Slashdot Mirror


Nuclear Scanning Catches a Radioactive Cat On I-5

Jeff recommends Seattle Times columnist Danny Westneat's story from a community meeting with Northwest border control agents. Seems their monitoring for dirty bombs from the median of Interstate 5 caught a car transporting a radioactive cat. "It turns out the feds have been monitoring Interstate 5 for nuclear 'dirty bombs.' They do it with radiation detectors so sensitive it led to the following incident. 'Vehicle goes by at 70 miles per hour... Agent is in the median, a good 80 feet away from the traffic. Signal went off and identified an isotope [in the passing car]. The agent raced after the car, pulling it over not far from the monitoring spot.' Did he find a nuke? 'Turned out to be a cat with cancer that had undergone a radiological treatment three days earlier.'"

130 of 594 comments (clear)

  1. I know the name of its owner.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Schrodinger

    1. Re:I know the name of its owner.... by Kanaka+Kid · · Score: 2

      What was the cat's state?

    2. Re:I know the name of its owner.... by LaskoVortex · · Score: 5, Funny

      What was the cat's state?

      Washington--which is a quantum superposition between Oregon and Canada.

      --
      Just callin' it like I see it.
    3. Re:I know the name of its owner.... by piemcfly · · Score: 4, Funny

      catatonic?

    4. Re:I know the name of its owner.... by piemcfly · · Score: 5, Funny

      wait, that was supposed to say

      'catatomic'

      ... and he ruins his own joke as usual.

    5. Re:I know the name of its owner.... by scubamage · · Score: 5, Funny

      Its state doesn't matter, because it changed when it was observed. My guess is either alive or dead.

  2. Lolcat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Schrödinger cat is not amused

    1. Re:Lolcat by tubapro12 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Schrödinger's cat is not amused—maybe.
      There, I fixed that for you.
    2. Re:Lolcat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      How about this?

  3. Ha, ha by bruce_the_loon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Now, how do you explain that you've just had radiation treatment to the mindless TSA buffoon who's found you're radioactive?

    --
    Trying to become famous by taking photos. Visit my homepage please.
    1. Re:Ha, ha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why should I explain the details of my cancer treatment to some TSA agent? My medical history is private and should be protected by law from unnecessary disclosure.

    2. Re:Ha, ha by budgenator · · Score: 5, Interesting

      When I had a cardiac stress stress test there was a sign that informed patients that cross the boarder would trigger radiation detectors for at least three days. I work in a dental office and we are the only office that accepts the DHS's dental plan so we have many patients that are Customs Agents, he told me it took the Canadians 3 days to get their trash cleaned up enough to get it across the boarder without triggering the detectors.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    3. Re:Ha, ha by j-pimp · · Score: 4, Informative

      Now, how do you explain that you've just had radiation treatment to the mindless TSA buffoon who's found you're radioactive? What? Oh I get it... because all TSA workers are mindless, buffoons. Just like all blacks like watermelons, Irishmen are drunks, and Italians are in the mob. Of course.

      Yeah I once had a set of RJ45 crimping tools in my backpack that I happened to use as carry on luggage. As I waited on line to go through the TSA checkpoint and remembered they were in the bottom of my bag I was afraid of 2 things (1) the tools being confiscated because they could be used as weapons, and (2) the agents not knowing what they were and detaining me. Well they did attract TSA attention. The woman operating the scanning machine asked me if they were "telephone tools" and I said yes. She asked her supervisor who let me go through with them. So yes bringing strange things through airport security will raise eyebrows, but its not always a one way ticket to Gitmo.

      --
      --- Justin Dearing http://www.justaprogrammer.net/ We're just programmers.
    4. Re:Ha, ha by chrish · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, some people are lazy and still throw out the waste from our Home Fusion reactors instead of shipping them to one of the government-owned CANDU reactor sites. What's even more WTF is that the fuel comes with a pre-paid shipping label, you just have to shove it in a box, slap the label on, and call Purolator to come pick it up.

      --
      - chrish
    5. Re:Ha, ha by GooberToo · · Score: 5, Informative

      if you have to travel home to be in hospice near your family.

      I'm just throwing this out there. I know this is somewhat off topic. Just don't forget organizations like Angel Flight (West, South Central, East, and North East) exist to assist ambulatory patients that can't otherwise afford air transportation for specialized, non-local, medial treatment. Of course, they help with other emergencies too, such as after Katrina.

      If you have a medical and financial need, Angel Flight may be able to help you side step financial and time problems created by road travel and the TSA during public air travel.

    6. Re:Ha, ha by Loucks · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hey, they made me take off my shoes. My shoes! Then they couldn't immediately identify an X-ray of my obscure, specialized electronic device, nor could they easily see through the ~5 miles of cable I routinely carry on when I travel (better not check it--those criminal baggage handlers would STEAL it.), so I was delayed by FIVE WHOLE MINUTES. I didn't say anything at the time, but now I'm waging a passive-aggressive internet-based war of words against the TSA. It seems like the most sensible way to express my neurotic fury at a mild inconvenience, and it's ever so easy to couch my rhetoric in terms of attacks on TSA employees' intelligence and rants about civil rights that display a depressing ignorance of actual law.

    7. Re:Ha, ha by justthisdude · · Score: 4, Informative

      For a little reality check, a friend went in for liver cancer treatments this morning. Mt. Sinai is in New York city, and the treatment involves Yttrium-90, so when the prepped her they told her she needed a note from her doctor because she will probably get scanned and stopped at the Lincoln Tunnel when she goes home.

      --
      "I love his boyish charm, but I hate his childishness" - Leela
    8. Re:Ha, ha by ChemGeek4501 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It won't be a TSA person - it's usually state police that have portable gamma spectrometers in addition to the survey instrument that was on the road, that way they can identify the isotope if it were a gamma emitter. It's an amazingly sensitive and sophisticated system, and the folks that are usually running it are some of the brighter bulbs in the state police box.

    9. Re:Ha, ha by iCharles · · Score: 3, Insightful

      HIPPA vs. Homeland Security: who will win?

    10. Re:Ha, ha by Muad'Dave · · Score: 5, Informative

      For those that are curious, Y-90 has a half life of 64 hours and decays into (stable) Zr-90 via the emission of a 2.28 MeV beta- particle. It has a fairly high specific activity of 2.5x10^5 Ci/g (naturally, given its short half life). It is mainly produced from Sr-90, which is fairly dangerous if ingested because the body treats it like calcium - it ends up locked in your bones where it irradiates surround tissue - like bone marrow that produces blood cells. Here is a datasheet from a supplier - you can get it in activities of 1 Curie! That's 37 GBq.

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    11. Re:Ha, ha by stubob · · Score: 4, Interesting

      So the new order is: cat box, soap box, ballot box, jury box, ammo box?

      --
      Planning to be moderated ± 1: Bad Pun.
    12. Re:Ha, ha by Idarubicin · · Score: 2, Informative

      Now, how do you explain that you've just had radiation treatment to the mindless TSA buffoon who's found you're radioactive?

      This isn't really a new problem. Radiotherapy patients were getting picked up by radiation monitors in the New York subway system years ago. See for example this case, which involves a fellow who was searched (strip searched) twice in Manhattan subway stations during a three-week period. This was back in 2002. My understanding is that most (American) clinicians are aware of the potential problem, and know enough to send their patients out the door with explanatory paperwork and pager numbers for medical personnel who can explain to police why certain individuals are radioactive.

      Heck, it's been long enough that I suspect most police/Homeland Security officers may actually be familiar with this potential for false positives. Now, I admit that the 'radioactive pets' problem is a new one to me, and there's a large part of my mind that says, "Quit torturing the cat. Let it go. Put the animal to rest peacefully, rather than have it get arrested, detained, and blown up by Homeland Security."

      --
      ~Idarubicin
    13. Re:Ha, ha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Note to self:

      Bring a bald cat when transporting nuclear materials on I-5.

