deloch, L., Becker, I., Fietkau, R., Frey, B., & Gaipl, U. S. (2020) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms21176377 · Cited by 138
All the fun of the FAIR: fundamental physics at the facility for antiproton and ion research
Durante, M., Indelicato, P., Jonson, B., Koch, V, Langanke, K., Meißner, U.-G., Nappi, E., Nilsson, T., Stöhlker, T., Widmann, E., et al. (2019) · Physica Scripta · doi:10.1088/1402-4896/aaf93f · Cited by 129
Mesenchymal Stromal Cells and Exosomes: Progress and Challenges
Forsberg, M. H., Kink, J. A., Hematti, P., & Capitini, C. M. (2020) · Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology · doi:10.3389/fcell.2020.00665 · Cited by 107
Recent Advances and Challenges in Polymer-Based Materials for Space Radiation Shielding
Toto, E., Lambertini, L., Laurenzi, S., & Santonicola, M. G. (2024) · Polymers · doi:10.3390/polym16030382 · Cited by 106
Aspergillus niger Spores Are Highly Resistant to Space Radiation
Cortesão, M., de Haas, A. M., Unterbusch, R., Fujimori, A., Schütze, T., Meyer, V., & Moeller, R. (2020) · Frontiers in Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2020.00560 · Cited by 104
Factors mediating spaceflight-induced skeletal muscle atrophy
Lee, P. H. U., Chung, M., Ren, Z., Mair, D. B., & Kim, D. (2022) · American Journal of Physiology-Cell Physiology · doi:10.1152/ajpcell.00203.2021 · Cited by 104
Space-type radiation induces multimodal responses in the mouse gut microbiome and metabolome
Casero, D., Gill, K., Sridharan, V., Koturbash, I., Nelson, G. A., Hauer‐Jensen, M., Boerma, M., Braun, J. G., & Cheema, A. K. (2017) · Microbiome · doi:10.1186/s40168-017-0325-z · Cited by 99
GeneLab: Omics database for spaceflight experiments
Ray, S., Gebre, S., Fogle, H. W., Berrios, D. C., Tran, P. B., Galazka, J. M., & Costes, S. V. (2018) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/bty884 · Cited by 97
Cyanobacteria and microalgae in supporting human habitation on Mars
Mapstone, L. J., Leite, M. N., Purton, S., Crawford, I. A., & Dartnell, L. (2022) · Biotechnology Advances · doi:10.1016/j.biotechadv.2022.107946 · Cited by 92
“Exposure to the ionizing radiation of cosmic rays during transit as well as while on the Martian surface is also of great concern as it can result in carcinogenesis, tissue degeneration, and potentially acute radiation syndrome (Chancellor et al., 2014; Pavleti ´ c et al., 2022).”
Space radiation and cardiovascular disease risk
Boerma, M. (2015) · World Journal of Cardiology · doi:10.4330/wjc.v7.i12.882 · Cited by 91
The Future of Personalized Medicine in Space: From Observations to Countermeasures
Loriè, E. P., Baatout, S., Choukèr, A., Buchheim, J., Baselet, B., Russo, C. D., Wotring, V. E., Monici, M., Morbidelli, L., Gagliardi, D., et al. (2021) · Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology · doi:10.3389/fbioe.2021.739747 · Cited by 90
Zheng, Y., Ganushkina, N., Jiggens, P. T. A., Jun, I., Meier, M. M., Minow, J. I., O'Brien, T. P., Pitchford, D., Shprits, Y., Tobiska, W. K., et al. (2019) · Space Weather · doi:10.1029/2018sw002042 · Cited by 85
Patel, S. (2020) · IJC Heart & Vasculature · doi:10.1016/j.ijcha.2020.100595 · Cited by 84
Cortese, F., Klokov, D., Osipov, A., Stefaniak, J., Moskalev, A., Schastnaya, J., Cantor, C., Aliper, A., Mamoshina, P., Ushakov, I., et al. (2018) · Oncotarget · doi:10.18632/oncotarget.24461 · Cited by 83
Space Radiation Protection Countermeasures in Microgravity and Planetary Exploration
Montesinos, C. A., Khalid, R., Cristea, O., Greenberger, J. S., Epperly, M. W., Lemon, J. A., Boreham, D. R., Popov, D., Gorthi, G., Ramkumar, N., et al. (2021) · Life · doi:10.3390/life11080829 · Cited by 79
Mao, X. W., Nishiyama, N. C., Pecaut, M. J., Campbell-Beachler, M., Gifford, P., Haynes, K. E., Becronis, C., & Gridley, D. S. (2016) · Radiation Research · doi:10.1667/rr14267.1 · Cited by 78
Radiation on Earth or in Space: What Does It Change?
