Naked Nightmares
Have you ever dreamed that you were running through your highschool, or attending a family dinner, or walking through some public space naked?
Well your dreams may now become reality. Since our friend, the undie bomber, has now proven that current airport security devices totally suck we can be expecting these fancy new gadgets (see below) in the future. And you thought taking your shoes off, and getting patted down was embarrassing...
Tweet
Comments [75]
Millimeter wave technology NOT x-rays
The technology that will most likely be put into wide use uses radio frequency waves not x-rays:
"Millimeter wave technology produces whole body images (woman at left, man at right) that reveal what's under your clothes, including Metallic or non-metallic devices and objects are displayed, including weapons, explosives and other items that a passenger is carrying on his/her person. The images are viewed by a Transportation Security Officer in a remote location. According to the TSA: To ensure privacy, the setup "'has zero storage capability and images will not be printed stored or transmitted. Once the transportation security officer has viewed the image and resolved anomalies, the image is erased from the screen permanently. The officer is unable to print, export, store or transmit the image.'"
http://www.livescience.com/technology/090401-airport-scan.html
"When you look for the bad in mankind expecting to find it, you surely will." ~ Pollyanna
Rusty, good links. I
Rusty, good links. I assumed, silly me. Another disgusting thought I had was, what do they do when they discover passengers who have done silly things like swallowed baloons of cocaine that are now inside their bodies? You know someone who hasn't gotten the memo is going to be caught like this (eww). And if you put that little black privacy screener over your privates, doesn't that leave some um areas for stowage as unviewable, and therefore a pretty good place to stow your bomb accelerant/boxcutter whatever. They should pay those screeners more...especially if they have to look at people's junk all day long.
Yeah, wouldn't make much
Yeah, wouldn't make much sense to use an x-ray machine since the powders that guy had in his drawers probably wouldn't show up on one.
Yep
True, Robin. And the article I posted said that when given the choice 99% of the passengers at LAX picked the scanner over full body pat down; the scanner seems less invasive to most people. The article also pointed out that the machines have no capability of storing images so people worried about their image showing up on the web, needn't.
"When you look for the bad in mankind expecting to find it, you surely will." ~ Pollyanna
I really hope that's the last
I really hope that's the last scrotum shot on Vp.
Hehe. I actually wondered if
Hehe. I actually wondered if men would be more nervous about this tech than women because they wouldn't be able to lie about their endowments, or lack of.
Just think of all that
Just think of all that radiation dosing the nads...bet the menfolk aren't liking that either.
Breast cancer risk
Given the recent debate about the trade offs of radiation risk in mamograms vs results, there may be cause for concern for all. Imagine the cancer survivor who is a frequent air commuter for her job.
You're absolutely right...
Excellent point.
Good point
Considering that I am one of those paranoid types that got rid of my microwave to avoid unneccessary radiation, this certainly doesn't make me happy. Luckily, I don't fly that often.
Another reason not to go
Another reason not to go anywhere, or do anything. Welcome, 2010!
Sure. If you live your life
Sure. If you live your life based on avoidance and fear. Or you can just go and do whatever you want to do and to hell with it. Personally, the last thing I think about when I'm considering taking a trip is the airport scanners. In fact, I completely forget about them until I'm at the airport and standing in line.
Being concerned about our health and safety is a real issue...
There are people who live their lives concerned about the risk of exposure to cancer causing elements in their lives....and quite honestly, I'm glad that they care enough to ask questions. That certainly doesn't mean that they are living their life based on fear and avoidance. That certainly is simplifying a very real risk. To some, the risk is more real, than to others. I'm glad that there are those who advocate for my health and safety...
As with all cancer causing elements, it's the cumulative effect that can be detrimental to our health. So, for an individual who flies frequently, it can/should be a real concern. Combine this, newly applied technology, with a lifetime of medical xrays, microwave ovens, cell phones, EMF's, radiation from televisions, etc., and the risk is accelerated. By itself, the scanner may sound benign, but as I stated, it's the cumulative effect on an individual over a life time that makes the difference.
No manufacturer ever wants to claim that their product should be cause for concern, but there is a reason that more people are finding their genes mutated, and cancer taking a stronghold on younger and younger people around the globe.... It just seems that most people would rather pretend that the risks are negligible.
From The American Academy of Pediatrics. Here is a current list of Child and Adolescent Causes of Death. Note the inclusion of cancer. Cancer in children is both genetic, and environmentally induced.
