What Do You Guys Think of Airport X-Rays?
First off, thanks so much for the birthday wishes! As I’ve said in the past, I generally quite like getting older and that’s largely thanks to natural beauty which has, among other things, helped me be more accepting of my maturing self.
Yesterday, on the big day (thanks mum!), I flew to San Francisco for work and some play, something I now do every two weeks or so. I usually enjoy these quick trips, and I’m particularly fond of the fancy SF Terminal 2 I land at where there’s both a great wine bar, restaurants, and a market where you can get kale chips and the best cappuccinos (LAX take note). Not to mention that visiting a different city is always a great way to hit the reset button, make you appreciate your home, your husband, your town, and all that other good stuff.
Now onto the problem: LAX and SFO use those X-ray scanner things, and while I know they’re said to be safe, the bi-monthly exposure has me a little concerned. Forgive me if I don’t always trust what we’re told by the authorities, but the whole chemicals-in-cosmetics thing has turned me into something of a skeptic. I can’t help but wonder: Is this regulation radiation exposure, even if “mild,” maybe doing damage?
A new government report assures that you’d have to pass through the scanner about 12 times a day to reach annual radiation limits. But some light googling leads to plenty of skepticism too, like in this piece on NPR. This quote from David Agard, a biochemist and biophysicist at the University of California, reads like a now-familiar script:
“Many people will approach this as, ‘Oh, it must be safe, the government has thought about this and I’ll just submit to it. But there really is no threshold of low dose being OK. Any dose of X-rays produces some potential risk.”
Then there’s the whole hey-you-can-see-everyone’s-junk thing that raises all kinds of privacy questions, and the fact that their effectiveness has come into question too. And our friends in Europe have banned them—remember, they’ve also banned over a thousand ingredients in cosmetics, while we’ve banned nine. Now, I realize that I’m a little late to this debate, and a coworker of mine had to tell me that I can request the pat-down instead. Done. That’s going to be my move. Why chance it, right? How about you? Does your city use the scan, and if so, do you submit?
I’m a NYCer and I can’t recall which airport it was (I’ve recently flown out of all three: LGA, JFK and EWK) but I’ve definitely met monsieur scanner, and not only does it totally creep me out that whoever is watching the screen can see my bits and pieces, but I’ve also got a wonky thyroid and exposing it to any random blasts of radiation freaks me out in a serious way. I’ve only been through the machines 2 or 3 times thus far, and all the while I was legs spread and hands up (that sound pretty gnarly!) I was debating asking for a pat down instead. I think I’ll opt for the pat down the next time the scanner and I come face to face.
http://iloveublank.blogspot.com/
It so happens that although I fly quite a bit, it’s either internationally or, if domestically, it’s usually to Miami from New York via Ft. Lauderdale, so I never get to come across these blasted things. That said, from the moment the rollout began, I knew that I would opt out every single time. And it’s not even necessarily about the radiation exposure (although that is certainly part of it). I just have a huge issue with the whole notion of it – the privacy violation, the Big Brother State, etc, etc – and have no interest in submitting myself to the indignity. I happened to have experienced the full pat-down while living in Eastern Europe where advance scanning technology was not available and it’s really not that invasive. I mean, yes, a lady will touch her hand on your crotch, but it’s really not that bad. It’s certainly better than some juvenile morons giggling over your naked pictures (this has happened!) while you get exposed to unnecessary radiation!
We don’t use them here (Yukon, CA) but I’m REALLY anxious whenever I travel now. It upset my stomach the second-to-last trip I took (traveling through a different airport) because I didn’t know if I would have to opt for a pat-down (ya, ’cause THAT’s any more ideal!) and if I might encounter resistance to my opt-”out.” I wasn’t even considering the health aspect, just my privacy/bubble.
I’m TERRIFIED for the people close to me who don’t have an issue going through them. Same as cosmetics – why is any level of radiation, not already occurring naturally, acceptable? Have they been studying the long-term (20+ years) effects of these scanners? No. Then how can they say the levels are acceptable?!?! I believe we will find out that they’re not.
I’m am TERRIFIED of the day when these body scanners have replaced the metal detectors entirely, and that means I’ll have to opt for a pat-down every time I travel. Further to that, I’m unsure how I’m going to travel with my kids because I will not allow them through the scanner and obviously I’m not letting a stranger touch them all over! Then there’s the proposed scanner-vans….but I haven’t heard about that in Canada yet.
That chart is off because Seattle and Burbank also have the scanners–I went through them both. Blah.
I have to get semi-annual scans (mammogram and cat scans), and I was really concerned about my exposure from them (is checking for cancer going to give me cancer??)- and a few of my doctors told me that I would be exposed to a lot more radiation going through airport scanners. There has got to be another way to do these things. I know some doctors use thermography, so I wonder if that could be used in airports as well, if not something similar.
Timely post!I will be travelling back to Germany in April.I live in Texas and our airport uses them too. I have not given much thought about the rays, but when I first saw one of these things I was thinking more about privacy questions. What in the world??!!That really seems too revealing in my opinion. Interesting article about this issue:
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-18563_162-563797.html
But since I travel with my 2 little girls I never have to go in one of these things since they don’t put children in there and I usually end up carrying my daughters through the metal detector only.
I’m in Oakland (across the bay from SF) and I haven’t flown since the scanner things came out, and I don’t plan to if I can possibly avoid it. I’ve got problems with this from the political issues to health concerns. I don’t particularly want a pat down either, and have heard unpleasant things about that experience – like being treated obnoxiously for making that choice and taking an excessively long time to get through the process. I wouldn’t want my son subjected to either the scan or the pat down. So I’m hoping to not have to travel soon and I’m waiting for high speed rail!
Okay, so the very first thing in all of this that freaked me out, when they started using these scanners, was the privacy issue. I HATE the idea that, even for a matter of minutes, there is a naked picture of me somewhere being viewed by some random stranger, we have NO control over the process of ensuring destruction of these images and hey, even with everyone being honest and decent mistakes can happen. (I don’t consider myself a prude but in this day and age even trustworthy people turn out to be not-so-trustworthy – I don’t do Paris Hilton-style home movies and I am selective of who gets to see me in all my unclothed glory, I definitely don’t want these private-public images to exist.) My sister (very rightly) pointed out that, as kids, we were repeatedly instructed to not allow anyone to ever do anything to or with our bodies that ever made us feel uncomfortable and this lesson was hammered into me so deeply that I am still, at 39, feeling very strongly that I have the right to dictate who sees what, when and where.
Then, speaking to friend who had more scientific concerns I learned that airport and flight staff are recommended to go through the pat down process instead of the scanners, the reasoning being that while “they” say the scanners are safe, the more you go through them, the more you are exposing yourself to any known or potential danger.
Bottom line: I go through the pat down process and plan to continue. I’m not saying that is is enjoyable in any way but I feel a million times more comfortable with this choice. I was originally worried that I would be seen as difficult or argumentative with airport security staff (who we most definitely do NOT want to piss off as the consequences can be quite dire in this heightened age of security and who, let’s face it, can sometimes power trip a little) but I fly fairly frequently and have had no issues whatsoever.
I think they’re useless…not just because I disagree with the disintegration of personal privacy that this machine so flagrantly exposes, but also because they simply don’t work!
Have you seen this? A man sews a pocket on the side of shirt and drops in a metal object to prove it. http://tsaoutofourpants.wordpress.com/2012/03/06/1b-of-nude-body-scanners-made-worthless-by-blog-how-anyone-can-get-anything-past-the-tsas-nude-body-scanners/
I NEVER go through the scanner. I request a pat down (you will get the same sex person, unless you request otherwise). I have never had an issue.
I had my first pat down a few weeks ago when I accidentally hand-signaled towards the ‘opt-out’ line when a security guard looked my way. (I had been left barefoot by the no-shoe rule, and was desperately hoping to be able to put my ballet flats back on ASAP).
Once I got to the special line, I heard the airport security people mumbling and groaning about ‘opt-outs’, sighing in what sounded like some very annoyed voices, when I recalled a story that I heard from an aunt about having been pulled into a private, scary-looking room and getting a pat-down by one of those security bullies, being touched in places they didn’t want to be touched – I instantly remembered why I had always chosen to just take my chances with radiation poisoning, and wondered if I had made a big mistake!!
Anyway, when it came my turn, I had a nice lady who took me about 5 feet to the left, in plain view of all the other travelers, touched the outside of my clothing, around my bra (no T or A touching of any kind) and that was it!!
Never will I go through one of those machines again! Why take the risk when I can make friends with a nice security lady instead? And hey, since they’ve got to hire someone to pat down all the ladies, I’m probably helping to create a job at the same time….BOUYAH!
You also get radiation from the flying in an aluminum thing closer to the cosmos …
http://www.epa.gov/radtown/cosmic.html
So opting for pat-down would reduce total amt of radiation for the day of travel. Which just seems sort of common-sense. Then again, I’ve still been too chicken to opt-out.
@CCNY Thanks for the breakdown! I definitely hate being the annoying person but screw it…
Yeah, now that I think about it, can’t believe I opted for the x-ray / poison / cancer line just to be cool!
I think the chart on NPR is more provocative than the rest of the piece. I read something similar on another site many months ago, but can’t find the link so I offer up this one instead: http://news.discovery.com/human/travel-body-scanners-radiation.html
I get the privacy issue, but once I realized how much more radiation I was exposed to through the simple act of flying, I stopped worrying about the radiation from the scanner. What’s .02 compared to the 20 microsieverts from a transcontinental flight, or the 3000 in the “yearly exposure” category. While I admit eliminating it where you can is certainly an option, I don’t think the radiation risk from body scanners merits the alarm.
