This could have big implications for human reproduction in spaceflight.

“Exposure to short duration gravity load changes including microgravity, as sustained in a parabolic flight statistically significantly decreases the sperm motility and vitality of human fresh sperm samples,” the team found, adding that this may have huge importance for any prolonged human settlement missions in space.

“In the future, should humans remain in space for long periods of time with exposure to different microgravity and hypergravity peaks, which could range from months to a number of years, reproduction may pose a problem to be tackled.”

The mechanism by which sperm motility was decreased remains unknown, with further study needed.

    • NatakuNox@lemmy.worldEnglish
      10·
      16 days ago

      I’m dyslexic and for a moment I was like. Why would you take people who work on boats on the vomit comet? Is it to see if their sealegs transfer to space?

      ᕕ( ᐛ )ᕗ disorders can be fun sometimes…

      Ps. Someone should do that study I mentioned.

  • rumba@lemmy.zipEnglish
    811·
    16 days ago

    A few seconds of microgravity? Something sounds off, that would probably be enough to be seen in parachutists and fighter pilots. I think I’m going to wait for the peer review on this one…

    • NatakuNox@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2212·
      16 days ago

      Also can we stop trying to figure out how humans are going to survive off earth… Until we at least make earth livable again? Like “Genius of the Century” Elon Musk is pouring billions into trying to get man to Mars while actively helping to making earth unlivable.

      Like no one should be allowed to leave this rock until it either becomes Paradise or worse than fucking Mars!

      • rumba@lemmy.zipEnglish
        263·
        16 days ago

        If you’re going to call for the stopping of advancement of science while we figure out how to not be horrible we might as well just cash it out now.

        • NatakuNox@lemmy.worldEnglish
          65·
          16 days ago

          Not my point. Advancement should never be stopped but us as a civilization needs push that science towards solving the most immediate and important problems.

          Just a observation. Wish it was reality. But with enough social collaboration we can make one man’s wet dream of being the last of humanity, while spreading his “Superior” seed across the cosmos; socially, financially, and legally unacceptable.

          • boywar3@lemmy.worldEnglish
            172·
            16 days ago

            Scientific advancement in space experimentation leads to breakthroughs in other areas - all scientific progress is interconnected.

            “Pushing science towards solving the most immediate and important problems” is sort of a nonsense statement, as there could be new efficiencies/strategies that are discovered in fields that are completely unrelated to what would normally be associated with “the most immediate and important problems.”

          • GBU_28@lemm.eeEnglish
            9·
            16 days ago

            We have many many scientists working on “important problems”.

            We do not have a deficit in research or curiosity, we have an issue with people willfully implementing policy that is detrimental. (Power, Profit, willful ignorance, intending to hurt others, etc)

          • j4k3@lemmy.worldEnglish
            5·
            16 days ago

            Actually, space civ or anywhere else for that matter will serve as an excellent research lab experiment to solve Earth’s problems.

            I’m not in favor of the tech bro++ oligarchy at all, and I believe this is going to get a good bit worse before it gets better for a specific reason of what will happen after the first M-type asteroid in NEO is successfully mined.

            One must look at the situation on Earth from an uninvolved 3rd party perspective. Everything humans do is just a form of complex social hierarchy like any other animals. The primary form if display is the barbaric primitivism of collecting the fundamental means of survival; wealth. There is little incentive to display in other more advanced forms like reputation (academia/film industry), or merit (Olympics/military), within the broader population. One can behave terribly and ameliorate a massive share of the real cost using the environmental container to distribute the tax. In space, that is simply not possible. Sustainability is only possible within the elemental cycles. Existence becomes the driving factor. The economy of social hierarchy instead shifts to more advanced forms such as merit and reputation. The most fundamental resource and struggle becomes the heat budget in most instances. This fundamental shift is very important to future history as it creates the technology and engineering mindset that the environmental container is not a valid unlimited resource. Once the technology exists at smaller scales in space, it can be implemented at greater scale on Earth. The financial burden to iterate this tech and refine it to the point where it can be practical on Earth with little cost increase is simply not viable at all, not even for government programs. The big difference is M-type asteroids. Few talk about this, but elemental resource scarcity on any round planet is due to gravitational differentiation. The moment humans access a large M-type astroid (the core of a differentiated planetesimal that has broken up), all wealth accessed in the Holocene is basically irrelevant. The moment that happens, within a generation there will be space colonies. Everything else happening in space is basically taking this into context. Japan in leading the way on prospecting and mining exploration at the moment. They are the most relevant group to watch at the moment.

      • reksas@sopuli.xyzEnglish
        1·
        16 days ago

        i dont think anyone is going to survive if they try to leave permanently, not with this level of technology. Or if they do they will just suffer

  • Francisco@lemmy.worldEnglish
    78·
    16 days ago

    After sparing this paper a fair bit of attention I feel I’ve wasted it.

