Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Is That Airport Security Scanner Really Safe?

  1. #1

    Exclamation Is That Airport Security Scanner Really Safe?

    Is That Airport Security Scanner Really Safe?

    https://blogs.scientificamerican.com...r-really-safe/

    We don't actually know for sure, which should be a cause for concern

    By Farah Naz Khan on December 18, 2017

    The holiday season is upon us, and with millions of Americans expected to be traveling over the next few weeks there will be many more airport body scans than usual done by the U.S. Transportation Security Administration (TSA). Gone are the days of metal detectors and baggage screening alone as the means for airport security: The TSA introduced advanced imaging technology (AIT), better known as full-body scanners, as a primary screening modality in 2009. The widespread use of this technology across the U.S. ramped up after a passenger flying to Detroit successfully smuggled explosives in his underwear onto a U.S.-bound flight on Christmas Day of that year.

    But AIT was introduced to airports across the country with very little transparency for passengers. As a result, most of the general public probably does not realize there is minimal proof these technologies actually prevent terrorist attacks, and there have been no long-term studies about their safety and efficacy. As a physician, I cannot help but question the risk/benefit balance involved. I have worried about risk ever since their initial implementation, and I have never set foot in a body scanner despite extensive air travel over the years—I always choose to “opt out” instead. The lack of clear benefit with no complete absolution of risk begs the question: Why is the TSA expanding the distribution of body scanners instead of getting rid of them?

    The History of TSA Body Scanners

    When AIT was initially rolled out, the TSA had two modes of screening: backscatter x-ray scanners and millimeter wave body scanners. Backscatter x-ray scanners used low doses of radiation in order generate a computerized image of the entire body These scanners came under significant fire by several different groups, including physicians and experts in the field of radiological research, due to their use of ionizing radiation—the kind that can break apart molecules. In a special report in 2011 for the Archives of Internal Medicine (now JAMA Internal Medicine) radiologists helped the public understand dose equivalents to the backscatter machines—with 50 TSA scans being equivalent to the exposure of one dental x-ray, a thousand scans roughly equivalent to a single chest X-ray, and so on.

    Estimating the actual health risks that came with this added exposure, however, was more challenging. And despite the fact backscatter machines use only low doses of radiation when compared with the exposure from routine medical procedures, the argument held strong that humans should not be exposed to ionizing radiation without clear medical benefit.

    This argument formed the basis for a ProPublica and PBS NewsHour story that decried the nonchalance with which the government introduced this new method of security screening without reliable scientific testing of the risks involved. Despite these public concerns, backscatter x-ray scanners were deemed to provide only a “negligible individual dose” (pdf) of ionizing radiation in a special report on radiation protection issues prepared by the National Council on Radiation Protection & Measurements (NCRP) for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

    According to the NRCP, a passenger would have to undergo 2,500 backscatter body scans in one year before exceeding the annual limit for ionizing radiation exposure from nonmedical devices. And although these minimal health risks did not faze the TSA, the European Union banned backscatter machines in 2011 due to health and safety concerns. The machines were also widely believed to violate passenger privacy, given the graphic nature of the images they produced. Ultimately the TSA began shelving the backscatter scanners in 2012 due to an issue with the manufacturer’s privacy software (pdf).

    With the shuttering of backscatter x-ray scanners, the TSA shifted to millimeter wave body scanners. These use electromagnetic waves to generate high-resolution images of unusual objects that might be concealed by passenger clothing; these anomalies are then superimposed on the image of a mannequin to protect privacy. The frequencies of the waves used by these scanners are measured in tens of gigahertz (GHz), and at these frequencies the radiation is considered high-frequency non-ionizing radiation—the kind of that heats up molecules.

    Millimeter wave body scanners avoided many of the controversial issues that took down the backscatter x-ray machines, until the TSA issued a surprise update to their policy in early 2016, allowing agents to deny the right of passengers deemed to be security risks to opt out of the scans. Several privacy advocates spoke out (pdf) against this move, but the TSA pushed forward with their updated regulations.

    Has AIT Been Effective?

    The TSA blog regularly posts roundups of weapons discovered during TSA screening procedures. More often than not these posts make no mention of items detected with AIT. Body scanners have detected the occasional knife, underwear full of ecstasy, a plastic dagger and a loaded gun—yet everything but ecstasy and the plastic dagger would likely have been picked up by metal detectors, without exposing passengers to radiation.

    What the TSA has not publicized is the high false-positive rates of millimeter wave body scanners, with a ProPublica report citing a 54 percent false-positive rate in Germany due to the machine picking up even sweat as a potential cause for concern. And whereas the backscatter x-ray scanners have been shelved, a team of researchers obtained their own backscatter body scanner and demonstrated multiple vulnerabilities in the scanners—from allowing weapons to be smuggled through to the machines’ susceptibility to malware.

    To date, there has not been a single report of aviation terrorism that was thwarted thanks to AIT. Even in the immediate aftermath of the underwear bomber’s failed attack, statistical journalist Nate Silver placed the odds of being on any given flight with terrorist activity at less than one in 10 million in the decade preceding that incident. Nevertheless, nearly eight years after that pivotal moment in U.S. aviation security history, we are still scanning passengers with potentially harmful machines every day. A spring 2016 report from the TSA defends AIT—justifying the over $2.1-million cost of the scanners from 2008 to 2017 by arguing the machines “deter would-be attackers.”