    14. Re:Ha, ha by tandr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I was afraid of 2 things (1) the tools being confiscated because they could be used as weapons, and (2) the agents not knowing what they were and detaining me. The fact that you were thinking about it is scary enough already, don't you think? Not that I go through airport security happily singing every time recently - you stand in line and trying to think what did you forget to take out that might be strange looking or hard to explain... :(
    15. Re:Ha, ha by __int64 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's great, and I'm glad this system gracefully handles medical exemptions without the need to stare down barrel of a beretta. It's apparently easy to get cards and pass through the checkpoints, but doesn't this break the system? Surely, if one can obtain weapon-grade nuclear material, one could easily obtain a medical exemption card. That's gotta be several orders of magnitude easier.

    16. Re:Ha, ha by fpi · · Score: 2, Informative

      As a Nuclear Medicine physician, I would provide you with a letter/documentation stating that you had received a radiopharmaceutical for diagnostic or therapeutic purposes, the description of the radionuclide including the physical half life and estimated biological half-life (it may clear from your body before it would physically decay away), the exact date and time of administration, and my card and phone number to contact me for any questions. There would be no disclosure of why you received the radiopharmaceutical.

      Yes your medical history is private, but you lose that privilege if you can potentially cause harm to others. For example, if I administer 200 mCi of Iodine-131 (half life 8 days, gamma and beta rays)to a patient for recurrent thyroid cancer, and he agrees to stay at home alone for over a week, yet instead he hops on a cross-country bus sitting hours and hours next to a pregnant lady and small children, then both he and I would be considered irresponsible in protecting the public from unnecessary radiation exposure.

  4. asking for a tag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Please, please, please, somebody tag this catscan.

  5. Poor thing... by Katatsumuri · · Score: 5, Funny

    I heard it hated to be observed.

  6. cool. by RelliK · · Score: 4, Funny

    Did the cat have any superpowers?

    --
    ___
    If you think big enough, you'll never have to do it.
    1. Re:cool. by jx100 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Its purr could attract law enforcement officials.

    2. Re:cool. by RuBLed · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'M DA BOMB! LAWL!!

      KTHXBAI

    3. Re:cool. by Eponymous+Crowbar · · Score: 5, Funny

      We seem to be missing the real news here -- this has to be the first cat that can drive a car on the interstate, right?

    4. Re:cool. by kevingolding2001 · · Score: 2, Funny

      And Eric, being such a happy cat, was a piece of cake.

    5. Re:cool. by die444die · · Score: 3, Funny

      No, I believe Toonces drove I-10 a few times.

      --
      die444die
    6. Re:cool. by Nimey · · Score: 2, Funny

      How much did you pay for this?

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
  7. LOL @ Privacy Tag by QuantumFTL · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Emitting nuclear radiation is the equivilent of shouting "hey, here, look in my vehicle. I've got something NUCLEAR!" No wonder there's no privacy. I'm sure if the vehicle was glowing no one would feel bad about them being pulled over. This just happens to glow in a very different way.

    1. Re:LOL @ Privacy Tag by clarkkent09 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      True, but since there are legitimate reasons for emitting radiation they should take that into account. The last thing people (or cats) undergoing radiation therapy for cancer need is to be stopped and searched on every corner

      --
      Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
    2. Re:LOL @ Privacy Tag by fbjon · · Score: 4, Insightful
      So then, why haven't a human been caught in this net before? It seems there should be more radioactive people than cats being driven around.


      Also, the story has a slight smell of urban legend. Snopes hasn't picked it up yet, though.

      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    3. Re:LOL @ Privacy Tag by Ucklak · · Score: 2, Informative

      The cat probably had a thyroid condition - like my cat.
      You can give the cat thyroid medication twice daily or zap it.

      The 3 days is kind of strange though. I was told that the cat has to stay at the clinic for a week to get rid of most of the radiation.

      --
      if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
    4. Re:LOL @ Privacy Tag by budgenator · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The are all the time, I had a stress test and the office told me that crossing the boarder would trigger the alarm for at least three days and that they had Dr's statements for Customs available for the asking. Customs turn back trash trucks at the boarder for radiation all the time now, you'd be amazed at how much nuclear waste Hospitals used to dump into our landfills unnoticed.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    5. Re:LOL @ Privacy Tag by slashqwerty · · Score: 4, Informative
      So then, why haven't a human been caught in this net before? It seems there should be more radioactive people than cats being driven around.

      They have.

    6. Re:LOL @ Privacy Tag by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That isn't necessarily true. I was injected with a radioactive isotope to check for a fractured sternum. The idea was that if there was damage, the radiation would be concentrated on a fracture as the body attempts to repair it.

      The hospital was busy, and had no open waiting rooms while I waited for the results. They sat me down in a side room. Every couple of minutes a tech came in and was checking on a piece of equipment. He ended up with this very puzzled expression on his face. Left and came back a few times.

      Eventually it looked as if a lightbulb had lit in his mind and he glanced at the machine, then at me, then back at the machine. Eventually he asked me 'So, let me guess, you are radioactive?' With a sheepish grin I replied what type of test I was in there for and that they had placed me in the room. Apparantly he had been trying to test some type of radioactive material as well and his numbers were 100x larger than what he had been expecting. The radiation I was emitting threw off his numbers to an extreme degree from across the room.

      I drove home a few minutes after that and had there been a radiation detector on the side of the road I'm confident that I would have set it off as well.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    7. Re:LOL @ Privacy Tag by prisoner-of-enigma · · Score: 3, Interesting

      My cat just received treatment for a benign thyroid tumor causing hyperthyroidism. It cost a bloody fortune (US$1,100) but it was either that or medicate him twice a day for the rest of his life (euthanasia was not open to consideration). The clinic was RadioCat in Marietta, GA. Take a look at their logo and tell me if it doesn't bring back memories of Napster's...but I digress.

      The clinic kept him for three days after the treatment, both to observe and to let some of the radioactivity die down. After he came home, we had to keep him separate from our other cats (we have five total). We were cautioned not to dispose of his litter in the trash; it should be flushed. The clinic said the county dumps have radiological sensors that scan everything going into the dump, and the litter would definitely set off the sensors. It would cause an investigation that would have the trash company trace back where that particular trash truck picked up garbage from and could cause a lot of unneeded trouble. We were advised not to hold the cat for more than 20-30 minutes per day and to wash our hands thoroughly after any contact with the cat.

      I knew our pet would be "hot" when he came home, but I had no idea the cat could set off a roadside sensor. Either this fellow didn't let the lab keep the cat for the required 3-4 days before transporting him or the sensor was amazingly sensitive. If so, I'm actually quite happy about it. If somebody is transporting a radioactive cat is found, they're detected, nobody gets their fur in a fluff, and everybody goes their way. If somebody is transporting a dirty bomb or components thereof, they're detected and law enforcement deals with it. I see nothing here to complain about.

      --
      In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
    8. Re:LOL @ Privacy Tag by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Emitting nuclear radiation is the equivilent of shouting "hey, here, look in my vehicle. I've got something NUCLEAR!"

      The problem, as the other posts in this thread show, is that having something NUCLEAR! is not all that unusual, and usually quite benign. It's not just radiation therapy patients - these radiation detectors get set off by some foods (bananas, cocoa powder, Brazil nuts) camping equipment (lanterns, propane), and stone and clay products (granite, kitty litter, pottery).

      When you get that many false positives, your test is useless. It's just more security theater. You need to test not just for the presence of nuclear radiation, but to set an appropriate threshold.

      I suppose that the calculation of such a threshold with a formula involving the square of the distance to the object being tested is too complicated for the majority of people responsible for our security. And that, friends, is not reassuring.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
  8. It's all fun and games... by KillerCow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...until some law-abiding citizen going about his lawful business gets stopped and accosted for no reason beyond "the machine said so" during a routine blanket surveillance sweep. Enjoy the slide into a police state.

