Slashdot Mirror
Cancer Cluster Possibly Found Among TSA Workers
OverTheGeicoE writes "TSA employees at Logan International Airport believe they have identified a cancer cluster in their ranks, according to documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act and released by the Electronic Privacy Information Center. They have requested dosimetry to counter 'TSA's improperly non-monitored radiation threat.' So far, at least, they have not received it. The documents also reveal a paper from Johns Hopkins that essentially questions whether it is even safe to stand near an operating scanner, let alone inside one. Also, the National Institute of Standards and Technology says that the Dept. of Homeland Security 'mischaracterized' their work by telling USA Today that NIST affirmed the safety of the scanners when in fact NIST does not do product safety testing and never tested a scanner for safety."
This should stop now. Most people dont even realize that there is the possibility of danger of goin into one of these things. Those of us that are concerned get the ol pat down. Myself, I'm not even going to fly at all. F you TSA.
This is a classic government mistake, trying to eliminate a threat in one area causes needless problems in another area. Ever since 9/11 the airport security people have gotten a blank check. TSA seems willing to buy any new scanner invented, safety tests will be done later if ever. It's been a long time since we've heard of an airplane disruption on a domestic flight... do we really need to up the specs on this technology?
It's been a very bad day for the TSA. And a very good day for people with no love for a police state.
Is this like a malicious Beowulf cluster?
PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
If you can't beat the system from without, beat it from within. We should throw as much support as possible behind this - get some lawyers in there, get some reporters over there, do whatever we can.
Not trolling but after what they did to this 95 year old woman http://news.travel.aol.com/2011/06/26/tsa-pats-down-elderly-woman-removes-adult-diaper-video/ I hope they all get cancer and die.
Shame on you TSA and shame on you President Obama for letting this happen to AMERICA.
it boggles the mind
How many people need to be deadly sick from this insanity to realized the non sense of a full body scanner.
Considering tons of material entering in each days in airport for restaurant, boutique and workers... I feel safe to say that someone can find another way to enter stuff behind the gate without having to carry it on himself!
Bad guy will always have the guns even if it's illegal!
Sounds like karma to me... no decent human being would be able to handle that job long-term. Only the most callous and sadistic stay.
Women are like electronics: you don't know how damaged they are until you try to turn them on.
But you see, security devices aren't regulated. Medical devices are regulated, but security devices aren't medical devices. Says so right on the label. Just take our word for it that this is safe.
on the use of these cancer spreaders at airports!!!!!!!!
Thank you.
Yours In Krasnoyarsk,
Kilgore Trout
Standing in the scanner for a short period exposes you to a small amount (Although it, by design, dumps all that radiation in a thin layer of skin, upping the effective dose for your skin...), and reflects the rest. Standing around the reflected radiation, for hours, and hours on end, for days, months, and years...
Hey, the shoe sizing fluoroscopes were such a great idea, too...
There is no safe level of radiation - there are simply levels that don't significantly increase risk. It may well be discovered that hanging out by XRay sources isn't as un-bad for your health as previously assumed (perhaps due to not actually testing..) I'm so glad my tax dollars paid for all this tech and will now pay all the large sums that will get awarded in the inevitable law suits.. Yay.
in assuming it's the scanners before having properly ruled out Voodoo.
Nullius in verba
I suppose it's time to get comfortable with the idea of intimate relations with TSA screeners. It wouldn't be so bad but for the lack of choice in who does the screening, the lack of cuddling afterwards and total absence of a commitment. It just makes the whole ordeal seem so tawdry.
Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once
Even if you bought into the bullshit about the scanners being safe (despite little or no testing), doesn't it seem a little obvious that something was up when they wouldn't let TSA employees were those little radiation badges that change color to indicate when you've had too much exposure?
Did the survey adjust for the fact that these window-licking retards have been chewing on paint-chips and drinking from the toilet?
Can we make corrupt politicians, and anyone who voted for the Patriot Act work these machines for a few months every year?
They deserve it. Random text to pad out the comment.
The TSA has yet to catch a real terrorist, but has likely given at least some people cancer. All for security theater. And also all the abuse of authority they have done lately, such as making a 95 year old woman remove her Depends during a search: http://www.newsherald.com/news/mother-94767-search-adult.html , I almost don't feel bad for the affected agents.
Obviously the cancer is caused by all the terrorists their catching with radiation bombs.
But NIST does test for accuracy, and the other labs that test for safety would rely on that accuracy.
Counting on the manufacturer for safety testing. What could go wrong?
