Abstract
During spaceflight, astronauts are exposed to a variety of unique hazards, including altered gravity fields, long periods of isolation and confinement, living in a closed environment at increasing distances from Earth, and exposure to higher levels of hazardous ionizing radiation. Preserving human health and performance in the face of these relentless hazards becomes progressively more difficult as missions increase in length and extend beyond low Earth orbit. Finding solutions is a significant challenge that is further complicated by logistical issues associated with studying these unique hazards. Although research studies using space-based platforms are the gold standard, these are not without limitations. Factors such as the small sample size of the available astronaut crew, high expense, and time constraints all add to the logistical challenge. To overcome these limitations, a wide variety of Earth-based analogs, from polar research outposts to an undersea laboratory, are available to augment space-based studies. Each analog simulates unique physiological and behavioral effects associated with spaceflight and, therefore, for any given study, the choice of an appropriate platform is closely linked to the phenomena under investigation as well as the characteristics of the analog. There are pros and cons to each type of analog and each actual facility, but overall they provide a reasonable means to overcome the barriers associated with conducting experimental research in space. Analogs, by definition, will never be perfect, but they are a useful component of an integrated effort to understand the human risks of living and working in space. They are a necessary resource for pushing the frontier of human spaceflight, both for astronauts and for commercial space activities. In this review, we describe the use of analogs here on Earth to replicate specific aspects of the spaceflight environment and highlight how analog studies support future human endeavors in space.