1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Full-Body Scanners to Fry Travelers With Radiation

Discussion in 'News & Current Events' started by KenH, Dec 31, 2009.

  1. KenH

    KenH Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Ratings:
    +0
    "Virtually all passengers and airline crews who pass through airport screening checkpoints in the U.S. may soon be forced to submit to compulsory, whole-body X-ray exposure. Some fliers could be “fried” several times in one day. Frequent fliers could get hit hundreds of times each year. Pregnant women, infants, the chronically ill and immune suppressed would get the rays. Grateful herds of traveling livestock, prodded by TSA drovers through federally-funded “nuke chutes,” are expected to believe Hollowell’s scientifically unsupported assertion that ionizing radiation delivered via backscatter will be “about the same as sunshine.”

    Officials must naturally defend compulsory passenger X-rays as harmless. But they are signing no guarantees because ionizing radiation in the X-ray spectrum damages and mutates both chromosomal DNA and structural proteins in human cells. If this damage is not repaired, it can lead to cancer. New research shows that even very low doses of X-ray can delay or prevent cellular repair of damaged DNA, raising questions about the safety of routine medical X-rays. Unborn babies can become grotesquely disfigured if their mothers are irradiated during pregnancy. Heavily X- rayed persons of childbearing age can sustain chromosomal damage, endangering offspring. Radiation damage is cumulative and each successive dose builds upon the cellular mutation caused by the last. It can take years for radiation damage to manifest pathology."

    - more at www.prisonplanet.com/full-body-scanners-to-fry-travelers-with-radiation.html
     
  2. Salty

    Salty 20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,897
    Ratings:
    +609
    Faith:
    Baptist
    and if a vet has shrapnel left in his body from a wartime injury....
     
  3. NiteShift

    NiteShift New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    2,034
    Ratings:
    +0
    If the alternative is strip search for everyone, I'd take my chances with the scan.
     
  4. Walguy

    Walguy Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2002
    Messages:
    525
    Ratings:
    +3
    I can assure you that no one will be fried by these devices.



    It will be more like being microwaved...
     
  5. Deacon

    Deacon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    7,122
    Ratings:
    +281
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The article is a lot of un-informed hype... just scare tactics for the sheep.

    I've been involved with cardiology scanning for more than 20 years in the areas of cardiac catheterization (fluoroscopy) and nuclear scanning (SPECT).
    It's considered to be a field where a medical workers exposure to radiation is highest.
    We have to be vigilant to monitor and limit our exposure levels.

    That being said, the full-body-scanners present a low-level, non-penetrating form of x-ray that performs a task without excessive exposure.
    The exposure levels are comparable to five minutes in the sun -think of that next time you go to the beach.
    But there is a difference, both whole-body scanners and background radiation expose a large body surface area to low-level radiation.
    The difference being that background radiation has slightly higher x-ray energy level and penetrates deeper into the body.

    Manufacturers say that frequent flyers can have 500 scans/year before levels of radiation become a concern. That's a whole lot of flying.

    Rob
     
  6. KenH

    KenH Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Ratings:
    +0
    I guess we'll see the results in 10-20 years from those repeatedly exposed to these contraptions at airports. Then we'll know if there was a danger or not to people. Of course, if there is it will be too late for those exposed to these things.
     
  7. Marcia

    Marcia Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    11,139
    Ratings:
    +0
    The level of radiation in the scanners is no more than what the average person gets each day in normal life.

    People are actually more concerned about the privacy issue.
     
  8. Salty

    Salty 20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,897
    Ratings:
    +609
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Lets keep an eye on Professional sports teams. How many flights does a professional baseball or basketball player make in a year.

    Many business professionals are liable to fly 3 or 4 times a week. That may only be 200 scans a year, but year in year out....

    and we are only specuating....

    Salty
     
  9. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Ratings:
    +0
    I'll be concerned when they start setting them up at state lines. I drive everywhere that I can.
     
  10. Jon-Marc

    Jon-Marc New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,752
    Ratings:
    +0
    Since I don't travel, I won't have to worry about it--even if I was one to worry.
     
  11. Nonsequitur

    Nonsequitur New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    637
    Ratings:
    +0
    Which is?.........
     
  12. Nonsequitur

    Nonsequitur New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    637
    Ratings:
    +0
    Radiation is our friend. Just ask the Japanese.
     
  13. poncho

    poncho Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Ratings:
    +227
    Who cares about the machines. We should all be glad they aren't tatooing us like cattle and making us walk through the terminals naked. Yet. For national security of course.

    Forget about modesty folks, just form the parade line over there, single file if you please and walk slowly through this dark opening to the plane and be seated in your assigned comfort cell for the duration of your flight. Sorry for any inconvenience and thank you for all your cooperation from The Establishment. :)

    And of course we'd agree to all this too because the kind hearted central planners are experts and know just what to do to keep us all safe.

    Say Cheeze! Your full naked body scan is now underway. Don't worry, no one will ever see this on You Tube or America's Funniest Videos!

    We Promise! Trust Us!
     
    #13 poncho, Jan 4, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 4, 2010
  14. Johnv

    Johnv New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Ratings:
    +0
    Less than that. The level of radiation in the scanners is less than that in a room lit by incandescent light bulbs. You will be exposed to more radiation in the walk from your car to the security line than you will in one of these scanners.
    As a seasoned business traveller, I can tell you that there's no such thing as privacy if you're willing to get on an airplane. I have no problems whatsoever with these scanners. I'll be the first to go through them if it makes everyone else safer.
     
  15. Marcia

    Marcia Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    11,139
    Ratings:
    +0
    Are you asking why it violates privacy? It's because it shows your body under the clothes.

    There was a big article on this in Today's Washington Post. They have photos. They said the person's face would be blurred and that the scanner would not be at the checkpoint. He/she would be elsewhere and communicate with a TSA person at the checkpoint. The photos would be erased and deleted.
     
  16. Marcia

    Marcia Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    11,139
    Ratings:
    +0
    I would expect a man to feel that way. Women feel a little more concerned about it.
     
  17. Nonsequitur

    Nonsequitur New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    637
    Ratings:
    +0
    I meant to both questions.
    I agree with what you said though.:thumbsup:
     
  18. carpro

    carpro Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    21,978
    Ratings:
    +1,245
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Doesn't everything?

    I also heard that spending too much time reading the bilge on prison planet will fry your brain or turn you into a paranoid schizo.
     
  19. KenH

    KenH Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Ratings:
    +0
    And we are to believe the government????
     
  20. Johnv

    Johnv New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Ratings:
    +0
    Then women shouldn't fly. Whether you're a man or a woman, there's no such thing as privacy when flying.
     
Loading...