TSA breaks insulin pump
 

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news...18/detail.html

"..The teen was ushered through the scan, but said she still had to go through a full body pat-down because of fruit juice she had to control blood-sugar levels.
"At that point I was really frustrated because what I really wanted was the pat-down in the first place," said Barry.
"When they saw her juice, they panicked and they didn’t know what to do. A diabetic is going to need a source of sugar, preferably liquid. I can assure you she’s not going to blow up a 737 with an insulin pump and three Capri Sun Juice(s)," said Savannah's mother, Sandra Barry.
Sandra said she called the maker of the insulin pump, Animas.
"They said she’s got to take that pump off as soon as she lands. And my heart just sank, because I know how expensive they are. I knew how upset she would be, and I knew that I had to be the one when I got to DIA to tell her," said Sandra..."

After putting aside the "disgusting" for a moment, this quote was particularly sad:

Kippie's blue cop uniforms and shiny badge have worked beyond his wildest dreams.

As usual, the Spokesholes did not disappoint:

Yep, it's the passenger's fault.

And another good quote from the article:

"These aren't isolated incidences. They are occurring across the country"

The thing I see as odd here is that the manufacturer of the insulin pump thinks that the NoS could have damaged the pump. I was expecting to read about physical damage to it during a pat down.

Is it possible for MMW or backscatter radiation to damage a device like this?

(Note: It is sad that I don't see the TSA's disgusting behavior as odd - just normal abuse these days)

It's hard to say, I think. Some believe that the NoS can damage insulin pumps, others don't.

Me? Not a chance of me sending mine (OmniPod by Insulet) thru the NoS. It's not worth the risk. The pat-down is always :rolleyes: + :td: and occasionally :mad:, but it is not anywhere near the :mad::mad: I'd be if the NoS were to damage my device.

It may be that the manufacturer considers BSX a risk, but not MMW - but realistically, if that's the case, the manufacturer is better off suggesting pax avoid all scanning rather than asking pax to try to determine which type of scanner is in use.

Additionally, since no one actually gets to perform independent tests on these scanners, how exactly is the manufacturer supposed to verify that the medical device won't be damaged?

Probably a TSO who's been told to tell pax that the machines are safe, no more radiation than a cellphone, less than a flight, so if the pax can take a flight without harm, she can use the scanner, right?

The manufacturer of the insulin pump seems to believe that the scanners (not specified) could damage the software that determines dosage of insulin, meaning that too much or too little insulin could be administered to a diabetic whose disease is bad enough in the first place to require the use of the device. Fortunately, all involved (with the notable exception of the TSA), were aware of the danger and took precautions (not w/o risk) to arrange for insulin to be available at the destination. Luckily, this was a short domestic trip. Can you imagine if it had been a different set of circumstances and the dangers were not recognized by the person most affected and the actions of TSA caused an in-flight medical emergency or worse? :mad:

I wear an Animas pump that appears to be the same model that she uses. Animas told me not to go through either type of scanner. I knew x-rays were bad for it, so I never went throught the BKSX. I wondered if the MMW would damage it, but I never wanted to risk it. Isn't SLC MMW only?

The other problem here is that the TSA dealt with the juice poorly. I've thought about bringing juice through the checkpoint since I would be allowed to because of a medical condition. I've never done so because I figured the hassle wouldn't be worth it.

I emailed Animas after my first opt-out about a year and half ago. I wasn't sure if it was safe for the pump to go through the scanners. I got a phone call quickly telling me that I did the right thing. After getting a particularly invasive patdown in February, I emailed again and got a phone call telling me the same thing.

When I got my invasive patdown, the screener tried to convince me that the MMW was safe. He gave me the usual less radiation than a cell phone, less than 2 minutes of flying, etc. I'm really glad I didn't let him get me in the MMW scanner.

Here's a more complete story

Among the new tidbits:

"Savannah then showed agents a doctor's note explaining that the sensitive insulin pump should not go through the body scanner. She says she was told to go through it anyway."

and

"She said, because we don't have the machines to scan the juice to make sure this is not an explosive we do have to do a full body pat down and search your through your bags."

Which is really ignorant. Totally ignorant. It's punishment, plain and simple.

During an earlier point in my career, I performed software installations. After a few incidents where the tape would not load at the client side, I would always ask for a manual inspection at the checkpoint. About 50% of the time I would get push back (pre TSA days) where they told me it was perfectly safe.

I started asking the screeners to run the tape through the x-ray several times on the way back after the successful installation. It was just an experiment. Many times the tape would not work back in the office where I would also get the same parity errors I would previously get on site.

These tapes were low density and media today is much higher density. I would expect that the same results might be found on computer equipment. Some sites were always fine but others would damage the tape repeatedly. Some x-ray machines must have been really cranked.

I don't know how the TSA gets around that first point if they're sued. And that second point is total, complete and absolute BS.

Mike

+1

As though a patdown and bag search somehow ensures that the contents of the juice boxes aren't dangerous....:rolleyes:

I think it's more a case of a piece of life-safety (or critical medical gear) has not been tested for safety in these machines. Exactly the same justification that FAA uses for banning the use of electronic equipment during critical phases of flight - and the same justification that hospitals use to ban the use of cellphones & certain other electronic equipment in critical-care areas.