Restier-Verlet, J., Nachef, L. E., Ferlazzo, M. L., Al-Choboq, J., Granzotto, A., Bouchet, A., & Foray, N. (2021) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms22073739 · Cited by 85
Choi, W., Barker, R. J., Kim, S., Swanson, S. J., & Gilroy, S. (2019) · American Journal of Botany · doi:10.1002/ajb2.1223 · Cited by 75
Evaluation of deep space exploration risks and mitigations against radiation and microgravity
Dobney, W., Mols, L., Mistry, D., Tabury, K., Baselet, B., & Baatout, S. (2023) · Frontiers in Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.3389/fnume.2023.1225034 · Cited by 74
Applied nuclear physics at the new high-energy particle accelerator facilities
Durante, M., Golubev, A., Park, W.-Y., & Trautmann, C. (2019) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2019.01.004 · Cited by 72
Space–brain: The negative effects of space exposure on the central nervous system
Limoli, C., Jandial, R., Hoshide, R., & Waters, J. (2018) · Surgical Neurology International · doi:10.4103/sni.sni_250_17 · Cited by 66
Radiation-Related Thyroid Cancer
Saenko, V., & Mitsutake, N. (2023) · Endocrine Reviews · doi:10.1210/endrev/bnad022 · Cited by 64
Dried plum diet protects from bone loss caused by ionizing radiation
Schreurs, A., Shirazi‐Fard, Y., Shahnazari, M., Alwood, J. S., Truong, T. A., Tahimic, C. G. T., Limoli, C. L., Turner, N. D., Halloran, B. P., & Globus, R. K. (2016) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep21343 · Cited by 61
Onorato, G., Schiavi, E. D., & Cunto, F. D. (2020) · Frontiers in Physics · doi:10.3389/fphy.2020.00362 · Cited by 60
Towards sustainable horizons: A comprehensive blueprint for Mars colonization
Neukart, F. (2024) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e26180 · Cited by 64
Research plans in Europe for radiation health hazard assessment in exploratory space missions
Walsh, L., Schneider, U., Fogtman, A., Kausch, C., McKenna-Lawlor, S., Narici, L., Ngo-Anh, J., Reitz, G., Sabatier, L., Santin, G., et al. (2019) · Life Sciences in Space Research · doi:10.1016/j.lssr.2019.04.002 · Cited by 59
Zwart, S. R., Gibson, C. R., Gregory, J. F., Mader, T. H., Stover, P. J., Zeisel, S. H., & Smith, S. M. (2017) · The FASEB Journal · doi:10.1096/fj.201700294 · Cited by 59
Boron Nitride-Based Nanomaterials for Radiation Shielding: A Review
Cheraghi, E., Chen, S., & Yeow, J. T. W. (2021) · IEEE Nanotechnology Magazine · doi:10.1109/mnano.2021.3066390 · Cited by 54
Willey, J. S., Britten, R. A., Blaber, E. A., Tahimic, C. G. T., Chancellor, J., Mortreux, M., Sanford, L. D., Kubik, A. J., Delp, M. D., & Mao, X. W. (2021) · Journal of Environmental Science and Health Part C · doi:10.1080/26896583.2021.1885283 · Cited by 56
Self-citationWhat can biofabrication do for space and what can space do for biofabrication?
