Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Safety/Security > Practical Travel Safety and Security Issues
Reload this Page >

How many injuries caused by the screening process?

Community
Wiki Posts
Search

How many injuries caused by the screening process?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Dec 22, 2008 | 8:23 am
  #1  
Original Poster
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: DCA / WAS
Programs: DL 2+ million/PM, YX, Marriott Plt, *wood gold, HHonors, CO Plt, UA, AA EXP, WN, AGR
Posts: 9,386
How many injuries caused by the screening process?

Came thorough AMS yesterday on the way back from Prague.

DL opened the gate for screening an hour-and-ten-minutes before the flight was to leave - I arrived within minutes after it opened and found a line 50 feet long down the concourse. Fortunately, they had a business class access line (no one waiting) that skipped the regular line. Inside the roped-off-interview area there were another 30+ people that had been interviewed and were then lined up for the x-ray. Although 2 screening stations are installed, AMS and Delta were only operating ONE (for an oversold 767). In fact, it was so crowded and hot that they weren't even bringing in folks for the inane interviews until the line moved a bit (about a 3 minute wait for me, longer for Y).

Once I was interviewed, I got into the snaking line for the lone operating x-ray/WTMD. Frustrating because of the US "shoes off" edict, yet most European passengers are used to being able to leave shoes on. It was VERY hot in the line area, and it was moving excruciatingly slowly (15 minutes+). There was nowhere to sit inside the roped off area.

As we reached the x-ray, the passenger ahead of me fainted and went down, splitting her head open (blood on the floor). Apparently she'd been in line 25 minutes (before and after the interview) and at one point asked where she could sit, and was told she couldn't. Likewise, she was denied a request for water before going down (can't be too safe, can we?). The security folks didn't move for about 30 seconds, then were more concerned about making sure no passenger got inside the ropes as opposed to helping the woman. At least her companion was there to help.

Meanwhile, the (classy) folks behind me said "step over her or go around". (and it wasn't even a flight to JFK )

Finally got through the line in 20 minutes. Delta made us exchange our boarding passes (issued by Skyteam partner Czech Airlines for the DL flights)... before they'd load the checked bags.

I did later see the woman who went down sitting in the boarding area being tended to. I hope she got on the flight...

Leaves me wondering how many people need to get injured or hurt because of the screening process and the lack of efficiency on the part of the airlines & government/airport screening authorities.
Global_Hi_Flyer is offline  
Old Dec 22, 2008 | 8:55 am
  #2  
Suspended
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,953
Allegedly there was the woman who suffered fractures because some screener made her remove her walking cast.

While I don't know of any others, I am certain that there must be a lot of people with back, hip, etc. conditions that are aggravated by having to stand in a long line creating more pain than would otherwise be normal.

I, for one, can walk all day if I move at a good clip but I can't stand in place or move slowly for more than about 5 minutes before my back starts to act up.
doober is offline  
Old Dec 22, 2008 | 4:34 pm
  #3  
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: various cities in the USofA: NYC, BWI, IAH, ORD, CVG, NYC
Programs: Former UA 1K, National Exec. Elite
Posts: 5,487
I'd bet there are tens or hundreds of thousands of foot fungus infections, as well as other infections, that can be blamed on the shoes-off policy. I would suggest that 50% of TSO's working the screening area be selected to work in socks for a month to see the effect on the rate of such infections. Of course, since the TSA's raison d'etre is the perception of safety, not actual safety, such a study would be counterproductive.

Of course it's probably a violation of workplace safety rules to require TSA employees to work in socks. The implied message is a nice #@*& you; we don't give a rodent's hind quarter about public health or passenger safety from the TSA to to the traveling public.
ralfp is offline  
Old Dec 22, 2008 | 6:02 pm
  #4  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: HSV
Posts: 876
Originally Posted by ralfp
Of course it's probably a violation of workplace safety rules to require TSA employees to work in socks.
Yeah, OSHA would probably have a fit.
HSVTSO Dean is offline  
Old Dec 22, 2008 | 6:07 pm
  #5  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Somewhere near BWI
Programs: DL DM, HH Dia, SPG Gold, MR Plat, Hertz PC
Posts: 3,654
Originally Posted by HSVTSO Dean
Yeah, OSHA would probably have a fit.
And, yet, it is perfectly within TSA logic to require that passengers walk around the C/P in their socks, or less...
DevilDog438 is offline  
Old Dec 22, 2008 | 6:20 pm
  #6  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Programs: I work for the TSA
Posts: 848
I'd bet there are tens or hundreds of thousands of foot fungus infections, as well as other infections, that can be blamed on the shoes-off policy.
Or we could blame it on the passengers' lack of foresight. A clear plastic disposal baggie can be slipped over the foot to create a sanitary barrier, and probably costs less than a nickel.