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
Nice troll. "Take one life to save one life." Remember, if this is a cancer cluster, and it is caused by something in the TSA environment, they're literally killing themselves so that you can feel a sense of security. And most would argue that you cannot prove the scanners are effective, thus you're trading their lives for imaginary safety. If you're willing to kill just to feel safe, wouldn't it be better if you just picked up a gun, went to $terroristsourcedujour and started shooting?
Canada: The US's more awesome sibling.
I actually talked about this with a TSA agent recently (during a pat-down). The trouble is that the X-ray "spot" in the scanners is actually fairly intense; the scanning machines are only safe if the spot in kept in motion., as it is supposed to be when in use. (The scanner is doing a raster scan, and looking for backscatter.) If there is any internal reflection, then someone outside the machine (i.e., a TSA agent) could get repeated exposures, which would not be good. The same might be true if people in the scanners had reflections from buttons or other metal items. It seems unlikely, but the only way to be sure is to measure it.
...What American would honestly let some terrorist hijack a plane in 2011? The only reason they succeeded on 9/11 was because no one knew what the hell was going on. Passengers would bum-rush them today, plain and simple.
Are you trying to claim the government will mischaracterize the truth in order to push a political agenda that is convenient?
That seems highly unlikely.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
I found the following link: http://www.sierradosimetry.com/pricelist.aspx
On this page is offered a dosimetric badge service costing $160/year. At that level, the user return their badge each month, receiving a new badge. They are given a monthly result reading, which should be higher time resolution than needed for this application.
If the TSA employees really care, maybe 16 of them could each pitch in $10 for one badge to be worn by the person who runs the machine...
As a frequent flyer it is fairly easy to avoid the scanners. Many smaller airports don't have them, and they are too slow for the majority of larger ones and are often turned off or majority of people waved around. Over time you learn where the scanners will not be used. The sad part is most TSA agents are normal people that need a job. They are forced to stand near devices that may be safe if operating properly, but over time normal wear and tear will increase the exposure. As is normal with a slow acting, long term effect problem, owned by the government, it won't be acknowledged until the majority of victims are dead. Like nuclear submarines, have the TSA agents where dosimeter badges every day for a year. Lets see if there is a problem.
Before, I was all like "Ban the TSA! Charge them with sexual assault and manufacturing backscatter child porn!" but now I'm all like "Remember 9/11! We must continue to install TSA-operated X-Ray equipment everywhere!"
If you willingly work for the TSA, you deserve whatever you get.
Seriously, how likely is it that cancer would be completely uniformly distributed?
Given that most TSA staff appear to be ill-educated mouthbreathers whose primary diet consists of cigarettes, Coke and Funyuns, shouldn't they consider general lifestyle factors as well?
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
Ask yourself this question: Would you rather have Freedom or Security?
I choose freedom. Unfortunately I can't choose often enough because the majority in the US vote for Security, then act surprised when they lose Freedom.
While I have no doubt these machines are the bane of our personal freedom, and may even be dangerous its also possible that cancer clusters show up randomly. They do in areas near cellphone towers, unrelated to radiation, simply because clusters happen randomly too.
Hm, Hm, Hm... I thought all the Fukushima threads had established that low-dose radiation is far from harmful, and actually promoting your health? Where are the nuclear proponents now? All I see in this thread so far is decrying of the evil government raining down destruction by means of scanning machines. Cognitive dissonance, anyone?
Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
How long have these scanners been in place? How many TSA employees are there?
How many are smokers?* How many have been diagnosed with cancer? What sort of cancers are we talking about here?
It seems very early on for any meaningful pattern to have become visible.
_____
*- consider this shorthand for every common risk factor that might be relevant.
Right. Of course the scanners are useless, better to use you know proven security screening methods like ... profiling(behavioral and otherwise).
Om, nomnomnom...
I love how they talk about the primary beam on the Xray scanner as if it's enough that the primary beam isn't pointed at someone. When xrays strike an object usually there is backscatter radiation as well as diffraction and florescence. These are all factors that are considered when designing medical treatment and imaging rooms, that's the law. Give me a break, both ends of the machine are open at all times and the machine runs at all times...
The letters about safety read like a typical employer disclaimer when they're caught doing something unsafe.
I'm confused. Does non-ionizing radiation cause cancer at Slashdot or not? I've seen no end of claims about how our beloved cell toys can't possibly be the cause of brain tumors because the radiation is non-ionizing. Well, guess what; the full body scanners don't emit ionizing radiation either. Also, the power level of one of these back scatter systems is thousands of times smaller than a cell phone dose.
