Featured Post from University of Florida

Opinion: Hey Florida! Want to go to Mars? Here’s what it will do to your body

Dec 11, 2025

1 min

Rachael Seidler


CaptionResizeWrap TextRemove


The president is eager “to plant the stars and stripes on the planet Mars.” Would you sign up for that mission? What would happen to your body in the three years you would be gone?


As the United States continues to prioritize space travel, you might wonder why anyone would want to travel to Mars and whether it’s even ethical to expose humans to such extreme physiological conditions. The world is watching as the astronauts on the Boeing Starliner remain stuck in space until at least March due to a capsule malfunction.


So many questions have arisen about the impacts of people spending extended periods of time in space, and we don’t have all the answers yet. However, because I study how spaceflight affects human physiology and performance, I have some ideas.


The first 10 minutes of your journey will be exciting, but it’s the next months and years we really need to worry about. We have solved some of the problems but not all. After you lift off, the high g-forces will paste your body against the crew couch as you accelerate, but there’s really not too much to fear. A typical launch results in only about half the acceleration experienced by a fighter pilot in a tight turn. You might feel lightheaded, but astronauts have dealt with this for generations.


Read the full article in the Tampa Bay Times here:

Connect with:
Rachael Seidler

Rachael Seidler

Professor

Rachael Seidler researches the neural control of movement in health and disease, with a specific focus on motor learning.

SpaceParkinson'sCognitive AgeingNeuroscience and the BrainNeuroplasticity
Powered by

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from University of Florida

2 min

Giant croclike carnivore fossils found in the Caribbean

Imagine a crocodile built like a greyhound — that’s a sebecid. Standing tall, with some species reaching 20 feet in length, they dominated South American landscapes after the extinction of dinosaurs until about 11 million years ago. Or at least, that’s what paleontologists thought, until they began finding strange, fossilized teeth in the Caribbean. “The first question that we had when these teeth were found in the Dominican Republic and on other islands in the Caribbean was: What are they?” said Jonathan Bloch, curator of vertebrate paleontology at the Florida Museum of Natural History. This initial confusion was warranted. Three decades ago, researchers uncovered two roughly 18 million-year-old teeth in Cuba. With a tapered shape and small, sharp serrations specialized for tearing into meat, they unmistakenly belonged to a predator at the top of the food chain. But for the longest time, scientists didn’t think such large, land-based predators ever existed in the Caribbean. The mystery deepened when another tooth turned up in Puerto Rico, this one 29 million years old. The teeth alone weren’t enough to identify a specific animal, and the matter went unresolved. That changed in early 2023, when a research team unearthed another fossilized tooth in the Dominican Republic — but this time, it was accompanied by two vertebrae. It wasn’t much to go on, but it was enough. The fossils belonged to a sebecid, and the Caribbean, far from never having large, terrestrial predators, was a refuge for the last sebecid populations at least 5 million years after they went extinct everywhere else. A research team described the implications of their finding in a new study published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B. The study’s lead author, Lazaro Viñola Lopez, conducted the research as a graduate student at the University of Florida. He knew his team members had come upon something exceptional when they unearthed the fossils. “That emotion of finding the fossil and realizing what it is, it’s indescribable,” he said. Read more ...

