Love Is the Drug: Staring at a Beloved’s Face Lessens Pain | 80beats

Posted on by

love-painStaring at your beloved’s face really can take the pain away and make everything better. A small but intriguing study has found that college students who looked at pictures of their beloveds felt less pain than others.

The study, published in PLoS One, was a collaboration between the pain researcher Sean Mackey and the love researcher Arthur Aron, who wondered how their fields might overlap in the brain. First they put out the call for volunteers in the early, passionate stages of a relationship.

The authors recruited 15 Stanford undergrads who were “wildly, recklessly in love,” said Mackey, adding that the recruitment process took “only days. It was the easiest study I’ve ever recruited for,” he said. “Within hours they were all banging on my door, ‘Study us! Study us!’ When you’re in that kind of love, you want the world to know about it.” [HealthDay News]

At the lab, the 15 volunteers either looked at photos of their beloveds, or at photos of an “equally attractive” acquaintance. In a third variation meant to test the impact of a mental distraction, the volunteers were asked to perform a cognitive task like listing sports that aren’t played with a ball. Then the researchers dialed up the pain, using a heated probe which they pressed against each person’s palm.

The photo of the beloved and mental distraction appeared to reduce pain by about the same amount: 36% to 45% for moderate pain, and 12% to 13% for high pain. (The photo of the peer had no effect.) But when the scientists redid the experiment while scanning subjects’ brains with a functional MRI, they saw that the photo and the mental-distraction task activated very different parts of the brain. [Los Angeles Times]

The fMRI scans revealed that the love-induced pain relief was linked to activity in the reward centers of the brain like the amygdala, as well as activity in the limbic areas associated with emotion. In contrast, the distraction-induced pain relief occurred mostly along cognitive pathways.

The study may not lead to any practical treatments in the near future, says Mackey, but it may lead to new avenues of research.

“Will I be going back to my patients and prescribing one passionate love affair every six months? I don’t know if I’m going there,” Mackey said. “But it tells us there’s a lot more to the experience of pain than just the injury.” [Los Angeles Times]

For much more on love and sex on the brain, check out DISCOVER’s special brain issue, on newsstands now. A section on “the science of sex” includes a Carl Zimmer article about where sex lives in the brain, a piece by yours truly on the intellectual component of lust, and an article by Paul Bloom on the rules of attraction.

Related Content:
80beats: Can the Human Body Make Its Own Morphine?
Discoblog: In Terrible Pain? Then Head to an Art Museum!
DISCOVER: Music for Pain
DISCOVER: Men Don’t Feel Women’s Pain

Image: iStockphoto


Blasting Off Into the Blackness | Visual Science

Posted on by


I see a lot of rocket launch photos. It becomes increasingly hard to find them unique. Once in a while, a special one like the above comes along that pleases even my jaded eye.

The Soyuz TMA-01M rocket launched from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan on Friday, Oct. 8, 2010 carrying Expedition 25 Soyuz Commander Alexander Kaleri of Russia, NASA Flight Engineer Scott J. Kelly and Russian Flight Engineer Oleg Skripochka to the International Space Station.

Courtesy NASA/Carla Cioffi

Satellite view of a volcanic pressure valve | Bad Astronomy

Posted on by

The Earth is a writhing, seething cauldron of molten rock and metal. In some spots under the Earth, the pressure builds and builds, until something has to give, and KABLAM! You get a huge volcanic eruption.

On the other hand, sometimes the pressure just gets relieved nicely and steadily and politely, like in the Klyuchevskaya volcano in Kamchatka, Russia, as seen in this gorgeous Terra satellite image:

terra_klyuchevskaya

It’s a bit hard to tell here, but this is one teeny tiny part of a breathtakingly ginormous image that you can get by clicking the picture. Seriously, it’s 6000 x 8500 pixels.

And it’s stunning. This volcano, located in the far east side of Asia, erupts pretty steadily. That’s actually a good thing, given that first scenario above. There are actually four erupting volcanoes in this area; another one, Bezymianny, can be seen just below the big one. In the original huge image, you can barely see either of them, but in this close crop you can see the plumes from both blowing to the northeast. And if you look carefully, you can even see a glowing red line indicating lava flows on Klyuchevskaya right at the peak. In the full size image you can actually see two such flows.

