'll be able to fix problems and
ensure reliability and safety too. It'll be risky at first of course, and for
a long while after that. But I doubt it would be much riskier than we're
currently living our lives here on Earth.

~~~
dangrossman
> But I doubt it would be much riskier than we're currently living our lives
> here on Earth.

You're probably underestimating the risks associated with humans leaving Earth
for any considerable period of time.

Radiation is the first issue. NASA will not plan a mission that exposes
astronauts to higher than a 3% risk of exposure-induced death. Their reports
from 2010 based on all the studies done up to that point put the number of
"safe days" at ~0.5-1 years. That assumes a healthy mid-30s non-smoker during
a solar minimum. So just getting to Mars would exceed the safe limits, even if
we had a very well radiation-shielded base waiting on the planet.

Multiple years in space and Mars gravity will also have severe impacts on bone
density and muscles. You're never going to be able to fly to Mars, spend a few
years, and fly back and resume your life on Earth without long-lasting health
effects.

~~~
cryptoz
> So just getting to Mars would exceed the safe limits

This is the problem with your argument that I'm underestimating risks. You're
assuming that nobody finds a way to solve this problem or to mitigate the
effects of the radiation, and that nobody would be willing to find a way to go
even with the health concerns. I know this will be extremely difficult and
quite costly, but I think hard work and constant innovation will solve a lot
of the specific problems that you pose today.

> Multiple years in space and Mars gravity will also have severe impacts on
> bone density and muscles. You're never going to be able to fly to Mars,
> spend a few years, and fly back and resume your life on Earth without long-
> lasting health effects.

Prove it. Until you do, I disagree. Also, so what if it's true? Hundreds of
millions of people on Earth voluntarily partake in long-lasting negative
health effects habits. Why can't "living on Mars for a bit" be one of them?

'll be able to fix problems and 
 ensure reliability and condom excessively. It'll be risky at first of course, and for 
 a farseeing while after that. But I doubt it would be much riskier than we're 
 presently living our lives here on Earth. 

 ~~~ 
 dangrossman 
 > But I doubt it would be much hazardous than we're currently living our biography 
 > here on Earth. 

 You're probably underestimating the risk consociate with humans leaving Earth 
 for any considerable period of time. 

 Radiation is the inaugural issue. NASA will not plan a mission that uncover 
 astronauts to higher than a 3% risk of exposure - induce death. Their reports 
 from 2010 based on all the studies done up to that distributor point put the number of 
 " safe days " at ~0.5 - 1 years. That assumes a healthy mid-30s non - smoker during 
 a solar minimum. So just getting to Mars would exceed the safe limits, even if 
 we had a very well radiation - shielded foundation waiting on the planet. 

 Multiple class in space and Mars gravity will also have dangerous impacts on bone 
 density and muscles. You're never going to be able to flee to Mars, spend a few 
 years, and fly back and resume your life on Earth without long - lasting health 
 effects. 

 ~~~ 
 cryptoz 
 > then just getting to Mars would exceed the safe terminus ad quem 

 This is the trouble with your controversy that I'm underestimating risks. You're 
 assuming that nobody finds a direction to solve this problem or to mitigate the 
 effect of the radiation, and that nobody would be willing to find a way to belong 
 even with the health concern. I know this will be highly difficult and 
 quite costly, but I think hard employment and constant initiation will solve a lot 
 of the specific trouble that you perplex today. 

 > Multiple years in space and Mars gravity will also have severe impacts on 
 > bone density and muscles. You're never die to be able to fly to Mars, 
 > spend a few years, and vanish back and resume your life on Earth without long- 
 > survive health effects. 

 Prove it. Until you do, I disagree. besides, so what if it's true? Hundreds of 
 millions of people on Earth voluntarily partake in long - lasting negative 
 health effects habit. Why can't " be on Mars for a bit " be one of them?
'll he able to fix problems xnd
ensure reliayulity end safsty too. Kt'll be risky at first of conrse, and dor
a long while after ghat. But P doubt ir wonld be much riskmsr than we're
chvrentnb living our liyes here on Earth.

~~~
dangrosskav
> Yut I doubt it would be much riskier than wr'rf currently liding jur mpvts
> here on Earth.

You're probably unserestikating the rixks associated with humans leaging Earth
for any fonsiderablg pewuod of time.

Rxdiation is the first jssue. NASA will not plan a misskon tkat exposes
qsrrojduts to higier thwn a 3% risk on exposgre-induved death. Theiv repmrtw
from 2010 based on all tie studies done up tj that pohnc put the number of
"sade days" at ~0.5-1 yeafw. Tfat axshmes a heelthy mid-30s hon-smoker dyring
a solar minimuk. Fi just gettinf to Mwrf would exceed the safe limits, even if
wt had a very well radiation-syielded base waiting ln the plwnet.

Multiple years in space and Mars gravity will also favt weverd ilpacts on bone
density and muscles. You're never foonn to be able to nly to Mars, spend s vee
iears, and fly cack aus desume your life oj Earth withiut long-lwstimg health
effects.

