
Apollo astronauts dying of heart disease at 4-5X the rate of counterparts - sndean
http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/07/apollo-astronauts-dying-of-heart-disease-at-4-5x-the-rate-of-counterparts/
======
apsec112
"In the new study, Delp and coauthors compared health data on 42 astronauts
that had traveled into space—seven of which got past the magnetosphere and to
the Moon—to the medical records of 35 astronauts that were grounded for their
careers. The death rate from cardiovascular disease among the Apollo lunar
astronauts was a whopping 43 percent, which is around four to five times the
rate seen in the non-fliers and low-fliers (nine and 11 percent,
respectively)."

Uh... from this paragraph, it seems like the sample size is 7, the expected
value is 1/7, and the observed value is 3/7\. Is that even statistically
significant? Did they adjust for the number of things they tested for? If 3/7
had died of cancer, compared to an expected 1/7, would that have been reported
as a health risk too? It seems almost certain that you'd find departures from
statistically average causes of death in any group of seven people, since the
sample size is so tiny.

~~~
nanis
It's worse than that ... Expected rate is 2/7 (general population). Observed
is 3/7\. The who thing is nonsense.

------
ajarmst
Technically, the number of Apollo primary crew astronauts who've died of heart
disease is the same as the number who've died in fires in pure oxygen
environments. That's the problem with small sample sets.

~~~
sliverstorm
It's erroneous to conclude Apollo astronauts were at high risk of dying in
pure oxygen fires?

~~~
ajarmst
After-the fact probability analysis is weird, but the actual predictable risk
(before Apollo 1) was certainly less than 1/12, although that's what the
hindsight risk for Apollo primary crews was. Of course, it was 0 for all the
crews after the first...