When I was a kid I loved space and volcanoes and dinosaurs. I used to draw giant Apatosauri (though we called ‘em brontosauri back then) with big conic volcanoes in the background blowing out giant plumes. My scientific accuracy was probably somewhat dwarfed by my enthusiasm back then, but the cool thing is now, as a grown-up, I get to see pictures like this one! Maybe there are no dinosaurs in them, but there’s still something incredibly cool about looking down on a volcano. And you can see the shadow of the plumes on the ground, too!

People joke about living in the future, but c’mon: we get satellite pictures of erupting volcanoes in full color and high-resolution delivered right to computers in our homes.

I love the future. Which is good, because I’ll be spending the rest of my life there. You too.

Image credit: Jesse Allen and Robert Simmon, using data from the NASA/GSFC/METI/ERSDAC/JAROS, and U.S./Japan ASTER Science Team.

Related posts:

- Volcano on volcano action
- Tourist gets dramatic volcano plume snapshot
- Plume and ash
- The one-dimensional volcano

… or seriously, click the volcano tag under the pictures to see all the posts I’ve made about them!


Revenge of the whippersnappers: Ed Yong wins National Academies Communication Award | The Loom

Posted on by

Hearty congratulations to Ed Yong, fellow Discover blogger, for winning this year’s online National Academies Communication Award. I serve as a judge for the awards, so I told the NAS folks I would have to sit this particular vote out this year, seeing that a fellow member of the Discover hivemind was in the running. From the sidelines, I was very pleased to see him win. Ed’s torrent of well-researched blog posts on natural history give the lie (again) that blogging isn’t serious journalism.

Congratulations as well to Richard Holmes for his wonderful book, Age of Wonder, Charles Duhigg for his deep exploration of our water woes, and Carole and Richard Rifkind, co-producers and co-directors of the show, “Naturally Obsessed: The Making of a Scientist.”

Full details at NAS.


X Marks the Spot of a Dramatic Asteroid Collision | 80beats

Posted on by

asteroid mashup

Out in the asteroid belt beyond Mars, two asteroids rendezvous-ed in the darkness, with explosive results. Atomic bomb level explosive.

These two asteroids, one probably 400 feet wide and the other, smaller asteroid around 10 to 15 feet across, collided sometime in early 2009. This is the first time we humans have observed an asteroid impact right after it has occurred, and the first time a resulting x-shape has been seen. Researchers aren’t sure what caused the novel shape, and they were surprised by how long the dust tail has lasted. The analysis of the finding, originally announced earlier this year, is published in Nature this week.

From Phil Plait, DISCOVER’s Bad Astronomer:

This is a false-color image showing the object, called P/2010 A2, in visible light. The long tail of debris is obvious; this is probably dust being blown back by the solar wind, similar to the way a comet’s tail is blown back. What apparently has happened is that two small, previously-undiscovered asteroids collided, impacting with a speed of at least 5 km/sec (and possibly faster). The energy in such a collision is like setting off a nuclear bomb, or actually many nuclear bombs! The asteroids shattered, and much of the debris expanded outward as pulverized dust.

Looking at the image, the bright spot to the left is most likely what’s left of one of the two asteroids, a chunk of rock estimated to be a mere 140 meters (450 feet) across. In the press release they’re not clear about the curved line emanating to the right of the nucleus. It may be — and I’m spitballing here — dust blown back from a stream of chunks, since the tail is broad and appears to originate from that swept curve, and not from the nucleus itself. The other filament perpendicular to the curve is from yet another piece of debris.

Read the rest of his original post, which includes more information about why we should pay more attention to asteroids. Since the first spotting, researchers have been tracking the collision site with the help of the Hubble Space Telescope, watching what happens over time.

