Did NASA Ever Consider Women for the Mercury, Gemini, or Apollo Programs?

Russell L. Schweickart, Keystone/Getty Images
Russell L. Schweickart, Keystone/Getty Images

C Stuart Hardwick:

Unambiguously, no.

This was not sexism. NASA decided early on, and quite correctly, that early astronauts must all be experienced high-performance jet test pilots. To anyone who understands what the early space program involved, there can be little question that choosing all men was the right call. That's because there were zero women in the country with high-performance test flight experience—which was due to sexism.

You may have heard of the so-called “Mercury 13” or the Women in Space Program, both of which are misleading monikers invented by the press and/or American aviator Jerrie Cobb.

Here’s what happened:

Randy Lovelace’s laboratory tested astronaut candidates to help NASA select the initial seven Mercury astronauts. He later ran Jerrie Cobb through the same Phase I (biomedical) tests (though not through the other tests, as he didn’t have access to equipment owned by the military). Contrary to some reports, Cobb did not test superior to the men overall, but she did test as well overall. And while that should not have been a surprise to anyone, it was in fact a surprise to many.

Lovelace published a paper on the work in which he suggested that women might actually be preferable candidates for space travel since they weigh less on average and consume less oxygen, water, and other consumables, a fact which I exploited in my book, For All Mankind, and I can tell you that on a long duration mission (of several months) the difference really does add up.

This had no effect on Mercury, Gemini, or Apollo, all of which were short little jaunts in which the mass of the astronauts wasn’t terribly critical, and all of which were always going to be flown by high-performance test pilots anyway.

However, it attracted the attention of famed aviation pioneer Jackie Cochran, who agreed to fund further research on the suitability of women for space.

Pioneer American aviator Jacqueline "Jackie" Cochran in the cockpit of a Curtiss P-40 Warhawk fighter plane
Jackie Cochran in the cockpit of a Curtiss P-40 Warhawk fighter plane
Public Domain, Wikimedia Commons

Cochran and Cobb recruited several more women, mostly from the ranks of the Ninety-Nines, a women aviator’s professional organization founded by Amelia Earhart. These women also went through the initial biomedical testing, and 13 passed at the same standard as met by the Mercury astronauts.

So far so good. Cobb, Rhea Hurrle, and Wally Funk went to Oklahoma City for an isolation tank test and psychological evaluations, and Lovelace secured verbal agreement through his contacts to send another group to the Naval School of Aviation Medicine for advanced aeromedical examinations using military equipment and jet aircraft.

However, no one had authorized the use of the military facilities for this purpose—or the costs that it would entail. Since there was no NASA request behind this effort, once Lovelace tried to move forward, the military refused his access.

Meanwhile, Cobb had been enjoying the attention she was receiving and, according to some, had gotten it into her head that all of this was going to lead to some of the women actually flying in space. In fact, I’ve found no evidence that Lovelace ever implied that. This was a small program of scientific study, nothing more. Nevertheless, Cobb flew to Washington, D.C. along with Jane Hart and was given a meeting with then-vice president Lyndon Johnson.

Johnson was congenial—Cobb has always claimed he pledged his support—but immediately afterward, he sent word to have all support for the experiments withdrawn.

Far be it from me to defend the motives of LBJ, but consider this: The president had publicly committed the nation to returning a crew from the moon by the end of the decade—and this was at right about the same time when enough work had been done for Johnson to have a handle on just how hard that was going to be. He may or may not have supported the idea of women astronauts in general—we have no idea—but Jerrie Cobb standing before the press, pushing for “women in space” was definitely, irrefutably a distraction he didn’t need. And any resources devoted to it were being pulled directly away from the moon shot—which, to Johnson, was the goal.

Jerrie Cobb poses next to a Mercury spaceship capsule
Jerrie Cobb poses next to a Mercury spaceship capsule
NASA, Public Domain, Wikimedia Commons

Cobb has always maintained the women were misled and betrayed. I’ve found no evidence of that. Testimony of many of the other participants suggests that Cobb simply got carried away—not that anyone could blame her. Let’s remember that at that time, she couldn’t have known what was really involved in space flight or what the program would look like over the next decade. No one did.

Of course, American women did start flying in space with the Space Shuttle. Do not for a moment think this means they didn’t face the same prejudices at NASA that they did everywhere else. The first class of women astronauts was, according to my sources, invited to help design an in-flight cosmetics kit—an offer they immediately and forcefully shot down. Thirty years later, women remain a distinct minority in the U.S. astronaut corps ...

The bigger question is not whether Cobb was betrayed, but why, in 1961, not a single U.S. woman had been hired to work in high-performance flight test—considering that so many (like Cobb, for example) had performed test flight and ferry duties during the war.

Why weren’t women welcome in the post-war aerospace economy, and why—even today—are so few women granted degrees in engineering of any sort? I don’t know the answer, though sexism is unquestionably in the mix, but it’s a question we need to address as a nation.

This post originally appeared on Quora. Click here to view.

How Is a Sunscreen's SPF Calculated?

Rawpixel/iStock via Getty Images
Rawpixel/iStock via Getty Images

I’m a pale person. A very pale person. Which means that during these hot summer months, I carry sunscreen with me at all times, and apply it liberally. But I’ve never really understood what those SPF numbers meant, so I asked some sun care to break it down for me—and to tell me how to best apply the stuff so that I can make it through the summer without looking like a lobster.

Soaking up the sun ... safely

SPF stands for Sun Protection Factor, and it indicates a sunscreen’s ability to block UVB rays. The concept was pioneered at the Coppertone Solar Research Center in 1972; in 1978, the FDA published an SPF method based on Coppertone’s system, according to Dr. David Leffell, chief of Dermatologic Surgery and Cutaneous Oncology at Yale.