Ages 1-4 years:
• accidents
• development and genetic conditions present at birth
• cancer
Ages 5-14
• accidents
• cancer
• homicide
I only mention this Robin because the issue of exposure to radiation, is a real concern for the health and safety of all of us. I, for one, don't believe what I'm told by those who are selling the public on the use of a products safety when there are real concerns. Neither do I blindly believe those who manufacture a product who state that it is completely safe and without risk. Everyone's personal, hereditary genetic makeup is different - therefore there is no way to state that it is safe for everyone...
It's not about fear. Cancer, and the genetic mutations that cause it, are very real. Being pro-active should be encouraged... Questioning the safety of this technology is a good thing to do.
It seems reasonable that the traveling public should be offered an option to this technology, which I might add - will only be as effective as those who are educated, and competent enough to use it.
*edit to add* This was just a different point of view on the subject. We have a tendency to be reactionary in this country, my preference is to do the right thing - not necessarily the easiest thing.
Did I say there wasn't a
Did I say there wasn't a risk? I'm pretty sure I didn't. I'm also pretty sure we're all adults on here so what exactly is the importance of children's health statistics? We're all going to die. You either make a choice to avoid everything that might kill you (which by the way, is far more likely to be a car) or you live with the risks that modern life brings with it. Which also doesn't mean you don't advocate for safer, more effective means of screening. It just means you make a choice to avoid the current system or you live with it. Period. I happen to believe that the enrichment that travel brings to my life is worth the risk of flying and of airport screening technology. It's not like I'm getting x-rayed on a regular basis.
Gosh, your tone sounds so angry Robin.
When children are dying from cancer, at an alarming rate - we are doing something very wrong. That's the point, Robin.
Obviously, the cumulative effect of our exposure to even acceptable environmental hazards is killing us, and creating a tremendous amount of suffering... When children suffer from a disease that should take decades to develop, we have to look at environmental risks. All environmental risks... including new technology that we are told is perfectly safe.
You might understand this correlation: Think of children as, the canary in the coal mine.
When children are being adversely effected, suffering, and dying from cancer for no apparent logical reason, we had better reevaluate what we consider acceptable environmental risks, and the ensuing cumulative genetic damage.
The question's that are being raised by many people, concerning the new technology, goes far beyond privacy concerns. IMO, the dialogue about our health and safety, is equally as important as the discussion of airline safety... if not more so.
We're all going to die? I've chosen to be far more pro-active about my health, than to settle for that as an answer to anything...
Radio waves don't cause cancer
The scanners will not be using x-rays. See my post and link at the top of the thread.
"When you look for the bad in mankind expecting to find it, you surely will." ~ Pollyanna
Really?
The safety of RF frequencies is still being debated...
If you, in fact, know something that scientists don't know - please let the scientific community investigating the safety of cellphone use, and the coorelation between brain tumors, - share your information... I'm sure they'd appreciate it.
radio waves have too little energy
From the American Cancer Society site:
Unlike x-rays and gamma rays (which are examples of ionizing radiation), radio waves have too little energy to break the bonds that hold molecules (such as DNA) in cells together. Similarly, since RF of this frequency contains relatively low energy, it does not enter tissues. At very high levels of exposure, RF can cause warming of tissues, much as a heat lamp does.
http://www.cancer.org/docroot/PED/content/PED_1_3X_Cellular_Phone_Towers...
"When you look for the bad in mankind expecting to find it, you surely will." ~ Pollyanna
Rusty,
Thank you for responding to the conversation with a reasoned and respectful tone. I found your links helpful, though I'm still not sure how machines are going to tell the difference between a menstrual pad or diaper and a chemical bomb pad. Sometimes I think we expect our technology to save us from ourselves.
millivision
I don't want to hawk any products, but this came up when I Googled "millimeter wave technology":
http://www.millivision.com/technology.html
[edited to correct typo]
"When you look for the bad in mankind expecting to find it, you surely will." ~ Pollyanna
No, with cancer and rf
No, with cancer and rf scientists are talking about levels high enough to raise body temperature and prolonged exposure. Not a 1 second blip in the airport.
edited to add: they don't know if long-term exposure to high levels will cause cancer either. They want further study.
"When you look for the bad in mankind expecting to find it, you surely will." ~ Pollyanna
Rusty...
It's all about the cumulative effect.
For some, that would be the effect over a lifetime. For others, who's risk factors indicate a larger probability of gene mutations, it takes much less exposure - and a much shorter period of time to present with symptoms of serious illness.
As I understand it, you're
As I understand it, you're correct about the x-rays having a cumulative effect. I know my dentist always asks me how long it's been since my last one. But these machines (as Rusty has pointed out) don't use x-ray technology. There is no radiation involved.
