Prospective women astronauts selection program

Betson, Johnnie R.; Secrest, Robert R.

doi:10.1016/0002-9378(64)90446-6

Cited by 13 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The programme was not officially sanctioned and, therefore, not supported by government facilities, requiring the use of other laboratories 10 . Under this programme 19 women underwent physical examination and extensive physiological and psychological testing, identical to that required of official male candidates 14 , 15 , 13 of which passed with “no medical reservations” 16 . Data from the VO 2max tests showed that the relative VO 2max values of the top four females were comparable to the average from 267 similarly aged male pilots 17 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of body size and countermeasure exercise on estimates of life support resources during all-female crewed exploration missions

Scott

Green

Weerts

et al. 2023

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Employing a methodology reported in a recent theoretical study on male astronauts, this study estimated the effects of body size and aerobic countermeasure (CM) exercise in a four-person, all-female crew composed of individuals drawn from a stature range (1.50- to 1.90-m) representative of current space agency requirements (which exist for stature, but not for body mass) upon total energy expenditure (TEE), oxygen (O2) consumption, carbon dioxide (CO2) and metabolic heat (Hprod) production, and water requirements for hydration, during space exploration missions. Assuming geometric similarity across the stature range, estimates were derived using available female astronaut data (mean age: 40-years; BMI: 22.7-kg·m−2; resting VO2 and VO2max: 3.3- and 40.5-mL·kg−1·min−1) on 30- and 1080-day missions, without and with, ISS-like countermeasure exercise (modelled as 2 × 30-min aerobic exercise at 75% VO2max, 6-day·week−1). Where spaceflight-specific data/equations were not available, terrestrial equivalents were used. Body size alone increased 24-h TEE (+ 30%), O2 consumption (+ 60%), CO2 (+ 60%) and Hprod (+ 60%) production, and water requirements (+ 17%). With CM exercise, the increases were + 25–31%, + 29%, + 32%, + 38% and + 17–25% across the stature range. Compared to the previous study of theoretical male astronauts, the effect of body size on TEE was markedly less in females, and, at equivalent statures, all parameter estimates were lower for females, with relative differences ranging from -5% to -29%. When compared at the 50th percentile for stature for US females and males, these differences increased to − 11% to − 41% and translated to larger reductions in TEE, O2 and water requirements, and less CO2 and Hprod during 1080-day missions using CM exercise. Differences between female and male theoretical astronauts result from lower resting and exercising O2 requirements (based on available astronaut data) of female astronauts, who are lighter than male astronauts at equivalent statures and have lower relative VO2max values. These data, combined with the current move towards smaller diameter space habitat modules, point to a number of potential advantages of all-female crews during future human space exploration missions.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of body size and countermeasure exercise on estimates of life support resources during all-female crewed exploration missions

Scott

Green

Weerts

et al. 2023

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These included (compared to males) lower body mass (and thus reducing the fuel required to reach orbit), lower oxygen consumption [Haynesworth and Toomey, 1998], as well as a lower risk of heart attack, a belief that the female reproductive organs were less susceptible to ionizing radiation, and the suggestion that females had better tolerance to cramped spaces and prolonged isolation [Freni, 2002;Weitekamp, 2004]. Flickinger's continued efforts resulted in the physical examination and extensive physiological and psychological testing of 19 women, 13 of which passed with "no medical reservations" [Betson and Secrest, 1964], with relative VO 2max values of the top four females comparable to the average from 267 similarly aged male pilots [Ackmann et al, 2003]. These four females were shorter in stature (168 ± 3-cm vs. 178 ± 1-cm), and had a lower body mass (54 ± 2-kg vs. 76 ± 1-kg) and absolute VO 2max (1.73 ± 0.05 L•min − 1 vs. 2.57 ± 0.04 L•min − 1 ) than the male group [Ryan et al, 2009].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Body size and countermeasure exercise: implications upon resource utilization during human space exploration missions with female astronauts

Scott¹,

Green

Cheuvront

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Employing a methodology reported in a recent theoretical study on male astronauts, this study estimated the effects of body size and aerobic countermeasure (CM) exercise in a four-person, all-female crew composed of individuals drawn from a stature range (1.50- to 1.90-m) representative of current space agency requirements upon total energy expenditure (TEE), oxygen (O2) consumption, carbon dioxide (CO2) and metabolic heat (Hprod) production, and water requirements for hydration, during space exploration missions. Assuming geometric similarity across the stature range, estimates were derived using available female astronaut data (mean age: 40-y; BMI: 22.7-kg·m− 2; resting VO2 and VO2max: 3.3- and 40.5-mL·kg− 1·min− 1) on 30- and 1080-d missions, without and with, ISS-like countermeasure exercise (modelled as 2x30min aerobic exercise at 75% VO₂max, 6d·wk1). Where spaceflight-specific data/equations were not available, terrestrial equivalents were used. Body size alone increased 24-h TEE (+ 30%), O₂ consumption (+ 60%), CO₂ (+ 60%) and Hprod (+ 60%) production, and water requirements (+ 17%). With CM exercise, the increases were 25–31%, 29%, 32%, 38% and 17–25% across the stature range. Compared to the previous study of theoretical male astronauts, the effect of body size on TEE was markedly less in females, and, at equivalent statures, all parameter estimates were lower for females, with relative differences ranging from − 5% to -29%. When compared at the 50th percentile for stature for US females and males, these differences increased to -11% to -41% and translated to larger reductions in TEE, O2 and water requirements, and less CO2 and Hprod during 1080-d missions using CM exercise. Differences between female and male theoretical astronauts result from lower resting and exercising O2 requirements – based on available astronaut data of female astronauts who are lighter than male astronauts at equivalent statures, and having lower relative VO₂max values. These data, combined with the current move towards smaller diameter space habitat modules point to a number of potential advantages of all-female crews during future human space exploration missions.

show abstract