“We expected the debris field to expand dramatically, like shrapnel flying from a hand grenade,” said astronomer David Jewitt of the University of California in Los Angeles, who is a leader of the Hubble observations. “But what happened was quite the opposite. We found that the object is expanding very, very slowly.” [NASA Press release]

These collisions give rise to a cloud of dust (which also forms the tail coming off of the collision site). Looking at the amount of dust created by this interaction caused Jewitt to re-think some assumptions about the origins of the solar system’s dust.

“These observations are important because we need to know where the dust in the solar system comes from, and how much of it comes from colliding asteroids as opposed to ‘outgassing’ comets,” Jewitt said. “We also can apply this knowledge to the dusty debris disks around other stars, because these are thought to be produced by collisions between unseen bodies in the disks. Knowing how the dust was produced will yield clues about those invisible bodies.” [NASA Press release]

Related content:
80beats: Found: One of Neptune’s Asteroid Stalkers
80beats: Satellites Collide Over Siberia, Creating Showers of Space Debris
80beats: Was Mars’ Moon Phobos Born From a Violent Collision?
Bad Astronomy: Video of asteroid near miss from this morning
Bad Astronomy: Hubble spins an asteroid
Bad Astronomy: When worlds really do collide!
Cosmic Variance: Space Junk 1: Science 0

Image: NASA, ESA, and D. Jewitt (UCLA)


What next for NASA?

Posted on by

On Monday, the President signed the 2010 NASA Authorization Act into law with little fanfare.  After an acrimonious debate that started with the February proposal of an FY2011 budget that would have dramatically shifted the agency’s goals and defied the traditional definitions of partisan warfare, the Senate’s compromise – championed by our own Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and Florida’s Sen. Bill Nelson – won the day.

There are two things in the Authorization Act that stand out to me.  First, the Constellation Program, as envisioned by former NASA Administrator Mike Griffin, is finished.  Congress has made it absolutely clear that his plan to abandon the International Space Station in 2015 is a non-starter.  NASA has been given clear direction to sustain the ISS through at least 2020.  Indications are that we are likely to keep it running for as long as is safe.

Second, the debate has shifted from whether commercial space will have a role in our national space program at all to what the most appropriate plan for developing public-private partnerships will be.  Even if we are only able to get modest reductions in launch costs, for example, through such partnerships, this will help NASA focus resources in its shift from an operationalized culture back to an exploratory culture.

The 2010 Authorization Act directs NASA to work on the following tasks over the next three years:

  • Exploration:
  1. A multi-purpose crew vehicle (likely derived from Constellation’s Orion)
  2. A Space Launch System for exploration missions Beyond Earth Orbit
  3. Exploration Technology Development, Human Research, Commercial Cargo, Commercial Crew, and Robotic Precursor Studies & Missions
  • Space Operations:
  1. ISS continuation
  2. A successful run-out of the Shuttle program
  3. A NASA infrastructure modernization program
  • Continued science research in earth sciences, planetary science, astrophysics, and heliophysics
  • Aeronautics and Space Technology Research
  • Dedicated Education & Outreach programs

While top-level funding totaling between $19 and $20 billion annually is described for each line item, the real money won’t be laid out until the appropriations bill comes.  That’s not likely to happen until after the next Congress takes office.  Until then, NASA will be operating under a Continuing Resolution which keeps the agency at 2010 funding levels and direction.

Where the Authorization Act is important is in the policies, goals, and objectives it lays out for NASA – particularly with regards to human space flight.  Given that this Act passed unanimously in the Senate and with easily more than a 2/3rds majority in the House, it is unlikely that we will see a change in this guidance for NASA, even if the appropriations law moves around some of the pie pieces.

First, the Act states that the long-term goal of NASA’s human space flight and exploration efforts is to establish and expand a permanent human presence beyond Low Earth Orbit and to involve our international partners where it is practical to do so.

Second, the Act states that NASA’s objectives in human space flight are to fully utilize the ISS (both as a National Laboratory and a proving ground for living in space), to assist and enable the expansion of commercial presence in LEO, to lay the foundation for sustainable economic activities in space, to identify potential space resources, to figure out how to live in space with “decreasing reliance on Earth,” to maximize the contributions of space exploration to our knowledge base, and to build mutually beneficial international partnerships in the pursuit of those goals.