    But when it comes to what AIT can or cannot actually detect, the TSA claims the information is classified. Even a former TSA agent spoke out against body scanners in an op-ed for TIME, arguing they are expensive and ineffective. The conservative the Heritage Foundation’s compilation of 60 terrorist plots since 9/11 also notes no post-2009 events were foiled by AIT. And still the TSA firmly stands by the nearly 800 machines at over 150 airports across the country. My requests for comments from aviation security experts have gone unanswered.

    The Facts about Health Risks of Millimeter Wave Body Scanners

    To understand potential health effects from the millimeter wave body scanners, it is critical to understand non-ionizing radiation, which encompasses everything from high-frequency ultraviolet solar radiation to very-low-frequency radiation from electric and magnetic fields. The millimeter wave body scanners emit radiation that falls in the microwave range of the non-ionizing radiation spectrum. Other technologies in this category include cell phones, microwave ovens, radar, wi-fi signals and cordless phones. The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) issued a statement (pdf) regarding potential health issues associated with millimeter wave body scanners in 2012, making it clear that higher-frequency waves will lead to more energy absorption. Guidelines for exposure limitations are set for all non-ionizing forms of radiation to prevent problems from localized heating and, per the ICNIRP, the TSA millimeter wave body scanners provide only a tenth of the radiation limit for the general public.

    So does this mean we are safe? According to the World Health Organization’s current electromagnetic field project, there is really no way to know at this point. Ivan Brezovich, a professor of radiation physics at The University of Alabama at Birmingham’s Department of Radiation Oncology, agrees these millimeter wave body scanners may not be 100 percent risk free and could have a biological effect. Brezovich explains that microwaves such as those from the millimeter wave body scanners can interact with the entire body, individual organs or with large molecules, thus having a potentially measurable effect. And although Brezovich was involved in experiments that demonstrated effects on cancer cells with radio frequency non-ionizing radiation exposure, he deems the risk of the millimeter wave body scanners as acceptable due to the low intensity and low penetration depth of the millimeter waves during the short scan duration.

    In a world where we are all exposed to non-ionizing radiation every single day, its amount in our environment is only going to increase as technologies advance. As an example, even our cell phones have been deemed “potentially carcinogenic” by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). Couple this with our existence in modern society today and we are all living in bubbles of potential carcinogens that we cannot rid ourselves of. So although there is no proof of long-term detrimental health effects from chronic exposure to non-ionizing radiation, we have also not been able to prove there is an absence of risk from these regular exposures. Recent Business Insider analysis demonstrated Americans are millions of times more likely to die from heart disease or cancer than at the hands of terrorist attacks carried out by foreigners. And so, until there is proof that the machines either prevent terror attacks or are 100 percent safe even with long-term chronic exposure, I will continue to opt-out of AIT screenings.

    Perhaps you should, too.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    I imagine they shrink your testes and kill testosterone .

  4. #3
    I always avoid those....
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Ron Paul know some weird people too.



    Quiz: Test Your "Income" Tax IQ!


    Short Income Tax Video

    The Income Tax Is An Excise, And Excise Taxes Are Privilege Taxes

    The Federalist Papers, No. 15:

    Except as to the rule of appointment, the United States have an indefinite discretion to make requisitions for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America.

  5. #4
    Don't care to try them. The local DMV offered to let me voluntarily join the Real I,D. Told me it would be easier to travel. I would only need one I.D. Told thm I don't reckon I'm going to be flying anytime soon. No.
    Theye have refused their Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

    Theye have erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

    Theye kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies

    Theye have combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution,

    For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

    For cutting off our Trade with parts of the world:

    For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

    For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

    Theye plundered and destroyed the lives of our people.

    Theye are at this time transporting Armies of Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy of a civilized nation.

  6. #5
    "We've got an opt-out over here." I have heard many a times...
    Once you go Paul, you see through them all.

  7. #6
    This goes here:
    Quote Originally Posted by Torchbearer
    what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.
    Hear/buy my music here "government is the enemy of liberty"-RP Support me on Patreon here Ephesians 6:12

  8. #7
    wouldn't hurt my feelings if I never traveled by air ever again.


    Don't need a weather man to know which way the wind blows

  9. #8
    Who Knows? Maybe itwould work out for the goodlike it did for Max Fielder?

    Chris

    "Government ... does not exist of necessity, but rather by virtue of a tragic, almost comical combination of klutzy, opportunistic terrorism against sitting ducks whom it pretends to shelter, plus our childish phobia of responsibility, praying to be exempted from the hard reality of life on life's terms." Wolf DeVoon

    "...Make America Great Again. I'm interested in making American FREE again. Then the greatness will come automatically."Ron Paul



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Just in time for the holidays!


    Chestnuts roasting on an open fire...


    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst

  12. #10
    I'm sure it's fine, they probably already looked into this concern and signed the needed documents that confirm it's perfectly safe.
    It's all about taking action and not being lazy. So you do the work, whether it's fitness or whatever. It's about getting up, motivating yourself and just doing it.
    - Kim Kardashian

    Donald Trump / Rand Paul (Vice Pres) 2016!!!!



Similar Threads

  1. New Game: Airport Scanner - Become The Ultimate Retard!
    By citizen in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-17-2013, 09:40 PM
  2. Airport Body Scanner Story on Yahoo's Front Page
    By KCIndy in forum Individual Rights Violations: Case Studies
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-04-2010, 11:29 AM
  3. Airport Security Scanner Creates Braw
    By catdd in forum Individual Rights Violations: Case Studies
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-06-2010, 08:08 PM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-17-2010, 06:12 PM
  5. These German Dudes got Balls! Naked in the airport scanner
    By teacherone in forum Individual Rights Violations: Case Studies
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-19-2010, 05:47 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •