Radiation Experts Concerned With TSA Airport Security Scanners

Reader Comments

Back to article

My concern is to those passengers that travel weekly, or even several times a week, passing through these x-ray machines. And what about those of us that travel weekly and are radiation workers. TSA doesn't allow us to travel with our radiation detection badges so we cannot even measure the amount of radiation we are getting. At least, if they are going to use an x-ray machine, they should education the TSA staff on radiation safety and detection devices.

Cynthia of CA 1:42AM March 20, 2012

Malthusian socialists, comprised of the central bankers throughout the world, are intent in population volume control. They use their power and influence to cull the population using TSA scanners, fluoridated tapwater and medicines, aspartame, Wi-Fi cell phone towers located in residential areas, mercury in vaccines, GMO foods, etc. etc. All of these things combined will reduce population numbers. PROTECT YOURSELF from the a-hole Malthusians, people!

John of MT 8:42PM February 09, 2012

What is the impact on pacemakers? I was told by the security folks there is non.

Fred Vos 11:05PM February 06, 2012

The fact that we have come to submitting a full body radiation scan everytime we board an airplane is ridiculous. This shows the abolute fear driven paranoid government we live under, which can justify anything under the umbrella of "security." However, it's more likely just one more case of the TSA, FDA and others turning a blind eye to safety standards as greedy politicians accept money from corporations who are trying to cash in big government contracts through peddling their garbage and often harmful products on the American public. "Just keeping the world safe from terrorism." says TSA, no matter if they give everyone cancer in the process. Arrogant Bastards!

Chris of CA 12:57PM November 18, 2011

A total invasion of my human rights! I should not be expected to submit myself to potentially risky x-ray examination for a non-medical reason. Airport staff do not have the expertise necessary to ensure that this x-ray equipment does not malfunction - and as for controlling images of passengers, well there is enough out on the web to cause us all to worry.

Experts in radiation safety were most concerned when some airports were playing with multiple neutron beam devices for examining luggage etc - the potential for a serious accident involving leakage or induced radiation is not inconsiderable. Now we are expected to believe that the "Jobsworth Bridage knows what's good for us as far as back-scatter in concerned.

Passengers pay excessively for airport checks - as customers, we should have a say in the "service" which is forced on us!

B E C Querel 12:25PM October 01, 2011

As a Paramedic and a Safety professional, I will be OPTING out for Life!!!

Ask yourself, how fast was this technology deployed, how long was it tested, what was it tested on (human or animal), if it is so safe what doesn't air crews have to go through it every time and where is the test results/studies?

Be smart, get to the airport early and OPT out. When millions are demanding a pat down, the gov will get the message! Do not accept things "as is" when your health is on the line. Life is short, no reason to make it shorter with cancer.

Phillip of AZ 5:26PM June 21, 2011

If you're concerned about the risks associated with the TSA's new scanning technology, you can now easily find out what type of scanner you will have to go through while travelling, with one easy search on http://www.thescanningauthority.com/

Todd of PA 1:15PM January 30, 2011

There is little convincing evidence that the US government has or employs reasonable standards for radiation exposure. Examples in the 20th century include: intentional irradiation of the mentally ill in the US (circa 1920s and 30s), exposure to thousands of "Atomic Troops" during the 1950s (for factual and dramatic info on these see: "The Atomic Soldiers" (Rosenberg), "Nightbreaker" and a dark humorous look: "The Atomic Cafe".

I did some preliminary research into radiation exposures and forecasting specific cancer risks for a MA Thesis. I used data from a long running research project on Nagasaki and Hiroshima survivors, nuclear industry workers, Chernobyl survivors, and airline industry flight personnel.

The last group was included because flight attendants and pilots ALREADY get additional exposure to radiation because of their frequent trips in the upper ionosphere, (http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/flightcrew/).

The subtle mutagenic effects of radiation have not been sufficiently studied to make any thoughtful, predictive, accurate statement about what low doses fo radiation will do to human cells. There has even been a beneficial, inoculation effect purported by exposure to low level ionizing radiation (radiation hormesis).

The point of this rambling note is that there is a large body of factual evidence that the government (has toted the "safe" levels and types of exposures to certain populations in the past and later revised those estimates. This same government has intentionally exposed its citizens to harmful radiation. Last, their is still a large gap in the data available re: exposure and radiogenic cancers.

Perhaps in our efforts to keep our country safe, we can engage measures that keep our aircraft safe AND that protect our citizens from a more insidious and potentially less apparent health threat.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

JLS of OR 5:04PM January 16, 2011

Age minus 18 x multiple is the amount of acceptable radiation dosage by standards.

16 yoa minus 18 x multiple is a negative number which maybe surpassed with constant unmonitored scanning by a child.

Did lobbying buy off a government agency? Time will tell.

Consultant of KS 3:47PM December 09, 2010

Given the choice between falling to earth in a million flaming pieces or getting xrayed a few extra times per year, I'll take my chances with the machine.

Erik of WI 4:18PM December 07, 2010

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Back to article

Eat + Run

advertisement

advertisement