ChefBill

Are there any safe airports left for international travel?

I read that PHL no longer has that 1 safe terminal. And have tried to use tsastatus to look for other safe airports that have international flights, but the data is very limited. I wouldn't otherwise mind doing the background checks for precheck, but the whole fingerprint thing is a bit creepy.

We're both citizens. Going to Munich or Vienna to visit wife's family.

Thanks,
Bill

Airbridge

To be really safe you should probably have her family brought here by submarine and place them in quarantine for 6 months before meeting with them

TheHap

Airbridge, 'safe' is a term used on these forums to mean an airport or a terminal that are using WTMDs. Please see the sticky at the top of this board:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/pract...y-scanner.html

If anybody is able to help with, I would be curious as well.

AllieKat

EDITED BY Mod - OT


And the general answer would be "no" - however "safe" isn't a good term anymore, as all the airports now utilise non-ionising radiation, so there are no legitimate safety concerns anymore.

pinkcat

Does this mean that the body scanners in all US airports are ok to go through in terms of radiation and cancer risk now?
I ask because I have a trip coming up and it would save me time if it was ok to use them, I have always opted out but my husband always went through the machines since they were brought into use and he died recently of a brain tumour

theddo

As far as I know there never was a known causation between the body scanners and any tumours, due to the infrequent use by most travellers.

However the backscatters are not used anymore, only the millimeter wave scanners are and those are not known to cause cancer but are more similar to cell phones. All of the should be millimeter wave scanners since the other groups lost their contracts. Ask.

The long term studies on people with the travel patterns of flyertalk has yet to be made, so maybe that will change in the future.

Spiff

No peer-reviewed studies have been posted and these disgusting, unnecessary machines do still take naked pictures of people. "Safe" certainly applies in the context of privacy and may also be applicable in terms of one's physical safety. The only thing TSA has released is "it uses MMW - don't worry about it." I've got two words for TSA and those two words are not "happy birthday".

AllieKat

Millimetre wave radiation is non-ionising and these machines operate at very low levels. There is no scientifically known method by which they could cause cancer, and if one were to be discovered, these machines would be the least of our worries - the scan is only a few seconds low at power levels much lower than a mobile phone, WiFi computer, walkie talkie, etc.

Also, it's very unlikely that a backscatter machine caused a brain tumour. While backscatter machines are likely to pose some cancer risk, it would most likely cause skin cancer since the vast majority of the exposure is to the surface of the skin.

Finally, millimetre wave machines do NOT product "nude" photos. Technically, even backscatter machines don't - your clothes are still on, thus it's not nude. Though it does bear a strong resemblance (not very sexy though - distorted, no hair, etc). Millimetre wave machines do not produce such an image, as the resolution is much lower. Even the image they do produce then gets masked and interpreted by software so no human ever sees the image the machine produces (which, again, is nothing like the image from a backscatter Xray to begin with).

Millimetre wave machines pose no practical privacy or safety concerns. They also haven't actually proved to be more effective than metal detectors, and they're ridiculously expensive. An enormous waste of tax dollars, they are.

Spiff

Really? What are those levels? Has the TSA released them? Has TSA released the ranges of power?


Irrelevant. They offer zero medical, or in my opinion any benefit whatsoever. Any risk, however miniscule is not worth it. Cancer is not the only concern.

Completely irrelevant. More danger, zero benefits. Whoever introduced such machines should be caned and sent to prison for life.

It's "nude enough" in my opinion. Furthermore, there is zero proof no such image is created though not displayed.

Again, no proof.

Agreed about the waste, but not about the privacy. No peer reviewed studies, just one "trust us" after another from TSA. Trust you, TSA? No, but I've got another verb/interjection for you.

AllieKat

I'm afraid I don't have time to find sources to give you the exact power levels, but they are extremely low, remember these machines are also sold on the private market, they're not some government top secret. The levels are orders of magnitude lower than those from a mobile phone or a Wi-Fi tablet, and you're exposed for only seconds.

To be fair, it's not QUITE an apples-and-apples comparison. The wavelength involved in much shorter than mobile phones and Wi-Fi, which could theoretically increase potential damage - it carries more energy. HOWEVER, the wavelength is still longer than visible light and carries far less energy than ionising radiation which causes cancer.

As for the images, get real. Seriously, there is no reason to believe the government has magically made millimetre wave far higher quality than the millimetre wave scanners sold on the open market. While the TSA has masking software, the scanners are widely available without it. Do a Google image search for sample images! I agree, I'm not 100% convinced (95% convinced, though) that the TSA/NSA/somebody doesn't log a "real" image. But do a Google image search to look at what those images look like. For the most part, the energy reacts with muscle and the images are hardly nudes. They're medical images, at best. They look like something from a science class, definitely not something ANYONE is going to get off to. Though frankly, no one is going to get off to backscatter images either. Sure, they look like "nudes" - like black and white nudes of a chemo patient in the most unappealing pose imaginable. Neither one of these machines is producing erotic content, and the millimetre wave is so far from appealing it is ridiculous to think some TSA agent goes home and faps to the images.

Let's fight these images on realistic concerns - high cost, slowdown in security lines, false positives, false negatives, etc.

pinkcat

I probably already know this in my head, there is no rhyme or reason to why a perfectly healthy 40 something man died in a year and 2 days

AllieKat

First, I am very sorry for your loss. Cancer is a vicious, vicious menace. You're right though, in saying there is neither rhyme nor reason to it. There are things we can do to reduce our odds. For one, avoiding ionising radiation exposure - including backscatter X-ray machines - will probably reduce the risk of cancer. This is on the assumption that the linear, no-threshold model is true. In truth, it's probably rather conservative (overestimating cancer cases at low doses). Certainly avoiding higher exposure procedures like CT scans can be reasonably assumed to reduce cancer risk; though do not avoid a scan when the benefit exceeds the risk! Remember, the assumption must be that if a doctor orders a scan, the medical benefit exceeds the risks of the exposure.

There's other things too, avoiding nitrites, keeping a balanced diet complete across food groups, etc. Ultimately, however, cancer is one thing that we have not managed to control very well. It's sad, tragic, and very rarely can be blamed on a specific cause. The odds of backscatter X-ray exposure being related to your husband's cancer are very very low (though non-zero). It would be so helpful if you could point to an event and say "that did it" - sadly, there's no such event.

I wish you the best in the rest of your life. Go out, enjoy it. Try to find happiness in the little things and be thankful for every moment you have with everyone you encounter. Love lots, forgive often, and remember what matters. It's all any of us can do. *HUGS*

pinkcat

Thank you for your kind words,
its always at the back of my mind, did this cause it, did that cause it. Its been a tough year and I am ready to start travelling again all the places we never got to starting with Hawaii

AllieKat

Of course, I think that's one of the nicest things you can do to honour your late husband - see the things and do the stuff you'd have done together. And, find enjoyment in it. Life is short, as you too sadly know. Make it rock!

neko

Even a low resolution image raises significant privacy concerns if one's body isn't "normal".

The device will clearly reveal that someone has had a mastectomy (> million American women are breast cancer survivors), or has had an ostomy (e.g. bladder and colon-rectal cancer survivors) or is incontinent (e.g. prostate cancer survivors).

Surely information about such meidcal conditions is both intensely private and emotionally charged, as well as legally protected (for everybody but TSA).

Do you really think that being forced to answer intimate questions in front of strangers, or family -- possibly including young children for whom details are not age appropriate, or co-workers/clients/partners is not a terrible invasion of privacy?

Hint - if your boss finds out that you were treated for breast cancer -- even successfully, some years ago -- do you think it puts you on the "in line for a big promotion" list or the "first to be laid off if things get tough, just in case" list?