Slashdot Mirror


Cancer Patient Held At Airport For Missing Fingerprints

A 62-year-old man visiting his relatives in the US was held for four hours by immigration officials after they could not detect his fingerprints because of a cancer drug he was taking. The man was prescribed capecitabine, a drug used to treat cancers in the head, neck, breast, and stomach. Some of the drug's side-effects include chronic inflammation of the palms or soles of the feet, which can cause the skin to peel or bleed. "This can give rise to eradication of fingerprints with time," explained Tan Eng Huat, senior consultant in the medical oncology department at Singapore's National Cancer Center. "Theoretically, if you stop the drug, it will grow back, but details are scanty. No one knows the frequency of this occurrence among patients taking this drug and nobody knows how long a person must be on this drug before the loss of fingerprints," he added.

20 of 323 comments (clear)

  1. The scariest words in the English language by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We're from the government, and we're here to help you!

    --
    Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    1. Re:The scariest words in the English language by MadAhab · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Bullshit.

      The scariest words in the English language are "I'm just doing my job." That doesn't sound so good in German either.

      Besides, immigration officials aren't there to help anyone. Just ask the tourists who don't come to the US anymore.

      --
      Expanding a vast wasteland since 1996.
    2. Re:The scariest words in the English language by sortius_nod · · Score: 5, Informative

      This is exactly my point.

      I too am an Aussie, and I find the notion of fingerprinting innocents a gross violation of human rights. It seems the typical response to not wanting to be printed is "if you have nothing to hide you won't mind".

      Well, my response is "if I am innocent then why am I being treated like a criminal"?

      I know this conversation will go nowhere due to the hard line Americans hijacking it and defending the police state they live in. None are so jaded as the people who fully accept giving up their liberties and rights for the sake of "security"... no, I'm not going to do the full quote, but you get the picture.

  2. just doing their job by castironpigeon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why think when you can follow protocol?

    --
    mmmm...forbidden donut
    1. Re:just doing their job by Ceiynt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Protocol, and current law, requires fingerprinting for incoming foreigners. I think DNA should be a good alternative if fingerprints are not available. I wonder what the protocol is for a double arm amputee. What if they had just said, "Oh well, you look sick and you won't do anything, so we'll let you in."
      What if they find out he's on cancer drugs because he's some sort of commie biochem guy and is now sick from that. He's dying and wants to do damage to America. He blows up a school. Oh, well, after a few years they'll find he wasn't printed coming into the country. Parents of kids killed sue because protocol wasn't followed, allowing a dangerous wanted person in the country, just because he was sick.
      Sickness does not beget special treatment. A plan B should be in place for this sort of thing.

    2. Re:just doing their job by hondo77 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      When was the last time a real terrorist was found in a border check?

      Nine years ago.

      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
    3. Re:just doing their job by darthwader · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why not do both? Protocol is: get fingerprint. If you cannot get a fingerprint, then you should use your discretion and initiative, e.g.:
      - carefully and thoroughly interview the visitor.
      - understand and verify the person's reason for not having a fingerprint.
      - understand why the person is visiting the country.
      - determine whether this person is likely to be a risk or not.
      - decide if the person should be allowed into the country despite the lack of fingerprints.

      If the border guards didn't want to think, they would have just deported him right away. They were willing to think. They did think. They interviewed him, thought about what he said,possibly spent some time verifying what he said, maybe consulted other people, and in the end they decided he was an acceptable risk. The process took 4 hours. It seems reasonable to me.

      I think this shows a system working perfectly. The normal case (over 99% of the time, I would guess) is a few seconds for a fingerprint. The exceptions are dealt with on a case-by-case basis, with a thorough interview and careful consideration (not a stupid snap judgment).

      --
      I hate it when I make a joke and I get modded "+5 insightful". Mod the stupid comments "funny", not "insightful", pleas
    4. Re:just doing their job by geekoid · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When government officials detain you for whatever they want, and nobody thinks its a big deal, then truly, the terrorists have won.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  3. Re:Can't be the first by Morphine007 · · Score: 5, Funny

    probably a wheelchair

  4. Technology-determined guilt or innocence by BetterSense · · Score: 5, Interesting
    When I was getting my CCW permit, which requires fingerprinting, there was an old man there. The police fingerprinters were failing to get fingerprints from him, I assumed because of his old wrinkled skin. Since he legally cannot get a CCW permit without fingerprints on file, he was basically being discriminated against on the basis that the fancy fingerprinting machine that the police station bought happened to not do the correct song and dance when he put his fingers on it.

    It's similar to the situation with breathalyzers where if the machine beeps or not can be the difference between you going to jail or driving home. Our judges have been replaced by robotic imposters, and I imagine it will get worse in the future.

  5. Headline on Fox News tonight: by RandoX · · Score: 5, Funny

    Terrible New Terrorism Drug Helps Terrorists Evade Identification And Cause More Terrible Terror.

  6. some people just don't have fingerprints by alphaFlight · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My wife had to get a special exemption to sit for the bar exam because the state police couldn't take her fingerprints, which were necessary for conducting the required criminal background check. She has no idea why her fingerprints are virtually nonexistent.

    --
    -= alphaFlight =-
    1. Re:some people just don't have fingerprints by Lord+Ender · · Score: 5, Funny

      She secretly works for the MIB. They remove your fingerprints when they join. Every time you discover this, however, she gets you with her little memory-zapper-thingy.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
  7. Obviously by TibbonZero · · Score: 5, Funny

    We must ban anti-cancer drugs. The terrorists might use them. Terrorists could hurt children. Think of the children!