There's other stuff to worry about...
I'd worry more about the accumulative effect of too many burgers and fries combined with too little exercise for our children. Just sayin...
Still searching for the right brainy quote.
A combination of environmental toxins
Chemicals, including those taken by women before and during pregnancy as well as the overwhelming preponderance in the environment; radiation; pollution; diet; an overdose of scholastic testing mandated by No Child Left Behind...
The factors are too innumerable to keep track of. Maybe its time to take a good hard look at all sorts of unnatural elements in our daily lives and ask ourselves which ones we truly need.
Nope
No, it has nothing to do with the cumulative effect. It has to do with high levels of exposure.
"When you look for the bad in mankind expecting to find it, you surely will." ~ Pollyanna
You must have misinterpreted my original post.
I've been talking about the cumulative effect of all of the toxic environmental exposures we experience daily... Not just one thing. Not just RF's, or chemicals, or toxic polluted air, or polluted water, everything - the cumulative, destructive effect of dangerous environmental exposures, of all types.
But sometimes your black and
But sometimes your black and white statements make it sound a lot like you believe the rest of are scared of our own shadows when we mention the shades of gray. And while we are not children, some folks here do have children and/or grandchildren. Not to mention the fact that the continuation of the human race is dependent upon them.
Cover your nads:]
Cover your nads:]
New styles for 2010
Go to leadlengerie.com for under garments in a variety of styles for him or her. For the fellas: briefs, boxers, and our most popular man thong. For the ladies, a max coverage teddy for the timid or pasties and G-strings for those who like to laugh in the face of danger.
Wowsa
This could be potentially a big money maker for the tabloids. I mean if they will pay millions to see pictures of Brad & Angelina's babies, just think how much the papp's would get paid for pictures of the baby making equipment!
Yikes.
Gross!
Gives a whole new meaning to PapparatSee. Let's hope they don't make a bad thing worse.
Drink ONE Bud Light!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOEMI8HRhlA
This will work - happy airports!
Vper Mission - find all those Bud Lights with x-ray vision!
Twitter Time @kdhales
.
.
Oh my.
I'm concerned that my tampon might look like an explosive device !!
no right to aviation
Here's a link to an article on the msnbc site that goes into the issues and available technology in more depth.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34630097/ns/us_news-airliner_attack/
Again, there is no right to aviation. Anyone who feels it's too intrusive is not required to fly.
"When you look for the bad in mankind expecting to find it, you surely will." ~ Pollyanna
Amtrak, baby!
http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=Amtrak/HomePage
I love the train - no hassles - cheap - time to read - Mile Low Club.....
Twitter Time @kdhales
Interesting
Yo, glad they are going to cartoonize me!
I want safe travel, as safe as they can make it, but if I live my life afraid to go anywhere because of terrorists, they win.
Still searching for the right brainy quote.
id really rather just take my pants off
and walk through starkers
Mmmmmm, yep!
How about I send you one of these cameras for your video segments.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3oDPfyL8CBw
Twitter Time @kdhales
New video segment?
I know how hard it is to come up with interesting topics for your blogs, so allow me to suggest...
See you tomorrow for
See you tomorrow for Pantsless Thursday!
For Xmas, CT got me a satiny kimono to wear around the house on my pantsless days. Isn't she thoughtful? Maybe one of my equally thoughtful friends will send her a link to Fredrick's on FB or something so she'll keep the pantsless love coming.
Low tech
I can't help thinking that it would be better to go low tech and just train a new cadre of crotch sniffing dogs.
Um, yeah, right
That pretty much does it for me and flying on commercial airliners. You just know that once I go through that thing, a lot of screeners are going to have a WTF moment.
yeah - those with "special" needs ...
Imagine the drama and embarrassment when they try to scan the elderly or the disabled - like my brother who's paraplegic and in a chair. How do you scan someone who's in permanent sitting position?!
Heck, it's bad enough going to the movies for him, with wheelchair 'unfriendly' fire regulations!
They will need to have exemptions, surely?
protocol
I wonder how long it would take them to realize that they need to write a protocol for that one.
Wow, what a fucking great
Wow, what a fucking great idea!
LOL
Y'all know how I feel about this one, so I bid you adieu, and happy discussing!
Scatching my head here...
You know, as smart as the tech geeks are in this country, you'd think they'd come up with a better screening method without being so damned invasive.
It is what it is.
They have. There are
They have. There are machines that can detect plastic and other chemical explosives, but I believe they are super-duper expensive.
So it's
pads without WINGS then ... yet another thing we have to worry about.