In terms of policy, the Act requires NASA commission the National Academies in 2012 conduct a review of the “goals, core capabilities, and direction of human space flight.”  This is one of the least discussed, but, perhaps, most important aspects of the 2010 Authorization Act.

The NASA science community is guided by a process called the Decadal Survey.  The National Research Council helps NASA identify and prioritize its science objectives and assess the missions required to meet those objectives.  This serves as a check and balance on mission creep and provides the Science Mission Directorate with guidance that survives beyond the political process.

Until now, human space exploration had no such process for providing policy and program guidance based on outside technical analysis.  Our work has been entirely subject to the vagaries of the ever-shifting political winds.  The 2010 Authorization Act explicitly calls for the National Academies to provide such a service for NASA human space flight, as their report will give findings and recommendations for the 10 years following the three covered in the Authorization Act.

Despite what you might read in some blogs, the Moon is not dead as a potential destination, either.  The Authorization Act explicitly states that the “regions of cis-lunar space,” including the lunar surface, should be included in space infrastructure development and that international partnerships in these endeavors will help address national security and economic concerns.

To provide the best value to the taxpayer, NASA is directed to take a “pay as you go” approach and size its crew and launch systems to the minimum necessary to conduct cis-lunar missions.  Missions to other destinations, such as asteroids or Mars, would be based on these technologies.

120 days from the enactment of the Act, NASA is required to present to Congress an assessment of any effort to expand or strengthen international collaboration on the ISS and any efforts in defining near-term cis-lunar missions.  These reports will be assumed to contribute to the development of the multi-purpose crew vehicle, the Space Launch System, and any other space technology the NASA Administrator deems appropriate.

While much has been reported about the Senate supposedly micro-managing the design of the Space Launch System, Section 302 (which covers SLS) is replete with caveats that give the NASA Administrator discretion on technical elements.  This suggests to me that Congress may be amenable if NASA runs the numbers and stands its ground if they’re asked to do something that doesn’t make sense.

The concern is that Congress wants the Space Launch System to be at initial operating capability by the end of 2016.  Under the existing funding profile, the Constellation Program’s Ares I rocket was not expected to be ready by that time and it was an arguably less capable booster than what Congress is asking for.

The only way NASA can accomplish this feat is if they have the technical and programmatic flexibility to develop a booster configuration that meets the schedule and budget constraints.  If this turns out to just not be possible, NASA needs to be able to speak out without fear of political repurcussion.

The Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle, based on what has been learned from the Orion project, is also expected to be ready to enter service no later than the Space Launch System.  While a dedicated, versatile exploration vehicle that can operate in conjunction with mission-specific modules would be a tremendous asset to NASA, the concern for this project is much the same as with the Space Launch System.  It’s not yet clear that NASA can meet the schedule within the budget expected.

Section 307 is also important because it establishes as a matter of policy that NASA should have a healthy balance between operational capabilities and advanced technology development.  The NASA Administrator is authorized to make investments in such R&D because of the potential for transforming the human space flight enterprise.

The question now is how soon the appropriations will be given out and how closely those will follow the guidance given in the Authorization Act.  While some appropriations committee members have indicated they will defer to the Authorization Act, other Representatives and Senators who were unhappy with the Authorization Act have said they will fight to get changes made at the budget end.

NASA now has the task of making assessments and beginning initial planning for how it will carry out the direction given by Congress and the President to establish permanent human presence Beyond Earth Orbit, make the most possible utilization of the International Space Station, continue its leadership in basic science and aeronautics research, and research revolutionary technologies that could transform our world or protect it from harm.

We’re not out of the woods yet, but it’s a place to start on the long road ahead.