I went through a checkpoint in my lil sock feet 4-5 days a week (sometimes multiple times in a day) for more than a year with no ill effects. Have never had a passenger tell me they contracted any sort of ailment from our floors.

The human body is remarkably resistant to disease!

Also, keep in mind that if you wear your shoes in your house, you're transporting microscopic particles of anything you stepped in outdoors -- including bacteria, germs and most likely bird or animal feces -- to your floors and carpeting.

I'll bet most people who complain about TSA's "shoes-off" rule don't think twice about wearing their shoes in the house and then walking barefoot on the same contaminated carpets!

Last edited by oneofthosepeopleyouloveto hate; Dec 22, 2008 at 6:27 pm
oneofthosepeopleyouloveto hate is offline  
Old Dec 22, 2008 | 6:45 pm
  #7  
Suspended
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,953
Originally Posted by oneofthosepeopleyouloveto hate
Or we could blame it on the passengers' lack of foresight. A clear plastic disposal baggie can be slipped over the foot to create a sanitary barrier, and probably costs less than a nickel.

I went through a checkpoint in my lil sock feet 4-5 days a week (sometimes multiple times in a day) for more than a year with no ill effects. Have never had a passenger tell me they contracted any sort of ailment from our floors.

The human body is remarkably resistant to disease!

Also, keep in mind that if you wear your shoes in your house, you're transporting microscopic particles of anything you stepped in outdoors -- including bacteria, germs and most likely bird or animal feces -- to your floors and carpeting.

I'll bet most people who complain about TSA's "shoes-off" rule don't think twice about wearing their shoes in the house and then walking barefoot on the same contaminated carpets!
Your scenario doesn't float. We build up a resistance to the germs we live with on a daily basis. It's the one's that are "foreign" to us that are the problem, the ones that can show up at checkpoints.

I believe another FTer has stats on what types of bacteria have been found on the floors/carpeting at checkpoints.

I have a family member who had MRSA. When we were talking to the infectious disease specialist I specifically asked if he could link any bacterial infections to airport checkpoints and the forced removal of shoes. While he said he could not as he'd never done any studies, he was certain that there would be cases that could be traced to the TSA's requirements, especially in individuals who have compromised immune systems.
doober is offline  
Old Dec 22, 2008 | 7:29 pm
  #8  
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: North of DFW
Programs: AA PLT, HH Gold, TSA Disparager Gold, going for Platnium
Posts: 1,535
Originally Posted by oneofthosepeopleyouloveto hate
Have never had a passenger tell me they contracted any sort of ailment from our floors.
Really, i really beg to differ, but then again i have posted this more then once, and other sanitary issues about TSA including gloves. A little search goes a long way.
Scubatooth is offline  
Old Dec 22, 2008 | 7:51 pm
  #9  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Chicago
Programs: AA EXP
Posts: 11,969
Originally Posted by doober
I, for one, can walk all day if I move at a good clip but I can't stand in place or move slowly for more than about 5 minutes before my back starts to act up.
I'm glad to hear that someone else has this problem. I was told that I was just plain nuts for saying that it hurts me to walk slowly.
the_happiness_store is offline  
Old Dec 22, 2008 | 7:56 pm
  #10  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Chicago
Programs: AA EXP
Posts: 11,969
Originally Posted by oneofthosepeopleyouloveto hate
Or we could blame it on the passengers' lack of foresight. A clear plastic disposal baggie can be slipped over the foot to create a sanitary barrier, and probably costs less than a nickel.
So now I have to bring plastic baggies to the airport to put over my feet - for every airport? The shoes off is just plain stupid.

I felt like such an idiot when I went to take my shoes off in Athens when they told me "we don't do that here" or in FRA or many other places.

It is just harassment by DHS and TSA.
the_happiness_store is offline  
Old Dec 22, 2008 | 8:07 pm
  #11  
All eyes on you!
25 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Nashua, NH USA
Programs: Seashore Trolley Museum "flight attendant"
Posts: 2,015
Originally Posted by ralfp
I would suggest that 50% of TSO's working the screening area be selected to work in socks for a month ...

Of course it's probably a violation of workplace safety rules to require TSA employees to work in socks.
OT: There have been some places (offices, computer rooms) where I and others worked barefooted and/or in shorts as things were very informal. I suspect that some TSA folks would dress similarly if permitted to.

