Subscribe to New Scientist

Space

Feeds

Home |Space |Health | News

NASA to restart primate irradiation testing

Late last month, NASA announced the winners of 12 awards for studying the biological effects of radiation. Topping the list is a $1.75 million project to irradiate up to 18 squirrel monkeys in an effort to find out what space radiation does to the central nervous system.

If it goes ahead, the experiment will be the first NASA-funded primate project to begin in more than 30 years. What will the experiment do and what does NASA hope to learn? New Scientist investigates.

What will this new experiment entail?

A group at Harvard Medical School's McLean Hospital in Belmont, Massachusetts, will expose the monkeys to a single dose of radiation that will be equivalent to the total amount of radiation astronauts will absorb during a three-year-long Mars mission. The monkeys' performance before and after exposure will be tested by measuring how they respond to visual cues on a computer touch screen.

The experiment is designed to investigate the effects of solar flares and galactic cosmic rays: both will bombard astronauts with charged particles in greater numbers once they leave the protection of Earth's magnetosphere.

Why does NASA want to do this experiment?

Since 2004, the US has been following a plan to return astronauts to the moon, with the eventual aim of going to Mars. There are hints that space radiation affects the brain, but it is still unclear how much of a risk it poses to deep-space explorers. NASA says it wants to find out what is needed to protect them.

How is this different from the radiation research NASA has done before?

The agency's last research project on primates began in the early 1970s, when NASA and the US air force studied the effect of radiation on cataract formation in rhesus monkeys.

But NASA has been examining the neurological effects of radiation for some time. In 2007, a helmet covered with particle counters and an electroencephalograph were sent to the International Space Station to assess how astronaut brain activity changes in real time in response to radiation. To date, the only animal research on the neurological effects of space radiation has been done in rodents.

What has the animal research shown so far?

Experiments on mice and rats have shown that irradiation can affect learning and memory. Rats, for example, have a difficult time navigating mazes and seem less interested in novel objects if they have been exposed to radiation. They also have a harder time learning to press a lever for more food and experience more anxiety in stressful situations.

In many experiments, the effects are similar to those seen in older rats. The cause of the damage is still poorly understood, but radiation is known to create highly reactive oxygen-containing molecules in the body. Such molecules are also suspected to contribute to the effects of ageing.

Why extend the study to primates?

"The data we have now, I think, is a basis for concern," says Bernard Rabin of the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, who has received support from NASA to study radiation effects on rodents. "There is a potential for cognitive deficits for astronauts within the dose range that NASA expects they would experience on a Mars mission."

But rat behaviour is too distant from human behaviour to allow straightforward predictions of how radiation will affect astronaut performance and brain function. To make a solid comparison with humans, a primate model is essential.

When will the experiment begin?

It's not yet clear. The research proposal is still awaiting approval by the Brookhaven National Laboratory in Upton, New York, where the irradiation would take place.

If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.

Have your say
Comments 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

Big Ethical Question

Mon Nov 16 11:32:08 GMT 2009 by Think Again

What do monkeys possibly get out of the study and space exploration?

Slowly radiate intelligent monkeys so we can meet aliens??

Wouldn't blame aliens for not wanting to meet us!

Big Ethical Question

Mon Nov 16 11:33:48 GMT 2009 by Salamander

Well after a couple of generations we can always claim it wasn't us - like we do in the US WRT Native Americans...

Big Ethical Question

Wed Nov 18 01:03:04 GMT 2009 by someguy

In a couple of generations it won't be us. It will be them, and they will have every right to claim it wasn't them.

Big Ethical Question

Wed Nov 18 05:46:51 GMT 2009 by Salamander

Love that - don't you?

What shall we take today?

Big Ethical Question

Mon Nov 16 13:16:23 GMT 2009 by Stan Edwards

NASA will use monkeys almost to the point of extiction and then they will find that monkeys were actually too important to the planet to be used in the first place.

If the name of the game is to find a new colony for earthlings in outer space - first locate the colony. It will be no use to eventually send monkeys into deep space (as an extended experiment) anyway - how would this ark be able to comprehend the cosmic Arrarat?

First find your target.

Test men to see if they could reach it and stop monkeying around.

Big Ethical Question

Mon Nov 16 16:46:58 GMT 2009 by Extinction?