    1. Re:It's all fun and games... by dlanod · · Score: 5, Funny
      I can see the interrogation now...


      FBI goon: "What's the matter??? CAT GOT YOUR TONGUE?"

    2. Re:It's all fun and games... by dbIII · · Score: 5, Insightful

      To make things worse a dirty bomb detector is a bit like having an Easter Bunny detector. It may create employment and the impression that something is being done to detect the kiddies but it's worth considering what phyicists think of the idea instead of various poorly educated coke-addled political advisors.

    3. Re:It's all fun and games... by Rocketship+Underpant · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It occurs to me that if someone actually wanted to transport a dirty bomb across the US, all they have to do is have a car a few miles ahead containing a radioactive cat, and they'll know for certain if and where there are radiation checkpoints.

      --
      He who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.
    4. Re:It's all fun and games... by QuantumG · · Score: 2, Funny

      Can't say I'm a physicist but I think it is bullshit. Cleaning up the mess of any conceivable "dirty bomb" is a mop and bucket affair. There's no possible pay to render a city uninhabitable or anything like that.. shit, a full-on nuclear weapon exploded at altitude didn't render Hiroshima uninhabitable. It's just a retarded idea.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    5. Re:It's all fun and games... by cheater512 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Or, if they cared about their sexual organs, they would use lead which would render the fancy detectors useless if done properly.

    6. Re:It's all fun and games... by G-funk · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm afraid you're not maintaining the correct level of obed^H^H^H^H fear, citizen. Please come with me.

      --
      Send lawyers, guns, and money!
    7. Re:It's all fun and games... by Martin+Blank · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If someone ever sets off a radiological bomb, the first thing I'm doing is taking out a loan to buy the land where it happens, because the value over the following decade is going to be tremendous. I'll even pay to throw in radiation detectors just to put people at ease.

      There are reasons to do some scanning for nuclear material, but if a few stray particles from a medical procedure is going to be enough to stop someone, there needs to be some decisions made on the sensitivity of the scanner.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    8. Re:It's all fun and games... by Cow+Jones · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why should suicide bombers care if the bomb they are carrying is making them sterile?
      They're alreade en route (so to say) to enter the Darwin Awards...

      --

      Ah, arrogance and stupidity, all in the same package. How efficient of you. -- Londo Mollari
    9. Re:It's all fun and games... by SharpFang · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, except:
      fear factor. People are deadly scared of radiation and it isn't enough to say 'the levels are harmless' to stop the panic.

      See this: http://radarmagazine.com/features/2006/12/toys-print.php

      "4. Gilbert U-238 Atomic Energy Lab"
      Honey, why is your face glowing? In 1951, A.C. Gilbert introduced his U-238 Atomic Energy Lab, a radioactive learning set we can only assume was fun for the whole math club. Gilbert, who American Memorabilia claims was "often compared to Walt Disney for his creative genius," had a dream that nuclear power could capture the imaginations of children everywhere. For a mere $49.50, the kit came complete with three "very low-level" radioactive sources, a Geiger-Mueller radiation counter, a Wilson cloud chamber (to see paths of alpha particles), a spinthariscope (to see "live" radioactive disintegration), four samples of uranium-bearing ores, and an electroscope to measure radioactivity.

      Called one of the most dangerous toys of all times, despite totally harmless radiation levels, yes?

      Imagine a dirty bomb made from ground depleted uranium bullets (Iraq, Afghanistan and some more have a plenty of them, just to pick up and use) goes off in Manhattan. Of course you and me know depleted uranium is called 'depleted' for a reason and you'd have to try really hard to get any results off it. But imagine how would a "Joe Average" react to the news: "Manhattan has been contaminated with slightly radioactive Uranium dust. The radiation level is entirely harmless. There is no reason to panic, the radioactive dust will not affect your health."

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    10. Re:It's all fun and games... by SharpFang · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Imagine a hidden compartment at the end of a container.
      An 18-wheeler truck would hardly feel it. A meter at the end, a fake wall hiding the content, pretty hard to spot.

      A different hideout: in Poland, the police found drugs smuggled that way but only thanks to a tip they got.
      A transformer (no, not the robot. A voltage changing device), and hide the material in the core. You can't take it apart without damaging it without unwinding a few miles of wire off the coil. In Poland, these were electric welding machines, each housing a few pounds of cocaine right inside the hollowed-out transformer core. If you want nuclear materials transported, you can get an industrial size transformer, the size of a small house. It can't be checked without being damaged beyond repair, its composition is mostly densely wound copper wire and closely laid steel plates (5 tons of lead wouldn't make a difference, plus the steel and copper mean a good shield already) and inside of the core is spacious enough to host a quite large nuke, not just a dirty bomb.

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    11. Re:It's all fun and games... by cheater512 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Whats sad is you American assume that the terrorists are dumb and stupid.

      9/11 happened without any indication (that anyone paid attention to anyway).
      That would indicate that you are underestimating their capabilities.
      They are usually well funded and are very determined.

      You dont need much material for a effective dirty bomb.
      It can also be transported in smaller quantities.
      That makes lead a valid option for transportation.

      You assume they wouldnt use a clean room.
      I'd say that if they knew there was a possibility of being detected then they would.
      Anyone who can get any substantial amount of radioactive material has considerable resources.

    12. Re:It's all fun and games... by nusuth · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There are reasons to do some scanning for nuclear material, but if a few stray particles from a medical procedure is going to be enough to stop someone, there needs to be some decisions made on the sensitivity of the scanner.


      That probably can't be helped. Cats and people travel openly while real radiological bombs should be transported in a closed box with a radiation shield. In order to catch the latter, the msensitivity cannot be low.

      --

      Gentlemen, you can't fight in here, this is the War Room!

    13. Re:It's all fun and games... by Utopia+Tree · · Score: 2, Informative

      But depleted uranium is a heavy metal and would be quite poisonous. This toxicity would overshadow the radioactivity by a great deal.

    14. Re:It's all fun and games... by discogravy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Something like 14 of the 19 September 11th hijackers had no idea theirs was a suicide mission.

      ...ah, yes from the interview with the surviving hijackers...no, wait.

      source?

  9. Radioactive cats... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    have 18 half-lives.
    (captcha: murders)

  10. Look, an Isotope! by LaskoVortex · · Score: 4, Funny

    Signal went off and identified an isotope

    Holy smokes! Isotopes everywhere!

    I'm surprised they needed a detector to find something that, by definition, comprises all of matter.

    --
    Just callin' it like I see it.
  11. So let's say... by ForestGrump · · Score: 5, Interesting

    1. I'm remodeling my house. I go down to Home Despot/Slowes and buy a dozen smoke detectors. Would I get pulled over for being a suspected terrorist?

    2. I'm a cancer patient undergoing radiation therapy. What can be done to prevent the horror of being pulled over by the KGB? Would it be reasonable to issue "radiology patient" tags, like they issue handicapped tags for the handicapped?

    3. What is the false positive rate of such monitoring? Here, we have a cute example of a sick cat setting off a false positive. What about other incidents like this that fail to get into the newspaper?

    Grump

    --
    Is it true that more people vote for the winner of American Idol, than vote for the president? -Ali G.
    1. Re:So let's say... by tirerim · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you're worrying about the KGB, you should be more worried about them making you radioactive than investigating you for already being radioactive.

    2. Re:So let's say... by piojo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      1. I'm remodeling my house. I go down to Home Despot/Slowes and buy a dozen smoke detectors. Would I get pulled over for being a suspected terrorist? Whether they would search you without permission would be a more interesting question. I think the police are well within their rights to pull you over and ask why you're emitting radiation. After all, the constitution doesn't prevent us from being stopped and asked questions.

      2. I'm a cancer patient undergoing radiation therapy. What can be done to prevent the horror of being pulled over by the KGB? Would it be reasonable to issue "radiology patient" tags, like they issue handicapped tags for the handicapped?

