Let's talk about the space-tampon story. OK, so this is a story confirmed by Sally Ride and Kathy Sullivan, where a male engineer asks if 100 tampons is good for one week, and she politely tells him he can go a lot lower. Very often repeated, and true so far as it goes. BUT

In an interview by Weitekamp with Rhea Seddon, the only MD among the women in that class, she said she was actually consulted on the decision! She said they ended up with a big number out of concern about microgravity effects and due to the NASA approach to redundancy.
Microgravity concerns were not unreasonable. In Sally Ride's biography by Sherr, she discusses how the first woman who actually had to use the tampons in space had issues with "capillary action." Space is horrible.
Anyway, so, the story Ride and Sullivan tell is true (and funny!) but there's some missing context. I am not a historian, and certainly not a historian on this topic, but I have read a lot of books. A plausible sequence goes like this:
1) Seddon is consulted as the lady MD.
2) Due to unknowns, gives a high number
3) NASA management doubles that number, out of abundance of caution
4) A kit with infinity tampons goes to the other women, delivered by some (happily never identified) male tech
This then gets told and retold as story about the idiocy of male NASA engineers, when it's more a story about bureaucracy creating weird results.

For the record, there ARE stories about funny/stupid things male engineers did, including bizarre early urine systems for women.
The latter were replaced by fancy adult diapers, which worked so well the men now use them too, instead of the old external catheter system which was kind of embarrassing (had to be sized to the individual) and tended to slip off.

More from Society

I've seen many news articles cite that "the UK variant could be the dominant strain by March". This is emphasized by @CDCDirector.

While this will likely to be the case, this should not be an automatic cause for concern. Cases could still remain contained.

Here's how: 🧵

One of @CDCgov's own models has tracked the true decline in cases quite accurately thus far.

Their projection shows that the B.1.1.7 variant will become the dominant variant in March. But interestingly... there's no fourth wave. Cases simply level out:

https://t.co/tDce0MwO61


Just because a variant becomes the dominant strain does not automatically mean we will see a repeat of Fall 2020.

Let's look at UK and South Africa, where cases have been falling for the past month, in unison with the US (albeit with tougher restrictions):


Furthermore, the claim that the "variant is doubling every 10 days" is false. It's the *proportion of the variant* that is doubling every 10 days.

If overall prevalence drops during the studied time period, the true doubling time of the variant is actually much longer 10 days.

Simple example:

Day 0: 10 variant / 100 cases -> 10% variant
Day 10: 15 variant / 75 cases -> 20% variant
Day 20: 20 variant / 50 cases -> 40% variant

1) Proportion of variant doubles every 10 days
2) Doubling time of variant is actually 20 days
3) Total cases still drop by 50%

You May Also Like