EPIC v. DHS: New FOIA'd Documents Raise New Questions About WBI Radiation
Jun 27, 2011, 9:19 pm
#32
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 38,410
1. I agree that it's hard to really analyze the outbreak of cancer among clerks at BOS. Why there and not at other airports? An easy explanation would be that nobody else complained through their union reps? regardless, given the clerk lifestyle we've all observed and, in some cases, photogaphed -- smoking, obesity, etc -- I think it would be hard to determine the number of new cases of cancer and cardiovascular disease beyond those would would be expected among this demographic.
Jun 27, 2011, 10:17 pm
#35
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: North of DFW
Programs: AA PLT, HH Gold, TSA Disparager Gold, going for Platnium
Posts: 1,535
For which anyone with medical training/expertise takes with a grain of salt due to the volume of inaccuracies or blatantly wrong info.
MRI is not used in airports, its industrial grade CT and X-ray scanners because this is what would happen with metal objects in luggage (not to mention the liability from destruction of property), and this is just one example of why.
MRI is not used in airports, its industrial grade CT and X-ray scanners because this is what would happen with metal objects in luggage (not to mention the liability from destruction of property), and this is just one example of why.
Jun 27, 2011, 10:19 pm
#36
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 80
Jun 27, 2011, 10:43 pm
#37
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: SAN
Posts: 2,426
It is highly improbable that the cancer clusters are related to backscatter, since it really hasn´t been around long enough yet (give it a few years...). But notice that all other point have long been pointed out around here. It is good to see that this is going mainstream.
To be frank, if there is a cancer cluster, it is most likely a statistical aberration. If truly due to radiation exposure in the airport, it must be due to leakage from luggage-screening machines.
I'm an opponent of whole body imagers and have opted out of backscatter every time, in large part due to health concerns. However, if we make scientifically unsound claims, we're no better than the TSA.
Jun 28, 2011, 9:39 am
#38
Join Date: Jul 2006
Programs: United
Posts: 2,710
BubbaLoop is correct. Backscatter has not been around long enough yet to be causing cancer. The lag time between exposure and carcinogenic effect of radiation is inversely proportional to dose, and it's unlikely that we will see the medically deleterious results of these scanners until 10-20 years from now, at least, even for frequent flyers or TSA workers.
To be frank, if there is a cancer cluster, it is most likely a statistical aberration. If truly due to radiation exposure in the airport, it must be due to leakage from luggage-screening machines.
I'm an opponent of whole body imagers and have opted out of backscatter every time, in large part due to health concerns. However, if we make scientifically unsound claims, we're no better than the TSA.
To be frank, if there is a cancer cluster, it is most likely a statistical aberration. If truly due to radiation exposure in the airport, it must be due to leakage from luggage-screening machines.
I'm an opponent of whole body imagers and have opted out of backscatter every time, in large part due to health concerns. However, if we make scientifically unsound claims, we're no better than the TSA.
Jun 28, 2011, 10:38 am
#39
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: YOW
Programs: Aero-something
Posts: 125
Lie
Deny
Deflect
Admit (usually via a press release on a Friday afternoon or buried on a website somewhere)
Jun 28, 2011, 10:47 am
#40
Join Date: Jul 2006
Programs: United
Posts: 2,710
Jun 28, 2011, 12:01 pm
#42
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,110
TSA senior leadership all the way up to Secretary of DHS have told them they are safe.
Looks like TSA screeners are either going to have trust these people or use their own brains and remove themselves from a potentially deadly environment.
Looks like TSA screeners are either going to have trust these people or use their own brains and remove themselves from a potentially deadly environment.
Jun 28, 2011, 12:20 pm
#43
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: An NPR mind living in a Fox News world
Posts: 14,165
I recall my first opt-out at the Dulles Diamond Lane a few months ago when I lost the opportunity to self-select. I announced to the moat dragon who directed me to the Cancer Machine that, "There's no way I am getting into your Cancer Machine." While waiting by the metal detector, the 20-something female clerk standing right next to the machine said, "Don't worry. They're safe." I asked her if she had read the Hopkins report. She had never heard of it (not surprisingly). After telling me that the machines "give you less radiation than your flight...," I looked her right in the eye and said, "Well, Missy, have you ever watched someone die of cancer?" She not only stopped talking to me; she stopped making eye contact as well."
Jun 28, 2011, 1:20 pm
#44
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: SJC, SFO, YYC
Programs: AA-EXP, AA-0.41MM, UA-Gold, Ex UA-1K (2006 thru 2015), PMUA-0.95MM, COUA-1.5MM-lite, AF-Silver
Posts: 13,437
If I were a still a young guy, I'd be in law school and learning everything I could about class action suits of this nature and about the body scanners to prepare for the windfall. Some attorney is going to be be fabulously rich in 20 years.
Jun 28, 2011, 1:25 pm
#45
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,728
Some attorney is going to be fabulously rich, all right - but he'll be taking MY money and YOUR money, not Chertoff's money.