Liam Sarsfield Gets A Light Slap on the Wrist

Posted on by

"Full docket text: Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Halil S. Ozerden: Sentencing held on 9/27/2010, for Liam Sarsfield. Court sustained in part and overruled in part Defendant's objections to PSR. Remaining objections to PSR rendered moot based upon agreement of the parties. Court granted Government's 5K1.1 Motion for Downward Departure. Count 1: Defendant sentenced to 3 years probation; $5,000.00 fine; restitution of $87,752.55 to NASA; and $100 special assessment. Presentence Report filed under seal. Government's Exhibits G-1 and G-2 admitted into evidence. Appearances: AUSA's Alyssa D. Farrell, Jerry L. Rushing, for the Government; Peter H. Barrett, Amanda B. Barbour, James B. Tucker, and William C. Barrett, Retained, for Defendant; USPO's Patrick Williams and Robyn Gulledge; DUSM Charles Kaes; CSO Stanley Vance."

Keith's note: So, this creep Sarsfield betrays the significant trust placed in him at the agency, sells out that trust for money, gets caught, sells out his friends by cooperating, and all he has to do is pay back the money he diverted to himself with a $5,100 fine? That's less than 6% interest. This is about as painful as paying off a home equity loan.

Previous postings

TEDxNASA Organizers Did Not Learn Much From Last Year’s Event

Posted on by

NASA Opens Registration for TEDxNASA

"One of "Woman's Day" magazine's 50 women changing the world, an author who could be the next JK Rowling, and a software developer who has an "app" for that - these are just some of the speakers at TEDxNASA, Nov. 4, at the Ferguson Center for the Arts in Newport News, Va. All are people with big ideas about "What Matters Next," the theme of TEDxNASA. This year's event, which is sponsored by NASA's Langley Research Center and the National Institute of Aerospace in Hampton, Va., will feature more than 20 top speakers who will share inspiring and thought-provoking stories. Presenters already announced include NASA's Chief Technologist Bobby Braun and Jim Green, director of the Planetary Science Division in the Science Mission Directorate at NASA Headquarters in Washington. Green will speak at the same time NASA's EPOXI spacecraft is flying by and snapping close-up images of comet Hartley 2, more than 11 million miles away from Earth."

Keith's note: This is getting silly. I have sent multiple requests to NASA LaRC PAO requesting the names of the speakers at this event. They simply refuse to release that information. Yet they put out a press release that describes some of the speakers - yet they still refuse to identify them by name. Clearly they know who these people are. So much for being open and transparent. NASA LaRC PAO touts this event as being one whereby the public and NASA can meet to exchange ideas. Curiously, when you go to register for this event, you are asked to pick one of these choices:

"- NASA Langley Civil Servant
- NASA Langley On-Site Contractor
- Other NASA Center - Civil Servant
- Other NASA Center - On-Site Contractor
- Other Government Employee
- Other"

LaRC PAO seems to be concerned (with great specificity) with regard what flavor of NASA/contractor/government employees attend. However, with regard to understanding the backgrounds (interests) of everyone else (teachers, students, doctors, accountants, truck drivers, nurses - i.e. the taxpaying public) LaRC PAO simply lumps everyone into one giant, impenetrable category called "other". This is typical NASA behavior: the agency simply does not understand how to collect metrics about their events so as to show their value in terms of outreach tools. Instead they ask for information in a way that confuses and ultimately obscures the collection of those metrics.

Previous TedXNASA postings

Buzz Was Against a Moon Base Before He Was For It

Posted on by

Statement from Buzz Aldrin On The White House Space Policy (April 2010)

"As an Apollo astronaut, I know full well the importance of always exploring new frontiers and tackling new challenges as we explore space. The simple truth is that we have already been to the Moon - some 40 years ago. What this nation needs in order to maintain its position as the 21st century leader in space exploration is a near-term focus on lowering the cost of access to space and on developing key, cutting-edge technologies that will take us further and faster - while expanding our opportunities for exploration along the way."

Why Mars? Buzz Aldrin Wants a Lunar Base First (October 2010)

"President Obama recently green-lighted a brand new mission and a new budget for NASA, including a grand long-term goal: a manned mission to Mars. But Aldrin, the second man to walk on the moon, says the moon is much more essential to American space efforts. In its haste to make new policy, Aldrin and other experts say, NASA is overlooking a critical component of space travel: a permanent, manned base on the moon that would make reaching Mars a much easier task. Establishing a lunar base could provide a safe source of water and a site for fuel depots, which would reduce the cost of transporting fuel from Earth for an eventual Mars mission, Aldrin told Fox News.com."