Moroni, L., Tabury, K., Stenuit, H., Grimm, D. G., Baatout, S., & Mironov, V. A. (2021) · Trends in biotechnology · doi:10.1016/j.tibtech.2021.08.008 · Cited by 53
Why Human Enhancement is Necessary for Successful Human Deep-space Missions
Szocik, K., & Braddock, M. (2019) · The New Bioethics · doi:10.1080/20502877.2019.1667559 · Cited by 53
Whoolery, C. W., Yun, S., Reynolds, R. P., Lucero, M. J., Soler, I., Tran, F. H., Ito, N., Redfield, R. L., Richardson, D. R., Shih, H.-Y., et al. (2020) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-020-59419-z · Cited by 50
Chandler, J. O., Haas, F. B., Khan, S., Bowden, L., Ignatz, M., Enfissi, E. M. A., Gawthrop, F., Griffiths, A., Fraser, P. D., Rensing, S. A., et al. (2020) · Life · doi:10.3390/life10040049 · Cited by 49
The current state and future trends of space nutrition from a perspective of astronauts' physiology
Bychkov, A., Reshetnikova, P., Бычкова, Е. С., Подгорбунских, Е. М., & Koptev, V. Y. (2021) · International Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science · doi:10.1016/j.ijgfs.2021.100324 · Cited by 51
Novel Indications for Commonly Used Medications as Radiation Protectants in Spaceflight
McLaughlin, M. F., Donoviel, D. B., & Jones, J. A. (2017) · Aerospace Medicine and Human Performance · doi:10.3357/amhp.4735.2017 · Cited by 47
Das, S., Neal, C. J., Ortiz, J., & Seal, S. (2018) · Nanoscale · doi:10.1039/c8nr04640a · Cited by 47
Radiation-induced degradation of silicon carbide MOSFETs – A review
Baba, T., Siddiqui, N. A., Saidin, N. B., Yusoff, S. H. M., Sani, S. F. A., Karim, J. B. A., & Hasbullah, N. F. (2023) · Materials Science and Engineering B · doi:10.1016/j.mseb.2023.117096 · Cited by 44
Shavers, M., Semones, E., Tomi, L., Chen, J., Straube, U., Komiyama, T., Shurshakov, V., Li, C., & Rühm, W. (2024) · Zeitschrift für Medizinische Physik · doi:10.1016/j.zemedi.2023.06.005 · Cited by 41
“Understanding and minimizing the risks from exposure to ionising radiation in space is critical to crew protection [17,18].”
BackgroundChallenges for the human immune system after leaving Earth
Marchal, S., Choukèr, A., Bereiter‐Hahn, J., Kraus, A., Grimm, D. G., & Krüger, M. (2024) · npj Microgravity · doi:10.1038/s41526-024-00446-9 · Cited by 42
Redox Signaling and Its Impact on Skeletal and Vascular Responses to Spaceflight
Tahimic, C. G. T., & Globus, R. K. (2017) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms18102153 · Cited by 40
Acute Effect of Low-Dose Space Radiation on Mouse Retina and Retinal Endothelial Cells
Mao, X. W., Boerma, M., Rodriguez, D., Campbell-Beachler, M., Jones, T., Stanbouly, S., Sridharan, V., Wroe, A. J., & Nelson, G. A. (2018) · Radiation Research · doi:10.1667/rr14977.1 · Cited by 40
Squidiff: predicting cellular development and responses to perturbations using a diffusion model
He, S., Zhu, Y., Tavakol, D. N., Ye, H., Lao, Y.-H., Zhu, Z., Xu, C., Chauhan, S., Garty, G., Tomer, R., et al. (2026) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/s41592-025-02877-y · Cited by 38
A Review of Magnetic Shielding Technology for Space Radiation
Ferrone, K., Willis, C. E., Guan, F., Ma, J., Peterson, L. E., & Kry, S. F. (2023) · Radiation · doi:10.3390/radiation3010005 · Cited by 38
Space Medicines for Space Health
Tran, Q. D., Tran, V., Toh, L. S., Williams, P. M., Tran, N. N., & Hessel, V. (2022) · ACS Medicinal Chemistry Letters · doi:10.1021/acsmedchemlett.1c00681 · Cited by 39
Wadhwa, A., Moreno‐Villanueva, M., Crucian, B. E., & Wu, H. (2024) · Immunity & Ageing · doi:10.1186/s12979-024-00449-w · Cited by 38
Gan, L., Wang, Z., Si, J., Zhou, R., Sun, C., Liu, Y., Ye, Y., Zhang, Y., Liu, Z., & Zhang, H. (2018) · Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.taap.2018.01.003 · Cited by 37
Early effects of 16O radiation on neuronal morphology and cognition in a murine model