Yet, here we are trumpeting 'cancer clusters' caused by low power, non-ionizing systems.
Either low power non-ionizing radiation causes cancer and your beloved cell toy is a carcinogen, or it doesn't and full body scanners aren't harmful. Which is it?
Some of us fly all the time. I for one will opt for the pat down next time. Personally I just look the guy in the eye and ask him out for a drink while he's got his hands on my junk.
F you for not being part of the solution and protesting.
Individual effective dose is below Negligible Individual Dose (NID) if an individual is subjected to fewer that screenings in a year...
Uhh, why in the name of FSM is the data most pertinent to the public redacted? That's the kind of data that isn't "sensitive" unless it makes the program look bad. Basically, in my humble opinion, that's an admission of guild by the DHS that these backscatter devices are probably exceeding the NID within a short period of time.
OP says that the letter says it "questions whether it is even safe to stand near an operating scanner, let alone inside one."
Um, helps to read the fine linked document, which has been partially redacted, but still says "Individual effective dose per screening (frontal and rear) of a subject is , less than the 10 urem (0.10 uSv) limit. Further down a standard (NCRP 1993) is quoted which "recommends that members of the general public receive less than 1 mSv (0.1 rem) per year."
So, if these numbers are compared (who knows if they are reproducible) you are considered safe up to about 10,000 scans per year (1 mSv / 0.10 uSv).
The document does indicate there is a potential danger from X-ray beam overshoot "above and behind" the scanner. Yes, but note in the diagram this area BEGINS at 13.8 FEET above the ground, and RISES IN A CONE!!! So, you may be at risk if you're about 14 feet tall (or work in an office on the second floor?) standing behind the machine...
Clusters of cancer cases happen all the time. There are condominiums in Florida where the incidence of cancer is 10-100 times higher than the national average. But, when we consider what kind of people live in them (retirees from New York), then the incidence is the same as would be expected for old people. It is important to adjust for factors. Also, clusters can occur at random due to chance alone. If one selects 1000 high schools, then some of them will have an unusually high number of pediatric cancer cases due to chance.
This relates to a famous statistical problem, “How many people can be in the same room until there is a better than 50% chance that there will be at least one shared birthday?”
The best way to approach this problem is to calculate the compliment, “What is the probability that there are no shared birthdays?”
When there is one person in the room, the probability is 1.
When there are two people, the probability is 364/365, since there are 364 other birthdays to choose from.
When there are three people, the probability is (364/365) * (363/365).
And so on, until there are 22 people, at which point the product becomes .4927028. At that point, there is a less than 50% chance that there are no shared birthdays. By the same token, there is a better than 50% chance that there is at least one shared birthday.
What TSA doesn't want to tell their own agents and the flying public are the basics of ionizing radiation exposure.
The basic formula for radiation exposure is: time X radiation level X ratio of body exposure = total exposure.
Since the backscatter scanner's radiation exposure is focused mostly on the skin the ratio would be roughly 20 to 1 (1 being an entire body Gamma Ray or X-Ray exposure) as opposed to a normal chest X-ray that exposes mostly the chest but does expose the entire body to X-Rays which would probably be 3 to 1. That makes the X-ray about 7 times damaging to the skin.
The time of exposure is very short for any one individual in the backscatter scanner so this factor is very low per exposure. That means the TSA agents will get hundreds of exposures every day as opposed to a traveler that would get dozens of scans per year at most.
The next factor is radiation level. Clearly the radiation level per exposure is much higher in the scanner than outside of the backscatter scanner but backscatter X-rays tend to escape outside the scanner via openings so the exposure outside would NOT be negligible compared to the exposure inside. Let's say the TSA agent gets 1/20th of the exposure any one passenger gets.
This formula predicts that the average passenger will get a tiny amount of radiation it is mostly concentrated in the skin equal to that of several cross-county flights (extremely low) and that the TSA agents will receive hundreds of times that dose per year (not so low).
This all assumes that the backscatter scanner is in prefect working order, if not it may give a X-ray up to hundreds of times above normal. This is why all other X-Ray equipment is run and inspected by X-Ray technicians. At TSA checkpoints you will not find any such animal.
At any rate is will be the TSA agents that may get low but considerable radiation exposures passenger after passenger, day after day, week after week, thousands of significantly reduced exposures every week as each average passenger gets a higher dose a few times a year at most. 1/20th times thousands of exposures is still about a FEW HUNDRED times the backscatter X-ray exposure than what any average passenger would experience per year. It is very conceivable that TSA agents may have an elevated risk of skin cancers in the future and we may be seeing the first signs of this with the cancer cluster.