    Nowhere in the paper could i find in what conditions the test samples were kept during the experiment. This is pretty basic stuff. At this stage I’d wage sloshing was the issue.

    Reading this part of the methodology:

    "2.2 Initial sperm analysis

    After liquefaction…

    [Two paragraphs later, in the same section: ] After this first analysis, the 15 sperm samples were split into two fractions. All the samples were exposed to ‘Parabolic flight’ (split 1) and to…"

    Did they liquefied the samples and tested like that? Whaa?

    The “After this first analysis” should not be in the “2.2 Initial sperm analysis”. It just shouldn’t!

    Then I think “15 sperm samples were split into two fractions”. … “the samples were exposed to ‘Parabolic flight’ (split 1)” — splits, fractions, what a mess!! At this stage I’ve wasted enough.

    The paper should be retracted, the reviewers spanked and the editor fired.

  • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
    30·
    16 days ago

    comparing an existing sample exposed to small doses of micro-gravity seems incredibly… useless… compared to sperm generated in space. how can they even begin to use it to make generalizations on ‘long term human space colonization’?

    • scops@reddthat.comEnglish
      11·
      16 days ago

      Especially considering the samples were exposed to supergravity as the plane came out of its dive. I feel like that would mostly invalidate whatever they were hoping to find.

      Also, why do they dismiss asking ISS staff to participate in studies? Bodily autonomy doesn’t mean you can’t ask someone to conduct … uh… research with you. It just means you have to respect it they say no. Astronauts seem like the types who wouldn’t mind putting in a little extra effort for… science.

      • T156@lemmy.worldEnglish
        3·
        16 days ago

        Also, why do they dismiss asking ISS staff to participate in studies? Bodily autonomy doesn’t mean you can’t ask someone to conduct … uh… research with you. It just means you have to respect it they say no. Astronauts seem like the types who wouldn’t mind putting in a little extra effort for… science.

        Too many other introduced variables? Microgravity has a lot of other systemic effects on the astronauts that might affect sperm motility, even before effects to the sperm themselves. Or just individual variation/genetics on the part of the astronauts themselves.

        They wouldn’t be able to get a sperm sample that wasn’t affected by microgravity from the astronauts to begin with.

    • lunarul@lemmy.worldEnglish
      7·
      16 days ago

      incredibly… useless… compared to sperm generated in space

      That’s what I don’t get. Transporting fresh sperm is not an issue that anyone cares about in space colonization. Sperm will get there in two ways: frozen or made on the spot.

  • j4k3@lemmy.worldEnglish
    121·
    16 days ago

    Literally (fiction) speaking, I’ve randomly gambled on ~10 generations max before the population crashes if a generation ship arrives and fails to complete an O’Neill cylinder on the other side.

    Sound legit? 4am, going to bed, so no read.

  • Cocodapuf@lemmy.worldEnglish
    9·
    15 days ago

    Can we please stop pretending that future space colonists will live their whole lives in microgravity? Nobody seriously suggests that as an option, that’s stupid. Countless studies have shown that for proper biological development, humans (and in fact nearly all organisms) need gravity. But for large space stations, spin gravity is actually not that freaking hard. If you can create a large enough station to support a sizable colony, it does not take much more engineering to make it spin.

    • Arondeus@lemmy.caEnglish
      141·
      16 days ago

      They are literally only talking about creating humans NOT on this world…

        • Pennomi@lemmy.worldEnglish
          92·
          16 days ago

          The universe has plenty of room for more humans. There’s a shit ton of matter out there, if you can get to it.

          • JackGreenEarth@lemm.eeEnglish
            16·
            16 days ago

            No, I meant to say by there being suffering in the world, I meant in the universe, rather than specifically referring to this planet and there would be no human suffering in off Earth colonies.

            • T156@lemmy.worldEnglish
              5·
              16 days ago

              … Why not just say that then? It would save much confusion.

              It’d be hard to say whether there would be no suffering in off-world colonies, but I should doubt it. Traditionally, colonisation has been a dangerous thing, and human nature is as human nature does. The best you can do is reduce it so that what suffering does occur is either minor, or ineffectual.

              • JackGreenEarth@lemm.eeEnglish
                13·
                16 days ago

                Today I seem really terrible at saying what I mean! 🤣

                Whether on or off planet, humans anywhere will experience suffering, likely to an extent that far outweighs the pleasure they experience. Therefore it’s unethical to create more humans if your goal is reduction of suffering.

    • Squizzy@lemmy.worldEnglish
      124·
      16 days ago

      Most of us aren’t suffering and spending time with my kids is amazing and I enioy it.

      • TachyonTele@lemm.eeEnglish
        2·
        16 days ago

        Lol the downvotes are killing me.
        “Fuck you for enjoying your life and family!”

    • angrystego@lemmy.worldEnglish
      72·
      16 days ago

      I get you. But that’s life. Life wants to live and create more life. That’s what it’s about. The parts of life that ask why will be set aside and not used for the continuation of life.