'Naked' scanners may soon be on the way out

[nadinbrzezinski]

By Joy Jernigan, senior travel editor

The House Subcommittee on Transportation Security on Wednesday unanimously approved an amendment to the annual TSA Authorization Act of 2011 that would put an end to "naked" full-body images currently produced by Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) machines at U.S. airports.

The scanners, which were first deployed at U.S. airports beginning in 2007, have been widely criticized, with privacy advocates arguing the images are too revealing.
Under the amendment, introduced by Rep. Chip Craavack (R-Minn.), a former airline pilot, the Transportation Security Administration would have 90 days to install automated target recognition software on all AIT machines. The new software produces a generic, stick figure outline of a person being screened rather than a detailed, passenger-specific image. If a traveler has a suspicious item on their body, it shows up as a red box on a specific area of a stick figure outline.

http://overheadbin.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/09/14/7762175-naked-scanners-may-soon-be-on-the-way-out

Comment: http://posterous.com/#spaces/nadinbrzezinski/posts/70309924

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. I am encouraged to hear this...

[ZombieHorde]

2. Oh great. I just renewed my subscription to TSA Voyeur Magazine. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. RLOL

:thumbup:

[exboyfil]

4. So how much was spent on them before we decided to

cancel them???

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. Comment on my site

but :thumbsup:

[Ilsa]

5. Chertoff must be brokenhearted. nt

[KansDem]

6. I don't think the "nakedness" was the only reason...

TSA agents were showing signs of increased rates of cancer...

Google: TSA agents cancer

But if they want to say stopping their use is for "privacy reasons," so be it. They were an affront to civility anyway...

[MADem]

8. Well, this doesn't sound like they're stopping them--just changing the imaging.

The backscatter will still happen, it just won't be represented on the screen by an image of the human form in question....

[KansDem]

9. That's unfortunate...

As I understand it, the kind of radiation used by these machines is absorbed by the tissue, and that's the worst kind.

I worked as an orderly in an x-ray department for a few years back in the 1970s and every tech I worked with told me that the least harmful x-rays were those that passed through the body and struck a film canister to expose the film. Like the kind used to determine broken bones.

But the worst kind are those that are absorbed by the tissue, and these agents work around such machines 8 hours a day, 5 days a week (I assume)...

[MADem]

10. I am not an expert on those things at ALL, so your comments cause me no small amount of

dismay.

They tell you when you step up and do the legs apart/arms up stance that you're getting less than a tooth x-ray, and the same amount you'd get spending ten minutes at altitude. I don't think they are "lying" but maybe they haven't been told the whole truth. I fly every so often, out of an airport with one of those things, so I'm not real happy if the radiation will be sticking with me.

I suppose lead scarves for the thyroid, and maybe lead drawers for the below the belly-button business, might be a money-maker to put on sale in the TSA community!!!