Look, cancer occurs everywhere, and people are lousy with seeing patterns that don't exist. The same sort of thing happened w/ Fukishima: it would take years for that to have _caused_ cancer in anyone, but if a month after the disaster someone you know gets diagnosed, you will assume it was *because* of the disaster. People read an article about how these machines are unsafe, and a month later their co-worker gets diagnosed; they assume it's because of the machine. But in neither case could there have been enough time for the proposed cause to have had that effect.
And the article says "TSA *employees* identified cancer clusters possibly linked to radiation exposure." The employees? Not, like, a doctor?
These machines should be tested for safety, and I hope they are... before an _actual_ cancer cluster is created.
Those who fail to understand communication protocols, are doomed to repeat them over port 80.
Backscatter X-ray machines do emit ionizing radiation. The competing millimeter wave scanners are not ionizing, but having flown through Boston Logan airport recently, the machines they were using certainly looked like backscatter, not millimeter wave, scanners.
It could bring the whole TSA down if a few people get cancer.
Or not ... because the taxpayer will be funding it and they've always got *trillions* to spare.
No sig today...
These fucking scanners don't put themselves into the airports, train stations, bus stations, sports events, concerts, shopping malls, and mobile trucks!
And why is it one end of the government doesn't see the other end wagging?
If it is proven that these scanners are dangerous and must be removed, what will fill the 'fear theater' void?
I first imagined, "Body Cavity Checks For All!", but that != profit for Chertoff, et al. Maybe they'll do it for shits & giggles, anyway...
Imagination drew in bold strokes, instantly serving hopes and fears, while knowledge advanced by slow increments...
Wow, what a bunch of hogwash. The identified cancer cluster was identified as "an influx of TSA employees falling victim to various forms of cancer, strokes and heart disease". It is not limited to Boston - it is actually the ATL employees who first mentioned it. I'm sure the exposure over the last 12 months caused all this. Cancer pops up (as does heart disease) the moment you are exposed...
Read the sources, not the press releases.
Those TSA goons deserve to die of cancer.
You do realize of course that all passengers may "opt out" of the full body (z-backscatter) scans? Right?
All you have to do is say "I opt out of the scanner". Then they take you, give you a light pat-down and send you on your way. I do it every time, and never really had a problem with the "enhanced pat-down" crap. They barely touch you to begin with, and not once have they gone all the way up to my family jewels.
Not really that difficult...
I loved flying back in the days when you got wings, playing cards and meals. The pilot was always giving kids tours of the cockpit.
Now it is all about squeezing the last dime out of flights and politically driven security theatre. Not much fun for anyone.
While I want someone to stick it to the TSA for the scanners I think it is unlikely they have a case.
There are simply not that many TSA agents in the world to produce a statistically significant cancer signal without exposure at the level that would produce visible signs of poisioning or at least easily spotted with portable dosimeters able to detect low energy x-rays.
It would have to be trivial for TSA to make an exposure case simply by measuring the environment in which they work.
What was done to that woman was atrocious. However condamning the rank and file TSA employees does nothing; they're just trying to make ends meet like everybody else, and in general they too loath what they have to do as a part of their job. People at the top that are responsible for all these nonsense are utterly indifferent to what happens, and until they're held accountable, nothing changes.
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
Serves you right for molesting passengers. Should have stuck to flipping burgers. We tried to tell you that those back skatters weren't save but you chose to listen to your "govt" and Michael Chertoff. Ya know, the guy that makes a bundle lobbying for the scanners. Well, I guess it could be worse. You could live in Fukushima.
Anything will cluster if you run the math that way. Most clustering algorithms take the number of clusters to find as an input. It's also difficult to get any useful result if you have a small pool of samples to begin with.
. . . they'll just hire more.
If the drawing annotations are correct, this is not a trivial dose at all. The paper assumes a 38.6 hour work week. The yearly dose for an agent standing in the areas indicated in the drawing would be 576 mREM/yr. (The 'hot' areas are above and to the side of the scan units.. right where a reasonable person might put an observation catwalk).
The thing is, if they are this incompetent with known technology, why in the hell are we trusted them with unproven technology whose risks are known unknowns?
Let them burn for taking away our civil liberties. Karma pay back.
