Traveling with Nitro Pills
Jun 11, 2014, 9:53 am
#31
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,629
I have a friend who uses Clear contact lens solution. She buys a cheap store brand lens solution, empties the bottle, sterilizes it and then transfers the Clear solution to the store-brand container, which is in her baggie. She flies on a very regular basis and has never had her solution in the store-brand container confiscated.
For what it's worth, here's an interesting note:
Has the TSA changed their rules regarding Clear Care? Or does the "meets TSA requirements" refer to the size of the bottle, not the contents?
http://www.drugstore.com/clear-care-...4?catid=328028
For what it's worth, here's an interesting note:
Has the TSA changed their rules regarding Clear Care? Or does the "meets TSA requirements" refer to the size of the bottle, not the contents?
http://www.drugstore.com/clear-care-...4?catid=328028
Of course, I don't know if the Clear Care prohibition was ever actually posted on the website, either. It's actually not just Clear Care, it's any solution that contains the forbidden ingredient(s) that are in Clear Care.
Jun 11, 2014, 10:00 am
#32
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,629
With all due respect, I think you are 180 degrees off on the rationale for the disclaimer. It was included specifically to allow people to "game the system." The disclaimer is there to enable TSA screeners to ignore any rule, discard common sense and require forfeiture of any object for any reason or no reason at all.
I understand that you do not make the rules and are only stating them, but if you really want to clarify the rules you would say the following:
"TSA screeners can ban anything they want to and there's not a thing you can do about it."That is the reality. If I am wrong please show me where a passenger has any enforceable recourse against an inappropriate banning if an item.
I understand that you do not make the rules and are only stating them, but if you really want to clarify the rules you would say the following:
"TSA screeners can ban anything they want to and there's not a thing you can do about it."
I'd like to see a news program do another 'sting' operation, similar to the one that revealed that a Florida screener didn't turn in a tablet, he stole it - and the local TSA never even processed the submitted lost/stolen report.
Tag a few choice items like the Jimmy Choo perfume and expensive sno-globes and liquor and see how many end up in the homes of TSOs who were on duty at the time.
If I personally were a TSO, I'd have no problem with this. I don't have a problem with my work or phone calls being randomly monitored on my job because I have nothing to hide.
Jun 11, 2014, 1:40 pm
#33
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
<deleted>, why are you discussing the Nitro Pill issue here on FT but have gone silent on the TSA Blog? Someone tell you ignore the issue?
Last edited by TWA884; Jun 26, 2017 at 3:03 pm Reason: Privacy / Conform to moderator's edit of quoted post
Jun 11, 2014, 3:19 pm
#34
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,629
I don't think it's fair to poke <deleted> on this. He doesn't make the rules.
There are many items that fit multiple categories.
2" toy gun on a sock monkey: is it a toy or is it a 'replica weapon'?
Clear Care: is it a medical solution or a prohibited potentially explosive ingredient?
Nitro pills: are they medicine or a prohibited explosive ingredient?
In each case, the items are governed by two sets of rules, one more common sense, one zero tolerance paranoid. It is up to the TSO to decide which rule to apply. If you look at the examples I gave, you will realize that in each case, the more restrictive set of rules applies.
I don't think TSA is going to discuss nitro on their blog because 1) the odds are fairly small that someone will get caught and 2) confiscation is the official rule, just as it is with Clear Care: zero tolerance for contraband substances applies to medicine.
I think <deleted> knows this, but knows that the incidence of confiscation remains low (they either have to be reading labels or you've handled the pills, contaminated the bottle, then yourself, failed a swab and they've been discovered that way). He assumes, rightly so, that people fly with them every day and they do not get discovered like mine did.
Of course, that does me no good. After the lecture I got, and the fact that a report was made, there is no way I will risk flying with them again. There's no doubt that if I got caught a second time, I will be in very big trouble. Because of the report, I won't be able to plead ignorance, even if I were willing to lie.
There are many items that fit multiple categories.
2" toy gun on a sock monkey: is it a toy or is it a 'replica weapon'?
Clear Care: is it a medical solution or a prohibited potentially explosive ingredient?
Nitro pills: are they medicine or a prohibited explosive ingredient?
In each case, the items are governed by two sets of rules, one more common sense, one zero tolerance paranoid. It is up to the TSO to decide which rule to apply. If you look at the examples I gave, you will realize that in each case, the more restrictive set of rules applies.
I don't think TSA is going to discuss nitro on their blog because 1) the odds are fairly small that someone will get caught and 2) confiscation is the official rule, just as it is with Clear Care: zero tolerance for contraband substances applies to medicine.