Keith's note: I'm a little confused. Back when the President's space policy was released, Buzz had his sights set on Mars, and didn't think that we shoud be going back to the Moon to any great extent - if at all. Now he has done a 180 and says we need to build a Moon base. Which is it Buzz? Moon base or Mars base - or both?

Bolden Gets Some Support for China Trip

Posted on by

Letter From Representatives Larsen, Boustany and Kirk (PDF)

"We are writing to congratulate you on your upcoming trip to China. U.S.-China space cooperation is an important piece of the U.S.-China bilateral relationship and we hope your trip proves successful. Specifically, we ask your support for the the U.S. and China to establish a joint-rescue capability in space that would enable the U.S., China, and Russia to rescue each other's space crews."

Marc's note: Well it would seem while some members of congress are upset with Bolden's trip to China others see the trip in a totally different light.

Another Stealth Bolden TV Appearance

Posted on by

Keith's note: These are excerpts from internal NASA email "NASA Administrator Addresses Workforce Later Today -- Thursday, Oct. 14" "You are invited to watch a special message from NASA Administrator Charles Bolden later this afternoon. The administrator has been meeting with the entire senior leadership team over the past two days discussing the path forward for the agency, and he wants to share with you the key points from this important dialogue." "Please join Administrator Bolden for this broadcast today. However, if you cannot watch this afternoon's remarks, the administrator will send an updated message to all employees later today."

Curiously these comments will not be on NASA TV or made available to the public or the media - unless someone inside NASA leaks details. This is, of course, not PAO's doing - but rather the agency adhering to White House direction to avoid all possible interaction (direct and indirect) between Bolden and the media. He'll beam in, talk to his staff, and then beam out.

Keith's update: NASA circulated this internally but did not see the need to send this to the public. If you are inside NASA's firewall you can watch a video of this presentation here.

Internal Message from Charlie Bolden to NASA Employees: Moving NASA Forward

"Over the past two days, Deputy Administrator Lori Garver and I were joined by NASA's senior leadership -- the center directors, the heads of our mission directorates, and other members of our management team -- at a retreat to plan the agency's future. With passage of the NASA Authorization Act of 2010, we now have a clear direction and can begin making plans for moving the agency forward. All of us engaged in a thoughtful and productive dialogue about the challenges and opportunities we face, and you'll be hearing more about the outcomes in the near future. We are united in our goals."

Virtual Moon Rocks

Posted on by

NASA And Gowalla Launch Partnership With Search For Moon Rocks

"NASA and Gowalla, a mobile and web service, have partnered to bring users one small step closer to the universe. The partnership populates Gowalla with NASA-related information and four virtual items -- moon rocks, a NASA patch, a spacesuit and a space shuttle -- that can be found at agency-related venues. ... Gowalla users can find virtual moon rocks by checking in to any location where a real one is on display. The United States successfully brought lunar samples back to Earth during the Apollo 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, and 17 missions. NASA provides a number of lunar samples for display at museums, planetariums and scientific expositions around the world. Most lunar displays are open to the public."

Keith's note: I wonder if Gowalla has the location of these four small Apollo 11 Moon rocks on display - on the ISS...

Controversy Over Bolden’s China Trips Continues

Posted on by

NASA Chief's Trip to China Sparks Controversy, space.com

"NASA chief Charles Bolden is preparing to visit Chinese space authorities. But the trip has met opposition from some lawmakers over its intent to continue a dialogue on human spaceflight cooperation between the U.S. and China."

NASA Administrator's China visit draws congressional ire, Nature

"I do not believe it is appropriate for the Administrator to meet with any Chinese officials until Congress is fully briefed on the nature and scope of Mr. Bolden's trip," said one of the congressmen, John Culberson (R-TX), in a 12 October letter addressed to President Obama."

