Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

10 xrays to get through screening, on average...defend that!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-20-10 07:51 PM
Original message
10 xrays to get through screening, on average...defend that!
Edited on Sat Nov-20-10 07:55 PM by CreekDog
"They take X-ray images on the front, back and sides—about 10 X-rays per below-the-knee prosthetic, more if your prosthesis has a mechanical knee. After these X-rays pass inspection, you're free to fly."

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/aviation/safety/the-problem-with-prosthetics-and-airport-security

This is where the process slows down. Swabs are taken immediately in and around all prosthetics to detect for bomb-making material. Then you wait. The next step is to go under the CastScope...

Once the operator is found, you go under the machine, prosthetic limbs still on. They take X-ray images on the front, back and sides—about 10 X-rays per below-the-knee prosthetic, more if your prosthesis has a mechanical knee. After these X-rays pass inspection, you're free to fly.

For Jeffrey J. Cain, the chief of family medicine at the Children's Hospital in Denver, Colo., and a below-the-knee double amputee, this is a typical encounter with airport security, by the book. The problem? It rarely goes down like this. "There's such variability in screening people with prosthetics," Cain says. Sometimes an amputee gets a pat-down after the backscatter scan (which isn't required); sometimes he or she is asked to remove a limb; and always, Cain says, there is confusion: "It's like being pulled over by the policeman—there's only one correct answer, and it's not that of the police department; it's that of the person in front of you."

"I'm sick of taking six X-rays and then having to explain what they're seeing," Chenowith says. "There's an issue with these high-tech prosthetics. Obviously, I'm wearing a high-tech device and I need to be screened—but authorities need to keep up on the technology. I can understand prototype devices, but the Proprio foot has been on the market a while."

The TSA couldn't be reached for comment


The Amputee Coalition of America survey found:

"75 percent of respondents said they were unsatisfied with their most recent TSA experience."

TSA says of Cast Scope:

Q: How much radiation exposure is produced from 1 scan of the CastScope? