Going to Mars? Your Body Might Disagree
Bergita Ganse, MD, PhD, from Saarland University, in Saarbrücken, Germany; Bimba Franziska Hoyer, MD, head of the Rheumatology Section and Center for Inflammatory Medicine at the University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany, and associated with the German Aerospace Center; and Claudia Stern, MD, senior researcher, head of the department and flight surgeon in the Department of Clinical Aerospace Medicine at the Institute of Aerospace Medicine, emphasized this message during their lectures at the 131st Congress of the German Society of Internal Medicine.
The 260 days of weightlessness during the journey to Mars present significant physical and psychological challenges for astronauts, with risks that remain inadequately researched.
Muscle Atrophy
Within merely 5-11 days in space, astronauts can lose up to 20% of their muscle mass, particularly in the lower extremities. Type II muscle fibers, which are responsible for powerful strength, are particularly affected. This transition from endurance-oriented type I fibers to power-oriented type II fibers further impairs muscle endurance. The loss of muscle strength often exceeds the loss of muscle mass due to fat deposits. Daily intensive onboard training programs of approximately 2.5 hours can slow muscle loss but cannot fully prevent it. Full recovery of muscle fiber composition may take several months after their return to Earth.
Bone Density
Bone mass decreases by 1%-2% per month in space, potentially leading to a loss of up to 20% during a Mars mission. The weight-bearing bones in the legs are particularly affected. Regeneration of bone mineral density is exceedingly slow and can take years. Consequently, osteoporosis results in permanent changes in the bone structure. Along with targeted strength training, calcium, vitamin D, and bisphosphonates are used as countermeasures, although their effectiveness remains limited.
Cartilage Damage
Upon returning to Earth, astronauts may experience cartilage damage due to rapid reloading. Loss of collagen and changes in the subchondral bone increase the risk for pain and functional limitations. Urinary biomarkers may help detect cartilage damage early in the future.
Back Pain
More than half of astronauts suffer from back pain while in space, often associated with an increased risk for herniated discs. The cause is likely due to the pressure placed on the intervertebral discs during weightlessness. Discomfort impairs sleep and work ability, which could have serious consequences on a Mars mission.
Vision Changes
Since 2008, visual changes after long-term missions have been documented, commonly involving papilledema, increased intraocular pressure, and blurred vision. The causes appear to be multifactorial, with cephalad fluid shifts, increased intracranial pressure, elevated CO2 levels, and genetic factors all playing a role. While symptoms generally resolve upon return, they could potentially become critical issues on longer missions.
Medications and Diagnostics
How medications work in microgravity and radiation is still not well understood. Dose adjustments and drug stability must be reassessed for long missions. Diagnostic devices must be small, independent, and artificial intelligence–supported, as telemedicine is limited by communication delays of up to 44 minutes.
Immune System Under Pressure
Isolation, stress, radiation, and long mission durations can significantly weaken astronauts' immune systems due to changes in cytokine levels, alterations in lymphocyte populations, and an increased risk for viral reactivation observed under space conditions. Infections such as herpes zoster or bacterial contamination can thus lead to problems, particularly given the limited treatment options due to limited resources.
Conclusion
The medical challenges of a Mars mission are vast, ranging from muscle and bone loss to vision problems, radiation exposure, psychological stress, and limited medical care, all of which pose major risks to astronaut health and performance. Advancements in training, diagnostics, and treatment are urgently needed. Reaching Mars will require innovative solutions and interdisciplinary teamwork; however, the journey begins with the Moon and many more research milestones.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
11 minutes ago
- Forbes
2 Reasons We Feel Better When Others Are Worse Off — By A Psychologist
Most of us have a natural tendency to compare ourselves to others. This can be explained by social comparison theory, developed by psychologist Leon Festinger, which suggests that we determine our self-worth by comparing ourselves to others. When others experience setbacks, we may experience a range of emotions in response, from empathy to pity to even joy at their misfortune. While feeling happy about someone else's pain may sound strange, it's not as uncommon as you might think. This stems from our tendency for 'downward social comparison.' When we compare downward — i.e., to someone worse off — we often feel better about our own lives. It's a subtle, sometimes unconscious coping mechanism, especially in moments of self-doubt. The emotional experience of pleasure in response to another's misfortune is called Schadenfreude, a German word that combines Schaden, which means 'damage,' and Freude, which means 'joy.' Schadenfreude often occurs in competitive environments. For instance, you may feel happy when an employee who cozies up to your boss performs poorly and gets berated by them. This is because people have an inherent need to feel better about themselves and often acquire a better self-image by comparing themselves to others who may be less fortunate. Consequently, people who feel their self-worth is threatened are more likely to feel Schadenfreude. Here are two key reasons why you may be feeling happy about somebody else's suffering: 1. Schadenfreude May Boost Self-esteem In Competitive Scenarios Why do we feel a sense of guilty pleasure at someone's downfall? In a 2017 study published in the European Journal of Social Psychology, researchers sought to answer this question. They tested whether Schadenfreude met any of these four basic psychological needs: the need for self-esteem, control, belongingness and a meaningful existence. Researchers conducted four experiments, all of which pointed to similar outcomes: Schadenfreude does meet our basic need to reaffirm our social standing through comparisons, especially when we compare ourselves to a rival we're envious of. In the first study, participants were asked to imagine being in a job interview, which was also being attended by their primary university competitor. They were told that only one would get the position. In the competitive scenario, participants felt more schadenfreude and need satisfaction than in non-competitive circumstances. Researchers found that they felt more in charge, experienced higher self-esteem and felt a greater sense of belonging. In another situation, they were asked to recall a real-time scenario when their competitor failed. Once again, researchers found that more schadenfreude led to increased feelings of self-esteem, a greater sense of personal control and a stronger perception of meaning in life. Seeing someone else fail or struggle can shield us from feelings of inadequacy, at least for the time being. When life feels out of control, seeing others in similar or worse positions makes our own experiences feel less like personal failures and more like part of a shared human messiness. This is especially true in more competitive scenarios. We all want to believe we're doing 'okay' in life. If someone else is doing worse than us, it affirms that we're not falling behind. 2. Schadenfreude May Reaffirm Your Belief In A Just World Interestingly, another 2013 study published in the Australian Journal of Psychology found a link between schadenfreude and beliefs in a 'just' world. When people's belief in a just world was threatened, they felt more pleasure when someone else suffered a misfortune. For example, they might laugh more at a story where someone 'gets what they deserve.' This may be because they want to restore their belief that the world is fair. When someone holds such beliefs, they're more likely to think that good things happen to good people, while misfortune finds those who deserve it. If they can't help the victim, they might instead blame the victim or believe the person deserved it. This way, they get to justify the misfortune that befell them. However, this does not always indicate that the victim is deserving of punishment or that they are responsible for the outcome. Does Schadenfreude Make You A Bad Person? Schadenfreude doesn't automatically make you a terrible human being. The practice of downward comparison may feel cruel, but that is not always the intention. These reactions often happen without our conscious awareness, and you may have tried to push these thoughts away, knowing it wasn't right. This sense of awareness and moral grounding is what differentiates you from someone that deliberately wants to watch others fail. However, if you find yourself constantly hoping for someone else's downfall and actively trying to put them in compromising situations, that may be worrisome. Instead of trying to eliminate the instinct entirely, try to notice it but avoid giving it too much power. Otherwise, it may make you complacent and feel less motivated to improve because you think 'at least, I'm not that bad.' If you must compare, try to shift your mindset to lateral or upward comparisons that inspire change. Try to put in effort to grow. Look at people doing 'better' than you and learn from them. If seeing others do better than you makes you feel like you're 'not enough' or that you haven't 'achieved enough,' try comparing yourself to those only one or two steps ahead of you. That way, you can realistically map out your progress. You may also want to mark your progress against your past self. Self-comparison allows you to see how far you've come and where you want to go from here, but like any form of comparison, it's a double-edged sword that can make you spiral about your flaws. The healthiest approach is to learn to accept yourself right where you are, without any sense of comparison, viewing your journey in this life as strictly your own. When you begin to embrace the feeling of being and having 'enough,' you naturally stop engaging in self-destructive behaviors or trying to bring others down. Do you often take pleasure in others' misfortune to make yourself feel better? Take this science-backed test to find out: The Schadenfreude Scale
Newsweek
5 hours ago
- Newsweek
Donald Trump Threatens 250% Tariff on Pharmaceuticals
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. President Donald Trump has said that tariffs on pharmaceutical imports could eventually reach up to 250 percent, as his administration works to lower prescription prices for Americans. During an interview with CNBC on Tuesday, the president said he will initially impose a "small tariff on pharmaceuticals," which will rise to 150 percent "in one year, one and a half years maximum," before then eventually jumping to 250 percent. Newsweek reached out to the White House via email for comment. Why It Matters The United States imports a significant amount of pharmaceuticals each year—over $200 billion in 2024, according to the Observatory of Economic Complexity. Should Trump follow through on ramping up these duties, the highest he has threatened on the industry to date, experts believe this could result in significant increases to drug prices in the U.S. However, some health policy experts told Newsweek this could also help rebalance the global drug supply chain to better favor American customers. What To Know Trump said that the tariffs are intended to encourage pharmaceutical companies to move their operations to the U.S.—"because we want pharmaceuticals made in our country"—and to minimize reliance on Europe. He had previously threatened to place 200 percent tariffs on pharmaceuticals in July, but said he would give the industry time before this change came into effect. Trump's threats of pharmaceutical tariffs have raised concerns among experts that these could lead to increased costs and medication shortages in the U.S. In April, the UNC Center for the Business of Health published a report warning that these effects would be especially significant for generic drugs, which are more likely to be imported and operate on lower profit margins than brand-name medications. "A 250 percent tariff on pharmaceuticals would have a significant impact on drug prices," said health economist Jeromie Ballreich. Ballreich told Newsweek that, for branded pharmaceuticals, higher costs from the tariffs will be "passed on to consumers and most likely will be indirect through higher prescription drug insurance premiums." Major pharmaceutical companies across the world saw their shares fall on Wednesday following Trump's announcement. England-based AstraZeneca was down by 1.1 percent, Indiana-based Eli Lilly by 2.3 percent, and Germany-based Bayer AG by nearly 10 percent as of 11:20 ET. President Donald Trump speaks to reporters near Air Force One at Lehigh Valley International Airport on August 3, 2025. President Donald Trump speaks to reporters near Air Force One at Lehigh Valley International Airport on August 3, latest threat comes as the industry braces for the outcome of an ongoing probe by the Commerce Department into the national security implications of America's medicinal imports. The investigation was launched in April by Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick under Section 232 of the 1962 Trade Expansion Act. Trump did not provide many specifics, such as whether certain classes of pharmaceuticals would be exempt, beyond stating that these tariffs are separate from the country-specific duties that came into effect last week. However, the announcement appears to contradict the terms of the European Union deal struck in July, which the European Commission president said placed a 15-percent tariff "ceiling" on multiple sectors, including pharmaceuticals. Experts had already warned that the 15 percent tariff outlined in the EU trade deal could end up costing the pharmaceutical industry billions. The cost implications could also be seen as conflicting with the administration's separate attempts to lower the price of prescription drugs. President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen meets with President Donald Trump in Turnberry, Scotland, on July 27, 2025. President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen meets with President Donald Trump in Turnberry, Scotland, on July 27, May, Trump signed an executive order directing the Secretary of Commerce and U.S. Trade Representative to "ensure foreign countries are not engaged in practices that purposefully and unfairly undercut market prices and drive price hikes in the United States." It also proposed that the U.S. be given Most-Favored-Nation (MFN) status, which would require drug companies to offer Americans the same lowest price that drugs are sold for in other countries. Trump followed this up by sending letters to 17 of the world's largest pharmaceutical companies on July 31, outlining steps they must take within 60 days to lower prescription prices for U.S. customers. These include extending MFN pricing to Medicaid, guaranteeing MFN pricing for new medications and negotiating "harder with foreign freeloading