NASA boss to land in China, Global Times

"Although it has been impossible for the two sides to work out any substantive agree-ments, the visit could pave the way for possible future cooperation," Hu Yumin, a senior researcher at the China Arms Control and Disarmament Association, told the Global Times Thursday. "The US, a leader in space technology, possibly conceives cooperation with China as helpful to addressing obstacles in future US space projects," he said. "Many scientists in both countries have longed for cooperation between China and the US. Bolden's trip will not only cement bilateral cooperation but also increase trust between the two countries," he added. In an exclusive interview with the Global Times in January, Bolden said that, as a former astronaut, he advocated international cooperation in space that could benefit humankind and that he preferred collaboration over conflict with China."

NASA Monkey Irradiation Experiments Continue To Draw Criticism

Posted on by

Space Station Living, Radiation, and Monkeys, Discovery

Former NASA astronaut Leroy Chiao "You may have heard about planned monkey radiation experiments, and the recent protests against them. I understand the necessity of animal experiments in developing drugs and treatments, but I must admit that this one has me scratching my head a bit. I have no doubt that some advances in scientific knowledge would be realized through these planned experiments, but I'm an operational guy (despite my Ph.D.). How would these experiments help us to survive in deep space? I don't see it. The bottom line is that exposure to high levels of radiation is bad. We need to figure out how to detect, and protect against exposure as well as to treat if exposure occurs."

Keith's note: The following was forwarded to me by PeTA today: "We recently received several documents from the Department of Energy which indicate that in Aug 2010 the Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) made a decision about whether to move forward or not with the controversial NASA-funded monkey radiation experiments. Attached is a heavily redacted statement that BNL drafted and sent to the DoE announcing their decision (although it has yet to be released to the public). You may have seen that NASA has recently stated publicly that the experiment 'might not happen'. These new documents are the first we've heard of any final decision being made at all."

Budgetary Limbo Mode

Posted on by

US midterm elections: Policy row launches NASA into limbo, Nature

"Congress baulked, and on 29 September passed an act requesting funds for projects initiated under Constellation and granting less than half of the administration's request for private spaceflight. With Congress now in recess and unable to allocate funds, NASA is funded at current levels and cannot change course. "It has to keep spending on programmes that it's going to kill, and can't start new programmes that it wants to," says Keith Cowing, editor-in-chief of the website NASA Watch. ... For Cowing, competing interests could spell a troubled future for the space agency. "How can NASA progress if it's pulled in ten different directions?" he asks. "

Today’s NASA EPO YouTube Video

Posted on by

Reader note: "Have a look at this September 13, 2010 Youtube video "Music Hack Day London 2010: interview with Kelly Snook (Imogen Heap)" recorded in London. NASA's Kelly Snook is featured and her name badge says "NASA/Imogen Heap". She says that she is a studio engineer for Imogen Heap (a band that performs in Europe) and that she also works for NASA.".

Keith's note: Kelly has always been very creative artistically. From what I understand she's on a sabbatical - without pay - in the UK.

Keith's update: Kelly was at MIT last year as a "Sonic scientist" and attended Berklee Music where "Music production lights me up like nothing else in the world," she says. "The professional benefits of simply doing it, as opposed to sitting at my desk at NASA and just dreaming about doing it, are already immeasurable, but adding to that the systematic knowledge and training of the Berkleemusic coursework is light upon light."

Speculation Mounts as White House Mulls Bolden Replacement

Posted on by

Flight added to shuttle mission, Houston Chronicle via St Louis Today (they initially stated that this was an AP article - it is not)

"Even as President Barack Obama signed off Monday on plans to steer the nation's space program toward Mars, Senate staffers on Capitol Hill reported growing speculation that the White House was preparing to replace NASA administrator Charles Bolden. Bolden, a former astronaut, has the reputation of being a can-do leader known for sometimes ignoring bureaucratic constraints. However, top administration officials have eased him into the background as the midterm congressional elections approach."

Keith's note: The White House is very dissatisfied with Mr. Bolden's performance of late. Departure and replacement choices are topics of frequent discussion in the White House and on Capitol Hill. This will all pick up once the mid-term elections, STS-133, and Thanksgiving holiday approach.