This first excerpt is from Mike Adams, The Health Ranger from 10/19/10
(NaturalNews) I encountered my first airport naked body scanner while flying out of California today, and of course I decided to “opt out” of the scan. You do this by telling the blue-shirted TSA agents that you simply wish to opt out of the body scanner. Here’s what happened after that:
A TSA agent told me to step to the side and stay put. He then proceeded to shout out loudly enough for all the other travelers and TSA agents to hear, “OPT OUT! OPT OUT!” This is no doubt designed to attract attention (or perhaps humiliation) to those who choose to opt out of the naked body scanner. I saw no purpose for this verbal alert because the same TSA agent who was yelling this ultimately was the one who patted me down anyway.
For the pat down, first I was required to walk through the regular metal detector. From there, I was asked if I wanted to be patted down in a private room, or if I didn’t mind just being patted down in full view of everyone else. Not being a shy person in the first place, I told the agent I didn’t need a private room.
He then explained to me that he was going to pat down my entire body, including my crotch and my buttocks, but that he would use the back of his hands to pat down the crotch and buttocks areas. This is probably designed to make the pat-down seem less “personal” and more detached. That way, air passengers can’t complain of being felt up by TSA agents who might get carried away with the pat-down procedure. He asked if it hurt for me to be touched anywhere, and I told him no, at which point he proceeded with the pat down.
It was a well-scripted pat-down, covering all the areas of my body, including a mild crotch sweep (it wasn’t especially invasive or anything, as doctors will do far worse during a physical exam). He swept my arms, legs, hips, back of the neck, ankles and everywhere else. To the TSA’s credit, this guy was fast, efficient and only used a light touch that was in no way disturbing. But it did take an extra five minutes or so compared to walking through the naked body scanner.
Speaking of the naked body scanners, as I was having my crotch swept by the back of the hand of this TSA agent, I was observing other air travelers subjecting themselves to the naked body scanners. They were told to walk into the body scanner staging area and then hold their arms in the air in a pose as if they were under arrest. They were told to freeze in this position for several seconds (perhaps 10 seconds) during which they were being blasted with ionizing radiation that we all know contributes to cancer.
The TSA, of course, will tell you that these machines can’t possibly contribute to cancer. But they said the same thing about mammograms, and we now know that mammograms are so harmful to women’s health that they actually harm ten women for everyone one woman they help (http://www.naturalnews.com/020829.html). So I’m not exactly taking the U.S. government at its word that naked body scanner radiation is “harmless.”
As these air travelers were being scanned, their naked body images were appearing on a screen somewhere, of course. Some TSA agent was examining the naked body shape and contours of all these people, and even though we were told by the TSA that the image viewing machines cannot store images, we have since learned that the machines actually do have the capability to store those images (http://www.naturalnews.com/029378_f…). In addition, rogue TSA employees could simply use their cell phones to take snapshots of what they see on the screen. There are no doubt rules against such behavior, but it’s bound to happen sooner or later.
Meanwhile, my own security screening was proceeding fully clothed. I don’t want to broadcast my naked butt cheeks on the TSA’s graphic monitors, thank you very much!
Very few people opt out of the naked body scanners
The most fascinating part about this entire process was not the verbal broadcast of my opt out status, nor having my crotch swept by the latex-covered back hand of some anonymous TSA agent, but rather the curious fact that I was the only one opting out. Although I must have watched at least a hundred people go through this particular security checkpoint, there wasn’t a single other person who opted out of the naked body scan.
They all just lined up like cattle to have their bodies scanned with ionizing radiation.
Dr. Eric:
And so I wonder too, why we don’t opt out? Not wanting to seem suspicious, or perhaps because we are too hurried to care if we are killing ourselves. Most commonly however, I believe we tend to think if everyone it is doing it, then it is safe. But my readers know that cannot be true; such is the case with McDonald’s. We recently reviewed that 50% of a chicken McNugget is filler and toxic garbage… but a lot of people are eating there!
Take a look at this more recent article excerpt from Mike Adams:
…I’ve received a steady stream of reports from people who are traveling, all of whom are now choosing to opt out of the scanners. The reports coming in demonstrate an amazing ignorance among TSA security screeners about how the naked body scanners actually work.
One report from a very credible source (a famous health author whom I know quite well) reveals that TSA officers told her the naked body scanners don’t even emit X-rays. “It’s a myth,” the officer said. “There are no X-rays from those machines.”
Really? Then how do they work? Are they MAGIC? Do TSA officers cast a magic Spell of X-Ray Vision on the air travel passengers like some sort of Dungeons & Dragons adventure?
(Or maybe the TSA officers simply buy those X-Ray vision glasses advertised in the back of comic books and use those to gawk at passengers.)
That the TSA’s own employees don’t even know these machines emit radiation is a real whopper. But of course it only makes sense: They’ve probably been told this by the TSA because no person in their right mind would actually work 8 hours a day standing next to a machine that emits radiation every few seconds (no matter how seemingly small the dosage).
