TSA has no regular testing system for its pornoscanners

[Richard D]

Many experts are skeptical that the TSA's new backscatter pornoscanner machines are safe, but even the experts who endorse them are careful to bracket their reassurances with certain caveats: the safety of the machines depends heavily on their being properly maintained, regularly tested, and expertly operated. Whether or not you're comfortable with the intended radiation emissions from the scanners, no one in their right mind would argue that a broken machine that lovingly lingers over your reproductive organs and infuses them with 10,000 or 100,000 times the normal dosage is desirable.

But when Andrew Schneider, AOL's public health correspondent, contacted the TSA to find out what maintenance and testing is in place to ensure the safe operation of the scanners, he discovered that the TSA appears to have no regime at all to ensure that they are functioning within normal parameters. While the TSA claims that entities like the FDA, the US Army and Johns Hopkins all regularly inspect their machines, none of these groups agrees, and they all disavow any role in regularly maintaining and testing the TSA's equipment (the Army has tested machines in three airports, but has not conducted any further testing). And Johns Hopkins denies that it has certified the machines as safe for operation in the first place -- let alone taking on any ongoing testing and certification program.

For example, the FDA says it doesn't do routine inspections of any nonmedical X-ray unit, including the ones operated by the TSA.
The FDA has not field-tested these scanners and hasn't inspected the manufacturer. It has no legal authority to require owners of these devices -- in this case, TSA -- to provide access for routine testing on these products once they have been sold, FDA press officer said Karen Riley said...

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/12/23/tsa-has-no-regular-t.html

[Divernan]

1. I have raised this issue before & it sinks like a stone.

Including the fact that the operators of said machines can "adjust" them to a higher dosage to improve clarity.

This is a serious issue.

Please rec. this post.

[LibDemAlways]

2. expertly operated?

Considering that the TSA flunkies are given 2 days training on the machines and no x-ray tech certificate is required, I'd say that alone should send up a huge red flag.

Americans are sheep and generally just go along with whatever the government tells them to do. In this case their government could very well be exposing them to dangerous levels of radiation and there doesn't seem to be any recourse other than refusing to be x-rayed and enduring a humiliating patdown instead. The media tired of this issue after Thanksgiving, but it certainly isn't going away.

[LisaL]

3. Where is the proof these machines are safe?

"APL's role was to measure radiation coming off the body scanners to verify that it fell within standards. We were testing equipment and in no way determined its safety to humans," said Helen Worth, the lab's head of public affairs. "Many news articles have said we declared the equipment to be safe, but that was not what we were tasked to do."
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2013733774_scanners22.html

[obxhead]

4. When they stop working we fix them, otherwise they are working.

lovely. :mad:

I think I'll opt for the groping over these machines when I travel.

[Richard D]

5. And why this didn't get five votes . . .

. . . and make it to the greatest page, I just don't understand.
Such an important issue that has such an impact on so many.

[CreekDog]

6. That's not the only x-ray TSA uses on people

with Castscope (which you cannot "opt out" of), TSA says you get at least 4 xrays, but a Popular Mechanics article said 10 is closer to average (per trip each way!).

now you tell me, is it safe to have some TSA dude point that xray thingie at your cast (or your 6 year old's). is there any chance he's hitting the guy in the picture below, right where it counts? and consider that the rays penetrate 1/4 inch into the skin (although for some reason they can see through a cast --how much does is that really?):



http://www.tsa.gov/approach/tech/castscope.shtm

[flamingdem]

7. REC - groping or cancer causing ionizing radiation, hmm what a choice! nt

[LisaL]

8. Who is benefitting from these machines?

"Many of the scanner companies are also on pace to spend record amounts of money for lobbying this year on Capitol Hill, where they see potential problems as some lawmakers push for limits on airport-security practices. Top scanner businesses have reported spending more than $6 million on lobbying this year, records show. That doesn't include industrial giants such as General Electric, which also dabbles in scanning technology and has spent more than $32 million on lobbying this year."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/23/AR2010122304412.html?hpid=topnews