Originally Posted by
just another jocky
The RAF Centre of Aviation Medicine informed the review that following consultation with international colleagues and experts ‘no consulted expert or organization recognises the existence of a low-G impairment syndrome’ and that ‘the total unanimity and unambiguous nature of expert opinion and long-term international experience offers significant reassurance
With all due respect to RAFCAM, that statement absolutely does not offer reassurance, let alone at a significant level! They might as well say that because no-one has ever seen a blue chicken, then blue chickens don't exist!
If there is a real desire to find out the state of scientific / medical knowledge on the topic, there needs to be an independent person / body conducting the search, ie one which can express an opinion without the risk of incriminating itself or its own past inaction
Completely agree - the report has attempted to draw a conclusion from a review of opinions and research examples which either didn't assess cognitive performance by intent, or were not able to assess cognitive performance to the level that the report required. If the regulator wants to take this seriously, then they should motivate some actual research in a centrifuge, not a lit review.