The TSA had already been lobbying for rad badges, and been turned down because the badges would make people tend to believe the scanners weren't safe. :-)
He put his boots up on the table and made a face. "The sig," he smirked. "You can waste your life in search of the sig."
But a self-identified cancer cluster is never really convincing. There was a recent situation in San Diego where parents believe that a school build on contaminated ground are causing a cancer cluster among the children of the community. But repeated reveal by the state (yae, it's a conspiracy!) has shown that not to be the case. Yes, dosimetry monitoring and actual analysis of cancer cases among TSA employee are in order. But I am not jumping to conclusion too quickly. As far as I understand, cancer causing radiation doesn't act this way, this fast.
The only possible interpretation of any research whatever in the 'social sciences' is: some do, some don't
Setting aside arguments against x-ray scanners for a moment, it's hard to believe that TSA workers developed cancer in such a relatively short time from exposure to relatively low intensity radiation. How long have the scanners been in operation? Three years tops (if even that long?) Seems to me that the scanners would have to be releasing huge amounts of radiation to have a chance of causing a problem so soon after their introduction.
You don't need to wonder, there definitely is radiation outside the scanner. The hundred or so scanner pictures released a while ago clearly show bystanders behind the person being scanned. It makes sense when you think about it, if I can see the inside of the scanner, then it can reach me with a direct ray.
Some decades ago, X-ray machines were common. So common that you could go into a department store and get an X-ray to see how well your new shoes fit. Doctors routinely used continuous X-ray scanners (fluoroscopes) with dosages much higher and for much longer durations.
Once people started to suspect that X-rays could cause cancer, it was straightforward to find out. Not trivial, but straightforward. Follow a lot of people and look for a correlation between exposure and cancer. Lo and behold, there is an effect.
Once the effects were measured we could compare risks. One of the results was that the risk due to undiagnosed dental problems is far greater than the risk of cancer from an X-ray, so dental X-rays are a good trade-off.
Fast forward to modern times and we have scanners. There is no evidence to suggest that these devices are safe, or unsafe. The manufacturer has a *model* of what should happen with the dosages, and the consensus of opinion is that the devices are safe... except that the result is based on the model, not evidence. Pick different assumptions to get a different model and there may be a risk.
Some assumptions about the new technology are: a) The manufacturer is correctly reporting dosage, b) The radiation is blocked by the skin (or in reverse, the effects will concentrate in the skin), c) Exposures below a certain threshold pose no risk (versus, any exposure causes proportional risk)
To put this in perspective, it's instructional to look at the history of MRI machines. Despite the fact that there is no known mechanism for magnetic fields interacting with the body and causing problems (notwithstanding metal implants &c), the FDA cautiously required progressive testing of the machines before they were deployed for common use.
I approve of this sort of thing. It's one thing to believe that magnetic fields have no effect, but it's important to test things out before you try them on, for example, pregnant women.
In summary, there has been no testing of the TSA scanners whatsoever. Their entire claim to safety rests on their belief that they know how the radiation will affect living tissue, but they cannot back that up with evidence.
They are not scientists, and they have side-stepped the normal medical safety certification process that we take for granted.
Scientists make conclusions based on evidence, politicians make conclusions based on models.
Most right. This is no different than say airline pilots vs. passengers. Statistics show airline pilots have a higher incident of cancer which of course makes sense since they're getting the dosage every working day of their life vs. a passenger that has occasional dosage. So too, a screener is there every work day getting their dose of radiation standing around those things.
On a related note. Does anyone know how successful passengers have been in trying to carry their own personal dosimeter through one of those machines? Are there certain versions more likely to be permitted?
Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once
Ah, the delicious irony of this. TSA goons get fried by their own contraptions. And AFTER insisting they are totally harmless and 100% safe.
When a dozen or so kick the bucket and panic sets in, guess how they're gonna fill the ranks? Bring in convicts from jails and chain them to the things so they don't run away? Offer more gropes of sick old ladies and innocent toddlers as perks?
Hooray for the land of the free and home of the brave. Almost makes you want to run to the nearest airport and give those poor goons a chance of one last grope before they croak!
>> Cancer Cluster Possibly Found Among TSA Workers
What a crying shame.
It's probably cancer of the anal sphincter. It's what happens when you assemble a critical mass of assholes.
TSA agents agreed to take part in a scheme to force travelers to subject themselves to lethal doses of radiation. Now it turns out the agents are infected by the machines they use on travelers. That's called Justice.
Oh and they can't complain, they've gotten away with the gropings so far.