I think <deleted> knows this, but knows that the incidence of confiscation remains low (they either have to be reading labels or you've handled the pills, contaminated the bottle, then yourself, failed a swab and they've been discovered that way). He assumes, rightly so, that people fly with them every day and they do not get discovered like mine did.
Of course, that does me no good. After the lecture I got, and the fact that a report was made, there is no way I will risk flying with them again. There's no doubt that if I got caught a second time, I will be in very big trouble. Because of the report, I won't be able to plead ignorance, even if I were willing to lie.
Last edited by TWA884; Jun 26, 2017 at 3:03 pm Reason: Privacy / Conform to moderator's edit of quoted post
Jun 11, 2014, 4:04 pm
#36
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,657
After the lecture I got, and the fact that a report was made, there is no way I will risk flying with them again. There's no doubt that if I got caught a second time, I will be in very big trouble. Because of the report, I won't be able to plead ignorance, even if I were willing to lie.
It might be interesting to request a copy of that report, to see what (if anything) was said about you ...
Jun 11, 2014, 4:07 pm
#37
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
[QUOTE=chollie;23018791
Of course, that does me no good. After the lecture I got, and the fact that a report was made, there is no way I will risk flying with them again. There's no doubt that if I got caught a second time, I will be in very big trouble. Because of the report, I won't be able to plead ignorance, even if I were willing to lie.[/QUOTE]
I still don't understand why you are willing to allow the TSA to put your health at risk. What kind of "big trouble" do you think you will be in if the TSA finds your prescribed medication again? Are you afraid you will be hauled off to jail and the key thrown away? Are you afraid of being fined? Put on a no-fly list?
Of course, that does me no good. After the lecture I got, and the fact that a report was made, there is no way I will risk flying with them again. There's no doubt that if I got caught a second time, I will be in very big trouble. Because of the report, I won't be able to plead ignorance, even if I were willing to lie.[/QUOTE]
I still don't understand why you are willing to allow the TSA to put your health at risk. What kind of "big trouble" do you think you will be in if the TSA finds your prescribed medication again? Are you afraid you will be hauled off to jail and the key thrown away? Are you afraid of being fined? Put on a no-fly list?
Jun 11, 2014, 4:14 pm
#38
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,629
No way I want to draw negative attention to myself. I do not want problems.
Jun 11, 2014, 4:21 pm
#39
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,629
I still don't understand why you are willing to allow the TSA to put your health at risk. What kind of "big trouble" do you think you will be in if the TSA finds your prescribed medication again? Are you afraid you will be hauled off to jail and the key thrown away? Are you afraid of being fined? Put on a no-fly list?
You will not find anyone from TSA who will say my fears are unfounded.
Jun 11, 2014, 4:46 pm
#40
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
Jun 11, 2014, 6:12 pm
#41
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SYD (perenially), GVA (not in a long time)
Programs: QF PS, EK-Gold, Security Theatre Critic
Posts: 6,764
I agree completely that any potentially helpful information from the TSA search function is negated by the "unless the TSO decides otherwise" in the tail. But the information prior to that isn't all that helpful, either:
Please point out the specific sentence in the following that says "nitro pills are allowed." (Hint, it's not there.)
Nitro pills are not liquids, gels, or aerosols, so this sentence is irrelevant to the subject.
Recommendations about labeling is nothing to do with whether an object is allowed. This does not say that labeling your medications makes them an allowed object.
Again with liquids, gels and aerosols, which is irrelevant to nitro PILLS.
Standard disclaimer which completely negates anything prior to this. The "is it allowed" search function should simply return this paragraph and nothing else.
No. Not really.
Sure, let's try again.
Notice how the words "nitroglyerin" or "patch" are not mentioned anywhere in the following text.
Generic statement - not particular to nitro patches, patches or even to medicinal items.
So make sure you don't buy the really big nitro patches.
Tell me what that has to do with NITRO PATCHES which I thought was meant to be the item under discussion here.
Even if it fits under your seat and is neatly packed, TSA might take it away from you.
How does just saying "nitro patches are allowed" or "nitro pills are allowed" give someone scope to "game the system"? You're grasping at straws.
...http://www.tsa.gov/traveler-informat...ohibited-items
The result when "nitro pills is entered into the search box is as follows:
Search Results For:
nitro pills
Check or Carry-on
TSA allows larger amounts of medically necessary liquids, gels, and aerosols in reasonable quantities for your trip, but you must declare them to security officers at the checkpoint for inspection. ...
The result when "nitro pills is entered into the search box is as follows:
Search Results For:
nitro pills
Check or Carry-on
TSA allows larger amounts of medically necessary liquids, gels, and aerosols in reasonable quantities for your trip, but you must declare them to security officers at the checkpoint for inspection. ...
... You may carry non-medically necessary liquids, gels and aerosols in your carry-on bags only if they adhere to the 3-1-1 rule: containers must be 3.4 ounces or less; stored in a 1 quart/liter zip-top bag; 1 zip-top bag per person. Larger amounts of non-medicinal liquids, gels, and aerosols must be placed in checked baggage. ...
... Even if an item is generally permitted, it may be subject to additional screening or not allowed through the checkpoint if it triggers an alarm during the screening process, appears to have been tampered with, or poses other security concerns. The final decision rests with TSA on whether to allow any items on the plane. ...
No. Not really.
Sure, let's try again.
Notice how the words "nitroglyerin" or "patch" are not mentioned anywhere in the following text.... To help officers get a clear look at your bag and reduce the need for additional screening, we suggest you pack your bag in neat layers (layer of clothes, layer of electronics, layer of clothes, layer of shoes, etc.) and wrap cords tightly around electronics items. ...
... Even if an item is generally permitted, it may be subject to additional screening or not allowed through the checkpoint if it triggers an alarm during the screening process, appears to have been tampered with, or poses other security concerns. The final decision rests with TSA on whether to allow any items on the plane.
How does just saying "nitro patches are allowed" or "nitro pills are allowed" give someone scope to "game the system"? You're grasping at straws.
Jun 11, 2014, 7:28 pm
#42
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Nashville, TN
Programs: WN Nothing and spending the half million points from too many flights, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 8,043
I was trapped by the TSO that insisted that a particular object with which I had flown over 200 times was suddenly not allowed on the plane. Escalation ensued and the supervisor agreed (of course). I lost my item. Value: ~$1000. Lesson learned. I now pack this item in my work shoes, in a shoe bag, in a special section of my checked luggage.
Supervisor escalation almost always fails and the reason is simple. It is based on the difference in reasonable escalation and punitive escalation.
Reasonable escalation: I am unsure whether this item is permitted. I would like to allow it but I need to double check with my supervisor. If they say it is OK as well, you are good to go.
Punitive escalation: I do not like this item. I do not understand what it is. I do not like your attitude and I am going to make sure you do not get to take it with you. I will ask my supervisor to agree that you are a trouble maker and need the punishment of losing your item.
A special subset of escalation includes the formerly common Nexus escalation. This nearly always became a punitive escalation at about the second level above the original ignorant TDC. I never lost. There is a reason, but the explanation is long and off subject. It is only mentioned now as there are punitive escalations in which the passenger wins. They are also rare. They are time consuming. You have to have facts on your side and an ability to prove it.
Supervisor escalation almost always fails and the reason is simple. It is based on the difference in reasonable escalation and punitive escalation.
Reasonable escalation: I am unsure whether this item is permitted. I would like to allow it but I need to double check with my supervisor. If they say it is OK as well, you are good to go.
Punitive escalation: I do not like this item. I do not understand what it is. I do not like your attitude and I am going to make sure you do not get to take it with you. I will ask my supervisor to agree that you are a trouble maker and need the punishment of losing your item.
A special subset of escalation includes the formerly common Nexus escalation. This nearly always became a punitive escalation at about the second level above the original ignorant TDC. I never lost. There is a reason, but the explanation is long and off subject. It is only mentioned now as there are punitive escalations in which the passenger wins. They are also rare. They are time consuming. You have to have facts on your side and an ability to prove it.
Jun 11, 2014, 9:10 pm
#43
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,629
As you (and others) found out with NEXUS, even with the facts clearly and unambiguously on your side, it could still be an uphill battle.
Far less clear with nitro pills, hence the odds of escalating and encountering a reasonable supervisor are even worse.
Far less clear with nitro pills, hence the odds of escalating and encountering a reasonable supervisor are even worse.
Jun 12, 2014, 12:55 am
#44
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: CPH
Programs: Delta SM
Posts: 497
Jun 12, 2014, 1:09 am
#45
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: CPH
Programs: Delta SM
Posts: 497
Though your explanation is excellent, I tend to keep things a little more simple: Escalation fails because the supervisors and checkpoint workers are colleagues who probably eat lunch, have coffee, and go to parties together. Their loyalties lie with each other -- not with the rules -- and certainly not with you.
