|
Article: TSA Postpones Safety Study of BKSX
And Sen. Collins is not happy about it.
The head of the Transportation Security Administration has backed off a public commitment to conduct a new independent study of X-ray body scanners used at airport security lanes around the country. Earlier this month, a ProPublica/PBS NewsHour investigation found that the TSA had glossed over research that the X-ray scanners could lead to a small number of cancer cases. The scanners emit low levels of ionizing radiation, which has been shown to damage DNA. In addition, several safety reviewers who initially advised the government on the scanners said they had concerns about the machines being used, as they are today, on millions of airline passengers. At a Senate hearing after the story ran, TSA Administrator John Pistole agreed to a request by Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, to conduct a new independent study of the health effects of the X-ray scanners, also known as backscatters. But at a Senate hearing of a different committee last week, Pistole said he had since received a draft report on the machines by the Department of Homeland Security’s inspector general, or IG, that might render the independent study unnecessary. . . “I hope the Obama administration is not backing away from an independent study of the health effects of these radiation-emitting machines,” Collins said in a statement to ProPublica. “What I asked for — and what the administrator committed to — was an independent study on the health effects of [the] machines, not just a study on whether TSA is doing an adequate job of inspecting, maintaining and operating” them. |
Article: TSA Puts Off Safety Study of X-ray Body Scanners
Nothing new here, just more of the same from the TSA. Lying... Delaying... Incompetence the norm.
http://www.propublica.org/article/ts...-body-scanners |
[redacted deleted quote and response - moderator]
That said, check out the last sentence in the Propublica article: The TSA plans to deploy 1,275 backscatter and millimeter-wave scanners covering more than half its security lanes by the end of 2012 and 1,800 covering nearly all lanes by 2014. |
Originally Posted by RatherBeOnATrain
(Post 17463895)
The TSA plans to deploy 1,275 backscatter and millimeter-wave scanners covering more than half its security lanes by the end of 2012 and 1,800 covering nearly all lanes by 2014. -OM |
What am I missing here? The MMW machines don't have the ionizing radiation issues that backscatter does, so why aren't they just installing those, heading off the "health issues" part at the pass and then addressing the privacy issues w/ the cartoon image?
I mean, I understand there will be opposition to the imaging technology among some people regardless of what they do--I merely speaking to the idea of how could the TSA implement a plan that would still get most opponents to come around? For me, it would take: 1) MMW only 2) Stop the "Freeze! Put your hands up!" criminality routine 3) Use the cartoon image (sorry the true term/acronym is escaping me at the moment) 4) Reduce the false positives or at a minimum, after a false positive, only have a patdown/quick frisk of the suspect area be completed vs a grope. They do that, I think that would be fairly reasonable (although not ideal--I understand an ideal of just x-raying the bags and walking through the WTMD is never coming back). |
Originally Posted by Brewfangrb
(Post 17464226)
What am I missing here? The MMW machines don't have the ionizing radiation issues that backscatter does, so why aren't they just installing those, heading off the "health issues" part at the pass and then addressing the privacy issues w/ the cartoon image?
Originally Posted by Brewfangrb
(Post 17464226)
...I understand an ideal of just x-raying the bags and walking through the WTMD is never coming back).
|
At a Senate hearing after the story ran, TSA Administrator John Pistole agreed to a request by Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, to conduct a new independent study of the health effects of the X-ray scanners, also known as backscatters. But at a Senate hearing of a different committee last week, Pistole said he had since received a draft report on the machines by the Department of Homeland Security’s inspector general, or IG, that might render the independent study unnecessary. . . |
Originally Posted by Brewfangrb
(Post 17464226)
(although not ideal--I understand an ideal of just x-raying the bags and walking through the WTMD is never coming back).
