Comments on: TSA workers being fried by radiation

By: TSA under fire over whole-body scanners — radiation concerns and effectiveness

TSA under fire over whole-body scanners — radiation concerns and effectiveness — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 14:31:31 +0000

[...] pregnant women and children, streaming through these ill-conceived machines at risk, TSA workers are facing even more danger. I predict that a major class action suit by TSA workers against the government for radiation [...]

By: zone

zone — Wed, 17 Nov 2010 23:50:03 +0000

Would want to know who is calibrating these scanners, how often they
are tested, and how knowledgeable those operating them are.
A trained group of CT technologist’s in CA unwitting exposed many patients
to high levels of radiation simply because of operator error.
This error was only uncovered after patients exposed later were reporting
ill effects such as hair loss.
Just because a device is designed to be safe does not mean it is if
misused or improperly calibrated.

By: JonJon

JonJon — Tue, 16 Nov 2010 15:20:36 +0000

Opt out then

http://www.amtrak.com

http://www.takeyourfreakingcarinstead.com

By: Top 13 reasons I love whole-body scanners

Top 13 reasons I love whole-body scanners — Fri, 08 Oct 2010 11:47:18 +0000

[...] We’ll slowly kill all the TSA officers. Think of the poor TSA employees forced to work with these giant machines (not to mention the luggage x-ray machines). When a [...]

By: Keith

Keith — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 01:24:51 +0000

@Hapgood

Don’t worry. When people start growing a third eye or second head, they’ll check the calibration on the machines.

By: Hapgood

Hapgood — Mon, 22 Mar 2010 15:14:03 +0000

The scanners probably are safe for the public and the screeners– assuming they’re properly maintained, calibrated, and operated. And there’s the big problem. There have been news stories about hospitals failing to calibrate and operate (and perhaps maintain) radiation machines, resulting in overdoses to patients. And this is in hospitals, which presumably have procedures and properly-trained technicians, along with oversight and independent audits.

Compare that with the TSA. The training of TSA personnel varies wildly between airports; they can’t even implement supposedly-simple rules about liquids and shoes with anything resembling consistency. They have no oversight or accountability at all, because that would be inconsistent with their “security” mission. And whenever they’ve had independent audits, the results have consistently shown ineptitude and ineffectiveness.

So even if the scanners are safe when they come off the manufacturer’s assembly line, how can we have any confidence at all that they will be properly maintained, calibrated, and operated at TSA checkpoints?

The TSA probably will do everything they can to evade that question, which is their strategy for dismissing any concerns about their competence or effectiveness. But if they do respond, the answer surely will be that “There’s no question that they’re safe.” And as patriotic citizens, we presumably have a duty to accept their assurances with unquestioning faith, just as we accept their assurances that the scanners provide effective protection and that they protect our privacy.

By: B.J.

B.J. — Mon, 22 Mar 2010 01:19:19 +0000

You want the public to believe SCANNERS are safe all that is needed

is a sign stating that the Whole Body Scanner is deemed safe for

PREGNANT WOMEN and the manufacturer assures fliers of their

safety! My bet is that they will NEVER assume liability so why me??

By: Scott

Scott — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 22:20:31 +0000

So Charlie, you write from a perspective of protecting the public interest and you express yourself as clearly anti-Union? The whole point of Unions is protecting the rights of workers against whoever (employers, governments, etc.) might be attempt to infringe on those rights. Unions also work to raise the standard of living for both Union and non-Union workers alike. The major opponent of Union rights are Big Business, which are the people usually trying to oppress workers and take their rights away. Considering from your columns that you do not seem like a supporter of Big Business, you really seem to have bought into their anti-Union propaganda. That’s sad.

By: SirWired

SirWired — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 13:02:35 +0000

Modern digital cell phones have a transmit power far smaller than the analog phones of yore. That’s why your battery on your tiny phone lasts a week or two instead of the two days for the small brick like it used to. They never found any conclusive health effects from the old phones; the likelihood of effects showing up with new digital models is far less. If the millimeter-wave machines are 1/10,000th of a cell phone call, even a theoretical danger is not present.

The cell phone debate isn’t “settled” because there are a lot of credulous folk out there willing to listen to ambulance-chasing class-action attorneys instead of reasoned research.

As far as the radiation from the backscatter machines goes… if we can’t even detect the stuff a half-foot away from the machine, the exposure by security staff is going to be beyond minimal. They’ll probably get about as much radiation from the sun coming in through the windows.

By: Keith

Keith — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 06:39:12 +0000

Sure, you can calculate the dose of radiation.

That said, cell phones are STILL getting conflicting reports of safety. And any researcher can easily buy a few cell phones and test them. What’s to be said for these machines? A trivial calculation? If that was true, the cell phone debate would have been settled years ago.

In general, tho, power is given, not taken. The problem is, there’s enough sheeple willing to give power to machines like these that those of us that find them undignifying are going to be shortly faced with the reality of not flying anymore.