Carr, H., Alexander, T. C., Groves, T. R., Kiffer, F. C., Wang, J., Price, E. T., Boerma, M., & Allen, A. R. (2018) · Life Sciences in Space Research · doi:10.1016/j.lssr.2018.03.001 · Cited by 37
Nowcasting Solar Energetic Particle Events Using Principal Component Analysis
Papaioannou, A., Anastasiadis, A., Kouloumvakos, A., Paassilta, M., Vainio, R., Valtonen, E., Belov, A., Eroshenko, E., Abunina, M., & Abunin, A. (2018) · Solar Physics · doi:10.1007/s11207-018-1320-7 · Cited by 37
Beheshti, A., McDonald, J. T., Miller, J., Grabham, P. W., & Costes, S. V. (2019) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms20030661 · Cited by 37
Translating current biomedical therapies for long duration, deep space missions
Iosim, S., MacKay, M. J., Westover, C. D., & Mason, C. E. (2019) · Precision Clinical Medicine · doi:10.1093/pcmedi/pbz022 · Cited by 39
Luoni, F., Horst, F., Reidel, C.-A., Quarz, A., Bagnale, L., Sihver, L., Weber, U., Norman, R. B., de Wet, W., Giraudo, M., et al. (2021) · New Journal of Physics · doi:10.1088/1367-2630/ac27e1 · Cited by 37
Giraudo, M., Schuy, C., Weber, U., Rovituso, M., Santin, G., Norbury, J. W., Tracino, E., Menicucci, A., Bocchini, L., Lobascio, C., et al. (2018) · Radiation Research · doi:10.1667/rr15111.1 · Cited by 36
Mao, X. W., Boerma, M., Rodriguez, D., Campbell-Beachler, M., Jones, T., Stanbouly, S., Sridharan, V., Nishiyama, N. C., Wroe, A. J., & Nelson, G. A. (2018) · Radiation Research · doi:10.1667/rr15219.1 · Cited by 36
Horst, F., Boscolo, D., Durante, M., Luoni, F., Schuy, C., & Weber, U. A. (2022) · Life Sciences in Space Research · doi:10.1016/j.lssr.2022.03.003 · Cited by 36
Scott, J. P. R., Kramer, A., Petersen, N., & Green, D. A. (2021) · Frontiers in Physiology · doi:10.3389/fphys.2021.614619 · Cited by 36
Overbey, E. G., Paul, A. M., da Silveira, W. A., Tahimic, C. G. T., Reinsch, S. S., Szewczyk, N. J., Stanbouly, S., Wang, C., Galazka, J. M., & Mao, X. W. (2019) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms20174094 · Cited by 34
Small tissue chips with big opportunities for space medicine
Mu, X., He, W., Rivera, V. A. M., Alba, R. A. D. D., Newman, D. J., & Zhang, Y. S. (2022) · Life Sciences in Space Research · doi:10.1016/j.lssr.2022.09.002 · Cited by 34
Polyimide nanocomposites for next generation spacesuits
Prakash, P., Weerasinghe, J., Levchenko, I., Prasad, K., & Alexander, K. (2025) · Materials Horizons · doi:10.1039/d4mh01816h · Cited by 33
Effects of low-dose oxygen ions and protons on cardiac function and structure in male C57BL/6J mice
Seawright, J. W., Sridharan, V., Landes, R. D., Cao, M., Singh, P., Koturbash, I., Mao, X. W., Miousse, I. R., Singh, S. P., Nelson, G. A., et al. (2019) · Life Sciences in Space Research · doi:10.1016/j.lssr.2019.01.003 · Cited by 33
Sasi, S. P., Yan, X., Zuriaga-Herrero, M., Gee, H., Lee, J., Mehrzad, R., Song, J., Onufrak, J., Morgan, J., Enderling, H., et al. (2017) · Radiation Research · doi:10.1667/rr14667.1 · Cited by 32
Long term food stability for extended space missions: a review
Watkins, P., Hughes, J., Gamage, T. V., Knoerzer, K., Ferlazzo, M. L., & Banati, R. B. (2021) · Life Sciences in Space Research · doi:10.1016/j.lssr.2021.12.003 · Cited by 32
Lau, P., Vico, L., & Rittweger, J. (2022) · Biomedicines · doi:10.3390/biomedicines10020342 · Cited by 32
Advanced material technologies for space and terrestrial medicine
Chua, C. Y. X., Jiménez, M., Mozneb, M., Traverso, G., Lugo, R., Sharma, A., Svendsen, C. N., Wagner, W. R., Langer, R., & Grattoni, A. (2024) · Nature Reviews Materials · doi:10.1038/s41578-024-00691-0 · Cited by 30
Schuy, C., Tessa, C. L., Horst, F., Rovituso, M., Durante, M., Giraudo, M., Bocchini, L., Baricco, M., Castellero, A., Fioreh, G., et al. (2018) · Radiation Research · doi:10.1667/rr15123.1 · Cited by 31
NASA GeneLab Platform Utilized for Biological Response to Space Radiation in Animal Models
