yautjalady

I just read your post after posting a reply to Barbell...
I haven't had the unfortunate experience of having to go thru a MMW.
I'm hearing impaired with balance problems (if in elevator, feel the motion in my head, uggh!) so I wonder how I'd react.. gah!
Now I know I don't ever wanna go thru one

barbell

I wouldn't disagree, but I've read several "MMW w/ ATR is fine because it's safe" or "...because it isn't BKSX", and others along those lines.

I just think it's important to explicitly point out that MMW=safe>BKSX is a logical fallacy, because that impression sometimes does get thrown around these parts.

I do know this: an acquaintance of mine who goes through these things because, "Well, what's the big deal?" remarked to me after I started talking more about it that, well, gosh, she gets headaches every time she's gone through airport security this year. These headaches are accompanied by nausea. She has no prior history of similar headaches. I don't think it's a coincidence.

That said, I think it's important to note that different people will react to different things differently. We don't know that her headaches were caused by MMW, she probably has other triggers. What we do know is that she has identified airport security as a contributing factor to her headaches that occur with concomitant nausea. We shouldn't take stories like yours and hers lightly. I only offer it as a second data point to yours.

Until TSA allows unbiased, third-party, independent testing of these machines, we'll never know.

RedSnapper

The cell-phone interference issue is indeed something that might be worth looking into, though if it is a localized phenomenon it might be something that the FCC doesn't care about.

"Health issues" have been discussed many times on this flyertalk. With MMW there simply aren't any (unless you count psychological ones). There is no controversy over this in the scientific community. BKSX is another issue, entirely.

I do understand that many people do feel uncomfortable with these things, and they feel the typical responses people get in uncomfortable situations. I wouldn't feel good having a stranger take nude pics of me, either.

average_passenger

SFOSpiff, I thought I was the only one. I also felt ill right after being forced to go through a MMW. The TSO said that I'd have to wait a very long time to opt out and I didn't want to miss my flight home since I had cheap tickets that didn't allow for changes and it probably didn't allow for missed flights. I had booked this one vacation long before all the craziness started. Thanks to the TSA, I have saved thousands of dollars not going on vacations that require flights. With the way the current stock market is going, I guess I'm kind of thankful to those TSA thugs for helping me save money. I could fly every weekend if i wanted to but no thanks. I'll avoid the TSO's and scanners for now.

After exiting a MMW, I felt dizzy, confused, and my skin was all warm and tingly. Seriously, my skin felt strange, like it was staticky or something. It almost hurt in a strange way.

Bravo to the DEFCON people for opting out in large numbers!!

barbell

That is an awfully confident pronouncement from someone who refuses to cite a source.

And the dismissal of possible health issues as "psychological" is both demeaning and irresponsible if you are unable to cite a source that has studied human health issues when humans are put in a semi-enclosed space and had these beams directed over their entire bodies. Do you have such a source you can cite?

SATTSO

I contacted someone I know, and the opt out rate was higher, but not as high as you would think. Actually, based on the demographic of those travelling, it was very low. If the normal opt out rate is 2 to 5%, daily, and you double or triple that number, it was still relatively low.

average_passenger

Even a low number of opt-outs is enough to annoy the TSO's. Even just one opt-out is one time that those expensive machines are NOT being used. I wonder if the sheeple think that using stimulus money to buy these machines is now worth it given our current economic situation. Did using the stimulus money for the machines help revive our economy? It doesn't matter how safe you feel when you can't even get a job and can't afford to fly!!

FliesWay2Much

When attempting to place raw opt-out numbers into proper context, here are some well-established qualitative calibrations:

Obviously, the TSA propaganda machine prefers as low a number as possible (real or fabricated). I would believe that some airports have at least 2% of passengers who are groped because they are handicapped. Do they count, or are those people in a different category?

I would also ask how the TSA keeps opt-out statistics. For the few times I could not avoid being groped, nobody ever wrote it down.

SATTSO

I agree. People, in general, become annoyed at things they shouldn't.

And I never thought the government should have handed out ANY stimulus money. But your double exclamation marks are the end are noted.

Boggie Dog

If you increase the number of pat downs being done at LAS by a couple of percent that is a lot of pat downs.

I support 100% Opt Outs, lets see how TSA handles that!

studentff

Actually, if the FCC is awake, they will care quite a bit, localized or not. They've been pretty harsh on cell phone jammers ( http://www.switched.com/2011/03/11/f...phone-jammers/ ) and even stood up against prisons and law enforcement attempting to use jammers. I think they kind of tolerate their occasional use by Secret Service, but I'm not sure.

And it's not just cell frequencies TSA could get in trouble for. It's interfering with any licensed (and in some cases unlicensed) radio service. FCC actually has an online interface for filing interference complaints: http://esupport.fcc.gov/complaints.htm

Given TSA's typical overreaction to cameras, I can't imagine TSA would be happy to see someone standing near one of their MMW checkpoints with a directional antenna, a wide-band scanner, and headphones, checking for interference. But it sure would be fun.

Unfortunately, there aren't really cheap general-coverage receivers that cover the sub-terahertz frequencies where interference is most likely. But their might be second-order interference at other frequencies that are more easily covered.

If the normal opt-out rate is anywhere near 5% or even at or above 2%, that's well above the typical TSA claims of 1% or less.

Tom M.

What demographic is that?

Does TSA keep passenger statistics based on demographics?

chollie

Please include those involuntary medical 'opt-outs' who are unable to assume and hold the postion in the NoS.

FlyerChrisK

FWIW, they were only using the WTMD's at the checkpoint for concourse D on Sunday afternoon. It's hard to opt-out of the naked scan when they're not running them.

SATTSO

The real question wouldn't be how TSA handles 100% opt outs, but how do passengers. To explain, passengers out number TSOs, usually , by a large amount. During the busy hours, how many passengers would be willing to miss their flights? Who would be the first passenger to give in, waiting in long line, with the AIT open, just so they could make their flight, never mind those passengers who do not care if they go through one or not (and despite how you feel, you know there are MANY passengers like that).

National Opt Out Day was a dismal failure, what makes you think there would ever be 100% opt out?