Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 11-21-2010, 09:20 AM   #121
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
ls99's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 4,792
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gumby View Post
I will note that a certain Austrian corporal did not do it all by himself.

I will also note that former camp guards are being prosecuted to this very day.

I can only hope that the appropriate people read history books.
The first line might be a little obscure for some. Hint: he had a funny moustache and liked to emulate the salute to Caesar.

Regarding history, yes more should read and understand.
__________________

__________________
There must be moderation in everything, including moderation.
ls99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 11-21-2010, 09:51 AM   #122
Administrator
W2R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 38,823
Quote:
Originally Posted by M Paquette View Post
Darn right! If a pilot gets on board with a pen knife, or nail clippers, or a pair of scissors, why, they might use that to take over the aircraft and force their way into... the... cockpit...

Never mind.
__________________

__________________
Already we are boldly launched upon the deep; but soon we shall be lost in its unshored, harbourless immensities.

- - H. Melville, 1851
W2R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2010, 05:13 PM   #123
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
clifp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,450
Quote:
Originally Posted by W2R View Post
The only upside of the TSA is it a gold mine of comedic material. If the government could sell TSA jokes and get royalty on TSA t-shirts and such we could probably get to a balanced budget in no time.
__________________
clifp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2010, 05:24 PM   #124
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
ls99's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 4,792
Quote:
Originally Posted by clifp View Post
The only upside of the TSA is it a gold mine of comedic material. If the government could sell TSA jokes and get royalty on TSA t-shirts and such we could probably get to a balanced budget in no time.
It is really funny for folks like me who never intend to fly commercial airlines ever. Not so good for those having to put up with the idiocy.
__________________
There must be moderation in everything, including moderation.
ls99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2010, 05:40 PM   #125
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
clifp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,450
Quote:
Originally Posted by ls99 View Post
It is really funny for folks like me who never intend to fly commercial airlines ever. Not so good for those having to put up with the idiocy.
Agreed. Unfortunately for Nords and I and the rest of the Hawaii ER contingent our travel choices are severely limited. Although I am hoping that I can convince him to borrow a fast attack sub for quick cruise to the mainland if the TSA stuff gets any worse.
__________________
clifp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2010, 05:44 PM   #126
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
harley's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Following the nice weather
Posts: 6,418
Quote:
Originally Posted by ls99 View Post
It is really funny for folks like me who never intend to fly commercial airlines ever. Not so good for those having to put up with the idiocy.
This made me think. I'm not planning to fly often, but when we go overseas there's not much of an option. But can we (US citizens) go into Canada and then fly overseas? I doubt I would do it since it's pretty far away, but if I lived on the northern border I'd give it serious consideration.
__________________
"Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement." - Will Rogers, or maybe Sam Clemens
DW and I - FIREd at 50 (7/06), living off assets
harley is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2010, 05:45 PM   #127
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
ls99's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 4,792
Cargo ship cruises to the rescue. Not glamorous but will get you there.
__________________
There must be moderation in everything, including moderation.
ls99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2010, 06:02 PM   #128
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
clifp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,450
With perfect comedic timing Saturday Night Live delivers this fabulous commercial

__________________
clifp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2010, 06:31 PM   #129
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Nodak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Cavalier
Posts: 2,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by harley View Post
This made me think. I'm not planning to fly often, but when we go overseas there's not much of an option. But can we (US citizens) go into Canada and then fly overseas? I doubt I would do it since it's pretty far away, but if I lived on the northern border I'd give it serious consideration.
I live 15 miles from the Canadian border and 90 miles from Winnipeg Manitoba. I know people that have done that, although not in the last 5 years so don't know if anything has changed. It shouldn't be a problem though as you need a passport to get into Canada now.
__________________
"Don't take life so serious, son. It ain't nohow permanent." Pogo Possum (Walt Kelly)
Nodak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2010, 06:52 PM   #130
Moderator Emeritus
Nords's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Oahu
Posts: 26,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by clifp View Post
Agreed. Unfortunately for Nords and I and the rest of the Hawaii ER contingent our travel choices are severely limited. Although I am hoping that I can convince him to borrow a fast attack sub for quick cruise to the mainland if the TSA stuff gets any worse.
We'll have the midwatch, and we'll have to be drill monitors for the morning set...
__________________
*
*

The book written on E-R.org, "The Military Guide to Financial Independence and Retirement", on sale now! For more info see "About Me" in my profile.
I don't spend much time here anymore, so please send me a PM. Thanks.
Nords is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2010, 07:32 PM   #131
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by ls99 View Post
It is really funny for folks like me who never intend to fly commercial airlines ever. Not so good for those having to put up with the idiocy.
Citizen! Operating a vehicle is a privilege! Bu operating a vehicle you hereby consent to inspections as deemed necessary for the safety and security of our interstate highway system. Welcome to the Interstate 80 Transportation Safety Administration checkpoint. Please step out of your vehicle, place your hands on the hood, and wait for our inspection team.