It's not that they believe damage will occur, it's that they can't state that damage will NOT occur. Given that, and the potential for liability should a mis-dose result in adverse medical impact on the patient, the manufacturer specifies that the device is not to be taken through the TSA machines.

If the TSA would allow independent testing or release the actual exposure levels, the engineers of these devices may be able to calculate the actual risk. And I do note here that MMW machines (which generate RF) may present as much or more risk than the backscatter machines. The lead lengths of components in the devices could act as antennas at the frequencies involved... resulting in EMI that could impact the device.

TSA is not willing to follow it's own rules by making passenger go through machine even though they requested opt-out for medical reasons. And they compound the issue by failing to produce technical data that might well show that there's no risk. When it comes to medical issues it just doesn't cut it for an unaccountable agency to say "trust me". The worst that can happen to the TSA screener is retraining. The worst that can happen to the passenger is death.

I wear an insulin pump and the manufacturer's leaflet clearly states that it can go through WTMD (and that it shouldn't alarm, but it always does), but not through X-ray machines and presumably not through AIT machines either.
As an engineer I am somewhat surprised as I don't see what in the pump could be sensitive enough to be affected. My suspicion is that the manufacturers of the pumps have simply not tested or qualified the pumps under these conditions and are CYA themselves just in case.
That said, most experiences I've had with security checks with the pump have been largely non-problematic. As I previously said, the WTMD alarms everywhere, except Australia. That leads to a pat-down, occasionally a wanding, usually an explosive swab and I'm on my way. Very rarely more than a few seconds extra. Some people doing the pat-down are terrified of getting anywhere near the pump, presumably concerned they're going to snag something, whilst others pat-down without really taking much notice.
The pump is pretty robust, it has to take all the bumping I give it after all and the manufacturers know that the appliance isn't always going to be in a gentle environment.
Relatively little of my travel is in the US, but my experience with TSA has not been significantly different from anywhere else, with respect to the insulin pump.

I'm not an expert, but I've always been told that x-rays don't, in and of themselves, disrupt magnetic storage media, particularly at the low exposure levels used in carry-on baggage scanners (which are limited in their power levels due to unshielded human proximity).

However, an x-ray machine is obviously an electrical device. I don't know how they generate, or detect, the x-rays they use to form the image, so a large electromagnet could be part of the process, and the magnetic field from that may be what disrupted your tapes.

I've passed magnetic media through the carry-on x-ray scanner a few times - floppy disks, various VHS tapes, and of course the hard drive of my laptops - without incident, but I did once have a shipment of floppies scrambled like a dozen eggs when they were shipped to me via FedEx. I always suspected that Fed-Ex had x-rayed the box in transit, but never could be sure. Whatever happened, the disks' FATs were scrambled and the computer wouldn't even recognize them as formatted media; after formatting, they seemed usable, though of course I tossed them out as untrustworthy anyway. Out of an abundance of caution, as it were.

As a type 1 pump wearer, I would just like to point out that there is no "bad" or "good" version of insulin dependent diabetes. It is like being pregnant. you either ARE or you are not. An insulin pump is used to administer insulin in a more precise way, much like tweezers are used to remove a splinter, rather than salad tongs...

This poor kid. Me, as an old lady, I know better than to even talk to the thugs at TSA....just opt me out, feel my boobies, swab my hands after you make me fondle the device you find "hidden" in my bra, and let me go disinfect myself! :rolleyes:

These are both really interesting anecdotes. I know that back in the day when I used film in my camera, I was told that 800 exposure and below film could be X-rayed, but 1600 exposure film could not. I thought that was more an issue of light-sensitive chemicals (X-rays are just slightly shorter than UV rays, and UV rays are just slightly shorter than visible light).

I will check and see if I can find anything out about magnetic storage and x-rays.

I agree that the manufacturer's warning is probably more an "we can't prove it's safe" rather than a "We're really worried about the damage". HTH is an engineer supposed to quality check a radiation exposure with no specs, dosage, or calibration records?!?

I am certainly no expert in this field, but I do get a chance to speak to technical experts --- and so I did. According to someone who is qualified to testify in court about such matters, without knowing the specifics, this person would advise never to pass the insulin pump through any x-ray or magnetic device.

The reason he gave was the same one about the full-body scanners. The levels of radiation / energy are given when the technology is functioning properly and well-calibrated. However, there is no procedure in place at the airport to make sure that this is true, and the testing is not done to test the probability of malfunction when operating all day, every day.

Bottom line, normal levels could be safe, but no way to know how often abnormal levels occur because monitoring procedures are not in place.

The chips used probably aren't radiation-hardened. The odds of trouble are low but not zero. The exposure rate might matter--two hits on the same memory cell in rapid succession would be more likely to cause trouble than two hits spread apart. It's probably more a liability issue, though.

The Fark thread on this incident had someone who appeared knowledgeable that said that x-ray generation involves big magnets. I have no confirmation on this, though.

