
With uncertainty around life on Mars, human visits present an ethical dilemma
The first step by a human on the surface of Mars will inevitably transfer Earthly microbes onto Martian soil. Scientists are increasingly concerned with what the implications of contaminating another planet will be.
A recent study, published this month in the journal Microbiome, analyzed the clean rooms at the Kennedy Space Center, where Mars landers are sterilized before launch. The team found 26 species of novel bacteria that could potentially survive the harsh environment of space.
These organisms contain genes that enhance DNA repair, detoxification of harmful molecules, and enhance metabolism, all of which makes them more hardy.
NASA goes to great lengths to ensure any spacecraft that departs for Mars is sterilized in these ultra-clean rooms and sealed in capsules before launch to prevent cross-contamination between two planets.
We don't know whether any of these microbes actually made it to Mars because we have no way of examining the spacecraft while they are on the Red Planet.
The chances of microbes surviving the vacuum of space, extreme temperatures, along with solar and cosmic radiation are slim, however there was a case where Earth microbes did seem to survive for years on the moon.
In 1969, the crew of Apollo 12 landed close to a robotic probe called Surveyor 3 which had arrived on the lunar surface three years earlier. The astronauts removed a television camera, electrical cables and a sample scoop which were returned to Earth for study on the long term effects of exposure to space.
To everyone's surprise, a common bacteria, Streptococcus mitis, was found inside the camera lens. This harmless organism, normally found in the mouth and throat of humans, was thought to have been on the spacecraft before launch because Surveyor was not sterilized.
A later study done by NASA in 1998 suggested the bacteria could have come from contamination due to poor procedures after the lens was returned to Earth. But there is still the possibility that microbes could survive in space.
Sterilizing a robotic spacecraft to prevent contamination is one thing, but sterilizing human beings is impossible. We are substantially made of bacteria, covered in microbes from head to toe and internally, constantly shedding them with dead skin and other detritus. And those organisms will travel with us to Mars.
WATCH | Saturday cleaning day on the Space Station:
New species of bacteria have been found inside China's Tiangong-1 space station and astronauts on the International Space Station are constantly cleaning the walls to prevent the buildup of microbes in that sealed environment. This is evidence that bacteria can survive the higher radiation environment of a space habitat.
That means any human boot that touches the Martian soil will bring with it organisms from inside the spacecraft or colony. Whether those bugs could survive long in the Martian environment is to be determined, but the more serious issue is what they would do to any indigenous organisms that could already be living on Mars.
Curiosity, one of the rovers currently driving around on the Red Planet, has been collecting soil samples from different areas and sealing them in tubes to be collected and returned to Earth by a future sample return mission. The idea is to look for signs of current life or fossils of past life using the powerful tools in Earth laboratories.
But NASA is proposing cancelling the sample return, so we may not know for some time whether microbes exist in Martian soil.
Mars shows signs of a warm and wet past, where the planet was once covered with lakes, rivers and oceans. This was during a time, roughly three billion years ago, when life was emerging on Earth. So far, no signs of life have been found on Mars, but we have only been looking on the surface, not underground where water might exist.
Still, there is talk of sending people to Mars, even establishing a Mars colony. But is that wise before we determine whether the planet has life or not?
In the classic science fiction story, War of the Worlds by H.G. Wells, Martians come to Earth with invincible machines that wreak havoc on cities. Our most powerful weapons are useless against their incredible power. But eventually, the invaders are taken down by the tiniest creature, the common cold, for which they had no resistance.
In real life, the tables are turned.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CTV News
12 hours ago
- CTV News
Trump says he's withdrawing the nomination of Musk associate Jared Isaacman to lead NASA
WASHINGTON — U.S. President Donald Trump said he is withdrawing the nomination of tech billionaire Jared Isaacman, an associate of Trump adviser Elon Musk, to lead NASA, saying he reached the decision after a 'thorough review' of Isaacman's 'prior associations.' It was unclear what Trump meant and the White House did not respond to an emailed request for an explanation. 'After a thorough review of prior associations, I am hereby withdrawing the nomination of Jared Isaacman to head NASA,' Trump wrote late Saturday on his social media site. 'I will soon announce a new Nominee who will be Mission aligned, and put America First in Space.' In response, Isaacman thanked Trump and the Senate, writing on X that the past six months were 'enlightening and, honestly, a bit thrilling.' 'It may not always be obvious through the discourse and turbulence, but there are many competent, dedicated people who love this country and care deeply about the mission,' he said. 'That was on full display during my hearing, where leaders on both sides of the aisle made clear they're willing to fight for the world's most accomplished space agency.' Trump announced in December during the presidential transition that he had chosen Isaacman to be the space agency's next administrator. Isaacman, 42, has been a close collaborator with Musk ever since buying his first chartered flight on Musk's SpaceX company in 2021. He is the CEO and founder of Shift4, a credit card processing company. He also bought a series of spaceflights from SpaceX and conducted the first private spacewalk. SpaceX has extensive contracts with NASA. The Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee approved Isaacman's nomination in late April and a vote by the full Senate was expected soon. Musk appeared to lament Trump's decision after the news broke earlier Saturday, posting on the X site that, 'It is rare to find someone so competent and good-hearted.' SpaceX is owned by Musk, a Trump campaign contributor and adviser who announced this week that he is leaving the government after several months at the helm of the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE. Trump created the agency to slash the size of government and put Musk in charge. Semafor was first to report that the White House had decided to pull Isaacman's nomination. Darlene Superville and Seung Min Kim, The Associated Press


CBC
18 hours ago
- CBC
A brisk walk a few times a week could help keep colon cancer away, study suggests
James Smith woke up from a colonoscopy to be told devastating news. At 59, he was diagnosed with colon cancer. Doctors found a mass so large it completely blocked their view of the rest of his colon. Smith said he was shocked. "It was hard, it was a hard diagnosis," he said. "It was hard to believe it was actually happening." Smith underwent surgery and four rounds of chemotherapy. When his doctors suggested he join a study to examine regular exercise and its possible role in preventing cancer recurrence, he said yes. He was concerned — through the course of his treatment he had lost about 26 kilograms, as well as muscle mass. But he joined, anyway. "At the beginning it was difficult, I won't deny. It was like, 'How am I going to do all this?'" Though he wasn't included in the final study, he ended up finding the program helped him gain a sense of control over the cancer and his treatments. Smith is now cancer-free and his prognosis is good, he says. The study, which was published in the New England Journal of Medicine on Sunday, found that for patients with colon cancer, structured exercise did make a difference. Seven years after being diagnosed, 90 per cent of the patients who took part in the structured exercise program over a three-year period were still living. In the group that had only received an informational pamphlet, 83 per cent of participants were still alive. The researchers don't know exactly why the program had such an impact. But the findings could have significant future implications for how patients with colon cancer, one of the most common cancers, receive treatment. Helping with traditional treatments The study enrolled 889 patients from 55 hospitals in Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom. The clinical trial focused on high-risk stages 2 and 3 colon cancer patients who had received surgery and chemotherapy. Half of the group was given the traditional take-home pamphlet recommending diet and exercise and the other half was prescribed a structured exercise program for three years. The study lasted for 15 years, with about half of the participants joining in the beginning and the rest later on. Patients in the exercise group were assigned a physiotherapist or a personal trainer to check in with at least once a month. But they were free to decide what kind of exercise they