The numbers themselves stand for the approximate measure of time a person who has applied the sunscreen can stay out in the sun without getting burned. Say you get burned after 20 minutes in the sun without sunscreen; if properly applied (and reapplied), SPF 30 will allow you to stay in the sun 30 times longer without burning than if you were wearing no protection at all. So, theoretically, you should have approximately 600 minutes, or 10 hours, in the sun. But it’s not an exact science because the amount of UV light that reaches us depends on a number of factors, including cloud cover, the time of day, and the reflection of UV rays off the ground, so it’s generally recommended that you reapply sunscreen every two hours (or even sooner).

What gives a sunscreen a higher SPF comes down to the product’s formulation. “It’s possible that an SPF 50 might contain slightly more of one or more sunscreen active ingredients to achieve that higher SPF,” Dr. Patricia Agin, president of Agin Suncare Consulting, says. “But it’s also possible that the SPF 50 might contain an additional active ingredient to help boost the SPF performance to SPF 50.”

No matter what SPF your sunscreen is, you’ll still get a burn if it’s not properly applied. So let’s go over how to do that.

How to apply sunscreen

First, make sure you have a water-resistant, broad spectrum sunscreen—which means that it protects against both UVB and UVA radiation—with an SPF of at least 30. “Typically, you don’t have to buy sunscreen that has an SPF higher than that unless you have very sun sensitive skin,” Leffell says. “That’s a very small percentage of the population.” (Redheads, people with light eyes, and those who turn pink after just a few minutes in the sun—you’ll want to load up on SPF above 30.)

Twenty minutes before you go out to the beach or the pool, begin to apply your sunscreen in an even coat. “Don’t apply it like icing on a cake,” Leffell says. “I see these patients and they’ve got the tops of their ears covered with thick, unevenly applied sunscreen, and that’s not a good sign.” Sunscreen sprays will easily give you that even coat you need.

Whether you’re using lotion or a spray, when it comes time to apply, Leffell recommends starting with your scalp and face, even if you plan on wearing a hat. “Make sure you’ve covered the ears and nose and under the eyes,” Leffell says. “Then, I would move down to the shoulders, and make sure that someone can apply the sunscreen on your back beyond the reach of your hands.”

Other areas that are important that you may forget to cover, but shouldn’t, are the tops of your feet, the backs of your hands, and your chest. “We see it all the time now—the v of the chest in women has become a socially and aesthetically huge issue when they are 50 and beyond. Because even though they can treat their faces with all sorts of cosmetics and procedures, the chest is much harder, and they are stuck with the face of a 40-year-old and the chest of a 60-year-old. You want to avoid that using sunscreen.”

Another important thing to keep in mind: Water-resistant doesn’t mean waterproof. “I always tell patients to reapply every couple of hours while you’re active outdoors," Leffell says, "and always reapply when you come out of the water or if you’ve been sweating a lot, regardless of whether the label says water resistant."

Determining whether or not you’ve succeeded in properly applying your sunscreen is easy: “You know you’re applying your sunscreen properly if, after the first time you’ve used it, you haven’t gotten a burn,” Leffell says.

Agin has a caveat, though: "It’s not a good idea to think of sunscreens only as a way to extend your time in the sun," she says. "One must also understand that even before becoming sunburned, your skin is receiving UV exposure that causes other damage to the skin. At the end of the 600 minutes, you will have accrued enough UV to cause a sunburn—one Minimal Erythema Dose or MED—but there is pre-MED damage done to skin cells’ DNA and to the skin’s supporting structure of collagen and elastin that is not visible and happens even before you sunburn. These types of damage can occur without sunburning. So you can’t measure all the damage done to your skin by only being concerned about sunburn."

Have you got a Big Question you'd like us to answer? If so, let us know by emailing us atbigquestions@mentalfloss.com.

An earlier version of this post ran in 2014.

What's the Difference Between Ice Cream and Gelato?

iStock/Getty Images/zoff-photo
iStock/Getty Images/zoff-photo

'Tis the season for beach reads, tan lines, and ice-cold desserts. You know it's summer when going to the local ice cream or gelato shop becomes part of your daily routine. But, what exactly is the difference between these two frozen treats?

One of the key differences between the two is butterfat. While ice cream's main ingredients include milk, cream, sugar, and egg yolks, the secret to making gelato is to use much less cream and sometimes little to no egg yolk. This leads to a much smaller percentage of butterfat in gelato. The FDA rules say that ice cream cannot contain less than 10 percent milkfat (though it can go as high as 25 percent) while gelato, much like soft serve, stays in the 4- to 9-percent range.

The churning method for both also differs, which affects the treat's density. Ice cream is churned at a much faster pace, leading to more air being whipped into the mixture. Ice cream's higher butterfat content comes into play here—due to all of that milkfat, the mix absorbs the air more readily. Gelato, on the other hand, is churned at a slower pace and absorbs far less air, creating a much denser dessert.

You also might have noticed that the serving style for the two treats aren't the same, either. In order to get those perfectly stacked ice cream scoops on a cone, buckets of ice cream must be stored at around 0°F to maintain its consistency, while the softer gelato is stored at a warmer 10°F to 22°F. Ice cream is then scooped into fairly uniform balls with the round ice cream scooper, whereas a spade or paddle is best for molding gelato into mound in a cup or a cone.

You can't really go wrong with either gelato or ice cream on a sweltering summer day, but there is one more difference to keep in mind while you debate which to get: taste. If you want a bolder flavor, you'll want to go with gelato. Because of the density of the cream and because there's less butterfat to coat your taste buds, gelato can seem to have more intensity to its flavors.

Have you got a Big Question you'd like us to answer? If so, send it to bigquestions@mentalfloss.com.

SECTIONS

arrow
LIVE SMARTER