|
Originally Posted by cardiomd
(Post 15578939)
Trvlr64, I don't think he meant it that way... he meant that there is a strong culture of safety in medicine, not referring to the specific scenario of a tube "blown".
For example (in my field that I'm intimately familiar with) if there were unexplained geiger counts in our nuclear cardiology lab, the whole lab would most definitely be shut down until the radioactive material spill was located and cleaned. We would most likely be fined and have JCAHO and OSHA headaches for years, even if the spill was not significant to human life (say, one dose of tracer spilled somewhere). We would be penalized and audited for the future as it shows a sloppiness that is inexcusable. The TSA has not shown that they audit the performance of these machines, or even demonstrated real-world third party data regarding output measurements in production units with effects on living tissue. Systematic low-dose irradiation of humans is not something to be taken lightly. But let's be real here. That poster said "machine meltdown". You're describing a radionuclide spill which would require a shut down you're correct. The x-ray backscatter isn't a constantly emitting x-ray source. It's only on when you step into the unit. If it was "ON" the entire time then the entire TSA would be wearing dosimeters. And I don't see them wearing those. And they wouldn't be constantly saying to travelers "it's safe". :rolleyes: "you get more radiation from flying" :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: . |
Originally Posted by cardiomd
(Post 15578939)
For example (in my field that I'm intimately familiar with) if there were unexplained geiger counts in our nuclear cardiology lab, the whole lab would most definitely be shut down until the radioactive material spill was located and cleaned. We would most likely be fined and have JCAHO and OSHA headaches for years, even if the spill was not significant to human life (say, one dose of tracer spilled somewhere). We would be penalized and audited for the future as it shows a sloppiness that is inexcusable.
The TSA has not shown that they audit the performance of these machines, or even demonstrated real-world third party data regarding output measurements in production units with effects on living tissue. Systematic low-dose irradiation of humans is not something to be taken lightly. Do the TSOs at my local airport with the backscatter machines (which are virtually never used) have annual radiation safety training? Are they even capable of explaining the difference between ionizing and non-ionizing radiation? Do they have a radiation safety officer monitoring the equipment for their safety and that of the traveling public? How are these backscatter machines calibrated, how often, and by what lab? I suspect I know the answers to these questions, and I don't like those answers. Privacy concerns aside, I will not use a device that emits ionizing radiation if it's not operated by a physician or a licensed radiology tech. |
Originally Posted by kbug43
(Post 15579735)
I'm an engineer, not in the medical field, but I have to have annual radiation safety training simply to work in a materials characterization lab where there is a SEM and a real time x-ray inspection system. There is additional training to actually use the equipment. Our RSO (radiation safety officer) does monthly audits with the Geiger counter and the state comes in to inspect annually. We have an array of radiation monitors in the lab and those monitors are calibrated annually. The x-ray has interlocks and the SEM basically can't operate in an unsafe condition (it would burn out the filament). I worked in that lab while pregnant and neither I or my obstetrician had any concerns over radiation safety.
Do the TSOs at my local airport with the backscatter machines (which are virtually never used) have annual radiation safety training? Are they even capable of explaining the difference between ionizing and non-ionizing radiation? Do they have a radiation safety officer monitoring the equipment for their safety and that of the traveling public? How are these backscatter machines calibrated, how often, and by what lab? I suspect I know the answers to these questions, and I don't like those answers. Privacy concerns aside, I will not use a device that emits ionizing radiation if it's not operated by a physician or a licensed radiology tech. It is complex, but when dealing with a very remote threat, the risk to the populace has to be minimal. Giving all passengers a few mrem of radiation yearly is not necessarily low compared to the extremely, extremely low that they prevent any threat. Deterrence effects are notoriously hard to measure, but low given the historically low threat rate before WBI was even technologically feasible. |
Originally Posted by flapping arms
(Post 15579462)
Cases like this are why I'd prefer the WBI machines had a placard right at their entry with the following:
1. Wide border in international orange. 2. The title WBI MACHINE in all caps and large print. 3. A notice that going through the WBI machine is optional, and the pax may opt out and be subject to an intrusive pat-down. 4. A notice that WBI does NOT detect weapons or explosives, only anomalies, and any anomaly will result in an intrusive pat-down. 5. A list of DO NOT GO THROUGH THIS WBI MACHINE IF YOU: The list would start with "opt out" and "were persuaded in any way to opt back in." Someone who is good at designing signs please PM me for the rest of my ideas. I have a three hour plane ride tonight with no inflight internet so I'll see if I can work on it. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 3:59 pm. |
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.