What about the scanned people itself? They belong to another cancer cluster (maybe more significant?) or they are too busy to investigate that?
Anyway, this probably will end in protection for them, not for the passengers.
but wouldn't you think that someone that was the former head of a government security agency might know a bit about the needs of that agency and be able to start a company that can provide for those needs?
Yes, I know, it's common practice, but profiting from an industry that you have or had official power over is textbook corruption. Participating in a bidding process where you have special inside knowledge is corruption, and it doesn't get more special or inside than "I was head of the agency last week."
Chertoff belongs in jail.
He put his boots up on the table and made a face. "The sig," he smirked. "You can waste your life in search of the sig."
Cancers are bad news, but we might be on the brink of a major free energy breakthrough as a consolation. We just need to find Ossama Bin Laden's corpse and attache it to a dynamo for free energy.
Die a slow, painful death you wannabe SS child molesters.
Radiation-induced cancer typically takes at least 10 years from time of exposure to surface. Most of these people have been "exposed" to whatever may or may not be leaking out of the back of the machines for less than a year. I think it's extremely unlikely that there would a cancer cluster so soon if the cause were radiation exposure.
Whether they are getting large amounts of radiation is up for debate, but whether they should be allowed to wear a radiation badge is not. As human beings they absolutely have the right to know what they are getting. The unknown promotes fear.
First of all, for someone making TSA wages, $160 is a significant investment.
Second of all, what are you going to do if it shows you're just about ready to glow in the dark?
Quit? If that was an option, you'd have done it long ago.
Tell your boss? Tell him what, that the unauthorized, unapproved device that you just violated national security with has thrown a spurious reading?
Tell your coworkers? "Honey, Bill says we have to get evicted this month because his armpatch turned green." I think you'd find your coworkers would rather call you a liar and a troublemaker than volunteer to become homeless.
Alert the media? "The TSA responded to blog reports today that Bill the TSA Guy has been fired for mental health issues, theft and sexual harassment charges. Mr. Bill has been committed for a 72-hour hold on suicide watch... [cut to coworker video] Bill was always a liar and a troublemaker..."
Youtube? "Defense contractor Quantum Dynamics, the maker of the badge in the "Bill the TSA Guy" video, reported today that the badge reading was in error and the result of user error, most likely the result of having been placed in a microwave oven...[cut to badge in microwave] See how the badge looks just like the one in Bill's video... [cut to coworker] Bill was always a liar and a troublemaker hanging around the microwave making popcorn when he should have been working..."
I've seen people die of cancer, and I've always said I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy.
Today I found out I meant it.
He put his boots up on the table and made a face. "The sig," he smirked. "You can waste your life in search of the sig."
We tried to warn you about molesting passengers and the Gay Molestation front. Now stop this crap immediately or you will eventually be forced to wear collars that go off with a behavior-mod type shock when eye dilation, blood pressure, or pulse rates are exceeded. The maximum collar response is limited to 50.000 V@90 amps.
You call yourselves "security personnel"? 9-11, the intentional DH oil well blow out, ARM fraud, hedge fund fraud, derivative fraud, coin of the realm out the Wall Street back door to British protectorate off-shore accounts, chemtrail/HAARP circle weather attacks, false flag violent attacks against American interests, poisoned vaccines, Monsanto selling poison as 'GMO's, crooked voting machines, cops beating up petite dancing girls, congress mewling on the job and taking bribes as the order of the day, Israel branding some congressmen with a "property of the Rothschild whorehouse" burn on their right buttcheek, the president violating every aspect of the Constitution he can get access to, and all TSA obsesses on is my junk. No wonder the 'elite' are killing you with cancer. And to quote the last TSA person I talked to, (with regards to being fondled and otherwise molested by the TSA) "There is nothing they can do about it. There is nothing they can do about it." HA-HA-HA. Already did.
Dogs and machines are cheaper and more effective and keep the rich people happier about raising tax rates.
While they irradiate all of the sheep who just go along with whatever they are told, they are also killing themselves! Fantastic. Only disgusting point is that they somehow think they are more entitled to protection than their victims, the American public.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
Check out this site for a list of the TSA's accomplishments. It seems that their greatest accomplishment is spending billions and billions of dollars without any *real* accomplishments.
This site has a much better approach to listing the accomplishments of the TSA.
"A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson
Now all of you morons at the TSA think that the PTB will care for you?? You are the Kleenex to be thrown after use! Either, you are the stupid cattle doing the job & then when your usefulness is gone,to the knacker!