McDonald, J. T., Stainforth, R., Miller, J., Cahill, T., da Silveira, W. A., Rathi, K. S., Hardiman, G., Taylor, D. M., Costes, S. V., Chauhan, V., et al. (2020) · Cancers · doi:10.3390/cancers12020381 · Cited by 31
Dose-Effects Models for Space Radiobiology: An Overview on Dose-Effect Relationships
Strigari, L., Strolin, S., MORGANTI, A. G., & Bartoloni, A. (2021) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2021.733337 · Cited by 31
Ong, J., Zaman, N., Waisberg, E., Kamran, S. A., Lee, A. G., & Tavakkoli, A. (2022) · Wearable Technologies · doi:10.1017/wtc.2022.21 · Cited by 31
Reynolds, R. J., Bukhtiyarov, I. V., Tikhonova, G. I., Day, S. M., Ушаков, И. Б., & Gorchakova, T. Y. (2019) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-019-44858-0 · Cited by 30
Biological Protection in Deep Space Missions
Sihver, L. (2021) · Journal of Biomedical Physics and Engineering · doi:10.31661/jbpe.v0i0.1193 · Cited by 30
Drago‐Ferrante, R., Fiore, R. D., Karouia, F., Subbannayya, Y., Das, S., Mathyk, B. A., Arif, S., Guevara-Cerdán, A. P., Seylani, A., Galsinh, A. S., et al. (2022) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms23137465 · Cited by 31
Colorectal Carcinogenesis, Radiation Quality, and the Ubiquitin-Proteasome Pathway
Datta, K., Suman, S., Kumar, S., & Fornace, A. J. (2015) · Journal of Cancer · doi:10.7150/jca.13387 · Cited by 30
Alwood, J. S., Ronca, A. E., Mains, R. C., Shelhamer, M. J., Smith, J. D., & Goodwin, T. J. (2017) · npj Microgravity · doi:10.1038/s41526-016-0002-8 · Cited by 29
Effects of acute low-moderate dose ionizing radiation to human brain organoids
Oyefeso, F. A., Goldberg, G., Opoku, N. S., Vazquez, M. E., Bertucci, A., Chen, Z., Wang, C., Muotri, A. R., & Pecaut, M. J. (2023) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0282958 · Cited by 28
Dermatologic manifestations in spaceflight: a review
Dunn, C., Boyd, M., & Orengo, I. F. (2018) · Dermatology Online Journal · doi:10.5070/d32411042001 · Cited by 28
Nair, S., Engelbrecht, M., Miles, X., Ndimba, R. J., Fisher, R., du Plessis, P., Bolcaen, J., Nieto-Camero, J., de Kock, E. A., & Vandevoorde, C. (2019) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms20215350 · Cited by 28
Everything you wanted to know about space radiation but were afraid to ask
Chancellor, J. C., Nowadly, C. D., Williams, J. P., Auñón-Chancellor, S. M., Chesal, M., Looper, J., & Newhauser, W. D. (2021) · Journal of Environmental Science and Health Part C · doi:10.1080/26896583.2021.1897273 · Cited by 28
Self-citationHybrid Active-Passive Space Radiation Simulation Concept for GSI and the Future FAIR Facility
Schuy, C., Weber, U., & Durante, M. (2020) · Frontiers in Physics · doi:10.3389/fphy.2020.00337 · Cited by 27
Millar‐Wilson, A., Ward, Ó., Duffy, E., & Hardiman, G. (2022) · iScience · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2022.105421 · Cited by 28
Hybrid methods of radiation shielding against deep-space radiation
Chowdhury, R. P., Stegeman, L., Lund, M., Fry, D. J., Madzunkov, S. M., & Bahadori, A. A. (2023) · Life Sciences in Space Research · doi:10.1016/j.lssr.2023.04.004 · Cited by 27
Wyrobek, A. J., & Britten, R. A. (2016) · Environmental and Molecular Mutagenesis · doi:10.1002/em.22018 · Cited by 27
Seawright, J. W., Samman, Y., Sridharan, V., Mao, X. W., Cao, M., Singh, P., Melnyk, S., Koturbash, I., Nelson, G. A., Hauer‐Jensen, M., et al. (2017) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0180594 · Cited by 26
Oryema, B., Jurua, E., Madiba, I. G., Nkosi, M. M., Sackey, J., & Mâaza, M. (2020) · Radiation Physics and Chemistry · doi:10.1016/j.radphyschem.2020.109077 · Cited by 26
Flexible wearable device applications for monitoring astronaut health: Current status and challenges
Wang, Y., Dong, D., Zhou, W., & He, J. (2025) · Wearable electronics. · doi:10.1016/j.wees.2024.12.007 · Cited by 25
Poon, C. (2020) · Engineering Reports · doi:10.1002/eng2.12242 · Cited by 25
