Full Body Scan X-Rays in Airports

[Guest guest]

Full Body Scan X-Rays in Airports

 

It is bad enough that little old ladies in wheel chairs are frisked

and defiled in airports but now they are wanting to use x-ray

machines that can see through clothing to undress us all without

consent " if " we want to fly. It's about time Americans start to

insert their own liability forms on these bureaucracy's that think

they can exposed us all to cancerous x-rays and Americans will stand

for the aftermath of increased cancer from it. If airports want to x-

rays us all with a full body scan then they need to sign forms for us

that they will pay for any medical cost that can incur from the

higher cancer risk they just made us endure in order to use thier

services.

 

There's also the privacy concern of screeners who could save the

images and sell them online to consider and while they say the

programing " blacks out " private areas-how is that to stop a so-called

terrorist from just hiding a weapon in those blacked out areas? Give

us all a break please.

 

American's need to think twice before entering any airport until they

remove or stop the use of all these machines. We all need to say

enough is enough and just stop flying! No money for these airports

and they will have no problem telling the government to stop treating

us all as if we are guilty without any cause.

 

Follow the money. For those who haven't figured it out yet this all

comes down to another power grab of our rights and money. It is also

yet another psychological experiment in conditioning the public into

thinking it's ok to force us to be subject to any medical treatment

they wish and insist we perform as they ask upon demand without any

proof of wrong doing so few will get how we have become an enslaved,

watched society that is controlled by thier own government. We are no

longer innocent until proven guilty in this country. All are deemed

guilty and now have to prove they are innocent in the name of so-

called security.

 

The increase in brain cancer of business people who use a cell phone

all the time is nothing to ignore. Will those business people who may

have developing brain cancer from cell phones get advanced cancer

from the added radiation of full body scans at the airport due to

frequent flying? This does not take into consideration anyone who

eats microwaved foods, has went through CT scans, mammograms, dental

Xrays, Chest X-rays or any other forms of being radiated through

mainstream medicine. The " accumulative " affect needs to be taken very

seriously with any radiation exposure. Remember they discounted the

damages of mercury because they said it was such a low dose in

vaccines. augh. Never taking into consideration how all those so-

called low levels add up from dental amalgams, vaccines, foods, etc.

No level of mercury is safe but that is just an example. The same is

true for radiation.

 

Take care, be well, and stay informed

God Bless, Pamela

 

Thanks Barb for bringing this to my attention.

____________________

_________________

 

CBS NEWS

Fly With A Smile — And Nothing Else

 

(CBS) Do you feel that your privacy is invaded when you go through

security at the airport? Just wait a little while. Soon, those TSA

inspectors may be able to see what you look like naked.

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/02/opinion/garver/main2322888.s

html

 

 

======================================================================

========

More links to this subject:

XXX-Ray Security

By Arnold Chao

Fri, January 5, 2007, 12:01 am PST

 

From wearing leaded aprons to viewing our innards in black and white,

many of us have experienced the standard medical X-ray imaging

process. Now U.S. airport security is using this century-old

technology in a new and revealing way. Instead of scanning your

belongings and stepping through a metal detector, you might be

virtually stripped by a Backscatter X-ray machine before hopping on a

plane. The process would reveal any potentially concealed weapons and

your nude body. The airport screeners may keep straight faces, but we

wonder if our exposed bodies will spark voyeuristic chuckles when

they see us and our loved ones naked. Is it less invasive than the

old-school bouncer pat down? Is this sacrifice of privacy for the

sake of security worthwhile? It's a tough call. We just hope that

real X-ray specs won't be the next innovation -- people watching at

the airport will be forever changed.

____________________

__

The Daily Gamecock: Full-body X-ray Reveals Bad Thinking - will your

privates be blurred?

USA Today: X-Ray Tests Both Security, Privacy - is that a plastic

explosive or is that your...?

TSA: X-Ray Backscatter Technology and Your Personal Privacy - it's

not that bad, according to the Transportation Security

Administration.

 

CNET: Scanners Search Through Clothing - read passionate opinions

from the public.

 

http://dir./thespark/5546/xxx-ray-security

 

____________________

__

 

Medical X-rays cause thousands of cancers

00:01 30 January 2004

NewScientist.com news service

Danny Penman

Medical X-rays are to blame for many thousands of fatal cancers every

year, according to the most comprehensive analysis to date. Medical

experts stress that X-rays and CT scans can be very beneficial, but

believe the new work shows that they should be used as sparingly as

possible.

 

" They are of enormous benefit for such things as early cancer

detection, but medical experts need to be aware of the quantifiable

risks of X-rays. " says Amy Berrington, of Oxford University, UK, and

one of the research team. " If you need an X-ray for medical reasons

then I should not worry about it. "

But Peter Herzog, of Ludwig-Maximilians University in Munich,

Germany, points out that many X-rays may be unnecessary. In some

countries, up to a third of chest X-rays may not be required, he

says. " In everyday practice, those ordering radiological procedures

should think carefully about the benefits and risks to their patients

for each examination. "

 

Adrian Dixon, a radiologist and spokesman for the Royal College of

Radiologists, believes this already happens in the UK: " This study

validates our policy. Our members are very scrupulous about vetting

all requests for X-rays and will only carry them out if it is for the

benefit of the patient. "

 

Medical X-rays are the biggest source of man-made radiation exposure

and are being used with increasing frequency in many countries. In

the US, for example, their use has increased by 20 per cent since the

early 1980s. The growing use of CT (computed tomography) scans, which

also use X-rays, are also adding to exposure.

Global variations

This rise prompted Berrington, with colleague Sarah Darby, to update

the seminal 1981 Dole and Peto study of the risks posed by medical X-

rays. Dole and Peto estimated that 0.5 per cent of all deaths from

cancer in the US were attributable to medical X-rays.

 

The Oxford team first estimated the radiation dose received by

patients for each X-ray. They then collated the numbers of X-rays

performed each year in 15 developed nations.

This data was then fed into a computer model for estimating the risks

posed by ionising radiation. This " Excess Relative Risk Model " is

derived from data gleaned from Japanese atomic bomb survivors.

The authors found substantial world-wide variations in the numbers of

cancers attributable to X-rays. The UK had the lowest, with 0.6 per

cent of all cancers attributable to medical X-rays. About 0.9 per

cent of all cancers in the US are caused by X-rays.

 

But in Japan, the corresponding figure was 3.2 per cent. Overall,

Berrington and Darby estimate that X-ray-based medical imaging causes

an extra 18,500 cases of cancer each year across the 15 countries

studied.

Herzog cautions that the increased risk of cancer could have been

over-estimated by the study, because of its reliance on the data from

Japanese atomic bomb survivors. It is the most accurate data

available, but the survivors were exposed to many types of radiation,

not just X-rays alone.

 

Medical Journal reference: The Lancet (vol 363, p 345)