Dr. Eric: WOW!! This is really sad, but guess what, the ignorance doesn’t stop there! I had a patient tell me last Monday that she rushed to the ER because of pain in her lower abdomen. The doc wanted to look at the ureter in order to determine if there was a kidney stone. They needed to take a CAT scan (CT Scan = somputerized tomography) to see the ureter. My patient wisely asked for an MRI instead, and the NURSE told her that there was more radiation from an MRI!!!  AARGGHHH!!
There is NO radiation from an MRI, where a CAT scan is listed as having moderate to high radiation esposure! I could not believe it, that a practicing nurse would believe that an MRI has more radiation, when there is actually NO radiation whatsoever.
Listen to this very important piece of information, YOU NEED TO BE EDUCATED. Avoid the body scanners, take the pat down.
8 thoughts on “TSA Body Scanners = RADIATION”
Well clearly this was written by an idiot. You are exposed to more radiation every day on earth, and MUCH more every hour you sit on a plane, than the small dose from the machine
Thanks for the comment, sorry you are incorrect. Radiation on earth is aboslutely insignficant to that of a body scanner. Come on, if there was enough radiation on earth, then you could place the appropriate screen (filter) in front of someone and utilize that radiation to see under someone’s clothes.
Radiation while on a plane, is significant, yet not as much as a body scanner unless you are receiving radiation from a very SIGNIFICANT solar flare.
Thanks for your comment!
– the less than idiot than you
Dr Eric, It is easier to say people are idiots when you don’t back up your claims with facts. The background radiation you receive over a year is far more than a single scan, but it is not nearly as intense. According to various sources on the web, 2.4 mSv per year is a person’s average exposure to background radiation. This equates to 0.000274mSv per hour. On a plane, you may expect exposures around 0.005 mSv per hour. According to various news reports, ~16000 TSA scans per year will result in an exposure of 0.25 mSv, and a scan lasts about 10 seconds. This equates to 0.0056 mSv per hour. So, it looks comparable to the radiation you receive while flying. If the news reports are correct, and the machines are maintained and monitored well, the scans shouldn’t be a cause for concern.
b,
UCSF Scientists believe that the policy without safety testing is a concern. Their letter addresses the points about low dosage possibly being misleading because of the area of energy absorption being the skin.
http://www.npr.org/assets/news/2010/05/17/concern.pdf
Also, from an ethics standpoint, I have to weigh the risks. As a non-terrorist, I can not benefit from myself being exposed to potentially deadly and/or unknown radiation risks.
If it turns out that one gets cancer from these scans, how is one to prove that the TSA caused or contributed to it? You can’t. They have absolutely no accountability in my health or well being. Even if this causes a few cancers. They get off scott free and continue business as usual. I’ll take the pat down.
Also, you implied that mammograms aren’t safe and provided a link as evidence. They may pose a radiation risk, but the link is only highlighting the danger from false positives. Patients assume that they have cancer and undergo unnecessary and potentially harmful treatment. The link does not say anything about the radiation.
b, I appreciate your position on this. The problem is that there has yet to be a public report releases that shows the tested results of the TSA body scan. I agree, if that dosage is correct, then it is not that bad.
But if it is true, then this is totally new technology to us, because we have yet to see this low level radiation for a device that can achieve these results.
I won’t deny where I stand, which is the “choose wisely first, so you don’t have to ask horrible questions later” camp.
Do we want to prevent terrorism, absolutely, but again, if a pat down doesn’t somehow reduce ones ability to know that an individual is secure, then let the pat down’s be the choice.
Also – Journal of the National Cancer Institute reports in November, that cancer risk is increased following radiation exposure in middle aged individuals.
Russell Blaylock has reported (and yes, some look at this MD as being to far away from conventional, but his clinical cancer experience is significant and successful), that mammograms increase risk of cancer by abour 2% per. Recently it has been suggested that it is about a 1% increased risk per RAD of exposure which is more like 1 RAD per mammogram, thus it might be closer to a 1% increase per.
If either of these conclusions are true, which are very difficult to quantify, then it would be wise to avoid mammograms, for the much less intrusive thermograph or ultrasound. Opting for an actual mammogram when one of these screening methods has uncovered concern.
Wise decisions, that is all we preach. Take the right heirarchy. I have known too many people that have died from cancer who simply followed convention in every way, shape and form. And I have known enough who have survived via unconventional methods, that I will question convention at every turn.
The nuclear crisis in Japan reminded me of my post here. It only goes to show that a TSA body scanner might be the least of your worries.
However, I was wrong when I wrote that “the scans shouldn’t be a cause for concern.” Even if the dosage from a scan and from an international flight are the same, there really is no such thing as a safe level of ionizing radiation. Perhaps, that is my biggest issue. No one, especially not the government or the media, should say these scanners are safe.
I admit I made several assumptions to compare the dosage received during a scan and during a flight. These assumptions (which may be the very same ones used by the media!) could stray from the truth. Dr. Levi’s claim, if true, definitely throws a monkey wrench into my calculations.
Bottom line, I would choose a pat down too, even if the government say there is nothing to fear from a TSA body scan.
Comments are closed.