wanted to do. They just had to do it for up to 45 minutes, depending on the type, three times a week. For Smith, that meant walking briskly on a treadmill. Other participants biked, swam or hit the gym. In each case, the exercise had to include a sustained, elevated heart rate. (They didn't specify a figure.) "If someone saw you walking, they would think you are late for an appointment," said Kerry Courneya, a kinesiology professor at the University of Alberta and the lead author of the study. Courneya launched the research because previous studies had hinted at the benefits of exercise, but nothing was definitive enough to convince doctors. The exercise program is not meant to replace traditional treatments, like surgery and chemotherapy, but is meant to enhance them. "There was a lot of skepticism with the observational studies, and many health-care providers and oncologists felt like they didn't act on them because they were methodologically limited." Researchers found differences in cancer recurrence, as well. Eighty per cent of the exercise group was cancer-free five years after their diagnosis, compared with about 74 per cent in the group that received the pamphlet. Colon cancer typically recurs in about 30 to 40 per cent of patients. Benefits comparable to some chemo drugs Dr. Chris Booth is a senior author of the study and an oncologist at Queen's University in Kingston. Booth suggests that when combined with traditional treatments, the benefits of the prescribed exercise program are comparable to some chemo drugs. "There are treatments we use every day that have much smaller benefits and some of the treatments we think are important have benefits that are comparable to this [exercise]." Dr. Sami Chadi is a colorectal surgeon and clinician investigator at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, part of Toronto's University Health Network. He was not involved in the research, and already encourages his patients to exercise. But he says he plans to use this research to help convince his patients to follow a structured exercise routine. "I don't think there is any question about it. I think a structured exercise program after surgery and after treatment is absolutely necessary, so we should be strongly recommending it as strongly as we recommend chemotherapy to our Stage 3 patients." The researchers don't know why exactly the exercise program impacted the recurrence and improved survival. They do know it wasn't about weight loss or improved cardiovascular function, because there was no significant change in either factor during the study. Dr. Booth describes it as a mystery that he aims to solve. "We banked blood on all the patients," he said. "In the next couple of years, we will be doing detailed biomarker analysis to try and understand what it is about exercise that is reducing the risk of cancer recurrence." WATCH | Dr. Booth on the study's findings: Prescribed exercise could be as effective as chemo for colon cancer, researcher says 2 minutes ago Duration 1:25 Dr. Christopher Booth, oncologist from Queen's University, discusses the results of his study that looked at the impact of an exercise program on people with colon cancer. In the meantime, he says this study should give enough evidence to convince patients, doctors and governments that structured exercise programs should be an important part in their arsenal to reduce the risk of a recurrence of colon cancer. As for Smith, it's been nearly five years since his diagnosis. He is doing well and still exercising and playing hockey in Edmonton. Recurrence is still something he worries about, but he's thrilled to hear the results of the research, calling them fantastic.

CTV News
21 hours ago
- CTV News
When you snooze, you might lose hours of sleep each month. Here's how to stop
The snooze button has been a common feature of alarm clocks for decades. (PeopleImages/iStockphoto/Getty Images via CNN Newsource) When jolted awake by the blare of an alarm clock, it's tempting to reach for the snooze button to catch a bit more shut-eye. In my case, 'just five more minutes' is practically a morning mantra. And what's the harm? There's increasing debate about your snoozing habit, and whether or not it's silently sabotaging your morning. On the 'stop snoozing' side of the research, sleep scientist Dr. Rebecca Robbins suggests the snooze alarm may actually cost us sleep. 'That first alarm may interrupt vital stages of sleep, and anything that you might be able to get after hitting the snooze alarm is probably going to be low quality and fragmented sleep,' said Robbins, an associate scientist for the Division of Sleep and Circadian Disorders at Brigham and Women's Hospital. The average snoozer takes an extra 11 minutes after their first alarm, according to a new study coauthored by Robbins that used data from the sleep-tracking app SleepCycle. That adds up to about one night's worth of sleep per month spent snoozing. As we sleep, the brain cycles through different stages of neurological activity and the second half of the night is dominated by rapid eye movement (REM) sleep, when most of our dreaming is thought to take place. It's an important sleep stage for our cognitive function and memory consolidation, said Robbins, who is also an assistant professor of medicine at Brigham and Women's Hospital. 