I second that, there is so much money going in and so many on the Homeland Security welfare teat that cutting it back and replacing it with real law enforcement would cost a lot of jobs and cut the revenue stream for a lot of security snakeoil salesman. It would be political suicide for anyone that does it, so don't expect it from a first term President.
The sheer stupidity of the situation with the machines is that no trustworthy third party examines the machines and declares them safe for use. It's a recipie for corruption or dangerous shortcuts, and the reason why not even a dentist could get away with the same thing with their x-ray machine.
That's a bit of a worry. I used to have to wear a dosimeter just because I worked in the same building as an industrial x-ray machine. The operators had a wear a dosimeter even though the machine was behind two brick walls with a foot of sand filling the space between the walls. You don't just throw the monitoring gear away because you think the sheilding is good enough, you keep it to confirm it is good enough. There were real time sensors with alarms as well but the role of the dosimeter badges was to monitor low level exposure to the wearer over time.
The older dosimeters were really just a bit of unexposed film and the density when it was developed at the end of the month would give you the level of exposure. That's simple and dirt cheap technology which does the job.
Are the real cancers, the real and present danger to all human beings of Earth and must be eliminated by stratigic nuclear action.
Even if 2 billion humans are killed in the action, the deaths of Napolitano and lap dog Pistol will be justified and necessary.
--
Ladies and gentlemen here we go again. For thousands of years people in various professions have been giving the same warning over and over again so here it is yet again. THE RICH DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOU, never did, never will, NEVER! It doesn’t matter if you are a loyal employee.
The ONLY WAY to world peace is to remove the wealth of all those rich enough to corner the market, withhold or “set the price” of resources, and manipulate laws and lawmakers into wars. Anyone with more than one million dollars thinks they’re safe. However, today one billion is what will make the difference. No matter how nice that billionaire may seem, behind the façade they are planning your future and for many, it will be your future demise.
Why has no one asked the obvious question: "Who Cares?"
No, seriously. If the TSA employees are what the public believes - bottom feeding scum who don't shouldn't be allowed to breathe' then why debate the matter at all?
After all, if there is a problem then two of the main concerns will result in A) Less TSA employees in the "short" term ((6 feet down) and B) Less potential TSA employees in the near to long future.
Win-win really. Go on, all you TSA, grope like you've never felt up a 6yo and her 95 year old granny before... and enjoy yourselves while it lasts.
In other news this doesn't answer the question as to who no one in the US retaliates on the spot against this ridiculous intrusion of human dignity
The obvious followup would seem to be to tell all the TSA folks that we see around the scanners that they are likely to get cancer. Push some statistics that are way over their head, and *poof*, not only have we hopefully saved some folks cancer, but we end up with a TSA who is deathly afraid of their own equipment.
Lovely bit of logic, 9/11 was done with box-cutters and was a hijack. That can be stopped by determined passengers, maybe.
But an exploding bomb? The two examples given WERE successful UP to the point the bomb failed to explode. But if the bombs had been properly made, the passengers would not have been alive enough to tacke the bomber after the explosion.
The whole security thing is the problem you always have with security, as long as the security is effective, nothing seems to happen to show the need for the security.
Think of it like this, that really big guy at the door of that peaceful bar, what the fuck is he there for? It is not as if anybody is trying anything. Nope, because the guard is there.
Want to know what happens when security isn't present at airports? Go back in history and the decade of hijacks and bombings.
It is like saying an electric fence is a waste because none of the cows are trying to break through it...
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Is the document redacted to protect the scanner makers, or because we recently raised our allowable limits?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
And this is why I've always opted for the pat down in the few times that I've flown and been forced through one of these things.
Well, one of the reasons. The other being privacy.
Honestly who cares if some dude with gloves on puts his hands on your pants. Takes a minute at most and you're through, with no extra dose of radiation, no naked image of yourself stored who knows where.
These machines combine X Rays and software. ENough said
Fukushima is crawling with technicians with proper radiation monitoring gear: geiger counters and sampling kits.
These machines had no monitoring whatsoever. Not only are the TSA people not issued dosimeters, they are discouraged from getting their own.
And, to make it worse, we're talking about machines that combine X rays and software. Do you know how often a bug in these machines might cause an overdose? Nobody knows what dosage they got. That is what is so scary.
There might be a cancer cluster or there might not be. Even if there is a cluster, it could be caused by pollution from the Charles River or from any other mundane source.
So, how do yo find out? Perform tests.
