you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 221 points 2 years ago (21 children)

That and NASA is a very safety conscious organization. So they want to overestimate everything and include way more than they need. So when she said a couple per day you can round that to 5 for safety, then considering it's a 6 day mission they want to include triple the amount of needed supplies which means 18 days worth. 18*5=90 which is pretty close to 100 so let's round up again. Plus tampons are a useful first aid tool, especially in zero gravity. You shove some into an open wound and it'll prevent blood from spilling all over the very sensitive equipment. Does a woman need 100 tampons for 6 days? Of course not, but she wasn't going to spend a week in the mountains, she was going to space, so the safety precautions were much more stringent

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 43 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    It's also a weight thing. Tampons are pretty light, it's like one hundred per pound, so they probably said "we can budget x pounds for this" and didn't think much about the reasoning behind why they're sending several hundred tampons into space, but we're entirely focused on how.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    Just a word of advice, the tampon in a wound thing, as much as the Russian military might advise it, is not good medical technique. Do not use a tampon to plug a wound. It'll likely do more harm than good. Just apply pressure to it from the outside with your hand if you have literally no other option.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago

    Agree in general. The problem would be debris trapping, fluid compartmenting, sterility, etc.

    But if you need a dressing and that's all you have, unpacking them into gauze pad like things would be great.

    All of this assuming you are literally flying 7.5km/s towards a trauma center

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Can the same be said about doing that in zero gravity with specialised sensitive equipment all around you that are essentially keeping you alive?

    I'll take an infection over crashing down in the ISS any day.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Luckily I'm sure there's plenty of perfectly good alternatives for them. I don't think we need to even discuss that as am option. Some people will literally buy them for their IFAK in case of gunshot wounds on earth though, so I thought I'd clear it up.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    Huh. Learned something today! Because I remember some "worst case scenario" show where a guy suggested just that if nothing else was available.

    Imagine how much it would suck treating a wound with a tampon and dying of toxic shock. 😬

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I learned recently that in space you might not need to piss as the piss floats in your bladder.

    normally you get 3/4s full and really need a slash, but in space it can fill up totally without you feeling anything and then just bust out your urethra without notice.

    honestly, it was probably a fair point.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    NASA also does everything they can to save weight though.

    On later Apollo missions, they cut the number of band-aids in the lunar lander's first aid kit from 6 to 12 to save weight.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    they cut the number of band-aids in the lunar lander's first aid kit from 6 to 12 to save weight.

    I see here is the problem. The guy doesn't know how to reduce weight, you don't add more stuff to cut on weight. That explains the extra tampons.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    Not that I disagree that NASA isn't safety conscious, but I've recently watched a video about the challenge disaster which seemingly could easily have been avoided if they had listened to the weather concerns or redesigned their solid boosters after issues were observed in the first place. I guess in that case they just got too complacent.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments