mules

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..."

FliesWay2Much

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.

OldGoat

And another good quote from the article:

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

tev9999

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)

mrhills0146

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 + and occasionally , but it is not anywhere near the I'd be if the NoS were to damage my device.

chollie

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?

loops

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?

spd476

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.

OldGoat

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."

Global_Hi_Flyer

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

SirFlysALot

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.

mikeef

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

chollie

+1

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

Global_Hi_Flyer

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.

catandmouse

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.