Do Not Be Alarmed, Citizen. The Computer Is Your Friend!
__________________
M Paquette is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2010, 07:39 PM   #132
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
calmloki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Independence
Posts: 5,459
Papers! Ve need your papers!
__________________
calmloki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2010, 10:53 PM   #133
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 401
Quote:
Originally Posted by FD View Post
Will this have a "happy ending" officer?
After a TSA pat-down recently, my friend looked at the agent and said "you
spend all that time playing with my balls and I don't even get a happy ending ?"
__________________
RustyShackleford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2010, 10:55 PM   #134
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 401
Quote:
Originally Posted by dex View Post
I think Osama and the boys are in their caves laughing and saying - look we made them sexually abuse their men, women and children in public.
Damn Dex, I'm surprised you aren't saying they should have
taken the "don't touch my junk" guy into the back room
and wrapped his head in a towel and then beaten him
with a phone book.
__________________
RustyShackleford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2010, 02:47 AM   #135
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
obgyn65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: midwestern city
Posts: 4,061
We know this type of attack is going to happen sooner or later, don't we ? I am not sure how the general public will react to random cavity searches - people will choose not to fly instead.

Quote:
Originally Posted by M Paquette View Post
Hoo boy. I can't wait to see what the TSA rolls out to cover this one.

Al-Qaeda
__________________
Very conservative with investments. Not ER'd yet, 48 years old. Please do not take anything I write or imply as legal, financial or medical advice directed to you. Contact your own financial advisor, healthcare provider, or attorney for financial, medical and legal advice.
obgyn65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2010, 05:50 AM   #136
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
RonBoyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Denver, Colorado
Posts: 5,280
Where there is a market opportunity, someone will exploit it:

Rocky Flats Gear protect your heath, privacy and dignity.

Quote:
Rocky Flats Gear is the US manufacture of a revolutionary flexible, attractive, lightweight, Lead (Pb) free, radiation shielding garments for individuals. Our emphasis is on protecting the traveling public, airline, medical, and security professionals from radiation generated by security and medical imaging equipment. Our novel products can protect tissues from a broadband of ionizing and non-ionizing radiation generated by imaging equipment and natural sources. For the first time, radiological shields are attractive, durable, affordable, fun, and comfortable to wear.

Quote:


Comfortable radiation blocking brief with radiation shield
  • Wear every day to block natural and man-made radiation.
  • Use for extended air travel to protect from whole body scanners.
  • Protect from increased radiation while flying or living at high altitudes.
  • Blocks/diminish Alpha and Beta radiation.
  • Blocks/diminish T-Wave/Tera hertz radiation from remote strip cameras.
  • Blocks/diminish X-ray/gamma radiation from back scatter x-ray machines.
  • Insures privacy of medical and body scanner images



__________________
"It's tough to make predictions, especially when it involves the future." ~Attributed to many
"In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. But, in practice, there is." ~(perhaps by) Yogi Berra
"Those who have knowledge, don't predict. Those who predict, don't have knowledge."~ Lau tzu
RonBoyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2010, 09:38 AM   #137
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
ls99's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 4,792
Quote:
Originally Posted by M Paquette View Post
Citizen! Operating a vehicle is a privilege! Bu operating a vehicle you hereby consent to inspections as deemed necessary for the safety and security of our interstate highway system. Welcome to the Interstate 80 Transportation Safety Administration checkpoint. Please step out of your vehicle, place your hands on the hood, and wait for our inspection team.

Do Not Be Alarmed, Citizen. The Computer Is Your Friend!
But it is for your own safety you know. And you must provide your own KY jelly.
__________________
There must be moderation in everything, including moderation.
ls99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2010, 11:14 AM   #138
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by obgyn65 View Post
We know this type of attack is going to happen sooner or later, don't we ? I am not sure how the general public will react to random cavity searches - people will choose not to fly instead.
Think of it as a guaranteed part time job available for you in retirement, should you be bored.
__________________
M Paquette is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2010, 11:23 AM   #139
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,929
Thank goodness I'm not the only person who can do the math on this.

Here's a letter sent by members of the faculty of UCSF, a leading cancer research and treatment center:

Quote:
LETTER OF CONCERN
We are writing to call your attention to serious concerns about the potential health risks of the recently adopted whole body backscatter X-ray airport security scanners. This is an urgent situation as these X-ray scanners are rapidly being implemented as a primary screening step for all air travel passengers.

Our overriding concern is the extent to which the safety of this scanning device has been adequately demonstrated. This can only be determined by a meeting of an impartial panel of experts that would include medical physicists and radiation biologists at which all of the available relevant data is reviewed.

An important consideration is that a large fraction of the population will be subject to the new X-ray scanners and be at potential risk, as discussed below. This raises a number of ‘red flags’. Can we have an urgent second independent evaluation?

The Red Flags

The physics of these X-rays is very telling: the X-rays are Compton-Scattering off outer molecule bonding electrons and thus inelastic (likely breaking bonds).