In later years I ceased that practice as I became a "consultant" and wished to maintain a more professional appearance. I was now one of the few wearing a good shirt and necktie. Except I would occasionally wear such things as Hawaiian shirts and shorts on Fridays.

Does fainting occur so fast that one doesn't have a chance to squat down or kneel down before falling?
AllanJ is offline  
Old Dec 22, 2008 | 8:08 pm
  #12  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: BLI or CLT
Programs: The usual suspects
Posts: 2,090
There are literally millions of Americans (probably everywhere, but I mainly practice medicine in the US) with chronic back problems who can't stand for long periods of time, though many can walk much farther/longer. Also many people with ENT problems like Meniere's disease, or abnormalities of the cerebellum in the brain will have problems with balance and often with prolonged standing.

I've traveled home to Seattle through Amsterdam on KLM and Northwest and have endured the endless security screening lines, but they weren't forcing the shoe carnival as recently as last May. Is it a DL thing? OTOH, just returned from TLV through ATL on DL, and they didn't require the shoe carnival in TLV. However, they wouldn't let us buy any liquids over "3 ounces" at Duty Free, even if we promised to put it in checked baggage once in ATL.

Consistent inconsistency to keep us fooled.
onlyairfare is offline  
Old Dec 22, 2008 | 8:19 pm
  #13  
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: North of DFW
Programs: AA PLT, HH Gold, TSA Disparager Gold, going for Platnium
Posts: 1,535
Originally Posted by AllanJ
Does fainting occur so fast that one doesn't have a chance to squat down or kneel down before falling?
Depends sometimes yes, but for the most part: no, this depends on the person mainly. I have passed out a few times and all but 3 times was i able to get in a brace position so as to not injure myself, but this is only because i was aware something was going on and had time to prepare. Last time i went from fine to being passed out in less then 15 seconds due to the pain I was in.
Scubatooth is offline  
Old Dec 22, 2008 | 9:48 pm
  #14  
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: various cities in the USofA: NYC, BWI, IAH, ORD, CVG, NYC
Programs: Former UA 1K, National Exec. Elite
Posts: 5,487
Originally Posted by oneofthosepeopleyouloveto hate
Or we could blame it on the passengers' lack of foresight. A clear plastic disposal baggie can be slipped over the foot to create a sanitary barrier, and probably costs less than a nickel.
And would probably be considered "shoes" by some TSA screeners.

If it's so easy, why doesn't the TSA do its part to protect the very people it's supposedly protecting and give out foot freedom baggies?

Originally Posted by oneofthosepeopleyouloveto hate
I went through a checkpoint in my lil sock feet 4-5 days a week (sometimes multiple times in a day) for more than a year with no ill effects. Have never had a passenger tell me they contracted any sort of ailment from our floors.
Neither single data points, nor passengers' not drawing conclusions about the origin of their foot fungus and then informing some random TSA employee, can be used to draw any conclusions regarding this matter.

Originally Posted by oneofthosepeopleyouloveto hate
The human body is remarkably resistant to disease!
Except when it gets sick, something that seems to happen to a lot of people.

Originally Posted by oneofthosepeopleyouloveto hate
Also, keep in mind that if you wear your shoes in your house, you're transporting microscopic particles of anything you stepped in outdoors -- including bacteria, germs and most likely bird or animal feces -- to your floors and carpeting.
Which is why many people take their shoes off upon entering their homes.

Originally Posted by oneofthosepeopleyouloveto hate
I'll bet most people who complain about TSA's "shoes-off" rule don't think twice about wearing their shoes in the house and then walking barefoot on the same contaminated carpets!
Carpets are different from flat floors that are crossed by thousands of people per day.

In the end it's the fact that it would [probably] be illegal to require TSA employees to work without shoes that says the most: it's not the passengers that are being protected.
ralfp is offline  
Old Dec 22, 2008 | 10:57 pm
  #15  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,015
Are we talking about PHYSICAL injuries to PAX? A finite number. PHYSICAL injuries to SCREENERS? Again, a finite number. MENTAL injuries to both? Hmmm. Dunno. I'm still outraged by what I know was a crime done to me by TSA four years ago, and that isn't like me at all, believe it or not. Wonder if any screeners emerge from their career as mentally changed individuals, as well. I just betcha they do.

Now, then. Injuries to the Constitution of the U.S.A. caused by the screening process?

Too late. Irrecoverable, I'm afraid.

However, if you believe in the IMPLIED Constitution (see Implied Consent), why, then TSA is STILL your smiling pal and will lead you all the way to the edge of the gangplank, and as you and your country slowly drown there will be scant sign of injury or outcry.
Lumpy 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.