collectSPACE: Messages - Reply to Topic

Space News
space history and artifacts articles

Messages
space history discussion forums

Sightings
worldwide astronaut appearances

Resources
selected space history documents

Forum:	Free Space
Topic:	McCartney to NASA: Cancel this experiment

Want to register?

Who Can Post?	Any registered users may post a reply.
About Registration	You must be registered in order to post a topic or reply in this forum.
Your UserName:
Your Password:	Forget your password?
Your Reply: HTML is ON UBB Code is ON Smilies Legend	[QUOTE]Originally posted by Robert Pearlman: [B]The scientists coordinating the test report that the low dose of radiation the monkeys will receive -- paramount to the exposure a human crew would be subjected to on a trip to Mars -- is not at a lethal level and beyond completing the variety of behavioral tasks they've been trained to perform, the monkeys will not be further tested on. The intent of the study, they say, is to monitor the long term effects of radiation exposure, so as to develop countermeasures. While the short term effects of exposure have been researched, longer term studies have not been conducted and such data is otherwise not available. I think it is fair to assume that Harvard and NASA scientists don't set out to devise ways to torture monkeys. If there was a way to accomplish this research with some lesser species or non-biological alternative, one would assume they'd be using it, if only to avoid the negative press. International Space Station crews are not subjected to the levels of radiation that astronauts moving beyond Earth orbit will face. Crew members in low Earth orbit do not receive the full brunt of radiation because the ISS flies within Earth's magnetic field. Some of those who oppose the tests suggest NASA should be focusing on means of preventing exposure rather than developing countermeasures. Certainly a worthy endeavor and one I believe NASA is pursuing as well, but what if the preventions fail during an emergency? Do we then tell the crew members flying to or returning from Mars, we're sorry, but there's nothing we can do for you because we do not know the long-term effects? I certainly do not relish the idea of exposing any creature (or human) to radiation, so I don't want to be mistaken as advocating the tests. But I also do not believe as laymen, the public (myself included) is sufficiently informed to judge what the biophysicists and behavioral pharmacologists propose as needed to devise the best protections for future astronauts.[/B][/QUOTE]
Options	Disable Smilies in This Post. Show Signature: include your profile signature. Only registered users may have signatures.
*If HTML and/or UBB Code are enabled, this means you can use HTML and/or UBB Code in your message.

If you have previously registered, but forgotten your password, click here.