'When you press the snooze button, especially for just a few minutes at a time, you're not likely to return to that REM stage,' Robbins said. But for a different take, there are sleep experts like Dr. Justin Fiala, a pulmonary, critical care and sleep medicine physician at Northwestern Medicine Canning Thoracic Institute. There isn't consensus on whether this lighter sleep achieved during a snooze session always does more harm than good, said Fiala, who is also an assistant professor at Northwestern Medicine. On one hand, losing out on quality sleep instead of just waking up later may increase the risk of cognitive impairment and lower one's mood. 'Certainly, if you're feeling worse off (and) more tired from the snooze alarm, I would recommend going back to waking up cold turkey without it,' said Fiala, who also runs the CommunityHealth Chicago sleep clinic. On the other hand, those with a certain chronotype — a natural disposition determined by factors such as age and genetics — may benefit from the habit, Fiala said, referencing a 2023 study which found night owls tend to rely on their snooze button more. 'If your chronotype is nocturnal, you're a night owl, but your work schedule requires you to be up at 5 a.m., that increases the dissonance between what your body is naturally inclined to do,' Fiala said. For these night owls, the brief period of light sleep induced by the snooze button may actually help them transition from deeper stages of sleep interrupted by the first alarm into wakefulness, he said, adding that more research should be done to fully understand this effect and its limitations. Regardless of one's chronotype, this distinction of who gets the most out of snoozing can also help inform how to get the most out of snoozing. Consistency is key Most sleep experts emphasize adults get the recommended 7 to 9 hours of sleep per night for good health and emotional well-being. Sleeping enough can also reduce feelings of tiredness upon waking, but the consistency of your sleep timing is just as important as duration, said Kimberly Honn, an associate professor of psychology at Washington State University Spokane. At deep stages of sleep, electric pulses of the brain reach a highly rhythmic pattern different from our more erratic, awakened state, she explained. Trying to wake up during these stages cuts important brain maintenance processes short and can lead one to experience the foggy effects of sleep inertia, which can last for several minutes or even hours after waking up. When the body is accustomed to a regular sleep schedule, it may reduce the experience of sleep inertia upon waking, Honn said. The body can grow accustomed to moving through each sleep stage at similar times, ensuring sleep cycles are completed before waking and eventually allowing you to fall asleep faster. 'In the perfect world, we would not be relying on an alarm clock at all,' Robbins said. 'We would be able to fall asleep and wake up naturally and have energy throughout the day.' Fiala said he generally recommends varying bedtimes by no more than 30 minutes per night, even on weekends. If you have to switch schedules, he says you should change it incrementally over time. Optimizing your morning routine It's possible people who use the snooze button less simply don't have the luxury to sleep past their alarm, Robbins suggested. Inflexible work schedules could require first responders to start their shift promptly, or parents may have to rally their children out the door and toward the school bus. For this reason, Robbins recommends those trying to ditch a snoozing habit introduce more time constraints into their morning routine by setting the first alarm as late as possible. 'Ask yourself: Is there anything in that morning routine that you could maybe do without? Or maybe you could find a way to do it faster?' Robbins said. Snoozing could also mean you're losing out on time that could be used for adding wakefulness-promoting habits into your morning routine. The heaviest snoozers tracked in Robbins' study used around 22 to 27 minutes resting after the first alarm — time that could be used for stretching, journaling or cooking a nutritious breakfast, Robbins suggested. 'We talk a lot about wind down routines and bedtime rituals. I think morning rituals are also really lovely to help you get excited about your day,' Robbins said. 'It's important to find something to look forward to, whether that's a meeting in the morning, making yourself a cup of coffee, whatever helps motivate you (and) gets you out of bed.' Timing your alarm to the sunrise and allowing natural light to come through your windows in the morning can also help signal your body to wake up, Honn said. By Kameryn Griesser, CNN