I don't like 'em. It is basically what we've been joking about for years, become horribly real: the TSA has figured out a way to make all of us fly naked
( Read more... )
Have you seen the letter scientists from UC-San Francisco sent to the TSA back in April about this very question? It goes into detail about the radiation question, and concludes that the TSA's dosage measurements are misleading, because they average the dose over the entire body, whereas the actual machines in use focus it shallowly on the surface of the skin.
Their words: "... 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."
They make a persuasive case that this could be risky to certain populations: Aging people already at increased risk for skin cancer, women with certain genetic propensities toward breast cancer, HIV patients and other immunocompromised individuals, etc.
This tells me that the radiation risks are, in fact, worth being concerned about.
Mostly, though, they asked the TSA to allow its data on the backscatter scanners to be scrutinized by an independent science panel. I've seen no evidence that this has occurred.
For what it's worth, the TSA employees I've encountered couldn't be described as "goons." They are people doing what they have to in order to earn a living; from what I'm hearing, most of them are not real crazy about the new procedures, but they have no choice - they only barely have the legal ability to unionize, as of last year, and *no* collective bargaining rights. They're at the bottom of the DHS foodchain. I prefer to aim my criticism at the top.
Yup, I've seen that letter, which is why I said 'So I can't say "yes it's safe" or "no, it's harmful" because I don't know.'
The point I was making is that in the process of flying for 3 hours you get 100x as much of exactly the same kind of radiation, all over your skin, as you do when you go through the scanner. If you're worried about the latter, then you SHOULD be worried about the former, and THAT is derailing the otherwise incredibly valid and important argument of why these scanners are such an incredibly bad idea.
I don't like 'em because I feel it's a complete violation of my privacy. It's said when you fly you give up certain rights; currently I feel like a convicted criminal when I go to an airport. And I pay an average of $350 a trip for this experience.
With the hassle it is to fly, I might as well show up naked with ID, because that's what going to an airport feels like these days anyway.
With the hassle it is to fly, I might as well show up naked with ID, because that's what going to an airport feels like these days anyway.
Basically.
It's possible I may be entering a point in my career where I might have to start traveling a bit more. I will have to decide what I want to do about this, and I'm not liking my options.
Comments 14
Their words: "... 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."
They make a persuasive case that this could be risky to certain populations: Aging people already at increased risk for skin cancer, women with certain genetic propensities toward breast cancer, HIV patients and other immunocompromised individuals, etc.
This tells me that the radiation risks are, in fact, worth being concerned about.
Mostly, though, they asked the TSA to allow its data on the backscatter scanners to be scrutinized by an independent science panel. I've seen no evidence that this has occurred.
Reply
Reply
Reply
The point I was making is that in the process of flying for 3 hours you get 100x as much of exactly the same kind of radiation, all over your skin, as you do when you go through the scanner. If you're worried about the latter, then you SHOULD be worried about the former, and THAT is derailing the otherwise incredibly valid and important argument of why these scanners are such an incredibly bad idea.
Reply
With the hassle it is to fly, I might as well show up naked with ID, because that's what going to an airport feels like these days anyway.
Reply
Basically.
It's possible I may be entering a point in my career where I might have to start traveling a bit more. I will have to decide what I want to do about this, and I'm not liking my options.
Reply
Leave a comment