3 min

Charities spend big to defend their board’s corporate agendas, new study reveals

Charities with corporate leaders on their boards spend an average of $130,000 a year lobbying on behalf of their connected companies. That’s according to a first-of-its-kind study that shows how companies benefit from their charitable work — and how charities may be all-too-happy to support their powerful board members in return for lucrative connections. The researchers behind the study say the findings could help policymakers and charity stakeholders keep tabs on a previously hidden form of political influence, but that such arrangements are perfectly legal for now. “Charities stand to gain something by behaving in this way. It doesn’t always have to be corporations pushing charities to behave in a way they don’t want to,” said Sehoon Kim, Ph.D., a professor of finance at the University of Florida and senior author of the new study. “It’s a natural quid pro quo arrangement that arises from the incentives corporations and charities have.” The American Medical Association shows one example of these incentives in action. In the 2010s, they actively lobbied against efforts by federal agencies to curb opioid prescriptions. This benefited companies like Purdue Pharma, the maker of OxyContin widely blamed for exacerbating the opioid epidemic in the U.S. It turned out that Richard Sackler, the former president of the company, sat on the board of AMA Foundation, a relationship viewed by many as controversial at the time. But Sackler had arranged for millions in donations to the foundation, and other charities are likely looking to corporate board members to help engineer large donations for their charitable work by connecting charities to other companies and leaders with deep pockets. Lobbying on behalf of their new friends, then, may simply be the most efficient way to ensure those donations keep flowing. Kim collaborated with UF Professor Joel Houston, Ph.D., and Changhyun Ahn, Ph.D., of the Chinese University of Hong Kong to conduct the analysis, which is forthcoming in the journal Management Science. They painstakingly hand collected data covering more than 400 charities and over 1,000 corporations that identified board connections, donations and lobbying activities that fell both within and outside of the charities’ typical political activity. The researchers focused on larger charities that already engage in some lobbying on their own behalf. These lobbying charities are three times larger than smaller nonprofits that never lobby. After a new corporate board member joined, these charities changed their behavior. They were far more likely to lobby outside of their own interests and to even work to support or defeat legislation that affected their new board member’s company, even when that legislation had nothing to do with their charitable mission. It worked out to about a 14% increase in the charity’s lobbying expenditures. “These were the smoking guns that there’s something going on that’s not supposed to be happening,” Kim said. Because lobbying is such an efficient use of resources, and because charities may lend their friendly brand to these lobbying efforts, this help from charities could significantly benefit these connected corporations. “These are previously unrecognized channels at play in terms of corporate political influence that policymakers need to be mindful of when assessing how influential corporations are likely to be,” Kim said.

3 min

Mental health providers may have trouble detecting bulimia in patients, study finds

When presented with a vignette describing the behaviors and characteristics of a patient with disordered eating, only a quarter of mental health providers who participated in a new study were able to correctly diagnose bulimia nervosa. The findings from researchers at the University of Florida College of Public Health and Health Professions, part of UF Health, appear in the journal Eating Disorders. Two common, yet less-recognized, patient factors may have led to the misdiagnoses, said Dakota Leget, a doctoral student in the college’s Ph.D. program in clinical and health psychology, who conducted the study with her mentor, Rebecca Pearl, Ph.D., an associate professor in the Department of Clinical and Health Psychology. The providers who participated in the study reviewed vignettes about a fictitious patient who was described as either having healthy weight or obesity and who used excessive exercise to compensate for overeating. Many patients with bulimia have average or higher body weight, yet misconceptions persist about the “typical” patient with bulimia, Leget said. “Unfortunately, we have stereotypes that someone with an eating disorder will look ‘very lean’ or ‘sickly,’ but we know that’s not the case for a lot of eating disorders,” she said. The study findings also suggest that providers may not associate excessive exercise with bulimia, despite the fact that it is listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders as one of multiple compensatory strategies used by people with bulimia. “I think my biggest takeaway is that excessive exercise may not be on mental health providers’ radar and may be overlooked when patients are presenting for care,” Leget said. For the study, the researchers recruited a nationwide sample of more than 200 mental health providers to read two patient vignettes and then select a diagnosis and recommended number of treatment sessions from a dropdown list of options. The vignettes described fictitious patients who met full diagnostic criteria for their respective disorders, according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Three-quarters of participants correctly diagnosed major depressive disorder in the first patient vignette, which served as a control. Participants were randomly assigned to receive one of two versions of the second vignette. In one version, the patient was described as having a healthy weight; in the second, the patient was described as having obesity. The other patient details were the same for both versions. The patient in the vignette reported she followed a strict diet a few days a week and engaged in a cycle of binge eating accompanied by excessive exercise. The vignette also described the patient’s thoughts and feelings about her appearance and how they affected her activities and relationships. Only 27% of providers correctly diagnosed the patient as having bulimia nervosa, and 38% of providers incorrectly diagnosed the patient with binge eating disorder. Correctly distinguishing between bulimia, binge eating or any other eating disorder is critical, the authors say, not only to ensure patients receive the right treatment, but also to appropriately monitor for other health effects, such as dangerously low sodium levels caused by excessive exercise. “If you are treating the wrong eating disorder, you might not be using the best evidence-based strategy,” Leget said. The findings also point to the need for more continuing education on eating disorders for mental health providers who may not have specialized training, Leget said. “Many people with eating disorders will probably be seen in outpatient settings and they may not be seen by someone with expertise in this area,” Leget said. “Early detection and treatment are crucial. If the community provider is able to detect an eating disorder they can treat that person or guide them to someone with the appropriate expertise so the patient gets the treatment they need sooner rather than later.”

View all posts
Powered by