Why not just give the employees the dosimeters they ask for? If the scanners are safe the test will prove it but, if the scanners are likely to be the cause, we'll know the truth. The only reason to refuse the request for testing would be because you don't want to know the truth.
Therefore, the very refusal of the government to perform the requested tests is a tacit admission that the scanners are dangerous.
X-ray machines in airports are dangerous and, through their own inaction, the government tells me so.
"Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens," which means "Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain." (Talbot, in: The Maid of Orleans (German: Die Jungfrau von Orleans), a tragedy by Friedrich Schille
Given that there are hundreds of thousands of TSA employees, one would expect there to be several hundred cancer cases and at least a few "clusters" regardless of whether the scanners are causing cancer or not. And this is even if you don't count secondary factors such as diet, exposure to cleaning chemicals, etc. I'm not saying don't investigate this - I'm just saying keep an open mind and don't go screaming "CANCER!" at the first opportunity.
As I understand it the backscatter machines use THz radiation which is closer to microwaves than x-rays so any attempt to compare these machines to x-ray imaging machines is a non starter. Additionally, the x-ray scanners are regulated and OHSA regulations dictate the amount of radiation the workers can receive let alone the many other rules that dictate how much radiation the general public can receive. It is almost like the engineers that designed the machines and the companies that make them have actually thought of radiation safety and meet all radiation exposure guidelines that are very conservative. I find it amazing that people here think that they automatically know better then the thousands of people working to keep these units safe, and in the 100+ years we have been working with x-rays we thoroughly understand the radiological risks and how to mitigate them. By the way your tin foil hats act like collectors that focus the radiation near your brain stem.
Ever since our sound defeat at the hands of the terrorists on 9/11, the occupational forces (TSA, NSA, Department of Homeland Security...) have become more and more brutal with their regulation of the citizenry.
HA HA HA HA Gestapo cancers ROTFLMFAO
Nobody knows, because the TSA is not doing a fucking thing to investigate further.
Wow. Such a thorough report! Where is that sarcasm font when you need it? Maybe the headline should read "Cancer Proabably Not Found".
First: A random cancer cluster somewhere in TSA is probably stastically likely. There are hundreds of airports around the country, staffed by thousands of TSA agents. The idea that one group of them (which is all we seem to have here) might have a higher than normal incidence of cancer is not surprising. There are also probably locations with LOWER than normal incidence of cancer. What we really need is something showing that TSA agents at backscatter checkpoints show an significantly increased risk of cancer over their counterparts who do not work with backscatter machines. One cluster at one airport does not show this.
Second: Cancer caused by radiation generally takes years of very high dosages to develop. The backscatter machines have simply not been in place long enough to create such health problems. Moreover, no one has ever shown that non-ionizing radiation can cause cancer of any kind, over any exposure level.
Third: The paper from Johns Hopkins doesn't say what OverTheGeicoE claims. This paper asserts that radiation levels from the backscatter machines is BELOW negligible levels. Generally, unless you are a believer in homeopathy, something below negligble levels is considered to be, well, the next best thing to nothing. The paper DOES state that there is a zone of leakage around at least some of the machines.
The comments about what NIST does are probably accurate, but do not amount to a condemnation of backscatter technology. And don't take this as a defense of "the gov'ment." It is not. I generally feel that the backscatter machines are not making air travel safer, and the way the TSA has kept the specifications for the machines under wraps makes them hard to assess in publie. I don't like them, and I don't look forward to going through them. But I also have not yet seen any compelling evidence that they pose a public health hazard. I look forward to a day when they are removed from our airports, but replacing them with a rabid paranoia about "the gov'ment" is not going to be a good choice.
Doing the terrorists' work for them?
Did you conveniently forget that OBAMA had nothing to do with the TSA?
I truly hope they all died long painful deaths.
Can anyone say KARMA?
I heard they use tetra hertz frequencies to scan, which never used to 'exist' because it was hard to get a useful amount of power at that frequency.
I heard that that frequency was high enough that the wavelength was so small it interacted with DNA, damaging it.
As I am the only person I know who has read the World Health Organisation's book on damaging effects of electromagnetic radiation, I can tell you that:-
1) there is no known way to test all the effects of electromagnetic radiation
2) there is no way to do time accelerated tests of electromagnetic radiation
3) tetra hertz frequencies fall outside of the frequencies covered / tested for by the WHO (at least from a commercial device point of view)
No radio engineer would subject themselves to much of this.
Questions:-
1) is this evil science
2) are you being sucker luckered by the TSA... I think so.