As can I. Personally, I am not overly concerned about an individual exposure to the machine. I do think that the TSA apologists are more likely than not correct that the average exposure is quite low, and the risk is also very low. I think I personally get more exposure in a single procedure I do than I would get with the SPAIT machine. The difference is that it is a known risk, I have been informed with decades of education the nature and extent of that risk, and I make the choice. The traveling public is not informed. If they were, there would be prominent little yellow and magenta signs on those machines that are the universal radiation warning signs. They are not there.

The bigger concern of the health physicists should be this: The TSA is exposing an entire population in an unprecedented manner to a sporadic burst of radiation. We simply do not know and cannot predict the effects of this type of exposure delivered to a population in this manner.

If the porn-o-scopes are essential (doubtful), there are other non-ionizing radiation techniques to obtain these images. X-ray based porn-o-scopes do not pass muster. This country and others banned freon because it was destroying the ozone which could lead to increased UV exposure and lead to increased skin cancer, in the population. Now, they propose to use x-rays to the skin as a condition for passage on an airplane?

I agree.

AIT scans are absolutely NOT essential as primary screening devices. I don't oppose using them as resolution devices, but ONLY with probable cause or warrant - at which time they must be used strictly by certified radiation technicians (is the proper term? I mean a person who is trained and certified to operate a medical x-ray machine), under direct supervision of LEOs, and following all of the same guidelines for probable cause that apply in a non-airport setting.

We make fun of TSA's "layered security" BS, but in truth, I think that layered security DOES make sense. It's just that the individual layers that TSA has chosen are either useless, abusive, applied without expertise, or cobbled together with huge gaps in them. True 'layers' would be applied one on top of the other, in a logical, consistent, escalating pattern - Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary.

Here is my general idea of a truly layered system:

Primary - Authorization check (checking ID against BP or gate pass to be sure the person is authorized to enter the sterile area). X-ray carry-on and checked baggage. Pass each passenger through a WTMD, an ETD puffer machine, and past sniffer dogs. If no alarms sound, there is no suspicion of a prohibited item, and the pax may proceed directly to his gate.

Secondary - if the WTMD alarms, HHMDs are used to narrow the focus of the search, and body-area-limited pat-downs may be used to resolve the alarm. If the puffer machine or the sniffer dogs alarm, ETD swabs are used to confirm or deny the presence of explosive or incendiary residue, to eliminate the possibility of false positives. If the baggage x-ray alarms, hand searches and ETD swabs are used to resolve the alarm. If the Secondary methods determine that no WEI are present, the pax is then free to proceed directly to his gate.

All Primary and Secondary screening is to be performed in full view and earshot of the public. All checkpoint recordings must be publicly available - preferably in real-time via the internet - and recording the checkpoint, the procedures, and the people therein by the traveling public using their own devices must be expressly ALLOWED by federal law, overriding any state laws which may restrict public recordings.

Tertiary - if the Secondary methods also alarm to the presence of WEI, the pax is detained, because at that point, reasonable suspicion has been established. Pax undergoing tertiary screening must be segregated from the public, on the assumption that if they ARE carrying WEI, they pose a threat to the traveling public. Tertiary screening must be performed by LEOs ONLY, following the same 4th Amendment procedures that are followed outside of an airport setting. Tertiary screening methods can include MMW scans, additional use of the Secondary methods, and verbal interviews conducted by LEOs, NOT by TSA clerks. If the Tertiary methods fail to reveal any further evidence of WEI, the pax is then free to proceed directly to his gate. If the Tertiary methods DO reveal evidence of WEI, the LEO may exercise his discretion to determine whether the WEI was brought in as an attack, or accidentally, and to decide whether the pax should be cited, arrested, or freed to proceed to his gate (without the WEI, naturally).

Tertiary screening should be performed away from the public, but within public view via CCTV at all times. The detained pax must be allowed to have up to two witnesses of their choice present during screenings. Tertiary screenings must be recorded at all times, both audio and visual, by cameras from all four corners of the room, and the recordings made publicly available. No tertiary screening shall be performed on anyone under the age of 18 without their parent or guardian's explicit permission, or outside the presence of the parent or guardian.

After all, if the screeners and LEOs do catch a bad guy, we want those recordings as evidence, right? And if the screeners or LEOs are falsely accused of impropriety, the recordings will clear them. If they actually engage in impropriety, the recordings will condemn them and their agencies can take appropriate disciplinary action against the screeners.

Verbal interviews (questions, statement of names and destinations, etc) during Primary or Secondary screening are a useless, inefficient, un-Constitutional invasion of privacy, and must be eliminated. Detention on vague suspicion without any actual screening alarms (Oh, that guy is carrying a lot of money! That's suspicious!) is also un-Constitutional BS and must be eliminated. Invasive searches used as Primary or Secondary screening methodology are un-Constitutional and must be eliminated.

TSA has completely lost sight of what it's supposed to be - it's a screening agency whose mandate is to prevent weapons, explosives, and incendiary devices from getting on planes. It is NOT an agency of law enforcement, it is NOT an investigative or intelligence agency, and it is NOT tasked with catching drug dealers, fugitives, or other criminals - it's one and only purpose is to screen people and packages entering the airport to prevent WEI from getting near the planes.

Thus far, they are not only an epic failure at that job, but have focused their efforts and bloated budgets on other jobs that are completely outside their mandate, and eviscerated the Constitution to do it.

WillCAD, that is exactly the kind of layered security I want too. Real layers. Why the TSA can't figure out this logical and EFFECTIVE approach to security I'll never know.

That's a heck of a point. I, too, have NEVER seen the proper radiation warning symbols on these machines. How does the TSA get away with this? These machines are industrial x-rays. I have been around these devices (when they have not been in operation!) in the space sector in facilities designed to inspect solid rocket motor segments for cracked fuel and in test facilities where the contractor was inspecting the integrity of welds in liquid rocket engine plumbing and propellant tanks. Every one of these machines had all sorts of labels on them.

And, let me add my thanks to the resident physicists and MDs who went into significant detail -- far beyond my expertise -- to study and explain the physics behind these machines and their real danger. Certainly, Hopkins understands all of this. The UCSF scientists understand this. I understand this, as do anyone with engineering or science background. The TSA understands this, too, but they have concealed it from the American public.

We can't let them get away with it.

I bet you that if you crack the scanner open you'll find the warning labels inside of it. And they probably think that is good enough.

It will take another 15-20 years to observe the bio-statistical results of the radiation exposure TSA staff is currently taking on the job. Yes, they will each be a component of a statistical study.... I feel bad for them.

You see - you learn everyday something new !

Absolutely -- I was referring only to my own qualifications to comment. I appreciate the clinic you guys are putting on.

Bart - do you know the above because you are a scientist or trained x-ray technician, or because your TSA leadership tells you so?

Knowing how well the federal government maintains sensitive equipment in general, the language in bold concerns me most.