This is what I'm thinking too. There's no way to know what the actual power level is. I'm sure the machines are calibrated at some point, but how often and by whom? The TSA says they are safe, but they aren't exactly trustworthy.

Maybe this scanner was putting out too much energy when this pump was destroyed or maybe the pumps are sensitive to the scanners. I don't know if the TSA has allowed or will allow the pump manufacturers to test their pumps using the TSA's scanners. They would probably claim SSI or some other nonsense to prevent the testing.

The two pumps I've used seem to be robust. If a scanner can damage this pump, what else can it damage?

Your cells. The expert I spoke to always ops out. Not because the backscatter or MMW is unsafe, but because they could be unsafe if the machine malfunctions. He thinks with the right malfunction even the MMW can cause problems. There is no reliable testing to say that is not true.

And note that the TSA as refused to allow anyone to test their machines, even though it was told by Congress to, and they won't even confirm they are doing any maintenance or testing to ensure they are staying in calibration.

Please note the in the medical world it is not uncommon to test the calibration of devices that produce radiation and find that 10% or more fall out of calibration over the course of a year.

A friend of mine was going through security at PDX and was stopped after getting into the machine that they had to re-calibrate before they scan her. I'm not sure I trust the guy who was hired off an ad on a pizza box to be calibrating this type of equipment.

It's also worth noting that no medical equipment gets used at the rates the TSA uses theirs. I'd expect the calibration to drift even farther with more use.

TSA destroys woman's insulin pump
 

and


and

No surprise here. TSA's highly trained, professional workforce redefines incompetence.

BUT... her plane didn't blow up. So #missionaccomplished .

The pax said it was an insulin pump, but unless the screener rubbed and jabbed it hard enough, she couldn't be sure it was an insulin pump and not a bomb.

Maybe she thought the pax had marijuana or >$10K cash or a suspicious book stashed under the pump. That's what they told her at the 'academy'.

For those not familiar with insulin pumps I will include a picture with examples of the common insulin pump styles.

Image borrowed from: https://i.pinimg.com/736x/84/fc/68/8...sulin-pump.jpg

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/84/fc/68/8...sulin-pump.jpg

The traditional insulin pump is represented in the left frame and the pod style pump in the right frame.

I think anyone who has ever been subjected to a so-called TSA Pat Down can see how the hands sliding firmly down the body technique that TSA uses could easily dislodge either unit although the infusion set used with the traditional pump is much more body conforming.

The POD type is an apply once and done for a few days of insulin. I don't believe it can be removed and reapplied. Cost can range from about $30 and up per pod (does not include controller) depending on sourcing. The mechanism needed to inject the insulin, and insulin reservoir, is built into the pod with no tubing connected to the controller as seen in the traditional pump.

The benefit of any pump system for a diabetic is eliminating multiple traditional injections of insulin each day plus in most cases much better control of the individuals Blood Glucose.

If a TSA screener is advised that a person is using an insulin pump then extra care should be taken in the area where the pump injection point is located.. Sadly that is asking far to much from the TSA screeners we see in our airports. As TSA has stated screeners have cognitive limitations that doesn't permit the exercise personal judgement in such matters.

It's simpler than that, Boggie Dog.

The TSA screener, like all screeners, has the final say on how the pax will be groped and how 'sensitive areas' will be targeted for particularly rigorous handling.

The pax should count herself lucky the TSO didn't simply confiscate the insulin pump, because as always, the screener has the final say on what is allowed.

No, it is even simpler than what you state, utter incompetence on the part of TSA!

I disagree. It is not incompetence.

That screener was not operating alone. She has had two weeks 'academy' training within the last year. If she's a new employee, she's had weeks of OJT before being turned loose to make up her own rules. If she's an old-timer, she had her initial training, her experience, and her 'refresher' two-week vacay at the 'academy'.

She is surrounded by other TSOs, LTSOs and STSOs, all highly-trained graduates of the 'academy'. If she did anything unacceptable, one or more of these eagle-eyed co-workers would have been quick to point it out, particularly one of the LTSOs or STSOs who are responsible for what goes on at their checkpoint.

If the screener truly was incompetent, it would mean that two weeks of intense training at the 'academy', weeks of OJT, and a crowd of always focused and alert TSOs, LTSOs and STSOs all failed to notice anything.

I believe she actually followed her training: if the pax declares a 'sensitive area', assume the pax is a liar and a te**orist and double down on the 'sensitive spot'.

I believe that TSA supervision is completely lacking. Screeners are acting on their on, not using the training that has been provided, and making it up as they go in many cases.

Watching TSA operate is akin to watching very young children in their first group play session.

If TSA doesn't respond, we will know that damaging or destroying insulin pumps is acceptable TSA practice.

Who knows how many nefarious plots TSA has foiled by destroying insulin pumps?

Very sad to say but at least it wasn't the entire electronic control unit. That would be another $800 or so.

I don't see how the public can ever trust TSA with our property or our bodies. The continuing damning history of TSA is just to great to ignore.

Something is very wrong with the TSA agency and its employees.