      3. What is the false positive rate of such monitoring? Here, we have a cute example of a sick cat setting off a false positive. What about other incidents like this that fail to get into the newspaper? I'm not sure this matters. Are people's rights being trampled as a result of this monitoring? I'd feel more strongly about this story if there was mention of someone getting arrested, hassled, held, etc. On the other hand, if they detect cancer patients, they must pull people over pretty frequently, and the program may never catch a terrorist... well, good thing I'm not in politics.
      --
      A cat can't teach a dog to bark.
    3. Re:So let's say... by David+Jao · · Score: 5, Insightful

      3. What is the false positive rate of such monitoring? Here, we have a cute example of a sick cat setting off a false positive. What about other incidents like this that fail to get into the newspaper? I'm not sure this matters. Are people's rights being trampled as a result of this monitoring? I'd feel more strongly about this story if there was mention of someone getting arrested, hassled, held, etc. On the other hand, if they detect cancer patients, they must pull people over pretty frequently, and the program may never catch a terrorist... well, good thing I'm not in politics.

      The false positive rate does matter, regardless of whether or not rights are being trampled. When you conduct any sort of large scale surveillance activity, the base rate fallacy implies that most of the triggering events will be false positives. With too many false positives, your surveillance program is worse than useless -- it wastes money that could otherwise be better used on other security initiatives.

      I know there is some emotional appeal in arguing that "if it saves even one life, etc. etc. then it's worth any amount of money" but in the real world that's just not true. In the real world, spending one billion dollars to save a life might be a bad idea if spending that same money on some other program would save two lives. In comparing the relative merits of two or more different security proposals, the false positive rate is one important factor to consider, because it affects the cost/benefit analysis.

      Of course, people's rights matter as well, because that also affects the cost/benefit analysis. Unfortunately, the American public is seemingly too dumb to perform any sort of analysis involving more than one variable. Since the false positive rate involves math, it doesn't have any political appeal at all. Hence the Republicans fixate only on the terrorists, and the Democrats when not fixating on the terrorists focus only on civil liberties to the exclusion of all else.

    4. Re:So let's say... by glwtta · · Score: 2, Funny

      All I'm getting from you is a lot of Freedom hating. Why do you want the terrorists to win?

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
    5. Re:So let's say... by freedom_india · · Score: 4, Funny
      Let me play FoxNews plus Gonzales for a while:

      1. I'm remodeling my house. I go down to Home Despot/Slowes and buy a dozen smoke detectors. Would I get pulled over for being a suspected terrorist? Yes. You would get pulled over and charged. You need to prove to the Police and the judge beyond doubt that the detectors are for your home. A work contract signed by your contractor, a REAL ID and a passport are necessary to get discharged from the case.
      Plus if you live in Montana or California, tough luck. These states support terrorism by rejecting REAL ID and thus endangering you! (endangering you by your rendition to Gitmo).

      2. I'm a cancer patient undergoing radiation therapy. What can be done to prevent the horror of being pulled over by the KGB? Would it be reasonable to issue "radiology patient" tags, like they issue handicapped tags for the handicapped? Yes. That badge would need to be accompanied by REAL ID. The badge itself would be built by the highest bidder who has offered better quality, 3D hologram embossed with your wife's or Eva Longoria's photo on the badge and also has Bluetooth enabled. Oh BTW, your insurance would not pay for the badge which would cost $399 each.

      3. What is the false positive rate of such monitoring? Here, we have a cute example of a sick cat setting off a false positive. What about other incidents like this that fail to get into the newspaper? Those details are "deemed classified." Much like information about cellphone tower coverage which companies used to provide publicly but stopped in 2003/04 when Bush deemed them classified at their instigation. Similarly if you continue questioning about false positives, you would be classified as a "person of interest" and be subject to such intense surveillance that the movie Enemy of State would be outdated. Heck, even your stool shit would be studied after scraping it from toilets.
      --
      "Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
    6. Re:So let's say... by Znork · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In the real world, spending one billion dollars to save a life might be a bad idea if spending that same money on some other program would save two lives.

      Indeed. Considering that traffic has killed approximately 280.000 Americans since 9/11 one could wonder how many lives would have been saved, had the 'war on terror' money been spent on improving road safety.

      One could also question wether terrorists would find terror a useful weapon if nobody cared more than they do about traffic risks.

      I wonder what would happen if Al Qaeda claimed they'd infiltrated the safety departments of several multinational car manufacturers, as well as the DMV and a multitude of road planning commissions.

    7. Re:So let's say... by asuffield · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Because every person who is caught (whether or not convicted,) automagically becomes innocent on Slashdot and other places.


      Other places like, for example, the law. Innocent until proven guilty. There's nothing magic about it.

      You're saying you haven't heard stories in the past seven years about people or groups of people being arrested/questioned/deported/accused for planning some sort of terrorist crime?


      And none of them have been convicted, which means they're all still innocent. I've checked. Have you?
  12. Already invented? by Circlotron · · Score: 3, Funny

    You mean they didn't just invent the cat scanner?

  13. nothing wrong with this by timmarhy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Passivly monitoring traffic for this kind of thing is harmless, and i'm sure no one would mind as long as the agent used a little common sense and didn't immediately assume the person in the car was osama.

    --
    If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
  14. Re:doesn't add up by masonc · · Score: 5, Informative

    Actually I believe there have been lots of similar events. A friend of mine is a member of some service organization and was on a club outing to nearby Canada by coach. On the border crossing back to America, they were stopped at the crossing when the border guards told the driver to shut the coach down and they boarded it. The club members were apprehensive as they had been replenishing the club alcohol stash and had a bit more than the legal duty free limits in the storage areas.
    The guards finally identified one older gentleman and questioned him, only to find out he had been a radiation trace injection four weeks previously. They were cleared and went on their way.
    If they have this equipment at all the major crossings and on the interstates, imagine the cost and the amount of money that has been spent on these type of projects.

    --
    CM www.cometenergysystems.com Blog: http://caribbeanrenewable.blogspot.com/
  15. That's an excellent coffee table story by martin-boundary · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Of course, it's not serious journalism to simply quote from a random funny story tossed out in an otherwise dull talk. Good speakers often have a collection of slightly oddball fake stories to put the audience at ease. Journalism means actually chasing up the story, interviewing the supposed cat's owner and the agent. If they actually exist, that is.

  16. Re:Proper investigation by clarkkent09 · · Score: 5, Funny

    You never know with those feline terrorists.

    Perhaps it was a persian cat? You can never be too careful with those Al-Qaeda supporters

    --
    Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
  17. No Human in the car? by tekrat · · Score: 4, Funny

    The summary says the car was populated by a "cat", but doesn't mention if there was a human driver. Either that, or the car was driven by a 60's beatnik with a fondness for Jazz music. "Hey dude, I just pulled over this radiocative cat, man, I mean he was smokin'."
    Cosmic.

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
  18. Re:Proper investigation by asliarun · · Score: 5, Funny

    I assume they promptly cut the cat open ...and it would have been quite safe as well. After all, the cat had 18 half-lives.
  19. Hunting a Bogey Man is a game of Cat and Mouse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    We should all start carrying around smoke detectors to drive these people nuts :)

    2 can play games.

  20. Meow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I, for one, welcome our radioactive terrorist cat overlords.

    {puts out a saucer of milk}

  21. Schrödinger's cat! by exekewtable · · Score: 4, Funny

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger's_cat

    OMG, they measured and saw it! the paradox is solved!

  22. Radioactive Steel Rebar by Detritus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I remember reading something about them discovering a truck loaded with contaminated steel at the gate of some federal facility. Sometimes radiation sources, like cobalt-60, get mixed in with scrap metal that is going to be recycled. The steel plants are scared to death that they will accidentally melt down a load of scrap that contains a radiation source, resulting in a lot of spoiled steel and a huge decontamination bill. They have their own radiation detectors to check incoming material.