nations." The letters also call on the companies to expand direct-to-consumer distribution models to ensure customers "get the same low MFN prices that manufacturers already offer to third-party payers." "At face value, these tariffs are contradictory to his efforts to lower domestic prices," Ballreich told Newsweek. "However, if the tariffs are used as a threat to get drug companies to comply to his administration's [executive orders], including the recent letters to pharmaceutical CEOs, then I think we could see some changes to the pharmaceutical market, which will lower domestic drug prices." Several drugmakers, including Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson, have also pledged to expand their U.S. manufacturing presence. Prior to the letters being sent, but amid this pressure from the administration, a number had also announced they would be reducing some U.S. drug prices. Health policy analyst Mariana Socal warned that beyond potential cost implications, the tariffs could significantly disrupt the drug development pipeline, potentially jeopardizing the release of new medications. "Aside from the problem of added costs, the uncertainty introduced by tariff policies is detrimental in and of itself to the pharmaceutical market," she told Newsweek, noting that only around one in 10,000 investigated compounds make it to pharmacy shelves, and only do so after decades of work. "Any added uncertainty is likely to be detrimental to this industry, including disincentivizing investors from supporting this industry and pharmaceutical manufacturers from continuing to look for cures," she said. What People Are Saying Health economist Jeromie Ballreich told Newsweek: "This tariff could really disrupt the U.S. prescription drug market, especially the Medicare part D market, where the party plans will be on the hook for the higher price prices and result in significant premium increases to offset these higher prices. Given that, I don't think it's likely that this massive tariff will occur, but rather is a threat to force companies to find solutions based on the executive orders and his recent letters to pharmaceutical CEOs." Mariana Socal, an associate professor at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, told Newsweek: "It is critical to continue to identify solutions to lower drug prices in America and improve drug affordability for Americans. However, it is unclear how tariffs would advance affordability. On the opposite, tariffs can be understood as a hidden tax." "In the short term, the likelihood that added costs from tariffs will be passed through to consumers can be reduced by existing contractual agreements with supply chain participants such as distributors and group purchasing organizations, which can protect buyers from price increases for 1-3 years," she added. "However, even if the added cost of tariffs would not necessarily be passed-through to patients in the short term, it could raise costs in the long run." What Happens Next On Sunday, Trump said he would be announcing tariffs on the industry "within the next week or so."
New York Times
13 hours ago
- New York Times
Mark Kelly: Don't Gut NASA
There's no country better at solving hard problems than the United States, and there's no better example of that than NASA. We put people on the moon in the 1960s with computers less powerful than the smartphone in your pocket. We built and launched a reusable rocket ship in the 1980s and used that to build a space station where astronauts can live and work in orbit. Just last week, we watched four astronauts launch an American-made rocket to the space station from American soil. NASA makes us proud to be Americans. And even more so, the agency is an engine of discovery and innovation that benefits all of us. I'm worried that President Trump is about to slow that engine down — and with it decades of American progress. That includes progress made during his own first term. Mr. Trump's ongoing attempts to slash NASA's work force and gut its budget send a message that America's leadership in space is optional. It isn't. For more than 50 years NASA primarily designed, owned and operated all of its spacecraft, from the first Mercury rocket launch in 1960 to the space shuttle I first piloted in 2001. When NASA announced it was changing all of that by contracting with commercial companies to bring crew and cargo to low Earth orbit, I thought the idea was pretty crazy. It was 2010, and I was training to be the commander of the final mission of the space shuttle Endeavour. I spent hundreds of hours in the simulator with my crew, preparing us to be ready for anything that came our way. I didn't trust that private companies could pull this off because they lacked the experience NASA engineers had. There's no margin for error when you're 250 miles above the Earth's surface. But I was wrong. Today, thanks to NASA's investments and guidance, commercial spaceflight isn't just working; it's cheaper, faster and more flexible than what the agency could provide on its own. The first Trump administration and the Obama and Biden administrations backed a model of awarding small, fixed-price contracts to multiple space companies to develop new spaceflight technologies. Using calculated risks and competition, that model is delivering big results. SpaceX, the rocket company run by Elon Musk, now takes astronauts and cargo to the International Space Station, and Northrop Grumman delivers cargo with its Cygnus spacecraft. NASA is working with private companies to build moon landers and deliver science experiments to the lunar surface. We're on the brink of returning American astronauts to the moon through the successor to the Apollo program, Artemis, which came together during Mr. Trump's first term and brings international partners into the fold. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
