Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Safety/Security > Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate
Reload this Page >

TSA Adjusting Prohibitions/Designated "Ask Bart" Thread

Community
Wiki Posts
Search

TSA Adjusting Prohibitions/Designated "Ask Bart" Thread

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Aug 14, 2006 | 3:21 pm
  #91  
Ari
FlyerTalk Evangelist
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 11,678
Originally Posted by Nanook
From the TSA website is the following:
"Some solid or powdered cosmetics items are permitted past the checkpoint; however, this is left to the discretion of the Security Officer. To minimize delays and hassle, we recommend that you pack all cosmetics in your checked baggage."

I guess it depends upon who looks in your back when you go through the security line. If that person isn't feeling well or just simply miserable, they may make you toss it.
Funny thing, I would call checking baggage a delay and hassle.
Ari is offline  
Old Aug 14, 2006 | 3:50 pm
  #92  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: XNA, TUL
Programs: Avis First, AA plebian :(
Posts: 196
Originally Posted by MSY-MSP
Unfortunately the Health Code violation thing is a common misconception. Apparently there is no rule in any state that requires a person to wear shoes to patronize any establishement. There are rules requiring footwear for employees of certain establishements, but not the patrons. So the signs saying no shoes no service are only corporate policies and not health code reasons. Though many companies will use the "health code" as cover for the policy.

Now having just stated the above, I do not agree with mandatory bare feet at the checkpoint, because I feel it does expose us to unnecessary risks of infection.
Perhaps that is true in your state(s), but it is not in mine, except when the airport terminal is privately owned. IIRC, the prohibition is against barefoot people in public buildings, as in owned by the public, not open to the public. Don't ask me what the logic is, them's just the rules.

Unfortunately the administrative regulations (of which this is one) of the state Board of Health aren't online. If you're interested, I can probably find a copy somewhere and post a quote.

Either way, I'm not flying until the mandatory shoe idiocy ends.
wierdo is offline  
Old Aug 14, 2006 | 4:40 pm
  #93  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Ontario
Posts: 321
Hi Bart
Thanks for posting at a trying time Im sure. Let me ask you this...there are 1000's of women across North America, who like me have gone through Breast Cancer treatment. For many of us this includes removal of underarm lymph nodes. By its definition that surgery puts us at risk for something called lymphedema(permanent severe swelling of an arm...although there are other types ) and many women who have LE as a result of their surgery. Without going into all the ins and outs of LE, let it suffice to say that cabin pressure has been correlated to LE risk. There are a number of precautions we
MUST take, ...for some that includes wrapping the arm or wearing a special sleeve, for others who dont yet have LE, they MUST use moisturizer to prevent skin from drying out, and most importantly increase water intake while flying. (if you're interested I can advise you of web sites to look at which show these requirements)
DH, and I have travelled alot, and as we get older were looking forward to flying more. Given these new procedures, it will be impossible for me to fly as I am not prepared to risk developing LE, after everything Ive already been through. If I cant carry moisturizer on a flight , I cannot put any on my arm when it gets dry(which I currently do 5- 10- times daily when Im not in the air)...and not keeping hydrated is just asking for trbl.
Ive read that prescriptions could be obtained for moisturizers, but in the same vein, Ive also read that OTC product prescriptions will be at the discretion of the TSA(or in Canada at our equivalent) at the airport. So how can I make travel plans? I cannot get on a plane without my moisturizer. If we make a booking I am quite sure that the airline wont refund if Im not allowed to carry moisturizer and I wouldnt be able to board if it is seized.
I have 3 flights booked over the next few months, one humourously enough for follow up medical treatment at the Mayo Clinic in a few weeks and Im even considering cancelling that.
Do you have any ideas for the 1000's of women in the same position Im in?
Legalbee is offline  
Old Aug 14, 2006 | 5:47 pm
  #94  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Montgomery Township, NJ and Homosassa, FL
Programs: CO Platinum, CO Million Miler, Starwood Platinum
Posts: 43
One more question on the shoe thing. What about a diabetic. If they pick up an infection on their foot it could have devastating consequences such as amputation. What in hell is the TSA thinking?

There are people from all over the world - potentially bringing in organisms not normally found in the US, which may be resistant to almost any antibiotic. Antibiotic resistance is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in this country.

What harm is there to letting someone sit down, take off their shoes, and put the shoes through the x ray the same as they would be screened if the person took them off before entering the WTMD.

I just don't get it and I would hope that the CDC will step up and make a public health recommendation. But I guess I shouldn't hold my breath waiting.