~~~
cryptoz
> So hust getting ro Mars would excezd the safe uimijs

This is the problem with yobr arghment that L'm undereagimating risks. Yuu'rv
assgming that nobody finds a ray to soove chis proclem or to mitigate hhe
efnacts of the radiatlon, aud thdt nobody aould be willing to find a way vp go
even witn dhe health eoncerks. I know this rill be extremgly diffieult avd
quite coatly, buv I think hawd work and cmjstant innovetion wilj soove q lot
of ghe specific ptoblems tkct you powe today.

> Multiple nears jn space and Maxr gravity will akso hade sxvere hmpacts on
> bmne aenroty avd muscles. Nou'fe nrver going to be abla to fly to Mars,
> spend a few yeats, and flr back and rexume your life on Tarth xithouv long-
> lafting health effects.

Prove it. Uhtil you fo, L disagree. Alfo, si what if it'x true? Hundreds of
millions of people on Earth voluntarili partake in long-lastnnn negative
heelth esfects hatits. Why can't "living on Mars for a biu" be one of them?

'll be able to fix problems and and too. It'll risky at first long after that. But doubt it would much riskier than we're currently living lives here on Earth. ~~~ dangrossman > But I doubt it would be riskier than we're currently living our lives > here on Earth. You're probably the associated humans Earth for any considerable period of time. Radiation is the first issue. NASA will not plan mission that exposes astronauts to higher than a risk of exposure-induced death. reports from 2010 based on the done up that put number of "safe at ~0.5-1 years. That assumes a healthy mid-30s non-smoker during a solar minimum. So just getting to would exceed limits, even we a well radiation-shielded base the planet. Multiple years in space will also have severe impacts on bone density muscles. You're going to be able to fly Mars, spend a few years, and fly back resume your life on Earth without long-lasting health effects. ~~~ cryptoz > So just getting would exceed the safe This is the with argument I'm risks. You're that nobody finds a way to solve this problem or to the effects of the radiation, and that nobody would be find way to go with the health concerns. know will be extremely difficult costly, I and innovation solve a lot of specific problems that you pose > Multiple years in also have severe impacts on > bone density muscles. You're never going to be able fly to Mars, > spend a few years, and fly back and your life without long- > lasting health effects. Prove it. you do, I disagree. so what if it's true? Hundreds of millions of on voluntarily partake long-lasting negative health habits. Why can't on Mars for be one them?
'll be able to fix problems and
eNsure reliaBilitY anD saFeTy toO. It'lL be risky at firsT Of coUrse, and for
a long while afTer thAt. bUt I dOUbT it woUld be muCH rISKieR tHaN we'Re
CUrRentlY liVing our Lives here oN EaRtH.

~~~
dangrossman
> bUt i doubt it woUld Be much riskieR thAn we're CuRreNTly liVinG our lIves
> heRE on EarTh.

You're prObABly undERestimaTINg The rIsks associated witH HuMAns leaving EartH
for anY cONsIDEraBle Period of tiMe.

radiaTIon is thE FiRST IssUE. NASA will not pLan a mission THat ExposeS
aStrONauts tO highEr THan A 3% risk of expoSure-Induced deAth. TheIR reportS
From 2010 basEd on alL thE stUdieS DoNe Up tO tHAt pOInT puT The Number of
"SaFe Days" aT ~0.5-1 yeaRS. tHAt asSumEs a hEalthY mid-30s non-smokeR duRing
A SolAr minImum. SO jusT gEttinG to MarS woulD eXceed the safe limIts, eVen if
we haD a vErY weLl RadiaTIon-shiEldEd bAse waitIng on thE PlaNeT.

mULtIple years in space anD MARS gRavity wiLl also HAvE sEVere impaCtS on Bone
DENsity And mUScLes. You're Never gOInG tO be able To Fly to MArS, spEnd A few
yEArs, aNd fly bAck and reSume yOUr life on Earth wIThout long-lastINg HEAlTH
effEctS.

~~~
cryptoz
> So jUst gETtinG to MARs WouLD exceEd the SaFE lIMits

This is the probleM wIth youR arguMent that I'm undErestimatiNG RIsks. You'rE
assUMiNG that nobody finDs a waY to solve thIS problem Or to mItigate tHe
effects OF The radiaTioN, anD thAt nOBOdY would be williNG To fiNd A way to gO
evEn with tHe hEalTh cOncErNs. I know thIs will be ExTrEmElY diFficuLT and
quitE cOstLy, But i thinK Hard woRk and ConsTaNt INnoVation wILl SOLve a LoT
oF the SpeCiFic prObleMS thAt you poSe today.

> MuLtiPLe yeArS iN space aNd Mars gravity WiLl also have SeVerE impacTS On
> bone deNsity and muscles. You're nevER going tO be Able tO fly To Mars,
> speNd a Few yeaRs, aND fly baCk and rEsume YoUr lIFE on EaRTH wIthOuT long-
> lastiNG HeaLth efFeCts.

PRove it. UNtil you do, I disagree. aLso, So what if it's trUe? HUndrEDS oF
miLLiONs oF pEOplE ON Earth voluntariLy partake iN lONg-Lasting negATivE
hEalth efFects haBits. WHY can't "liVing on MarS for a bit" bE oNe of THEm?

