NASA monitored and evaluated pulmonary edema risks during the Apollo missions

the verdict

REFUTED

the evidence says no

Recorded sources

0 sources for · 2 against

Counts group repeated records of the same source within each side. They do not measure evidence strength or source independence.

Evidence indicates that pulmonary edema was not considered a significant risk during the Apollo missions due to adequate oxygen partial pressure maintained in the spacecraft cabin, and it was not among NASA's listed medical operational concerns.

How claims like this are judged

Judged against reference works: claims of this kind are settled by the historical reference record, not journal abstracts.

Evidence against · 2

space.stackexchange.com: Was NASA concerned about Pulmonary Edema during ...

Recorded source metadata

space.stackexchange.com: Was NASA concerned about Pulmonary Edema during .... space.stackexchange.com. https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/69585/was-nasa-concerned-about-pulmonary-edema-during-the-apollo-missions

Notes that Apollo astronauts were not at risk for pulmonary edema because 100% O2 maintained adequate partial pressure.

Source citation format

See more details

More against · 1

ntrs.nasa.gov: 19700010467.pdf

Recorded source metadata

ntrs.nasa.gov: 19700010467.pdf. ntrs.nasa.gov. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/19700010467/downloads/19700010467.pdf

Lists the actual medical concerns of the Apollo program, omitting pulmonary edema.

Source citation format

The paper trail · every fact has a biography

first checked31 Jul 2026

judged → REFUTED · 1031 Jul 2026

More receipts

Is it true that Phonological evolution involves regular processes of phoneme elision, vowel nasalization, and tonogenesis?Is it true that Hemangiomas are treatable with medication?Is it true that Research identifies forms of intelligence that diverge from standard IQ measures?

Random receipt →The Trust Wiki →

Anyone with this link can read the claim and its public receipt, including any personal information in that text. Open permanent receipt.

Check your own claim

Challenge the receipt

I have a source that contradicts this verdict I have a source that supports it No source: request a receipt review Requests are recorded for review. This does not start an automatic check or guarantee a response time.

trust me, bro: win the argument, pass the class, survive peer review.

Citation formatting by citeproc-js (Frank Bennett) and the Citation Style Language project. Source and licenses.

This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work · Dispute this receipt