Oh, and by the way, I carry (but now I can't on the plane) hand disinfectant gel - to use when I touch an item that may be dirty and/or contaminated. But since I can't carry this on with me now, I can't even have the security of putting that on my feet.
CME Flyer is offline  
Old Aug 14, 2006 | 6:39 pm
  #95  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Winter Garden, FL
Programs: Delta DM-3MM United Gold-MM Marriott Lifetime Titanium Hertz President's Circle
Posts: 13,498
Originally Posted by Legalbee
Do you have any ideas for the 1000's of women in the same position I'm in?
Without being unnecessarily crude, I might point out that all of these women have hiding places that I don't and that could easily hold a small tube of moisturizer. Use it in the lavatory, and no one need know that you even have it (to avoid diverting the flight!). A tube of moisturizer won't set off the metal detector.

Bruce
bdschobel is offline  
Old Aug 14, 2006 | 6:42 pm
  #96  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Miami, FL
Programs: AA EXP/Marriott Plat/Hertz PC
Posts: 12,724
Originally Posted by bdschobel
Without being unnecessarily crude, I might point out that all of these women have hiding places that I don't and that could easily hold a small tube of moisturizer. Use it in the lavatory, and no one need know that you even have it (to avoid diverting the flight!). A tube of moisturizer won't set off the metal detector.
Be careful. I suspect that flights now have lavatory cams; which are there to monitor potential terrorist activity.
whirledtraveler is offline  
Old Aug 14, 2006 | 7:08 pm
  #97  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Ontario
Posts: 321
Originally Posted by bdschobel
Without being unnecessarily crude, I might point out that all of these women have hiding places that I don't and that could easily hold a small tube of moisturizer. Use it in the lavatory, and no one need know that you even have it (to avoid diverting the flight!). A tube of moisturizer won't set off the metal detector.

Bruce
Well, I know I "could" do all sorts of things(dont ask ) but the question is whether I "should" have to. One wouldnt think that given the health risk here women should have to.....well ....um....you know
Legalbee is offline  
Old Aug 14, 2006 | 7:12 pm
  #98  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Winter Garden, FL
Programs: Delta DM-3MM United Gold-MM Marriott Lifetime Titanium Hertz President's Circle
Posts: 13,498
Of course you shouldn't have to. We all agree on that. But the government is forcing us to behave in ways that don't make sense.

Bruce
bdschobel is offline  
Old Aug 14, 2006 | 9:03 pm
  #99  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
20 Countries Visited
1M
All eyes on you!
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Jupiter, FL
Programs: DL PM, Marriott Lifetime Titanium, Hilton Silver
Posts: 39,624
Originally Posted by bdschobel
Of course you shouldn't have to. We all agree on that. But the government is forcing us to behave in ways that don't make sense.

Bruce
Of course it makes complete sense. With the ban on liquids, except for medicines where the label matches the passenger name, there is no way a terrorist could possibly sneak liquids on a plane, unless they had access to ALL of the following: A bottle containing medicine, a computer, a printer, and labels. Now, how many people have access to such exotic materials????
pbiflyer is offline  
Old Aug 15, 2006 | 4:45 am
  #100  
Original Poster
Suspended
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,389
Deleted

Last edited by Bart; Jan 6, 2008 at 9:57 pm
Bart is offline  
Old Aug 15, 2006 | 6:32 am
  #101  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
All eyes on you!
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: An NPR mind living in a Fox News world
Posts: 14,343
Chertoff has already proven that he's clueless. His remarks the other day about TSA "having enough hands on deck" (a Navy term of all things for land-locked operations) ignores the fact that many of us are working mandatory overtime which, as would be intuitively obvious to the casual observer, indicates a lack of enough personnel for the mission as opposed to sufficient numbers for the job. I think this will put Chertoff in the spotlight more than away from it, and if he continues making empty-headed remarks, he could find himself on the same career path as the former head of FEMA.
Hawley was on the PBS News Hour last night doing an in-studio interview with Gwen Ifill. She asked him about the change of TSA people checking IDs and contractors loading bags. Hawley didn't have a clue what she was talking about and he started babbling about some of our airports use contractort screeners but they are trained to the same standards, etc, etc. Unfortunately, she let him off the hook and moved on to the next question. Hawley was also wearing a rug that was so bad, it made Sam Donaldson look like a GQ model.
FliesWay2Much is offline  
Old Aug 15, 2006 | 7:05 am
  #102  
Original Poster
Suspended
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,389
Deleted

Last edited by Bart; Jan 6, 2008 at 9:57 pm
Bart is offline  
Old Aug 15, 2006 | 7:08 am
  #103  
Original Poster
Suspended
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,389
Deleted

Last edited by Bart; Jan 6, 2008 at 9:57 pm
Bart is offline  
Old Aug 15, 2006 | 7:12 am
  #104  
Original Poster
Suspended
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,389
Deleted

Last edited by Bart; Jan 6, 2008 at 9:56 pm
Bart is offline  
Old Aug 15, 2006 | 7:18 am
  #105  
Original Poster
Suspended
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,389
Deleted

Last edited by Bart; Jan 6, 2008 at 9:56 pm
Bart is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

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.