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    1. Re:Radioactive Steel Rebar by rrkap · · Score: 2, Informative

      You're probably thinking about the 1983 incident that happened in Juarez Mexico. Part of a piece of cancer therapy equipment fell off when the unit was being transported in a pickup truck. The two guys sold it to a scrap metal dealer. It turns out what they had was a source capsule containing 1000 pellets of Co60. The truck broke down shortly afterward and the now radioactive vehicle gave very high doses of radiation to several people (including the children of the driver of the truck). However the bigger problem was that the container fully broke open at the scrap yard, scattering the pellets throughout (and rendering two of the workers sterile). These pellets were mixed in with steel that was used in furniture for fast food restaurants and in rebar. The incident would probably have gone undetected except a shipment of rebar from one of the foundries that bought steel from the scrapyard was accidentally delivered to Los Alamos National Lab where it set off radiation detectors. The steel, some of which had already been installed in restaurants was recalled and most was accounted for. This was the worst of these incidents that is known about however, such incidents are fairly common (meaning that a piece of contaminated steel is detected by someone every year or 2).

      --
      I like my beverages with warning labels!
  23. Let's say, then: by Wilson_6500 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    1) Depends on the design of the detector. There's no chance the alpha particles from the Am-241 will be detected, as the cardboard box the smoke alarms are in will stop those, but the photons might be. The cat's scan residue (rimshot, please, along with everyone else in this discussion--but I would guess it's Tc-99 residue from a Tc-99m scan) was picked up by this detector system, so assumedly the Am-241 gammas might as well. That said, I don't know what activity is usually used smoke detectors (and I'm too lazy to look it up), or what activity is usually administered to cats during vet. nuclear med. procedures; questions like these are ones of quantity. You might well be stopped. From their perspective, you might well be buying twelve Am-241 sources to line the casing of a bomb.

    2) I was under the impression that oncologists were in the habit of doing just that--giving "doctor's notes" to patients with outpatient implanted brachytherapy seeds or devices. Being treated with a linear accelerator would not be likely to leave a perceptible amount of radiation in your body (photoneutrons from high energy linacs might cause some activation, but I don't think that it's generally a serious concern as far as setting off radiation alarms). Would it also bother you that you might well set off radiation alarms at nuclear power plants, if you happened to work at one, while being treated for your cancer?

    3) From a machine perspective, this was not a false positive. From a judicial/social standpoint, it was. I don't have much more to add beyond that.

  24. The thing that worries me is... by Gordonjcp · · Score: 4, Funny

    ... just how radioactive was this cat? If it's sufficiently radioactive to show up at quite a distance in a moving vehicle, how much full-body radiation are the people around the cat getting?

    I do not want a hot cat sitting in my lap.

    1. Re:The thing that worries me is... by LaskoVortex · · Score: 5, Funny

      I do not want a hot cat sitting in my lap.

      Obviously a slashdotting geek to the very core. I'll take a hot pussy on my lap any day of the week.

      --
      Just callin' it like I see it.
    2. Re:The thing that worries me is... by retsil · · Score: 2, Informative
      The cat probably would have had Iodine therapy. Iodine has a half life of 8 days. You can find more information at http://rpop.iaea.org/

      It is possible to detect 0.01 MBq of iodine-131 at a distance of 2-3 m. This is a tiny fraction of the recommended discharge level in a patient.
      This means that the cat may have been relatively safe, even though the radiation is easily detectable.
  25. In Soviet Russia... by mindwhip · · Score: 3, Funny

    In Soviet Russia... Radioactive Cat scans you!

    --
    [The Universe] has gone offline.
    1. Re:In Soviet Russia... by yanyan · · Score: 5, Funny

      i can haz cat scan?

  26. Re:doesn't add up by clarkkent09 · · Score: 4, Informative

    It has, just hasn't been widely reported. According to this article, there are about 600 radiation scanners deployed around the country and the rate of false positives is so high that the guy in charge of the Homeland Security Dept. nuclear office says they are pretty useless in practice:

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,257004,00.html?sPage=fnc/specialsections/homelandsecurity

    --
    Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
  27. Re:doesn't add up by Detritus · · Score: 2, Informative

    There's a huge difference between being irradiated from an external source and ingesting or being injected with radioisotopes as a diagnostic or treatment procedure.

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  28. Fairly dangerous for one reason by Wilson_6500 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The fear of a dirty bomb is not that people will die--not many would probably die from the blast, or the radiation. Dirty bombs are nothing more than panic weapons. The public is, by and large, so terrified of anything "nuclear" that a large radiation dispersal device going off in a crowded area would cause literal waves of _redoubled_ panic as soon as someone realized and communicated that the bomb had radioactive isotopes inside it. Justifiably or not, it would then be a blind panic--these people would be running from something they can't see or smell, and probably don't understand in the slightest. Now, being informed about radiation won't keep it from bringing you harm if you happen to be exposed to it, probably wouldn't be much comfort if a radioactive bomb exploded across the street, and won't give you instantaneous wind-direction and plume information; it might help to allay the fears of those who're outside the blast zone, and might help ease the process of relocating back into the contaminated region.

    Sure, they're not weapons that'll kill millions of people at a stroke, but isn't one of the common themes of life that the most striking, obvious, and dramatic dangers aren't always the ones that should merit the most respect and attention?

  29. The man from the cat detector van. by Aussie · · Score: 5, Funny

    C: The man didn't have the right form.
    S: What man?
    C: The man from the cat detector van.
    S: The looney detector van, you mean.
    C: Look, it's people like you what cause unrest.
    S: What cat detector van?
    C: The cat detector van from the Ministry of Housinge.
    S: Housinge?
    C: It was spelt like that on the van (I'm very observant!). I never seen so
          many bleeding aerials. The man said that their equipment could pinpoint
          a purr at four hundred yards! And Eric, being such a happy cat, was a
          piece of cake.
    S: How much did you pay for this?
    C: Sixty quid, and eight for the fruit-bat.
    S: What fruit-bat?
    C: Eric the fruit-bat.
    S: Are all your pets called Eric?

  30. When my father was radioactive... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    My father once was given a tracer, which is a very small doses of radioactive diagnostic drink. It makes you slightly more radioactive than normal. Maybe 6 or 8 times as much as normal, which is still very low and can be easily dealt with by a human. It is a lot, a lot less than when obtaining a cancer treatment. Two days later he walked into a science fair. People could hold their finger on a Geiger-Teller to measure the radioactivity of their body. My father lined up as well. The two people before made the loudspeakers do: '...tick........tick...tick..........tick..................tick....' When is was my fathers turn it went: 'TICK!TICK!TICK!TICK!TICK!TICK.' and you saw some people behind him step out of line.

  31. This is Nothing by gambolt · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A lot of my family is from Oak Ridge TN, where the nuclear payload for the atomic bombs dropped in WWII was fabricated there is now a national lab.

    It's common knowledge that frogs are a problem for the feds around there. That's amphibians, not the French.

    Here's the problem. Frogs live in the ponds by the cooling towers. The frogs are radioactive. The frogs jump out on the road and get squished. There are then lots of radioactive tires rolling in and out of town. The multi-million doallar system purchased to keep people from sneaking radioactive material out of the area is therefore useless.

    Why the hell is the water in the coolant ponds radioactive? Isn't that a bad sign? Nobody cares, they are all used to it by now. The thing with the frogs sure is funny though.

  32. Re:Hardly dangerous by Zymergy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I strongly disagree. The Chernobyl explosion and resulting contamination was not designed to disperse radioactive material. It did a fairly good job of doing that *anyway*. I agree that the predicted effects are fortunately much less (20 years later) than previously predicted, but it was nonetheless extremely effective at effecting FEAR and Terror into that portion of the World. If Terrorists with high explosives expertise also had access to MORE deadly radioactive substances than Chernobyl contained, that would be VERY SCARY.

    Terrorists are likely more interested the FEAR and the sensationalized terrifying concept of "Nuclear Fallout" rather than the actual scientific effects of such a dirty radiological High Explosive dispersion device (AKA Dirty Bomb).
    Terrorists may actually target key water and food supplies or river systems with radiological explosive dispersion devices.

    Any primary "Dirty Bomb" Victims that inhale, eat, drink, or consume into their bodies ANY energetically decaying radioisotopes (especially ones with relatively short half-lives) will have an *almost certain chance* of developing lung and/or bone cancers.
    Plutonium-238, curium-244, strontium-90, polonium-210, promethium-147, cesium-137, cerium-144, ruthenium-106, cobalt-60, curium-242, and thulium isotopes all can produce oncogenic, teratogenic, and mutagenic effects on the human body (especially if ingested or inhaled). This happens if the initial exposure does not kill the primary victims.

    In any case, it is very very unlikely that a citizen jury of peers would consider the passive monitoring of specific "hot" radioisotopes by US authorities to be a violation of the 4th Amendment's "unreasonable searches and seizures".
    NOBODY should have any of the above in their possession unless they are professionals and they would have clearly marked DOT placards on their commercial vehicles as well as DOT, NRC (and probably DOE) approved possession and transportation paperwork and approved containment vessels. http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/basic-ref/teachers/11.pdf
    Also, they would have to follow controlled HC (Hazardous Cargo) approved routes within the US highway system. http://orise.orau.gov/reacts/guide/hazard.htm

    I agree that it is interesting some animal and human cancer patients (and other radiologically medicated persons) have been flagged "hot" by roadside sensors and detained by authorities. It is likely that those same sensors can determine the quantity and difference between the americium-241 (one gram is enough for 5000 smoke detectors) from the other more dangerous materials no civilian should never have. http://www.uic.com.au/nip35.htm

    I am a US citizen, and I DO feel better knowing that these things ARE being actively screened for by our government. It would be terribly irresponsible for our government to NOT look for radioactive substances if technology would allow it to conducted as unobtrusively as it is from the side of a PUBLIC highway or port of entry. Americans don't have a right to own dangerous radioactive components.

    OTOH, if they decide to screen for GUNS in the US... that's a Second Amendment right we DO have... and whole other issue.

  33. My friend used to work in a nuclear assay lab by MichaelCrawford · · Score: 3, Interesting
    They would monitor for leaks by collecting biological samples, oxidizing them down to ash, then mixing the ash in liquid scintillator then counting the rate of flashes in the fluid.

    She said all the pine needles in the woods near Oak Ridge are highly radioactive.

    She also monitored the lobsters caught in the Pacific next to the San Onofre plant near San Diego. Once they sent up extra lobsters: some to assay, and some to eat!

    --
    Request your free CD of my piano music.
  34. Wisdom follows, pay attention! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The really sad thing about this story is there are over 40 million people, including kids, in America who have no medical insurance coverage whatsoever. If they have cancer they are free to die and noone cares a damn about them. There are hundreds of millions of people in the Third World getting no medical service at all for lack of doctors and poverty.

    Yet, american cats are being radiation treated and apparently no slashdotters notice how crazy that is. One of the reasons so many people worldwide are terrified by the americans. The idea of humanism and solidarity seems to be missing entirely from the anglo-saxon ethos and the media cultivates thinly veiled vulgar social-darwinist ideas.

  35. Excerpt from terrorist handbook by edwardpickman · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Feed cat Plutonium pellets with kibble. Wrap cat in detcord. Place timer on cat and set for five minutes. Release mouse on crowded street. Release cat after mouse. Run. Remember to face Mecca at 4:29 after you release cat." "Oh, don't forget to plug ears."

  36. Warning. Re:This is Nothing by freedom_india · · Score: 2, Funny

    Hey, that piece of information ought to be classified and you ought to keep your trap shut instead of blathering out in open like this.
    If the terrorists read about this, then they would plan like below:
    1. Come to Oak Ridge, TN with an empty 2-tonner truck.
    2. Squash and drive over thousands of radioactive frogs in a matter of weeks shouting their usual battle cry "death to infi..."etc.
    3. Buy a Geiger counter locally and check for enough radioactivity.
    4. Skip to Mexico/border country and get a dirty bomb (I was watching "Goldfinger" Bond movie yesterday), the iodine kind which emits less radioactivity.
    5. Load onto this radioactive-tired truck (of course you would be stupid enough to drive out from TN all the way to Mexico on same tires and expect same radioactivity. So you stove away the tires and buy new/used ones which are NOT radioactive to drive to mexico. When you drive back you latch on the radioactive tires).
    6. Border guards stop your truck since it seems to be glowing with radioactivity. They look at the tires and the tired guys at wheel. Of course the terrorists would be telling the truth about Oak Ridge TN and telling them they had just made a delivery to that place. They can also produce a newspaper clipping or something which proves even the frogs are radioactive and ask the border guards to talk to the Sherrif there to prove it.
    7. Border guards allow the truck with "Medical Cargo" to enter US.
    8. About two weeks later somewhere an incident happens....
    9. Bush gets elected for a 3rd Time after tearing up the constitutionand is actually seen on Fox News using it as toilet paper to wipe cheney's ass with it.
    10. Cheney asks "So?"

    There, see the probabilities of imagination? ..and that is why you must never discuss confidential or "could be potentially confidential" stuff on slashdot.
    The KGB was right.

    --
    "Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
  37. Re:doesn't add up by tehdaemon · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is a story about Schrodinger's cat. This is exactly the kind of result you should expect.

    T

    --
    Laws are horrible moral guides, moral guides make even worse laws.
  38. At what cost? by Nomen+Publicus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So, how much does it cost per year to detect radio-active cats? Wouldn't it be cheaper to put up a sign saying "Radio-active materials are monitored" and spin a lie a couple of times a year using a story such as "We detected a radio-active cat, aren't we clever?"

  39. Re:doesn't add up by ocbwilg · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Situations like these are why these sorts of systems will never work. There are just far too many false positives. Not false positives in the sense that they detect radiation where there is none, but false positives in the sense that they detect legitimate and harmless sources of radiation but have to respond as if they found a dirty bomb. I wonder how many of the other sort of false positives they get, where the detector is tripped but they can't find any source of radiation. And how many hundreds of millions of dollars are bing spent on this monitoring?

    The worst part is, this post-9/11 monitoring has caught exactly zero dirty bombers. Sure, the article says:

    Giuliano says the point really is to catch terrorists. He says it's true that the odds of catching one here may be "a billion to one. But despite that, we have caught two." (Gazi Ibrahim Abu Mezer, who tried to sneak in at Blaine in 1997 to blow up the New York subway; and Millennium Bomber Ahmed Ressam, nabbed at Port Angeles in 1999.)

    But don't you find it odd that the only justification that the heightened surveillance post-9/11 works is based on two arrests that were made in 1997 and 1999, before the current surveillance was enacted? While we're at it, what kind of a hack journalist is the guy who wrote the article that he couldn't do some simple math with the dates and figure that out? So what we're left with is spending piles of taxpayer money to monitor and harrass our citizens with no proof whatsoever that it has a demonstrable benefit besides helping employment.

  40. Or they want you to think they can detect it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If I ran a rich and powerful investigative agency but didn't have the resources to search every vehicle I would plant a plausible story in the news which implied that my department did in fact have devices so sensitive that we could detect hidden contraband, from a distance, with ease.

    That way even if the bad people had the stuff, they would think twice before transporting it. If they believed the story, that would be almost as disruptive to the bad people as if we actually had such a device.

    Maybe such a device exists, but could some knowledgeable person here explain if it is possible, instead of everyone just accepting the story at face value.

  41. Catching radioactive humans by Harmonious+Botch · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So then, why haven't a human been caught in this net before? A human has. Or, at least, has been caught in something similar.
    A friend of mine was undergoing medical tests last year and he was stopped at the entrance to the San Diego city dump when getting rid of some trash. Not freeway speeds, of course, but he was in a moving, closed vehicle. Apparently people dump radioactive stuff.
  42. Insightful?? by adkeswani · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I check the comments expecting to see a series of Score:5 Funny.

    Instead, I find that most comments are Insightful and Informative.

    Come on people, a RADIOACTIVE CAT!

    Oh well, I guess this may be given an Insightful too...

  43. Re:Hardly dangerous by mikelieman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Americans don't have a right to own dangerous radioactive components. "

    I believe you misspoke, when you used the word "right" there.

    Perhaps, you meant to say, "Americans aren't PERMITTED to possess dangerous radioactive components?"

    While the "Right to Keep and Bear Property" isn't one of the explicitly enumerated ones in the Bill of Rights, the "Right to Keep and Bear Property" is the Right upon which *all* other Rights are founded.

    Without that absolute right, the notion of having any Freedom or Liberty is ludicrous.

    Yes, there's an obvious contradiction in being told that one is Free and at Liberty, but also told that they cannot own, possess or use property without obtaining prior permission from their Masters.

    My only advice is: When presented with this historical opportunity to watch a civilization fall, enjoy the show!

    --
    Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
  44. Re:Proper investigation by budgenator · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "Vehicle goes by at 70 miles per hour," Giuliano told the crowd. "Agent is in the median, a good 80 feet away from the traffic. Signal went off and identified an isotope [in the passing car]."

    That is the impressive part, they didn't have to "cut" open the cat because they knew what they were looking for inside a car passing at 70MPH; all they needed to know is how much and in what form. A therapeutic amount in a cat is no problem isn't a problem, half a Kg for a car bomb is a problem. Another interesting point is while he didn't actually say it, it sounds like these things are quite portable and was contained in the vehicle.

    --
    Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  45. Re:doesn't add up by Detritus · · Score: 2, Informative

    Being irradiated from an external source does not make you radioactive, except in unusual situations like being exposed to a neutron flux, which can cause neutron activation.

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  46. Strip searches for NYC subway cancer patients by michaelmalak · · Score: 3, Informative
    150 comments so far and no one's mentioned this yet from 2002?

    Americans undergoing radioactive medical treatments risk setting off anti-terrorism sensors in public places, and subsequent strip searches by police, warn doctors at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York.
  47. Oh! Come On. by camperdave · · Score: 4, Funny

    You know perfectly well that the news would be: "Manhattan has been contaminated with radioactive Uranium dust.". Lines like "The radiation level is entirely harmless." and "There is no reason to panic, the radioactive dust will not affect your health." might appear in the article, but it would be after the "continued on A7" hyperlink.

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  48. So stupid... by flajann · · Score: 4, Interesting
    A radioactive cat that just underwent cancer treatment? A cat is not a radiological bomb. Obviously, their detectors are way too sensitive.

    But more importantly, this is an innocent person that was harassed by the Homeland Insecurity types over something he'd done legitimately. What a waste of time and effort.

    If someone really does have a radiological weapon, all he has to do now is shield it in layers of lead to escape detection -- or have a radiological cat as a decoy.

    I suppose they'll harass people who just underwent cancer treatment as well. Wow. I feel so secure now.

    Of course, chemical-based bombs can do a lot of damage as well, but obviously this detector won't pick that up. What a waste of taxpayer's dollars.

    Low-tech can always thwart high-tech, anytime. The would-be terrorist on a shoestring budget can always find a low-tech way to circumvent these million-dollar high tech measures. Meanwhile, some egg-heads in government revel in the false sense of security they now have.

    Of course, it begs to reason how much of a real "treat" of "terrorism" there really is. Oh, but the big government contractors are loving the windfall from the paranoia. Well, that's the US for ya. Fear for Profit! Yeah, the American Way.

    1. Re:So stupid... by Pigeon451 · · Score: 3, Informative
      How was the person harassed? The agent pulled him over, questioned him, then let him go. Justified, since they detected radiation source. Doesn't sound like harassment to me. If they ran up to him with guns drawn, cuffed him, questioned him for several hours, then yes, that would be harassment.

      Compare this to metal detectors at clubs or airports. EACH person is individually scanned and searched. Is this harassment? An overstep of people's rights? How many people carrying weapons do they really find? It is a deterrent, as well as a detection system.

      As far as low-tech, agreed, low tech can cause minor problems such as bombing a building and is much easier. A few causalities, makes the news, etc. A nuke going off though, however, that is significant. Destroy a city, widespread panic and fear, international news. Much like the WTC incident.

    2. Re:So stupid... by Arccot · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A radioactive cat that just underwent cancer treatment? A cat is not a radiological bomb. Obviously, their detectors are way too sensitive.

      SNIP

      If someone really does have a radiological weapon, all he has to do now is shield it in layers of lead to escape detection -- or have a radiological cat as a decoy.

      Not quite. An unshielded slightly radioactive cat could quite possibly produce similar radiation to a shielded highly radioactive weapon. I don't see the device as being too sensitive. It picked up an unusual source of radiation, which is it's purpose.

      As far as shielding with lead, if something is radioactive, handling it can leave traces of radiation or material. Even with shielding, it can be difficult to completely eliminate all of the radioactive signature in a car.

      Same thing with drugs. Sometimes the sniffing dog hits on the door handle, when the big payoff is shielded in the gas tank.
    3. Re:So stupid... by flajann · · Score: 3, Insightful
      "How was the person harassed? The agent pulled him over, questioned him, then let him go. Justified, since they detected radiation source. Doesn't sound like harassment to me. If they ran up to him with guns drawn, cuffed him, questioned him for several hours, then yes, that would be harassment. "

      Justified from whose perspective? The cat? The cat's owner?

      As one who have been repeatedly been pulled over, visited, and questioned by police when I've done nothing wrong, there is no justification for intruding on the peace of mind of the innocent.

      Sorry, but unless that man actually were carrying a radiological device, bothering him is an intrusion on his peace and his life, even if they did "let him go." So does that mean that they will keep pulling him over every darn time he gets cancer treatment for his cat, or drives with his cat somewhere they have detectors? Would you want to be pulled over again and again and again when you've done nothing wrong? If that were to happen to you, would you not see that as harassment?

      We really need to revisit the Rights of the Innocent in this country. Basically, all the rights of the innocent have been systematically stripped away, made easy with your latest and greatest technologies. Perhaps you don't mind the NSA tapping your every phone calls and email correspondences and putting them through their supercomputer farms just to see if you are a terrorist or not. But I think most people would have a problem with that!

      As far as I'm concerned, if I haven't done anything wrong, then don't bug me. If you (law enforcement, NSA, Homeland Insecurity, FBI, etc.) do, you are invading my peace and my privacy as well. It IS harassment, plain and simple, and I for one will NOT stand for it. And neither should you if you care anything about your own rights.

      Perhaps you should see the Minority Report. Basically, we're talking about the same thing here.

  49. Radioactive cats and a vist from homeland security by zerofoo · · Score: 2, Informative

    My cat was recently treated for a hyperactive thyroid. The vet injected the cat with radioactive iodine and kept the cat in isolation for two weeks.

    After I was allowed to take the cat home, I was told to avoid having the cat sit on my lap, and I had to collect the cat's litter box scoopings and store them outside for two weeks. The vet told me if I discard the litter box contents into the trash, I would probably get a visit from homeland security. Evidently, they also scan garbage, and if they find any radioactive trash, HS tries to figure out where it came from.

    If they trace it back to your house, they will show up with a warrant to search the premises.

    When I told her she must be joking, she told me it happened to one of her clients.

    That's creepy on a bunch of levels - the fact that HS can trace garbage back to your house, and the fact that HS can "pay you a visit" after snooping through your garbage.