    --
    Tibbon
    tibbon.com
  8. The Penguin (not the Linux kind) tried this by RobertB-DC · · Score: 5, Funny

    In an episode of the original Adam West "Batman" series, the caped crusader was performing a high-tech fingerprint scan on all the citizens leaving some sort of event. Along comes a long-nosed fellow -- obviously The Penguin, since his disguise was about as effective as Superman's "Clark Kent" cover. Batman attempts the fingerprint scan, but the man has no fingerprints.

    "Holy Nonsequitur, Batman!" the intrepid Robin exclaims, "it's plastic!"

    "Yes, I believe that's what the surgeon used," replies the ersatz innocent civilian.

    Batman lets him go, but confides to Robin that he knows it's the Penguin -- but now that the dastardly enemy thinks he's slipped the trap, he will now lead them to the bad guys' secret lair.

    Obviously, the TSA should have done the same with this guy. Then, they could have found the entire Al Qaida leadership, probably meeting in a rakishly tilted room, behind the one-way mirror in a seedy magic shop.

    --
    Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
  9. Re:Best country in the world by gujo-odori · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Sure, they were dumb. Most criminals are. Most terrorists aren't exactly the sharpest marbles in the sack, either. How dumb do you have to be for someone to convince you that blowing yourself up or flying an airplane into a building is a good idea and will help you achieve your goals?

    However, they only failed because the supplier they found was an undercover Fed rather than someone who would supply actual weapons. As for reality, the rocket was real; it was just disarmed. As for the C-4, it's probably possible to supply fake C-4 that behaves just like the real thing except it won't actually explode. It's not surprising that they didn't test the stuff; they had no reason to, believing it to be authentic, and testing C-4 is likely to attract a lot of attention.

    The bottom line is, they *are* terrorists. They did have a concrete plan to carry out attacks. They attempted to carry out that plan. They were caught by good undercover police work. To try and say they aren't terrorists because they were arrested before they could blow anything up is like trying to say somebody isn't a drug dealer because he gets arrested after selling to a narc.

  10. Been there, done that... by Calibax · · Score: 5, Informative

    I was diagnosed with colon cancer in 2005, and after surgery I did the chemotherapy thing. One of my drugs was Xeloda, which is the marketing name for capecitabine, the drug this guy is taking.

    The problem mentioned in TFA is Hand-Foot Syndrome (HFS) or palmer-palmer erythrodysesthesia. Capecitabine causes redness, swelling, a rash, and burning pain in the hands and feet - and sometimes elsewhere such as joints and genitals. In bad cases the skin peels and you get blisters, ulcers and sores in the affected areas. This is because some of the drug leaks out of the capillaries and damages the surrounding tissues, and you have a lot of capillaries close to the surface in the hands and feet.

    There are drugs (Vitamin B6, corticosteroids, dimethyl sulfoxide) that can help sometimes - but they didn't for me. Walking became extremely painful, and my hands were constantly hot and painful, although I didn't lose my fingerprints as far as I know. Everything returned to normal some months after chemotherapy completed.

    I really sympathize with this guy. Dealing with immigration headaches while having bad hand-foot syndrome would have been a total hassle for me. Even standing up for a few minutes was torture.

  11. Re:Can't be the first by Daimanta · · Score: 5, Funny

    Catfish are toxic. Apparently they have such toxicity that they burn of your fingerprints if you handle enough of them.

    --
    Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
  12. My sister was held back too! by KreAture · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My sister has Nethertons Syndrome. It's relevant implication for this case is that her skin is replaced faster than normal. This causes her to have weak if any fingerprints.

    When visiting Florida for christmas last year my entire family was held back for about half an hour. Only after the "security person" had consulted his superior, and that superior had consulted yet another superior, were this 16 year old obvious thread to national security allowed to pass into America. They also tried to wipe her fingertips with alcohol. Very pleasant on what you can compare to a first to second degree burn.

  13. America: A Dialogue by QuoteMstr · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Based on a true story and submitted for your critical evaluation, dear reader, I present "America: A Dialogue".

    Alice: I can't believe people want to bring the 9/11 terrorists into the US.

    Bob: Well, it's the right thing to do. We need to stop torturing them and give them fair trials.

    Alice: But not here. They're too dangerous to bring into the country.

    Bob:: If our prisons can hold Timothy McVeigh, they can hold anyone. And they're being tortured over there.

    Alice: McVeigh is one thing, but if we hold Al Qaeda terrorists, their supporters will come down through Canada and bail them out of Fort Leavenworth. I think they're just too dangerous to keep here, and an island is much more secure anyway.

    Bob: But our soldiers are behaving like monsters and torturing these people.

    Alice: They deserve it anyway. They attacked us on 9/11. And the real monsters are on top*. Don't criticize our troops who are just trying to do their job. It must hard dealing with those people.

    Bob: We don't know they've done anything. They've never been tried. And our troops are responsible for what they do. Didn't we decide that at Nuremberg?

    Alice: We know they attacked us. These things happen during war. They happen all the time. My friend's father told me of some nasty stuff that happened in Korea. This is no big deal.

    Bob: [dramatic facepalm, exit stage left]

    [Curtain drops, Alice appears from behind it]

    Alice: I'm so glad we elected someone who can rehabilitate our image in the world.

    [House lights]

    * Note the slight improvement over the past few years