Breeding monkeys and then killing them is not going to have any effect on the wild population what a ludicrous assertion, the target is the moon they know fine well they can get there, they want to see what effect long term exposure to cosmic radiation has on the body of the astronaut, so this is what they are doing.

See, this is why eco-warriors get laughed at, because they can't argue a point using realistic arguments, they use fanciful nonsense and fail to comprehend the basic facts and thus actually do harm to their cause. Instead they should be intellectually honest and base their arguments entirely on the ethical issue which they can actually comprehend, rather than claim that they know better than the scientists how to conduct an experiment, and the implication that scientists choose to test on animals because they get off on cruelty.

Frankly people like you, who have poor arguing skills and zero comprehension of the subject would do your cause a favour by shutting up and leaving those on your side who have some understanding of the scientific method to do the speaking for you.

Big Ethical Question

Tue Nov 17 07:08:42 GMT 2009 by Salamander

Who cares about arguing skills???

His sense of ethics and conscience is far above anything you can comprehend.

Big Ethical Question

Mon Nov 16 14:13:09 GMT 2009 by Damon

To put it nicely, some people are emphatically challenged.

I really thought an organization that symbolizes new frontiers would be past animal testing, how barbaric.

I thought I've read in NewScientist that bodies respond differently to different radiation exposure rates. Short intense bursts VS long term low level exposure where the immune system has time to repair the damage without being over whelmed.

Big Ethical Question

Mon Nov 16 14:18:55 GMT 2009 by Damon

Of course that should read "Empathically challenged".. stupid spell check :) doesn't recognize my made up words!

Big Ethical Question

Mon Nov 16 17:26:28 GMT 2009 by Michael Stephenson

I do have empathy for the animals, but I like things like medicine and the unsubstantiated lie the protesters assert that animal testing is not necessary in medical research isn't going to change my mind about this.

I'd challenge anyone who is emphatically against animal testing to abstain from using all medicine, I'd like to see a protester who shuns the antibiotics that would save their life on principle, but that doesn't happen does it?

Now this isn't really for the advancement of medical science, but for the advancement of the human race in space exploration, but I happen to believe space exploration is very important for our species, and knowing how humans are going to react to exposure to cosmic radiation beforehand is actually clearly an important question that needs to be answered. And if anyone actually had an informed and reasonable alternative I'm sure it would be acted upon, but simply their is none, and the standard solution of "just testing on human volunteers" is not one, because these monkeys will be exposed until they die to get the figures they need.

Big Ethical Question

Tue Nov 17 07:13:35 GMT 2009 by Salamander

And I'd challenge anyone who wants to get meds tested to volunteer for the tests themselves.

If they want to volunteer, what right do they have to make those tests on higher animals??

Use Paedophiles

Mon Nov 16 12:37:26 GMT 2009 by Typical Sun Reader

Use paedophiles. What have the monkeys done to deserve this?

Use Paedophiles

Mon Nov 16 13:11:10 GMT 2009 by Gil

How are sexual deviants going to tell you if radiation makes brain behavior deviate from the norm?

Use Paedophiles

Mon Nov 16 13:48:46 GMT 2009 by Typical Sun Reader

"Mon Nov 16 13:11:10 GMT 2009 by Gil

How are sexual deviants going to tell you if radiation makes brain behavior deviate from the norm?"

Der! By becoming normal like the rest of us Sun readers!

Use Paedophiles

Mon Nov 16 14:49:53 GMT 2009 by Amen

Awesome comment!

Get all the paedophiles, rapists, murderers together, and dry nuke the hell out of them! Using monkeys, we've learned nothing as a species at all, or rather the idiots holding the purse-strings and power haven't. With luck, aliens will be discriminating enough to come down and death-ray the Government and any other fool who would sanction this as a viable means to advance space science. It makes you sick to your stomach

Use Paedophiles

Mon Nov 16 14:48:23 GMT 2009 by Ryan Fox

Here here 'sun reader'...

Use Paedophiles

Mon Nov 16 15:07:42 GMT 2009 by Typical Sun Reader

I'm sure celebrities would agree with me - so it must be correct.

Do I have qualifications to make such a comment - no, only my emotions and heart tell me so.

