The Cheap Thrill-Airport Security Measures run Wild

[haha]

Quote:

Originally Posted by M Paquette Thank goodness I'm not the only person who can do the math on this.

Thanks, another excellent post!

Ha

[M Paquette]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelB M Paquette, thanks for another very useful post. A question: Is this the same type of risk as UV radiation from excess exposure to sunlight?

I'm not a cancer specialist, just an old phart with an ancient physics degree. I would say it is similar but not identical. The soft X-rays penetrate the skin much farther than UV radiation, so there is a greater exposure to the lower layers of the epidermis, dermis, and subcutaneous tissue. The topmost layer of skin, the stratum corneum (sp?) is dead tissue. As I recall a fair amount of UV stops there, whereas the soft X-rays deliver much of their dosage deeper, in the layers of living cells.

It definitely goes too deep for sunblock to be effective.

[MichaelB]

Quote:

Originally Posted by M Paquette I'm not a cancer specialist, just an old phart with an ancient physics degree. I would say it is similar but not identical. The soft X-rays penetrate the skin much farther than UV radiation, so there is a greater exposure to the lower layers of the epidermis, dermis, and subcutaneous tissue. The topmost layer of skin, the stratum corneum (sp?) is dead tissue. As I recall a fair amount of UV stops there, whereas the soft X-rays deliver much of their dosage deeper, in the layers of living cells. It definitely goes too deep for sunblock to be effective.

Thanks for the response. Understand you are not providing medical or security advice. Still, humor aside, this is the only serious discussion on this topic I have had the opportunity to read.

From the letter you referenced I would conclude that people already at risk of skin cancer should probably pay close attention to this debate and look for additional analysis and intelligent discussion. This would include fair skinned people living in the southern hemisphere or close to the equator.

[BigNick]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RonBoyd Where there is a market opportunity, someone will exploit it: Rocky Flats Gear protect your heath, privacy and dignity.

Interesting. It could just be a scam. On the other hand, if it works, it poses a problem for the TSA. Do the rules say that if the backscatter produces no result ("Sarge, this guy has no wiener"), you get the "enhanced patdown"? Will it become a Federal crime to wear X-ray resistant clothing when boarding an aircraft?

[ls99]

New use for lead from old batteries. Lead based skin cream. Kinda like the zinc based suntan lotions. Patent pending.

[Keim]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigNick Interesting. It could just be a scam. On the other hand, if it works, it poses a problem for the TSA. Do the rules say that if the backscatter produces no result ("Sarge, this guy has no wiener"), you get the "enhanced patdown"? Will it become a Federal crime to wear X-ray resistant clothing when boarding an aircraft?

You bet they do. Any anomalous results get you pulled over for a hand job, er, enhanced pat down.

[dex]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RustyShackleford 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.

Huh?

[BigNick]

Looks like the powers that be are starting to get calls from constituents who matter: BBC

[Keim]

Good. If you don't like what the TSA is doing let them know:
https://contact.tsa.dhs.gov/DynaForm.aspx?FormID=10

I did. Of course, now I'll probably be subject to the super duper enhanced pat-down.

[aaronc879]

Quote:

Originally Posted by clifp 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.

I saw on the news last night that they are going to be mass producing a shirt with the phrase " It's ok, you can touch my junk"

[Keim]

They need a new slogan: Reach out and touch someone.

[RonBoyd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keim Good. If you don't like what the TSA is doing let them know: https://contact.tsa.dhs.gov/DynaForm.aspx?FormID=10 I did. Of course, now I'll probably be subject to the super duper enhanced pat-down.

They also have a fairly decent Blog at The TSA Blog. There is a lot of Public input -- and some (most?) not so complimentary -- so their skin is not that thin.

[harley]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keim They need a new slogan: Reach out and touch someone.

Here are a bunch of new slogans (ripped off from Reason.com)

[DoingHomework]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EllisWyatt Can I file a sexually harrasment claim against a TSA employee if they touch me? Nah, didn't think so......

There are some lawyers on flyer talk forum that believe you can. A DA somewhere says he will file sexual battery charges against TSA officers if the local laws are violated. That includes unwanted touching outside clothes.

With videos of kids being stripped and search circulating I think the politicals winds are going to shift very fast.

[haha]

Transportation Security Administration Chief John Pistole Says No Body Cavity Searches

[clifp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by M Paquette 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:

I suspect the TSA is going to soon learn my internet 101 rule.
"The collective intelligent of the net on any subject exceeds any individual organization" Plus since this is TSA we are talking about and not say Google or Goldman Sachs this isn't even a close contest.

Here are some additional scary things the machines "deliver to the scalp 20 times the average dose that is typically quoted by TSA and throughout the industry.” The Congressman raising the alarm earlier in the year is no idiot with a PHd in Physics and the former assistant director of the Princeton Plasma physics lab. Evidently the initial biomedical panels recommendation was that TSA adjust the scanners so that the head and shoulder weren't part of the scanning. The TSA felt that adjusting the scanner to accommodate different heights would be too timing consuming so they aren't doing it.

So we combine the information Paquette posted and that was confirmed and amplified by UCSF letter and BTW one of the letter signers is a Nobel laureate that radiation doses are concentrated to the skin and the Comic ray comparison is a BS smokescreen.

Next we take the fact that TSA screens ~800 million people and the TSA agents are treating the scanner the same way they do the X-ray scanner for our handheld luggage. Namely that if they are unsure of the image they rescan. I think it is pretty clear to me the our government in the name of safety is subjecting us collectively to a 1+ billion dose of radiation which is absorb primarily by the skin around our brains.

When the controversy started, I thought this was just another example of classic expensive and stupid but ultimately benign government policies. I really had zero problems with walking through the scanners and was basically amused by the comedy. I realize that risk is still very low of cancer from being scanned but I now I genuinely concerned about the health aspects of additional 6-10 (average number of flights per year for me) doses of radiation the TSA subjecting me to.

Over the last 10 years 246 people were killed by terrorist acts (all on 9/11) on US commercial aircraft. Between the cockpit doors and the Flight 93 legacy I think the risk for airplanes being used as weapons is tiny.

I'll leave it to the nuclear engineers and doctors on the board who know way more than I do about this stuff to tell me what the health risks of 1 billion screenings are but I'd shocked if it wasn't more than 25 fatal cancers per year.

[BigNick]

Quote:

Originally Posted by haha Transportation Security Administration Chief John Pistole Says No Body Cavity Searches

Or to put it another way, TSA chief reveals to would-be terrorists just how far they have to go.

In other news, the USAF reveals exactly which missiles their latest fighter aircraft is vulnerable to, and the Secret Service announces that President Obama will be going for a walk with Michelle, with no bodyguards, on the White House lawn next Tuesday at 11am.

[ls99]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keim They need a new slogan: Reach out and touch someone.

I thought that was copyrighted by snipers.

[BigNick]

Quote:

Originally Posted by clifp I'll leave it to the nuclear engineers and doctors on the board who know way more than I do about this stuff to tell me what the health risks of 1 billion screenings are but I'd shocked if it wasn't more than 25 fatal cancers per year.

A propos of nothing, I read many years ago - in a book! - that the odds of dying for a 60-year-old man are about one in a million every 15 minutes (just by being alive, plus his share of driving cars, flying in planes, jogging, etc, all the risky stuff that 60-year-olds do).

As I said, that's a propos of nothing. I suspect that both sides of the backscatter argument can use that to their advantage. Have at it.

[RonBoyd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DoingHomework With videos of kids being stripped and search circulating

You do know that the father stripped the child (took his shirt off)... and in contradiction to the TSA don't you?