    -ted

  50. Human example by GreenEnvy22 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Well I can relate one story I know of directly.
    This past summer one of our employees was going from Canada to the US via car, crossing at Port Huron, MI. He was going to a conference in Michigan and had a couple other people speaking at this conference with him. When they got to the border, an alarm went off and they were all hauled into the security office.
    After several hours they were let go after the guards contacted the doctor of one of the women in the car, and confirmed she had indeed ungergone a stress test with the radioactive fluid earlier that day.

    This was the womens own fault as the Doctors office had told her she should not do any international travelling for a couple of days, becuase of this very reason, but she did not listen.

  51. Re:Oblig. 'Heroes' Reference by jrjarrett · · Score: 2, Funny

    That could be cat-astropic.

  52. Happens all the time by dj245 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My father is an immigration inspector on the Canadian border. Apparently this is not uncommon and people are usually surprised when he asks them if they have had any recent medical tests. The only news here is that it was a cat this time.

    The detectors are very sensitive. Aparently the steel in many shipping containers built in China sets it off because the chinese are recycling a lot of the steel that was in now-decommissioned nuclear reactors.

    --
    Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    1. Re:Happens all the time by SchmellsAngel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Been happening since we started putting radiation detectors on roads. Here's a story from 1984 about an incident that sickened a Juarez neighborhood, yet amazingly killed nobody: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9501E7D71338F932A35756C0A962948260&sec=health&spon=&pagewanted=all
      "When a delivery truck took a wrong turn near the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico on Jan. 17, a radiation alarm was tripped."

      --
      We must repeat.
  53. Don't feel bad for the cat by elrous0 · · Score: 3, Funny

    I have it on good authority that he thinks of nothing but murder all day.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  54. This is not new at all by mattt79 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Something similar happened to me about ten years ago. My toddler aged daughter was undergoing nuclear scans to track her cancer treatments, and I was told that for the next 48 hours I should wear gloves when changing her diapers. A week later I get a call from some "government agency" asking why my garbage was emitting radioactivity! After I explained about the underlying medical issues, (including the fact that I-131 has a half-life of a couple days) there was no further problem.

    But here's the kicker, since I use a community dumpster, the only way the could identify me was to get the information from mail in my (presumably radioactive) trash.

    I learned two things from the encounter,

    1 - I need to get a shredder.

    2 - That someone has what may be the worst job in the world... radioactive dumpster diving.

  55. Dirty bombs? by pclminion · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I have yet to see any evidence at all that a "dirty bomb" is anything more than a crazy nightmare cooked up by an American paranoid whackjob. Do we really think "the terrorists" are going to use something like that? It seems like a huge amount of effort, with a huge risk of detection, for an effect that could just as easily be achieved in other ways. See for instance, 9/11.

  56. Yes, and I have the solution. by pavon · · Score: 2, Funny
    The reason for this is simple - people have a personal connection with their pets and their friends but not with strangers. The solution is equally simple - allow rich people to keep poor people as pets. All their needs will be taken care of and, they will have a more leisured life than the vast majority of people even in the first world. Instead of a chihuahua, Paris can doll around the street with her little Mexican kid. Instead of having a hunting dog, the Joneses can have their very own Appalachian Redneck. An why have a pit bull when you can have your property protected by an Urban Gangsta? Naturally we would need places to train these people to be obedient - we could call them public schools.



    </satire>

  57. Re:Radioactive cats and a vist from homeland secur by Varmint01 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What's really sad is that this family is probably now on a terror watch list, even though it's obvious that it was all a mix-up. Homeland Security is so bored because there's no actual terrorism to deal with that they'll just be devoting their resources to harassing innocent people and refusing to give anyone the benefit of the doubt.

    I'm dead serious, these people are probably all having their phones warrantlessly wiretapped and their emails read by some orderly in an FBI data center.

    Can we just get over this terrorism nonsense, disband the department of homeland security, and get on with our lives?

  58. Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    That's one hot pussy!

  59. ObFuturama by sconeu · · Score: 4, Funny

    No fair! You changed the outcome by measuring it!

    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
  60. Civics 101? Who can count that high?!!! by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "Why should I explain the details of my cancer treatment to some TSA agent? My medical history is private and should be protected by law from unnecessary disclosure."
    Your right to privacy is protected! You also have the right to be apprehended and held incommunicado indefinitely, which has been your right for some time now [doesn't ANYONE read the .sigs anymore?]. Anything you don't say can and will be used against you. It's the new American way.

    When U.S. citizens were children, most didn't learn their civics lessons. They didn't need to because they were going to be Pro Football or Baseball players, or actresses, or pick any other excuse you would like. They don't bat an eyelash now when they hear "if you have nothing to hide" or "we are benevolent protectors" (except to wonder what the word benevolent means.) Henry David Thoreau said that people will get exactly the kind of government they deserve, and that is indeed what the U.S. citizens have received.
    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  61. Happens all the time by NuclearGator · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Patients are given paperwork to prove that they have had nuclear medicine tests (what isotope and how much activity.) Nuclear power plant workers set off the detectors when they go back to work after Tl/Tc99m stress tests all the time down here in Fl. Longer lived isotopes like I131 for thyroid cancer ablation lasts quite a long time in the body (long biological half life with an 8 day half life.) All the major highways into NYC have detectors. Old news people...

  62. Re:Civics 101? Who can count that high?!!! by AstrumPreliator · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Henry David Thoreau said that people will get exactly the kind of government they deserve, and that is indeed what the U.S. citizens have received.

    I believe the next generation is getting exactly what their parents deserve. There seems to be about a generation of lag time between fuckup and consequence. Perhaps that's why we're losing our freedoms, we have no reason to care as it'll be our kids' problem. We certainly are a greedy species.

  63. This is not a cause for alarm or a rights issue. by Mactrope · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Radiation monitoring is useful and non invasive. Unlike real domestic spying, it only identifies things that can actually be harmful. Equipment operators have a simple purpose and can be adequately trained to distinguish real threats from false alarms but every alarm is worth following. People don't have to be identified and personal information never has to be tracked to stop threats.

    Radio isotope monitoring has long been done at borders and in waste disposal. These are last ditch portions of defense in depth to protect the public from real danger. Powerful sources are required for industry and medicine. They are supposed to be carefully tracked from creation to disposal but you can never be sure. There have been several ugly incidents outside the US and at least one where an isotope ended up smelted into something that was later caught at the US border. When everything else fails, road and garbage checks help.

    While nothing is impossible for a corrupt administration to abuse, this is not it. The real end of civil liberty comes from tracking and harassing dissidents and creating mechanism to lock them up.

    --
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=216934&cid=17629948
  64. calm down people by XLR8DST8 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    as one who firmly opposes the Patriot Act and the disintegration of privacy and civil liberties in our country, I must say that I find nothing wrong with our government checking for radioactive material. In our day and age where 99% of national security is simply 'theatre' designed to make you FEEL safe rather than actually BE safe (ahem, airport 'security'?), it's nice to know that there is a program out there that actually intends the opposite and isn't simply squandering time and taxpayer money playing mind games with us. In testing for radioactivity they are NOT conducting strip- or cavity searches nor your search engine history or phone records, nor monitoring anything, other than levels of radioactivity. This practice in & of itself is what this country NEEDS as part of REAL security. & in regards to us 'knowing' about it.. I don't care if I KNOW they are testing for radioactivity. How obnoxious that would be to be driving along the freeway to see signs saying 'warning, you are being scanned for radioactivity'. In fact I'd be more offended by that, as one could perceive that as fear-mongering and additional 'theatre' as psychological civil obedience conditioning. There's really no reason for me to know, and if our government is TRULY trying to protect me as they clearly are in this case I can objectively understand. Now, this is not to say that I don't want to know about OTHER types of surveillance, especially video, or believe that other types of surveillance, especially warrantless wiretapping, aren't intrusive, unconstitutional, and really just ways for introduce new domestic control under the guise of national security. I'm just saying in the case of radioactive material, hell, do you really need to know? Do you really care?