I received a flyer (see "NASA JSC Urine Collection Study Donor Request") from a friend today. The flyer comes from the outfit that holds the contract to build the 'potty' for the Orion vehicle.

Since I am no longer a rocket scientist, perhaps my thoughts on the flyer's request should be discarded out-of-hand. Perhaps not though.

The flyer requests that employees bring large quantaties of urine to work, or collect similary large quantities while at work, and turn them over to the company for analysis. A trusting person that had any knowledge of the engineering problems involved with making a zero-G toilet, would likely assume that there was a study of the effect urine solids as they pertain to the new Orion potty design, and that the company was merely saving costs by recruiting its employees to volunteer specimens to further its research. This would be a win-win situation (aside from the large beaker-peeing required by the employees), and the company. I.e., the company saves money, and the urinating employees feel that they are contributing much more than normal to thier employer's stock price.

What the company does not even remotely express in its request for urine donors is what is worrysome. There is no statement in the corporate request that the urine donors should expect privacy. There is no statement of what the urine shall be tested for. Hell, there aren't even suggestions of any sort of sterile procedures in the instructions. The only sort of adamant instructions seem to be the timing of the sample collection and the labeling of the donor's name on the sample.

The worst part about this flyer that request donations of employees urine is that it offers no promise of anonymity. It also does not define the scope of the tests which may be run on the samples. I mean, say that a urine sample yields a descriminator that indicates a kidney problem. Would such information affect the donor's career? Since all donors are to affix a label with their name to each donation, and since the request for donations has no promise of confidentiality, where, as is common in the medical field, does the presumption of annonymity come into play?

Does your insurance carrier get to see the results of your analysis?

All that I am, a man that has recently been laid-off from a manned spaceflight contractor can recommend is: Do not 'donate' your urine to XXX. After over 20 years in the effort of flying mankind to and from space I believe that I know from whence I speak. Your bosses are not to be trusted with even basic information about your personal life or your health.

The first rec I can suggest is: Don't have a poppy seed bagel.

Wiki -
Although the amount of opiates in poppy seeds is not enough to produce a narcotic effect in cooking or consumption,[1] the television show MythBusters demonstrated that one could test positive for narcotics after consuming 4 poppy seed bagels. The show Brainiac: Science Abuse had subjects that tested positive with only 2 poppy seed bagels. This situation was parodied on the show Seinfeld.

LOX?

Not a problem.

Good points, but to be fair - just because its not on the flyer doesn't mean that info isn't provided.

Wow - There certainly are some paranoid/conspiracy folks out there. However I just can't seem to connect the dots that, after immediately donating, said donors are suddenly going to be targeted for immediate termination from THE MAN because of what may or may not be in their urine. (Contrary to popular belief, folks really do have better things to do with their time and money). My recommendation is just to relax, drink your fluids beforehand, and do your part to help out the next generation of engineers and scientists by participating in the study (as I plan to do!).

- Former NASA contractor and current NASA employee, 8 years manned spaceflight experience (and still loving it!)

I concur with Reader.

NASA (particularly JSC) has a very poor track record of showing understanding of employees with medical illnesses or disabilities -- despite their claims to the contrary. I know of several persons who were pushed out the door when a medical condition was disclosed.

My question would be, why would NASA or its contractor want the name of the donor for this exercise? What does providing one's name have to with testing for Orion?

Been there!

To "Another Reader",

My point that I am no longer a rocket scientist refers to the fact that I was in fact laid-off after well over 20 years of service. I and others were laid-off apparently because of medical conditions.

Original Reader wrote:

"My point that I am no longer a rocket scientist refers to the fact that I was in fact laid-off after well over 20 years of service. I and others were laid-off apparently because of medical conditions."

Original Reader --

So was I (10 years in the bucket)

You can't work in aerospace as a contractor without being laid off at least once.

Collecting urine for testing ECLSS hardware is a common occurrence, only JSC would need to advertise for it.

Why don't they just put collection jugs with funnels in the JSC bathrooms? There was a large demand for urine collection during the LMLSTP Phase III testing. An empty jug in the morning is filled by the afternoon. That should more than meet demands, including excess for the weekends. All urine is mixed so there's nothing to identify individuals.

Just as an FYI, for this study, all the urine is mixed immediately together as well, directly after the sample is collected. (The donor actually carries the sample into the collection facility and pours it directly into the sample container himself/herself.) So, identification of individual urine simply won't be possible (for the folks who originally expressed the concerns on privacy). Total volume (at the end of the day) is the important factor here, not scrutiny or detailed chemical examination of each donor's "contribution" to the project.