Article: TSA Postpones Safety Study of BKSX
Nov 16, 2011 | 3:47 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: LGA
Programs: Double Unobtainium, Grace L. Ferguson Airline & Storm Door Co.
Posts: 155
Article: TSA Postpones Safety Study of BKSX
And Sen. Collins is not happy about it.
Full ProPublica story here.
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 Securitys 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.
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 Securitys 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.
Nov 16, 2011 | 4:14 pm
#2
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 471
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
http://www.propublica.org/article/ts...-body-scanners
Nov 16, 2011 | 4:44 pm
#3
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ATL Lost Luggage
Programs: Kettle with Kryptonium Medallion Tags
Posts: 12,674
[redacted deleted quote and response - moderator]
That said, check out the last sentence in the Propublica article:
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.
Last edited by magic111; Nov 16, 2011 at 5:33 pm Reason: removed deleted quote and response
Nov 16, 2011 | 5:32 pm
#4
Join Date: Feb 2011
Programs: AA Executive Platinum, Hyatt Globalist, HHonors Silver
Posts: 189
-OM
Nov 16, 2011 | 5:49 pm
#5
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 71
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).
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).
Nov 16, 2011 | 6:15 pm
#6
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney (for now), GVA (only in my memories)
Programs: QF Lifetime Silver (big whoop)
Posts: 9,322
Nov 16, 2011 | 6:33 pm
#7
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 516
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 Securitys inspector general, or IG, that might render the independent study unnecessary. . .
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 Securitys inspector general, or IG, that might render the independent study unnecessary. . .
Nov 16, 2011 | 6:34 pm
#8
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Boston
Posts: 821
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?
Nov 16, 2011 | 6:43 pm
#9
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 71
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?
Nov 16, 2011 | 7:00 pm
#10
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Boston
Posts: 821
Nov 16, 2011 | 7:52 pm
#11
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ATL Lost Luggage
Programs: Kettle with Kryptonium Medallion Tags
Posts: 12,674
Also, FWIW, I'm not aware of any peer-reviewed work that proves MMW is harmless.
Nov 16, 2011 | 8:12 pm
#12
Join Date: May 2010
Location: FLL - Nice and Warm
Programs: TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 1,025
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.
Nov 16, 2011 | 8:19 pm
#13
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Up in the air far too often.
Programs: Star Gold
Posts: 354
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.
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.
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.
Nov 16, 2011 | 8:48 pm
#14
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 71
Given the government's flippant attitude toward backscatter, I don't trust them for second on whatever the MMW might or might not do. But, at a minimum, they would SEEM to be far safer than getting dosed with radiation, which I would be damned worried about if I frequent business traveler.
Nov 16, 2011 | 11:25 pm
#15
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 453
[redacted deleted quote and response - moderator]
That said, check out the last sentence in the Propublica article:
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.