Of course, this is based on the evidence provided in these (and other) articles. I’m not a scientist, and would be willing to reconsider my stance in light of additional evidence. The entire thing DID make me reconsider how often I fly–I was taking lengthy flights every 6 weeks for a year or more, and still fly every 2-3 months. It wasn’t until this research about body scanners came out that I even considered the amount of radiation I was exposed to via flying.
I recently flew roundtrip, Sacramento,CA – Portland Oregon. In Sacramento, I reluctantly went through the full body scanner. It gave me the creeps on multiple levels. My body is very sensitive to energy and I knew it was not good for me. So upon my return, I told the agent in Portland I didn’t want to go through their scanner. He clearly acted annoyed and said it was safe and it is a brand new machine that does not use radiation and I could read all about it on a poster. But if I insisted on a pat down I could have it. He then walked away. I found a female agent nearby who said she would do it. I chose to be patted down in full sight (private room is possible) and she told me in advance exactly where and how (w/front or back of her hand) she would touch me; she was respectful. Though it is a vulnerable position to be in as a passenger and I did get stares from a number of employees, I felt good about following my insticts. It was worth the risk of using the machine and will continue to be my choice when flying in the future.
I always seem to get selected for this! I’ve probably been through it ten times. I never thought about the radiation exposure, but I have thyroid issues in my family and I am not taking chances in the future! I can’t believe I didn’t think about radiation before. Thanks for this post!
I’m not too concerned about it. I read an article that talked about how yes, you’re exposed to radiation but the amount you’re going to encounter being on an airplane is waaaay more than what’s coming from the x-ray. I’d never thought about that before.
Since I found out that I carry the BRCA 2 gene mutation (SIGNIFICANTLY increases my risks of getting breast cancer and ovarian cancer), avoiding exposure to radiation is very important to me. I just flew from Dallas Lovefield last week where they use the x-ray scanners and I opted out. The pat-down was not bad at all!! The female TSA worker was very professional, took me to an area in view of other people but with my back to them so I didn’t have to see them staring. She explained to me exactly what she was going to do and where she was going to touch me and with what part of her hand. It was fast and painless and I did not feel violated one bit. I FELT EMPOWERED!! I chose to avoid exposing myself to more radiation, as flying in the plane gives me more radiation than I would like to have. Just make sure that you arrive at the airport with plenty of time so that if you want to opt out you won’t miss your flight!!
For those of you who are scared- don’t be!! Honestly, it was incredibly mechanical and fast. Feel free to opt-out if that’s what you choose!
I think it is an unecessary invasion of privacy and a health risk. Long term effects on passengers and employees have not been determined. I don’t believe this I about protecting us from terrorism. Any terrorist will find away around this type of scan, easy peasy. Thie scanner is a waste of money.
What about the radiation exposure to frequent fliers? Have anybody given a thought about the risk frequent flier may have. I think it is high time to give a serious thought by authorities.
I absolutely refuse to use them and there’s usually a couple other people waiting for a pat down as well….I’m all for keeping things safe but there is no %^&*( way I’m going to expose my body to more toxic crap if I don’t need to.
I live in NYC but am from Raleigh (home of RDU, with the creepy scanners), and my partner is from Michigan (hi, DTW), and I am happy to say that I’ve never been through one. I’ve had to say, “Umm, can I go through the other one?” and then wait for a lady TSA agent to come pat me down. It’s not all bad–I get to chat with Mme. TSA agent about what a pain in the ass the whole thing is, and then I get to feel like I’m so cool for having denied the creep-o-matic scanner.
Bottom line? I think those things suck, and I hate seeing folks go through them all level-headed like it’s no big thing.
P.S.: my CAPTCHA is “testport These” and I feel like that’s somehow apropos.
I recently went to a bunch of different airports not on that chart that all had the scanners, but now I see that chart above is from 2009. I think most airports have them now.
I travel several times each month. I ALWAYS opt out.
My reasoning:
- banned in 27 European countries
- there is no third party that demonstrates the scanners as safe
- the only party that tests the machines is the TSA itself
(that’s like the cosmetic companies saying chemical soup cosmetics are safe)
- experts in that type of equipment say it will be leaking radiation (especially sad to see pregnant TSA employees)
- it doesn’t feel like it’s for safety, just feels dehumanizing–opting out just feels better
- somebody is making a lot of money on this deal–they want to sell at least 1000 more over the next few years
- no common sense–pregnant women and elderly and frail are shuffled through–really, do they look dangerous?
- the pat down is quick, easy, respectful–I like to make jokes, have a good laugh together and brighten their day
Happy travels! ; )
-
I always opt out too. I figure: we’re exposed to so much crap in our day-to-day existence that we can’t control… might as well do what I can to limit my exposure, even if it is \small.\ A bunch of small things can add up- in a positive OR negative way- it’s up to us which way we go.
I fly 2-4 times a month for work, and my airport (Minneapolis/St Paul) has those scanners. I’m known as ‘Female Opt-Out’ there, as I always tell them that I will be doing the pat-down instead. And I have yet to be hassled about it.