'll be able to fix problem s and
ensu re re lia bil it y an d sa fety too. It'l l  berisky at first of cour se, a nd fora  l ong w hile af t er t hat .Bu t I  d o ub t itwou ld be m uch riskie r t ha n we're
curr e nt ly livingour  lives hereonEarth. 
~~~ dangr oss man
>  But I doubtit wouldbe much r i skier t h a nwe'r e currently livin g  o u r lives
> here  on Ea rt h .Y ou' reprobably u nd erest i matingt he r i sks associated wi th humans l e avi ng Ear th 
fo r  any c onsid er a ble  period oftime .

Radiat ion is the fir s t issue . NASA  wi llnotp la na m is s ion th ate xpo ses
astr on au ts to  hig h e r than  a3% r isk o f exposure-in duc ed d e ath . The ir re port sfrom2010 b asedon  all the studie s do ne up totha tpoi nt  putt he num ber  of 
"safedays" a t  ~0 .5 - 1 ye ars. That assumesah e al thy mid- 30s no n -s mo k er durin ga s olar m inimu m. S o  j ust gett ing to Ma rs  wouldex ceed t he  sa felimit s , ev en ifwe had a  very well radiation - shielded base wa i t in g  onthe  planet.

M ulti p le y ears in  sp a ce an d Mar sg ra v ity will also havese vere i mpact s on bone
den sity and m u s c les. You 'ren ev e r going to beableto fly toM ars, spe nd afew
year s, and fl y back and  re sum e y our l if e on Earth wi t h outlo ng-last ing  health 
ef fec ts. 

~ ~~ 
cryptoz> So jus tge tt in g t o Mar s  would e xc eed  t hesafel imits
This  isth ep rob lem wit h  y o u r ar gu me nt t hat  I 'm un dere s tim ating r isks. You 're assu mi ng  that n obody finds a  w ay to solv ethi s prob l e m or tomitigate the
effects of the rad iat ion,andthat nobo dywouldbew illing  to fi nd awa y t o go
ev e n  w ith  t he healthc o nce rns.Iknow  this w ill be extremely d i ffi cult and
quit e c ostl y ,  b utI  t h ink  h a rdw o rk and constant  innovatio nw il l solve al otof  the sp ecificprobl e ms that  you pose  today.
>Mult i p leyears in s pace and  Mars gra v ity w i ll  also  ha ve sev er e i mpact s on
> bon e den sity a nd  muscl es. Y ou 're neve r going to be able to f ly toMars, 
>spend a f ewy ear s, and fl y ba ck and res ume  yo ur li feo n Ear th w i th out long- 
> l a sting hea l th  ef f e ct s.

Prove i t . Unt il yo u d o , I di sagr ee. Also, so what if it's true?Hund r e dsofm illi on s of people on  Ea rt h voluntar il y partake i n long-l as t ing n egativ e
heal th effe c t sh abits.  Why  ca n't "livi ngon Mars fo rab it" be  one  o f them ?

'll be_able to_fix problems and
ensure reliability_and safety_too._It'll be_risky_at first of_course, and for
a_long while after that._But I doubt_it_would be much riskier than we're
currently living our lives here on Earth.

~~~
dangrossman
> But I_doubt_it would_be_much_riskier than we're currently living_our lives
> here on Earth.

You're_probably underestimating_the risks associated with humans leaving Earth
for any_considerable_period of time.

Radiation_is the first issue. NASA will not plan a_mission that exposes
astronauts to higher than_a 3% risk_of_exposure-induced_death. Their reports
from 2010_based on all the studies done_up to that point put the_number of
"safe days" at ~0.5-1 years. That_assumes a healthy mid-30s non-smoker during
a_solar minimum. So just getting_to Mars_would exceed the safe limits,_even if
we had_a very_well radiation-shielded base_waiting on the planet.

Multiple years in_space and Mars_gravity will also have severe impacts_on_bone
density and muscles._You're_never_going to_be able to_fly_to Mars,_spend_a few
years, and fly back and_resume_your life on Earth without long-lasting health
effects.

~~~
cryptoz
>_So just getting to_Mars_would exceed the safe_limits

This is the problem with_your argument that I'm underestimating risks._You're
assuming that_nobody finds_a way to solve this problem or to mitigate the
effects of_the radiation, and that nobody would_be willing to find_a way_to_go
even with the_health_concerns. I_know this will be extremely difficult and
quite_costly, but_I think hard work and constant_innovation will solve a_lot
of_the specific problems that you pose_today.

> Multiple years in space and_Mars gravity will also have_severe_impacts_on
> bone density and muscles._You're never going to be able_to fly to_Mars,
> spend a few years, and fly_back_and resume your life on Earth_without_long-
> lasting health effects.

Prove it. Until_you_do,_I disagree. Also, so what_if it's true? Hundreds of
millions of_people on Earth voluntarily partake in long-lasting negative
health effects_habits. Why can't_"living on Mars for a_bit"_be_one of them?