I'm sure if more public policy was conducted by the emotions and we lowered the voting age to 10, gave women twice the vote power as men, then the World would be a better place.

If you don't agree with me, you're evil.

Use Paedophiles

Mon Nov 16 16:25:32 GMT 2009 by Typical Sun Headline

Barmy Bonkers Brainy Boffins Blast Baby Brass Monkeys.

(In depth story page 3 below the lovely Bobbie (16 today) in her luvely school uniform)

The Sun says:

Oi! We're brassed off! Leave our marmosets alone and go fry your own kn@ckers!

Use Paedophiles

Tue Nov 17 16:24:08 GMT 2009 by boabusmaximus

would an infinite number of sex offenders at an infinite number of typewriters write the complete scripts of all roman polanskis movies?

Use Paedophiles

Tue Nov 17 20:13:35 GMT 2009 by Hah Hah Hah

No but an infinitude of educated elite monkeys would come to his defence, drugging and forced sodomy is artistic you see...

How Daft Is That

Mon Nov 16 13:07:25 GMT 2009 by Huw Powell

A single dose that is the same as what you expect astronauts would get spread over 3 years?

Have a guess what happens if you drink 3 years supply of wine in one go - or have 3 years supply of sunshine in one go

it won't be the same as spreading it over 3 years

How Daft Is That

Mon Nov 16 15:09:00 GMT 2009 by Jason

It's 3 months and that is essentially the point. Going with your example, assume you drink 3 months worth of wine at once and you only get a slight buzz. So what level of buzz/drunkenness do you think you will experience if you drink 1 days supply of wine per day for 3 months? The answer is you would feel no buzz.

If we radiate monkeys at 90x higher radiation than they would experience normally and nothing bad happens then we know that if they are radiated at normal levels they will be fine

How Daft Is That

Mon Nov 16 17:48:47 GMT 2009 by Daniel

3 Years is what it takes for the planets to line up to get a decent launch window. Otherwise you need a fuel supply that we don't have.

How Daft Is That

Tue Nov 17 12:00:17 GMT 2009 by Huw Powell

where do you get months from?

I'm commenting on the article which says

"will expose the monkeys to a single dose of radiation that will be equivalent to the total amount of radiation astronauts will absorb during a three-year-long Mars mission."

Even single dose dose/response relationships of deterministic effects are non linear - I suggest this 'research' is a waste of monkeys.

Comments 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.

If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.

Monkeys are back at NASA (Image: NASA)

Monkeys are back at NASA (Image: NASA)

ADVERTISEMENT

NASA seeks its one true glove

14:58 17 November 2009

The second Astronaut Glove Challenge for more dextrous space gloves takes place this week

Meteor showers: good for skygazers, bad for satellites

16:59 16 November 2009

Several space missions have been damaged or destroyed by meteoroids over the years – David Shiga rounds up the casualties

Mystery 'dark flow' extends towards edge of universe

12:46 16 November 2009

Over a thousand galaxy clusters are streaming in one direction across the sky – some think it's the first sign of a neighbouring universe

Meteor shower this week as we cut through comet trails

18:00 15 November 2009

Hundreds of Leonid meteors an hour will stream across the sky on Tuesday when the Earth passes through old comet streams

Latest news

Balearic goats could grow slow

17:58 17 November 2009

A goat that lived on the Balearic Islands until 3000 years ago had bones like a reptile – which could explain how the species survived so long

Today on New Scientist: 17 November 2009

18:00 17 November 2009

Today's stories on newscientist.com, at a glance, including: how to skydive safely without a parachute, the bold ambition of Wolfram Alpha, and the search for the perfect space glove

Tasers safer than batons and fists

17:13 17 November 2009

Using a Taser to subdue a violent suspect is safer than wielding batons and fists, says a study of US police incidents

Mobile botnets show their disruptive potential

17:02 17 November 2009

Researchers demonstrate how a small number of infected phones could be used to attack a mobile network, making it impossible for most users to make calls or send texts

TWITTER

New Scientist is on Twitter

Get the latest from New Scientist: sign up to our Twitter feed

ADVERTISEMENT

Partners

We are partnered with Approved Index. Visit the site to get free quotes from website designers and a range of web, IT and marketing services in the UK.

Login for full access