|
Originally Posted by RadioGirl
(Post 17464351)
You're missing the part where a former head of DHS is involved with selling the x-ray version of the machines. @:-)
Originally Posted by RadioGirl
(Post 17464351)
And yet "just" x-raying the bags and walking through the WTMD works fine in most countries around the world. Hmmm. :confused:
Originally Posted by saulblum
(Post 17464467)
Why not? If the TSA's purchases were controlled by what really works for security and not by whose pockets can be best lined, perhaps someone would have realized the following: The threat of airplane bombings didn't suddenly start a decade ago. It's been a threat for decades. So how did we manage just fine for so long with just the WTMD and baggage x-rays? Better yet, how did no planes fall from the sky in the TSA's first eight years of existence, before the scanner deployment began?
|
Originally Posted by Brewfangrb
(Post 17464517)
I think you misunderstood my point. My point is that using x-rays for the bags and WTMD for the people is my ideal--I'm just fine with that. My only point is that I'm resigned to the fact that the ideal isn't coming back.
|
Originally Posted by Brewfangrb
(Post 17464226)
The MMW machines don't have the ionizing radiation issues that backscatter does, so why aren't they just installing those, heading off the "health issues" part at the pass and then addressing the privacy issues w/ the cartoon image?
Also, FWIW, I'm not aware of any peer-reviewed work that proves MMW is harmless. |
Originally Posted by Brewfangrb
(Post 17464517)
But that still answers it--there is no good reason for using backscatter ofver MMW to begin with.
Actual image here: http://epic.org/privacy/body_scanners/Body_Scan_Pic.jpg The MMW's really can't see crap, but because of reflective properties, stuff shows up "bigger than life" so things aren't too hard to spot, despite the crappy resolution. The x-ray has a "chance" of detecting powder if the high school radiologist is really on his game. The MMW has no chance of seeing powder, unless is is packed dense or in a container or bag. Bound in underwear by spray adhesive or such, it wouldn't have a chance of detecting it, in my opinion. I think they recognized the problem with x-rays early on, but these were the only 2 companies that met the procurement spec and the Rapiscan is clearly superior. The ATD issue hopefully will kill off the Rapiscan, as their auto-detection software is clearly not ready. The MMW ATD has been in use for 2 years at AMS, and the latest revision passed TSA's tests. Hopefully pressure will cause them not to buy any more Rapiscans, but it'll take a second round of politics to get the existing ones scrapped. We can only hope. BTW: Successful SDOO at DEN today. Kept belt on and wallet in back pocket, no problem. Young female BDO asking destination questions. Asked where is was going, said "somewhere warm" and ducked through WTMD before any further interaction. |
Originally Posted by RatherBeOnATrain
(Post 17464887)
My theory is that Backscatter is capable of full body cavity searches while MMW is not.
Also, FWIW, I'm not aware of any peer-reviewed work that proves MMW is harmless. MMW rays are not capable of damaging DNA, so the harm would have to come via other mechanisms, which is significantly less likely, and has never been observed even at incredibly high energies. X-rays are clearly mutagenic.
Originally Posted by Wimpie
(Post 17464991)
There is one valid reason why x-ray was chosen. They clearly produce superior images - possibly an order of magnitude better than MMW. This makes detection of stuff easier for their high school radiologists. They clearly have better "detection" capability.
Actual image here: http://epic.org/privacy/body_scanners/Body_Scan_Pic.jpg The MMW's really can't see crap, but because of reflective properties, stuff shows up "bigger than life" so things aren't too hard to spot, despite the crappy resolution. Both should be scrapped. MMW = low chance of detection and furthers the detection farce. Backscattter = privacy and cancer intrusion. Neither detect body orfice bombs. |
Originally Posted by RatherBeOnATrain
(Post 17464887)
My theory is that Backscatter is capable of full body cavity searches while MMW is not.
Also, FWIW, I'm not aware of any peer-reviewed work that proves MMW is harmless. |
Originally Posted by RatherBeOnATrain
(Post 17463895)
[redacted deleted quote and response - moderator]
That said, check out the last sentence in the Propublica article: The TSA plans to deploy 1,275 backscatter and millimeter-wave scanners covering more than half its security lanes by the end of 2012 and 1,800 covering nearly all lanes by 2014. That the WTMD is going away one day very soon. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 1:54 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.