<table border=0 cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 width="600"><TR><td bgcolor="#000000"><TABLE BORDER=0 cellpadding=4 border=0 cellspacing=1 WIDTH="100%"><TR bgcolor="#660000"><TD COLSPAN=2><CENTER>T O P I C     R E V I E W</CENTER></TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#494949"><TD valign=top>ejectr</TD><TD>McCartney <A HREF="http://www.bostonherald.com/news/national/general/view.bg?articleid=1277496" TARGET=_blank>sent a letter to NASA</A> in disagreement with the agency's plans to use live monkeys in an excess radiation exposure experiment. I commend McCartney for that action. <BLOCKQUOTE>"I believe NASA has the ingenuity to investigate the health effects of space travel without confining and experimenting on animals as was done in the old days," McCartney wrote to NASA head Charles Bolden. "It would be terribly disappointing if in our zeal to explore new frontiers and to learn about the fascinating universe where we live we began to regress in our treatment of the animals with whom we share this planet. May I appeal to you to cancel this experiment?"</BLOCKQUOTE> PDF: <A HREF="http://multimedia2.heraldinteractive.com/misc/SirPaulMcCartneyLetter.pdf" TARGET=_blank>Paul McCartney's letter to NASA</A></TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#333333"><TD valign=top>Rob Joyner</TD><TD>I agree with Sir Paul. I also believe that death row inmates are better suited for tests like these instead of using innocent animals. </TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#494949"><TD valign=top>issman1</TD><TD>They'll expose these animals to radiation then study their deteriorating health for years?Sounds gruesome, and is gruesome. Having said that, I doubt anyone who volunteered for Mars 500 will offer themselves as test subjects for this!Aren't long-term space station crews already exposed to radiation by virtue of being above the protection of Earth's atmosphere?Surely any useful information can be extrapolated using datapoints already collected from Mir and ISS missions. Or even compared with health records of people currently working in the nuclear industry.Better than what's proposed.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#333333"><TD valign=top>Robert Pearlman</TD><TD>The scientists coordinating the test report that the low dose of radiation the monkeys will receive -- paramount to the exposure a human crew would be subjected to on a trip to Mars -- is not at a lethal level and beyond completing the variety of behavioral tasks they've been trained to perform, the monkeys will not be further tested on. The intent of the study, they say, is to monitor the long term effects of radiation exposure, so as to develop countermeasures. While the short term effects of exposure have been researched, longer term studies have not been conducted and such data is otherwise not available.I think it is fair to assume that Harvard and NASA scientists don't set out to devise ways to torture monkeys. If there was a way to accomplish this research with some lesser species or non-biological alternative, one would assume they'd be using it, if only to avoid the negative press.International Space Station crews are not subjected to the levels of radiation that astronauts moving beyond Earth orbit will face. Crew members in low Earth orbit do not receive the full brunt of radiation because the ISS flies within Earth's magnetic field.Some of those who oppose the tests suggest NASA should be focusing on means of preventing exposure rather than developing countermeasures. Certainly a worthy endeavor and one I believe NASA is pursuing as well, but what if the preventions fail during an emergency? Do we then tell the crew members flying to or returning from Mars, we're sorry, but there's nothing we can do for you because we do not know the long-term effects?I certainly do not relish the idea of exposing any creature (or human) to radiation, so I don't want to be mistaken as advocating the tests. But I also do not believe as laymen, the public (myself included) is sufficiently informed to judge what the biophysicists and behavioral pharmacologists propose as needed to devise the best protections for future astronauts.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#494949"><TD valign=top>Tykeanaut</TD><TD>I agree with Paul McCartney, and not just because I grew up listening to the Beatles! There are plenty of truly evil people who could be used as test subjects.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#333333"><TD valign=top>J.L</TD><TD>I seem to recall Paul and John singing about monkeys on The White Album. Interesting coincidence.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#494949"><TD valign=top>jimsz</TD><TD>Surely a british geriatric musician billionaire could think of better things to do with his limited time left on earth than take the space agency of a foreign country to task for their scientific research?</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#333333"><TD valign=top>hlbjr</TD><TD>This isn't a trivial matter. It's called humanity. Look it up. Many groups around the world (including many doctors and scientists) agree that quite often there are more humane ways to gather data on the effects of various substances and traumas to humans than to subject animals to painful and cruel procedures. I repeat, this is not a trivial matter. You can gauge the advancement of a civilization by it's humanity toward animals (not my original quote). I love science and the space program and laud any effort to continue to progress with the minimum amount of painful procedures and suffering done to living creatures. </TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#494949"><TD valign=top>bruce</TD><TD>Paul is a dear friend, so I feel a need to stand up here. You would probably be surprised where Paul has put both his mouth and his money for the betterment of all living things. He also happens to be a huge fan of NASA and the idea of human space travel.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#333333"><TD valign=top>MCroft04</TD><TD>I agree with Robert's pragmatic assessment of the issue. And he is correct that astronauts in LEO don't have to worry about intense doses of radiation due to protection from the Van Allen radiation belt, except when they pass through the South Atlantic Anomaly (SAA), where the Van Allen radiation belt dips very close to the earth. I believe the ISS periodically passes through the SAA, requiring extra protection built into the ISS. While I respect Mr. McCartney and his endeavors to help others, his science is not quite up to NASA scientists.