Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Reports on Human Health Risks: 2017 Letter Report. Washington, DC: The National
analyzed over 30 different different reports from the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA) on the Evidence Reports of Human Health Risks. The journal includes
the functions and research done by NASA and risks assessed with the specified criteria, is the
evidence sufficient, any gaps in the study, possible relevant interactions among risks, the quality
of the report, and if the cited literature is reliable. The reports are as follows, risk of bone fracture
due to spaceflight-induced changes to bone, risk of early onset osteoporosis due to space flight,
risk of cardiac rhythm problems during spaceflight, risk of renal stone formation, and the risk of
adverse health outcomes and decrements in performance due to in-flight medical conditions.
This current source was written by Carol E.H. Scott-Conner, Daniel R. Masys, and
Catharyn T. Liverman, all editors and apart of the Committee to Review NASA's Evidence
Reports on Human Health Risks, as well as the Board on Health Sciences Policy; Health and
Medicine Division; National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The journal
was published for peer review by the National Academies Press, a publisher for scientists to
report their scholarly research to other educators. The objective of this report is to showcase all
of the different risks spaceflight poses to the human body along with the research that has been
done to potentially reduce these dangers. For example, the committee members review different
risk factors and define all the possible outcomes and possible prevention. Coverage for this
source is considered broad because of the in depth analysis done to assess all of the risk factors.
According to “Health Standards for Long Duration and Exploration Spaceflight: Ethics
Principles, Responsibilities, and Decision Framework”, a consensus study report written by
members from the Institute of Medicine, the information stated in this report is accurate. Two
sides of the story are identified and explained, a committee is analyzing NASA reports and
includes both the studies done by the NASA scientists as well as the gaps that are present in the
research.