Please sign in to post.
Posted by
39 posts

Nice advancement, from a privacy perspective. However, I'm still not going to let them radiate me. I work in a hospital x ray department and know the precautions we take to avoid exposure to radiation. I think those who work these machines should be required to wear manometers to monitor their accumulated exposure.

Posted by
16168 posts

Sadly, it seems, at some airports, TSA doesn't care about the rules. A few fliers recently reported at O'hare that they had three choices: 1) Go through the nude-0-scope, 2) leave the airport, 3) have the police called over and they'd be arrested. And supposedly a supervisor backed this up.....until TSA is forced to follow their own rules, we'll have to live with what they insist if we want to fly. Especially since it's been proven that if you complain, all you get is a form letter telling you how they are protecting you from terrorists. It's only been through actual lawsuits that the TSA has made changes.

Posted by
39 posts

Nice advancement, from a privacy perspective. However, I'm still not going to let them radiate me. I work in a hospital x ray department and know the precautions we take to avoid exposure to radiation. I think those who work these machines should be required to wear manometers to monitor their accumulated exposure.

Posted by
39 posts

Nice advancement, from a privacy perspective. However, I'm still not going to let them radiate me. I work in a hospital x ray department and know the precautions we take to avoid exposure to radiation. I think those who work these machines should be required to wear manometers to monitor their accumulated exposure.

Posted by
4555 posts

Don't forget that the average hospital X-ray gives you a dose of radiation anywhere from about 30 to 700 ?Sv of radiation. The backscatter whole body scanners deliver an average of .15 ?Sv per shot, about 1/200th of the lowest dose you'd get from an X-ray machine.

Posted by
990 posts

True, the amount of radiation is not high. But the point is, when I get an Xray, it presumably has a health benefit, so that I can balance the risks and benefits in deciding whether to get this particular Xray. When I get scanned, I'm getting the risk of radiation exposure that I believe is of no benefit to me. Not to mention the incidental aggregated exposure of the workers near the machine...

Posted by
4555 posts

As you fly at 40,000 feet, you're also exposed to more radiation than you are if you keep your feet on the ground....but that doesn't stop us from flying....

Posted by
12313 posts

I think that was a good compromise to keep the security but respect all the understandable privacy concerns.

Posted by
417 posts

Thats a relief. Regarding this: Machines now at airports are monitored by a TSA employee in a separate room, to prevent passengers and security workers at the checkpoint from viewing the full-body image that sees through undergarments. Not true when I went through one in May. I got an eyeful of, well, me, right in the same area as all the other passengers!

Posted by
12313 posts

Yes, a relief. I guess now I can stop worrying about the pre-vacation diet and extra sit-ups. :)

Posted by
1170 posts

Dang! I was going to get a prosthetic extension and "shake it" like a Polaroid picture for show. Give them something to talk about...