When India commissioned INS Aridhaman on April 3, 2026, Defence Minister Rajnath Singh posted a single line on X, in Hindi: “Shabd nahi, Shakti hai ‘Aridhaman’”, loosely translated as, “Aridhaman isn’t just a word, it is power.” The event was classified, as is customary for India’s nuclear submarine programme.
The headlines moved quickly to deterrence and geopolitics, but what about the crew?
Somewhere inside that 7,000-tonne vessel, crew members are preparing to spend months submerged, working metres away from a nuclear reactor, breathing recycled air, sleeping under artificial light, with no sunrises, no phone calls home, and no way to step outside. What that does to the human body is a question defence briefings rarely answer. Here is what science and research says.
The physiological toll of submarine deployment can be understood across four key stressors:
Radiation exposure that accumulates over time
Circadian disruption from the absence of natural light
A sealed atmosphere with elevated CO₂ and pollutants
Severe physical inactivity within confined space
A submarine patrol combines elements of spaceflight, shift work, and long-term ICU environments.
A landmark 27-year cohort study tracking 85,033 US Navy nuclear submariners found the average cumulative radiation dose was just 5.7 millisieverts, well below the 20 mSv annual occupational safety limit set by the International Commission on Radiological Protection. For context, a single CT scan delivers roughly 10 mSv. Scientists from the Regional Cancer Centre, Trivandrum, and BARC Mumbai tracked over 385,000 residents of Kerala’s high-background-radiation coastal belt and found no significant excess cancer risk, showing what decades of real-world low-dose exposure looks like in a living population.
Low risk is not zero risk. A large-scale review including the INWORKS study covering 308,000 nuclear industry workers across three countries found a statistically significant link between cumulative radiation exposure and cardiovascular disease, particularly ischaemic heart disease (a heart condition due to blocks in arteries), the likely result of radiation gradually damaging blood vessel walls over repeated patrols. A BARC Mumbai study on the same Kerala cohort found robust activation of DNA repair and stress response proteins in chronically exposed individuals, confirming the body does not passively absorb low-dose radiation but works continuously to manage it.
Beyond radiation, the more immediate stressor is something far less visible: light.
Submarine crews can go 60 to 90 days without natural light. The reactor gets the headlines. Darkness does the quiet damage.
The body’s internal clock, governing sleep, hormones, immune function, and metabolism, depends almost entirely on light cues. When those cues disappear, the system drifts. A study on Indian Navy sailors published in Medical Journal of Armed Forces India found significantly less restorative sleep at sea compared to shore, with measurable cognitive decline. Research from the Institute of Aerospace Medicine, Bengaluru showed that even after three nights of recovery sleep following sustained sleep loss, attention performance did not fully return to baseline, suggesting weeks, not days, are needed to normalize after a long patrol. A 67-day field study of an actual submarine crew found that melatonin continued its natural 24-hour rhythm regardless of the artificial schedule imposed onboard.
The body keeps looking for a sunrise that never comes.
Submarine atmospheres maintain CO₂ levels around 0.5 to 1%, versus 0.04% at the surface, enough to subtly impair concentration and decision-making over time. A 2025 narrative review in Toxics (MDPI) covering research through September 2025 found submarine air consistently elevated in volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and bio-aerosols originating from human metabolism, off-gassing construction materials, and onboard maintenance, linking this chronic multi-pollutant profile to airway irritation, impaired mucociliary defences, and neuro-behavioral effects. The continuous mechanical noise of propulsion systems and ventilation adds documented outcomes of its own: hearing loss, sleep disruption, and altered cognitive performance across enclosed naval platforms.
An Indian study across six Indian Navy submarines found over 91% of crew had insufficient physical activity, space simply does not permit it. A 26-day sortie study recorded weight gain in 29 of 42 crew from high-calorie rations combined with near-zero movement. This matters more because submariners enter service as an elite, rigorously screened group, what epidemiologists call the Healthy Worker Effect. When that strong baseline deteriorates across a 90-day patrol, the environment is the explanation, not the individual. A BARC Mumbai study on disabled submarines found that when propulsion fails and temperature regulation is lost, heat stress rapidly compounds the cardiovascular and cognitive load already building under normal conditions. Naval psychiatry literature consistently documents elevated anxiety, interpersonal stress, and sleep disturbance from long deployments, the cumulative weight of months in close quarters, no privacy, no contact with family, no change of scene.
INS Aridhaman joins INS Arihant and INS Arighaat in active service, with a fourth vessel already undergoing sea trials. Submarine medicine is no longer a niche concern, it is a national occupational health question. Indian researchers at Armed Forces Medical College Pune and INHS Asvini Mumbai have been building this evidence base quietly for years, studying everything from physical inactivity to thermal stress.
The people inside INS Aridhaman will face challenges that no strategic briefing addresses. Understanding those challenges does not diminish what these crews do. It is simply what medicine owes them.
The physiological observations discussed in this article are based on peer-reviewed naval medicine research and are not an assessment of the specific internal conditions or crew health of the INS Aridhaman.
Is it safe to work on a nuclear submarine?
Radiation doses on nuclear submarines are well below occupational safety limits. However, cumulative exposure over multiple deployments carries a small but documented cardiovascular risk, independent of cancer risk.
How do submarine crews survive without sunlight?
The body's internal clock continues functioning but drifts without natural light cues. Melatonin maintains its 24-hour rhythm regardless of the artificial schedule onboard, causing persistent circadian misalignment that can take weeks to normalize after surfacing.
What are the long-term health effects of submarine service?
Research documents cumulative cardiovascular risk from low-dose radiation, metabolic changes from physical inactivity, sleep debt that outlasts the patrol, and psychological stress from prolonged confinement, all compounded across a career of multiple deployments.
Friedman-Jimenez, G., Kato, I., Factor-Litvak, P., & Shore, R. (2022). Low-dose ionizing radiation and cancer mortality among enlisted men stationed on nuclear-powered submarines in the United States Navy. International Journal of Radiation Biology, 98(10), 1542–1550. https://doi.org/10.1080/09553002.2022.2055805
Nair, R. R. K., Rajan, B., Akiba, S., Jayalekshmi, P., Nair, M. K., Gangadharan, P., Koga, T., Morishima, H., Nakamura, S., & Sugahara, T. (2009). Background radiation and cancer incidence in Kerala, India — Karunagappally cohort study. Health Physics, 96(1), 55–66. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.HP.0000327646.54923.11
Nishad, S., & Ghosh, A. (2021). Chronic exposure of humans to high level natural background radiation leads to robust expression of protective stress response proteins. Scientific Reports, 11, 1287. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-80405-y
Azizova, T. V., Hamada, N., Grigoryeva, E. S., & Bannikova, M. V. (2024). Low-dose occupational exposure to ionizing radiation and cardiovascular effects: A narrative review. Healthcare (MDPI), 12(2), 238. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare12020238
Nasser, A., & Bhutani, S. (2017). Occupational health concerns: An analysis of physical activity of submariners. Medical Journal of Armed Forces India, 73(4), 344–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mjafi.2016.09.010
Bhutani, S., Khan, I., Nasser, A., & Saxena, C. S. (2020). Thermal stress inside a disabled submarine. Medical Journal of Armed Forces India, 76(3), 333–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mjafi.2018.03.001
Jaipurkar, R., Mahapatra, S. S., Bobdey, S., & Banerji, C. (2019). Work-rest pattern, alertness and performance assessment among naval personnel deployed at sea: A cross-sectional study. Medical Journal of Armed Forces India, 75(2), 158–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mjafi.2018.01.005
Mishra, S., Tripathy, N. K., Biswal, P., & Raghunandan, V. (2023). Cumulative sleep restriction and subsequent recovery sleep: Effects on subjective sleepiness, vigilance, and executive functions. Indian Journal of Aerospace Medicine, 67, 22–27. https://doi.org/10.25259/IJASM_14_2022
Van Puyvelde, M., Rietjens, G., Helmhout, P., Mairesse, O., Van Cutsem, J., & Pattyn, N. (2022). The submariners' sleep study: A field investigation of sleep and circadian hormones during a 67-day submarine mission with a strict 6-h-on/6-h-off watch routine. Journal of Applied Physiology, 132(4), 1069–1079. https://doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.00130.2021
Pawar, A. A., Chikkanna, C. B., & Rote, M. S. (2012). Occupational stress and social support in naval personnel. Medical Journal of Armed Forces India, 68(4), 360–365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mjafi.2012.04.026
Senis, M., et al. (2025). Submarine indoor air quality and crew health: A critical narrative review of respiratory and cardiovascular risks. Toxics (MDPI), 14(1), 33.https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics14010033