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#494949"><TD valign=top>mjanovec</TD><TD> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by jimsz: Surely a british geriatric musician billionaire could think of better things to do with his limited time left on earth<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Surely you have better things to do than to tell us what Paul McCartney should be doing with the rest of his life.If you don't agree with his opinion, fine. But don't use your prejudices against his national origin, his age, his occupation, and his economic standing to justify your dismissal of his opinion.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#333333"><TD valign=top>Tykeanaut</TD><TD>I agree! Personally, I don't consider the US to be a 'foreign' country either.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#494949"><TD valign=top>Kite</TD><TD>Great reply mjanovec to jimsz.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#333333"><TD valign=top>Murph</TD><TD>"I don't feel it is my place to comment on the government or its policies while I am a guest here, it's rude" - British musician Sir Mick Jagger, commenting on his position on the US elections. I agree with jimsz's comment. I lived in the UK for three years, and felt, and conducted myself in that same manner, as Jagger; as a guest in that country, its not my place to comment on its policies. McCartney is a fine musician. NASA has fine scientists. It's not his place to act as a NASA scientist.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#494949"><TD valign=top>Rizz</TD><TD>He's not acting as a NASA scientist, he is simply acting as a member of the human race, reminding the scientists that we share this planet with the animals, and NASA should consider that fact and respect it.Thats not rude. </TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#333333"><TD valign=top>Mike Dixon</TD><TD>McCartney made a statement / plea. To deny him, or to criticise his right to voice an opinion, regardless of his nationality, age or wealth (particularly in light of his stance on animal welfare matters that has been well documented for decades) is, in my opinion, unfortunate.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#494949"><TD valign=top>jimsz</TD><TD> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by mjanovec: If you don't agree with his opinion, fine. But don't use your prejudices against his national origin, his age, his occupation, and his economic standing to justify your dismissal of his opinion.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The same can be said for Mr. McCartney. Surely he has better things to do that take a foreign government agency to task. Say what you will, NASA is a US entity.There are no prejudices. He is a geriatric. He is not a US citizen. He is a billionaire (I believe but maybe only a millionaire?) and he is a musician. Prejudices are exposed where?Let Mr. McCartney rail against government entities in his country and maybe in a realm he might be educated on. I don't know if what NASA is doing is correct or needed but that is a decision for people who actually have a grasp on what exactly the study is doing and why.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#333333"><TD valign=top>Tykeanaut</TD><TD>As we both thankfully live in democracies, I would like to think we should have freedom of speech on any subject in any country?</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#494949"><TD valign=top>spaceheaded</TD><TD>We've heard from a former Beatle. But with all due respect to Sir Paul, wouldn't it be appropriate to wait for one of the former Monkees to weigh in on the subject? (sorry, couldn't resist)</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#333333"><TD valign=top>Murph</TD><TD> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by spaceheaded: ...wouldn't it be appropriate to wait for one of the former Monkees to weigh in on the subject?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You, Sir, are a genius.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#494949"><TD valign=top>Steve Procter</TD><TD>I suspect we'll not hear anything from the Monkees on this subject as they 'will be too busy singing to put anybody down' <IMG SRC="http://www.collectspace.com/ubb/smile.gif"></TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#333333"><TD valign=top>mjanovec</TD><TD> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by jimsz: Surely he has better things to do that take a foreign government agency to task. Say what you will, NASA is a US entity.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I can respect that opinion as long as you acknowledge that it should apply in both directions...and that Americans shouldn't take any foreign governments (or their agencies) to task for anything that they do. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by jimsz: There are no prejudices. He is a geriatric. He is not a US citizen. He is a billionaire (I believe but maybe only a millionaire?) and he is a musician. Prejudices are exposed where?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I'm not arguing that the points you brought up about his nationality, age, occupation, wealth were incorrect. I'm arguing about the reason why you brought up those points. For example, what role does McCartney's age have in the legitimacy of his opinion?NASA has <A HREF="http://www.collectspace.com/ubb/Forum3/HTML/003773.html" TARGET=_blank>already called upon McCartney</A> to help draw publicity to ISS Expedition 12 back in 2005. Apparently NASA had no problems with his age, occupation, wealth, or nationality when it served their purposes.If McCartney wants to share his opinion with Bolden in a written letter, it really doesn't bother me. The way I see it, it's up to Bolden to decide whose opinion is (or isn't) worth his time and consideration.</TD></TR><TR bgcolor="#494949"><TD valign=top>gliderpilotuk</TD><TD>Steve, have you ever thought about a career on the stage? <IMG SRC="http://www.collectspace.com/ubb/biggrin.gif">I'm all for freedom of speech and I'd defend McCartney's right to an opinion and to start a debate. I'm sure NASA are grown up enough not to be unduly influenced by Macca, or a Bono or a Sting, or any other A, B or C lister, just because they are famous. I don't know enough about the criticality of these tests being done on primates, so at the very least I hope NASA is spurred into clarifying their rationale and to justify (or not) something that most people nowadays find abhorrent.However, I do find myself wondering what Macca's stance has been on the tragic, but necessary testing of medical solutions on animals - solutions that have saved lives. Strange also that the PETA protests started in January yet he leaves it over six months to complain.</TD></TR></TABLE></td></tr></table>

Contact Us | The Source for Space History & Artifacts