Soler, I., Yun, S., Reynolds, R. P., Whoolery, C. W., Tran, F. H., Kumar, P. L., Rong, Y., DeSalle, M. J., Gibson, A. D., Stowe, A. M., et al. (2021) · Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2021.722780 · Cited by 25
Laiakis, E. C., Trani, D., Moon, B., Strawn, S. J., & Fornace, A. J. (2015) · Radiation Research · doi:10.1667/rr3967.1 · Cited by 25
Mortazavi, S. M. J., Bevelacqua, J. J., Rafiepour, P., Sina, S., Moradgholi, J., Mortazavi, A., & Welsh, J. S. (2024) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-323-95387-0.00006-6 · Cited by 24
Synthetic biology for space exploration
Onofri, S., Moeller, R., Billi, D., Balsamo, M., Becker, A., Benvenuto, E., Cassaro, A., Catanzaro, I., Cockell, C. S., Desiderio, A., et al. (2025) · npj Microgravity · doi:10.1038/s41526-025-00488-7 · Cited by 26
Radiation Risks and Countermeasures for Humans on Deep Space Missions
Sihver, L., & Mortazavi, S. (2019) · IEEE Aerospace Conference (AERO) · doi:10.1109/aero.2019.8742175 · Cited by 24
Abdullaev, S. A., Glukhov, S. I., & Gaziev, A. I. (2021) · Antioxidants · doi:10.3390/antiox10121885 · Cited by 24
A water-filled garment to protect astronauts during interplanetary missions tested on board the ISS
Baiocco, G., Giraudo, M., Bocchini, L., Barbieri, S., Locantore, I., Brussolo, E., Giacosa, D., Meucci, L., Steffenino, S., Ballario, A., et al. (2018) · Life Sciences in Space Research · doi:10.1016/j.lssr.2018.04.002 · Cited by 24
A bespoke health risk assessment methodology for the radiation protection of astronauts
Walsh, L., Hafner, L., Straube, U., Ulanowski, A., Fogtman, A., Durante, M., Weerts, G., & Schneider, U. (2021) · Radiation and Environmental Biophysics · doi:10.1007/s00411-021-00910-0 · Cited by 23
Keller, R. J., Porter, W., Goli, K., Rosenthal, R., Butler, N., & Jones, J. A. (2021) · Life · doi:10.3390/life11080844 · Cited by 23
“Research related to the radio-susceptibility of cyanobacterium species is complicated by the fact that ionizing radiation (IR) in space is complex, temporal, and comes in many wavelengths and particle sizes [103].”
BackgroundAveresch, N. J. H., Shunk, G. K., & Kern, C. A. (2022) · Frontiers in Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2022.877625 · Cited by 23
Metadata
- Authors
- Chancellor, J., Scott, G., & Sutton, J.
- Affiliations
- National Space Biomedical Research Institute (US)
- Corresponding author
- Sutton, Jeffrey
- Venue
- Life
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2014-09-11
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 491-510
- ISSN
- 2075-1729 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4206856
- OpenAlex
- W2017290871
- Semantic Scholar
- 0dae08815aba61fd12b71ab76d84c5815b55323d
- Cited by
- 455
- References
- 69
- Citations by year
- 2026: 42 · 2025: 64 · 2024: 65 · 2023: 37 · 2022: 49 · 2021: 64 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 5
- FWCI
- 1.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Life (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Civil War Book Review (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Civil War Book Review (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- National Space Biomedical Research Institute (NCC 9-58)
- Baylor College of Medicine (Friedkin Chair for Research in Sensory System Integration and Space Medicine)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology (medical) › Spaceflight effects on biology
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Effects of Radiation Exposure
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Radiation › Radiation Therapy and Dosimetry
- Keywords
- space radiation, astronaut health, galactic cosmic rays, solar energetic particle events, radiation-induced cancer, radiation sickness, radiation shielding, Mars missions, model organisms, omics, long-duration spaceflight
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
