Slashdot Mirror


TSA Puts Off Safety Study of X-ray Body Scanners

zokuga writes "ProPublica reports that the TSA is backing off a previous promise to conduct a new independent study of X-ray body scanners used at airport security lanes around the country. Earlier this month, an investigation found that TSA had glossed over research about the risks from the X-rays."

12 of 233 comments (clear)

  1. meanwhile, Europe bans the farking things. by crowlogic · · Score: 5, Informative

    meanwhile, Europe bans them. A lot smarter than these fools running the US, g*d damn them. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=europe-bans-x-ray-body-scanners

  2. Shocking by itchythebear · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'll have to find some sources, but didn't they refuse to allow the TSA employees to wear radiation exposure badges or something like that? (To determine if they were being over exposed)

    They probably don't need to do any studies on if the scanners are safe or not, seems like they already know the answer.

    --
    If what I just said sounded like a troll, it was probably just a failed attempt at humor.
  3. Re:Small risk by MadCow42 · · Score: 5, Informative

    >> I wonder if anyone is up for conducting a large-scale clinical trial to show the low-level employees that these devices are hazardous and that they too should be against them.

    You mean based on reports like this?

    http://news.slashdot.org/story/11/06/27/2012226/Cancer-Cluster-Possibly-Found-Among-TSA-Workers

    --
    I used to have a sig, but I set it free and it never came back.
  4. Re:And we're surprised by this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    What cost? Ionizing radiation is bad for you. There, no charge. When there's a benefit, then the risk may be justified, such as in medical applications, but security theater is not a good enough reason for exposing people to ionizing radiation.

  5. Re:Safety? by cvtan · · Score: 4, Informative
    While I'm sure your tongue was firmly in cheek: "Curie died in 1934 of aplastic anemia brought on by her years of exposure to radiation."

    However her husband fared better: "Pierre Curie died in a street accident in Paris on 19 April 1906. Crossing the busy Rue Dauphine in the rain at the Quai de Conti, he slipped and fell under a heavy horse drawn cart. He died instantly when one of the wheels ran over his head, fracturing his skull."

    --
    Sorry, but gray text on gray background is making my eyes bleed.
  6. I fly for business about every other week by Gordo_1 · · Score: 5, Informative

    And yet in all the months I've been running into these damn X-ray machines, I think I've only seen one other person opt out in favor of a pat down/groping session.

    The rest of this country seems to be full of sheep.

    1. Re:I fly for business about every other week by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Speak for yourself. I've opted for the pat down twice and have seen others do so. It will delay for about 3-5 extra minutes total, maybe less if they have the extra officer nearby. Despite all the hype about rubber gloves and cavity searches it's quite tame and reasonable. Unless you are in severe danger of missing your plane try it, you'll feel better about the small moral victory and the hassle is minimal.

  7. Re:And we're surprised by this? by ackthpt · · Score: 4, Informative

    What cost? Ionizing radiation is bad for you. There, no charge. When there's a benefit, then the risk may be justified, such as in medical applications, but security theater is not a good enough reason for exposing people to ionizing radiation.

    Preaching to the choir, AC.

    I underwent Radiation Therapy for 6 weeks after having a malignant tumor removed. My doctors, ever since, have tried to minimize how frequently I have X-Rays taken, opting for MagRes or Ultrasound to check things. I feel I've been baked and now must be wary.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  8. Re:Safety? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1, Informative

    I'm confused by your argument. Are you saying that radiation wasn't a problem back then because of the dangers of horse drawn carriages? But there are no more horse-drawn carriages (and therefore no threat of being killed in an accident with one). It still seems like we should avoid radiation. ?? Can anyone please explain what this man's argument is?

    You're gonna die.

    Get over it.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  9. Re:The science experiment is on the passengers by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Informative

    Of course I am sure that the TSA calibration records and maintenance records are a matter of public record on these powerful sources of radiation, and that scientists have been allowed access to these machines to confirm the governments assurances... They aren't? And they haven't?

    They don't need to be public record. They just have to be followed like every other x ray emitting device which are regulated by the states. You want to put an x ray machine in your office? Fine, put it in then call the state radiation physicist before you light it up. They come out and check it to make sure the public is safe (you're on your own).

    Guess what doesn't happen since the airports are considered federal enclaves?

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  10. Re:Of course by brillow · · Score: 4, Informative

    Oh yeah, and who does consulting for Rapiscan (the people who sell these things)? Michael Chertoff! Former DHS secretary who, while in office, said it would be just great if we bought a bunch of these things!

    I think they are a little scared because even if the company sells these things, it might not protect them from some giant class-action suit.

  11. Re:well... by tftp · · Score: 3, Informative

    What you are referring to is energy concentrated in a small part of the body as opposed to the whole body. The scanners distribute the energy over the whole body

    That's not what I read. Most of the energy of the scanner is absorbed by the skin, and the analogy is very much correct. I'm not copying the entire content of that URL here, please go there and have a look - the letter with concerns is written not by a couple of nerds in a basement but by scientists (unless membership in the National Academy of Sciences means nothing.) Let me just cite one small paragraph:

    "Unlike other scanners, these new devices operate at relatively low beam energies (28keV). The majority of their energy is delivered to the skin and the underlying tissue. Thus, while the dose would be safe if it were distributed throughout the volume of the entire body, the dose to the skin may be dangerously high."

    any breakdown with the scanning mechanism will be immediately evident in the image.

    That would be of little consolation to you. Let's imagine a real world scenario: the scanning stops - because, for example, someone shoved a blob of chewing gum into the gears. The machine starts working slower, slower and finally stops, with the X-ray beam focused on something totally unimportant, like your eyes or your brain (upper or lower :-) Let's say the interlocks failed and the beam is not shut off.

    What would you expect from a team of inept users of this technology? Do you believe they have a clue how the machine works? Do you think they care to know? Maybe there is one geek in the whole TSA, and he is not operating the machines anyway.

    The operator sees that the image is bad or incomplete. What do you think will happen? The operator WILL REPEAT THE SCAN - again and again and again, potentially burning raster tattoos into your skin with the X-ray beam. Only after several attempts he will give up. You will not be told what happened. You will be told to go to another machine or you will be molested by hand. You will not know what just occurred, and the TSA will get rid of you as fast as they can (or not, even if they themselves have no idea what they just did to you.) In any case, you will be getting radiation burns on your body within days, and good luck matching this to any specific machine in any specific airport. TSA will tell you that "safety of passengers is #1 concern of TSA and nothing like what happened to you could possibly happen to anyone, you included."