NPR: Med Student Rescues Body Part From Airport Security
Bristol Airport security and EasyJet manage to nearly kill an innocent woman, set major regnerative organ therapy back by months or more, and cost a medical team $21,000 for arranging a private flight to fly around the perilous airport security.
NPR: Med Student Rescues Body Part From Airport Security Bristol really sets the bar high, how can TSA top this? Apologists or those who think those of us voting for change are making too much fuss: this is why I say this inane airport security is actively making us less safe. Insane, fear-charged airport security isn't an annoyance to live with or another wasteful tax to write-off from your wages. It's downright dangerous. |
While I understand the point, this took place in the UK (easyJet doesn't fly to the US). Thus, the TSA is not involved.
|
Originally Posted by cmn.jcs
(Post 18793170)
While I understand the point, this took place in the UK (easyJet doesn't fly to the US). Thus, the TSA is not involved.
This nonsense isn't confined to just the U.S. Rationality and weighing risks using solid science need to happen everywhere. |
Seems a bit fishy. Firstly he booked easyjet, but it says it was the only direct flight so that is probably reasonable. But he didn't think to get some written documentation from the airline and just went straight to security?
|
NPR: Med Student Rescues Body Part From Airport Security
The clear lesson is that airlines and airport security are built for a very narrow use case. Anything outside of that use case they are unable to understand, or assist. In the story, the solution was a private aircraft.
As "security" makes airline travel progressively more troublesome and dangerous access to private aircraft will be increasingly valuable. Additionally, the "security" will create larger markets for remote meetings, perhaps in the business-oriented virtual world discussed in today's WSJ. |
This story should be front-page in any countries that are participating in the War on Liquids, which could have literally cost a life. If the patient had died as a result of this, it would mean that airport "security" has cost one life--and saved zero, resulting in a net loss of life. It's already been noted that the increase in driving to avoid the TSA has resulted in more deaths than 9/11 itself.
If the private airplane were not available to come to the rescue: Trains from Bristol to Paris: 5h 20m Flight from Paris to Barcelona: 1h 40m Of course, you'd have to assume that "security" would be willing to let you through in Paris with your liquid OBL. Unfortunately, if you tell this story to a pro-TSAer, their response will be the following: - Well, they got the organ in on time, didn't they? - That could have been a liquid bomb and blown the airplane up! I recently had the following conversation with a pro-TSAer: "What would happen if someone stood up in flight with a gun and announced their intent to hijack?" "That won't happen; the TSA keeps guns off airplanes." "If someone wants to get a gun onto an airplane, they will. The TSA has a 50+% failure rate finding guns. Even if they were perfect, someone who works in an airside vendor could put a gun in the middle of a pallet full of goods and sneak it right in." "But that's different." "OK, so what happens if someone pulls out a gun in flight?" "The passengers would panic!" :rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by cmn.jcs
(Post 18793170)
While I understand the point, this took place in the UK
|
If this was TSA no doubt they would ask for the name of the organ donor so they could check and make sure he was not on the No Fly List. :rolleyes:
|
"Don't like it, don't get tuberculosis."
|
There are standard procedures in place designating flights which carry perisable organs. Sending one of these organs with a med-student through airport security without any paper work isn't one of them.
|
Originally Posted by joeyrukkus
(Post 18796553)
There are standard procedures in place designating flights which carry perisable organs. Sending one of these organs with a med-student through airport security without any paper work isn't one of them.
It was carried by a professor who is an MD who had previously contacted the airline to make arrangements. A non-aviation person can't be expected to know the local ins-and-outs of airline and security procedures; that's what they're paying the airline for. The med-student merely did what many grad students are very adept at--finding an out-of-the-box workaround in the form of a short-notice private flight. Too bad there's probably no way to bill EasyJet and/or whatever entity controls security at Bristol for the flight. |
Originally Posted by joeyrukkus
(Post 18796553)
There are standard procedures in place designating flights which carry perisable organs. Sending one of these organs with a med-student through airport security without any paper work isn't one of them.
Thus he didn't know the details. He called and asked, he was told it was ok. Why should he think he needs to do more? |
Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel
(Post 18798480)
Thus he didn't know the details. He called and asked, he was told it was ok.
|
Birchall told reporters he had gone to the Bristol Airport ahead of time and was given specific packaging instructions, which he carefully followed. |
Originally Posted by Wally Bird
(Post 18798954)
Many here know the pitfalls of dealing with low and mid-level airline employees. You get incorrect information, the bum's rush or both. Finding someone with the knowledge and authority to deal with whatever your problem is can be a long and frustrating saga, one in which a university professor would be hopelessly lost.
Frankly, after reading the stories here at FT for years, I don't find anything surprising about this story at all. Okay, the element of drama involved with saving a person's life is unusual. But getting conflicting information from airport security officials about what is and isn't allowed through a security checkpoint --- especially regarding an unusual item? Happens every single day. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 7:51 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.