Re: NASA paying people to lie in bed

In article 
<8b2b930c-59b1-4bd6-b870-7f3c6974760e@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
 karomiow@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:

> On 9 May, 08:43, bill van <bill...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > In article <Xns9A98CC11E26A9opusthepenguinnet...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,

> > I'm pretty sure this wouldn't be pleasant. I assume that what they're
> > trying to emulate is the wasting of muscle tissue and other effects --
> > loss of bone mass? -- that come with weightlessness. The pay, for
three
> > months at an annual rate of $68,000, is not screamingly high for
> > something that may leave you with health problems that take more
months
> > to overcome.
> >
> $68000 p.a. is well above the average salary in the US. A lot of
> people do work that may leave them with health problems for a lot less
> money. In bed you are not going to fall of a ladder or get into a car
> accident or breathe in noxious chemicals etc.

I know it's not chicken feed, but it's for only three months. And you 
could argue you're working 24 hours a day. 

The fact that other people make less money for doing more hazardous work 
doesn't make this job better, it just means others are even worse. Look 
at this:

The absence of mechanical stimulation to bones and muscles in 
microgravity leads to substantial bone loss and muscle weakness in 
astronauts. In flights lasting four to six months, astronauts can lose 
bone mineral density approaching 1.6% per month. 

http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2001/01-187.txt

That might not have seemed significant 40 years ago, but now I'm 60, and 
it gives me pause.

-- 
bill
remove my country for e-mail