Posted on 11/17/2010 1:24:16 PM PST by FS11
Yesterday, two airline pilots filed a federal suit alleging that airport scanners and aggressive pat-down procedures constitute unreasonable searches in violation of the Fourth Amendment.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.wsj.com ...
You get more ionizing radiation from sitting in the lane at 30,000 feet than you get from the xray scanners.
The scanners are limited by law to less than 25 micro-REMS, and you get at least 200 micro-REMS per hour from cosmic rays hitting the plane at over 20,000 feet. Depending on the flight, it can be as high as 600 micro-REMS per hour, so the scanners can dose you with as much radiation as you’d get in maybe 20 minutes of flight.
I hate the scanners too, but radiation dose is not going to work to get them shut down.
Better to find the links fom Chertoff to the money to the scanner contractors.
I was done with Hannity years ago. Not for any particular reason except he never rises above the intellect of a cheerleader.
I don’t find him particularly informative.
I’d catch a glimpse of him here and there but anymore, especially having Karl “The Buffet” on his show, I just skip him altogether.
Now I recall why, He loves Bohemian Grove.
So it is true. They actually do meet up to decide our fates.
"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."
http://www.zdnet.com.au/body-scanners-have-mutagenic-effects-339307191.htm?omnRef=NULL
Frankly I believe anything that a guy like Michael Chertoff profits from after he leaves government is something that I will try very hard to stay away from. Today the local radio station was buzzing with rumors about profiteers.
I'm also very cautious about other X-ray devices no matter what the technicians say. I have a friend who works for a hospital and he is cautious too.
It's worse than you can imagine . . . 'Nuff said on FR
Very disturbing.
Because the TSA requires “same sex” groping, I am sure the TSA is attracting more homosexuals an lesbians than other agencies. Think about it, homosexuals and lesbians can get their sexual kicks while being paid for it. Government law states they can't be refused a job because of their sexual orientation.
It must be a dream job for those who define themselves by their sexual activities.
TSA: “You don't get on until we get off”.
In San Francisco and Palm Sproings they're already marketing t-shirts that read "Touch my Junk - Please!"
THX THX
From a post of mine on another thread:
..................................
You can get as much as 660 micro-REMS per hour in flight, with 250 micro REMS per hour being a low average. That’s at least ten times ground level background.
If the xray scanners are harmful with their less-than-a-second less than 25 microrem scan, airline flight is many many times more dangerous.
http://www.hps.org/publicinformation/ate/faqs/commercialflights.html
Plus, lots of airline radiation is heavy particles and neutrons, not just low energy x-rays.
...........................................
So air flight gives you at least 200 uREM/hour. This memo:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/fda-backscatter-response.pdf
says that the scanners are limited by law to 25 uREM per scan, and you’ll find actual measurements in the 5 uREM to 9 uREM from AS&E.
So you get more dose in flight. Plus, the in-flight dose is made up of higher energy photons mixed with particles from cosmic rays, and a bunch of really hot neutrons. Looking at the numbers, you can get more dose in an hour on a plane than you get from a scanner.
.......................
The BIER report of radiation risks:
http://www.dep.state.pa.us/brp/radon_division/BEIR VII Preliminary Report.pdf
And, of course, you actually believe the reports issued by companies that have cleared these machines so the profiteers can make mega bucks ________ ?
Did you check all the reports on my links _______ ? I know the answer to that question. Do not bother to reply.
I will just keep taking the train. In about two years the scanner companies will be buried in litigation over harmful effects from scanners. BIG SIS will be run out of DC on a rail and the profiteers may be locked behind bars.
My point was, you get more radiation from flying than from the machines. I provided references.
Do you have a reference that shows that the scanners give you more radiation than the 200 microR per hour minimum from flight?
Do you have a reference showing how much radiation the scanners put out?
I think if you cut n paste the whole line, you can see the BIER VII report. I can’t get that link to post properly.
Yes, take the train. At ground level background radiation is around 20 microREM, depending of course on just where you are, the altitude and ground composition being the most important factors. You’ll get less radiation at ground level.
Do not bother to answer. I know you did not read it. I will believe the pilots -- over a testing company that makes money passing machines off on the public.
I would not trust BIG SIS with an electric train. Why should I volunteer to have my body scanned ___ ?
“Did you check all the reports on my links _______ ?”
From your links:
Nov 15, 2010 ... The short answer is that the radiation risk from the TSA scanners is minimal for a member of the general flying public. ...
There are quite a few links to look at from your Google search, and oddly they are the same ones I got when I did the same search! lol
My point was, you get more radiation from flying than from the scanners.
This one:
“A traveler would require more than 1,000 such scans in a year to reach the effective dose equal to one chest X-ray, according to the American College of Radiology.
“But other medical experts point out that the elderly, pregnant women, children and others might be more susceptible to radiation than the average person,” Poole said. “And flight crews and airport workers who have to pass through the scanners every day would receive far more radiation than most passengers.”
That’s one of the reasons the Allied Pilots Association, which represents 11,000 American Airlines pilots, wants its members to opt out of the full-body scan and request another type of screening.”
Or was it another one?
The article oddly does not address in-flight dose. My point was that you get more dose in flight than from the scanners.
Great topic for the OFST!!
“I would not trust BIG SIS with an electric train. “
LOL yup me too, even if she had adult supervision!
Here is an interesting tool that pilots use to determine in-flight radiation dose:
http://jag.cami.jccbi.gov/cariprofile.asp
One Sievert= 100,000,000 microREM or 100,000 millirem
I think the mass opt out might happen on Thanksgiving week. Only takes a few and the line goes out to the parking lot.
I appreciate your info on the scanner radiation, as many of us laymen do not understand the differences in radiation sources, and wavelenghts, etc. Can you disclose your area of expertise/ professional background at all?
Regards
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.