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.

The X-ray dose from these devices has often been compared in the media to the cosmic ray exposure inherent to airplane travel or that of a chest X-ray. However, this comparison is very misleading: both the air travel cosmic ray exposure and chest X- rays have much higher X-ray energies and the health consequences are appropriately understood in terms of the whole body volume dose. In contrast, these new airport scanners are largely depositing their energy into the skin and immediately adjacent tissue, and since this is such a small fraction of body weight/vol, possibly by one to two orders of magnitude, the real dose to the skin is now high.

In addition, it appears that real independent safety data do not exist. A search, ultimately finding top FDA radiation physics staff, suggests that the relevant radiation quantity, the Flux [photons per unit area and time (because this is a scanning device)] has not been characterized. Instead an indirect test (Air Kerma) was made that emphasized the whole body exposure value, and thus it appears that the danger is low when compared to cosmic rays during airplane travel and a chest X-ray dose.

In summary, if the key data (flux-integrated photons per unit values) were available, it would be straightforward to accurately model the dose being deposited in the skin and adjacent tissues using available computer codes, which would resolve the potential concerns over radiation damage.

Our colleagues at UCSF, dermatologists and cancer experts, raise specific important concerns:

• A) The large population of older travelers, >65 years of age, is particularly at risk from the mutagenic effects of the X-rays based on the known biology of melanocyte aging.

• B) A fraction of the female population is especially sensitive to mutagenesis- provoking radiation leading to breast cancer. Notably, because these women, who have defects in DNA repair mechanisms, are particularly prone to cancer, X-ray mammograms are not performed on them. The dose to breast tissue beneath the skin represents a similar risk.

• C) Blood (white blood cells) perfusing the skin is also at risk.

• D) The population of immunocompromised individuals--HIV and cancer patients (see above) is likely to be at risk for cancer induction by the high skin dose.

• E) The risk of radiation emission to children and adolescents does not appear to have been fully evaluated.

• F) The policy towards pregnant women needs to be defined once the theoretical risks to the fetus are determined.

• G) Because of the proximity of the testicles to skin, this tissue is at risk for sperm mutagenesis.

• H) Have the effects of the radiation on the cornea and thymus been determined?

Moreover, there are a number of ‘red flags’ related to the hardware itself. Because this device can scan a human in a few seconds, the X-ray beam is very intense. Any glitch in power at any point in the hardware (or more importantly in software) that stops the device could cause an intense radiation dose to a single spot on the skin. Who will oversee problems with overall dose after repair or software problems? The TSA is already complaining about resolution limitations; who will keep the manufacturers and/or TSA from just raising the dose, an easy way to improve signal-to-noise and get higher resolution? Lastly, given the recent incident (on December 25th), how do we know whether the manufacturer or TSA, seeking higher resolution, will scan the groin area more slowly leading to a much higher total dose?

After review of the available data we have already obtained, we suggest that additional critical information be obtained, with the goal to minimize the potential health risks of total body scanning. One can study the relevant X-ray dose effects with modern molecular tools. Once a small team of appropriate experts is assembled, an experimental plan can be designed and implemented with the objective of obtaining information relevant to our concerns expressed above, with attention paid to completing the information gathering and formulating recommendations in a timely fashion.

We would like to put our current concerns into perspective. As longstanding UCSF scientists and physicians, we have witnessed critical errors in decisions that have seriously affected the health of thousands of people in the United States. These unfortunate errors were made because of the failure to recognize potential adverse outcomes of decisions made at the federal level. Crises create a sense of urgency that frequently leads to hasty decisions where unintended consequences are not recognized. Examples include the failure of the CDC to recognize the risk of blood transfusions in the early stages of the AIDS epidemic, approval of drugs and devices by the FDA without sufficient review, and improper standards set by the EPA, to name a few. Similarly, there has not been sufficient review of the intermediate and long-term effects of radiation exposure associated with airport scanners. There is good reason to believe that these scanners will increase the risk of cancer to children and other vulnerable populations. We are unanimous in believing that the potential health consequences need to be rigorously studied before these scanners are adopted. Modifications that reduce radiation exposure need to be explored as soon as possible.

In summary we urge you to empower an impartial panel of experts to reevaluate the potential health issues we have raised before there are irrevocable long-term consequences to the health of our country. These negative effects may on balance far outweigh the potential benefit of increased detection of terrorists.
__________________
M Paquette is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2010, 11:39 AM   #140
Moderator
MichaelB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Rocky Inlets
Posts: 24,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by M Paquette View Post
Thank goodness I'm not the only person who can do the math on this.

Here's a letter sent by members of the faculty of UCSF, a leading cancer research and treatment center:
M Paquette, thanks for another very useful post. A question:

Quote:
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.
Is this the same type of risk as UV radiation from excess exposure to sunlight?
__________________

__________________
MichaelB is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:20 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.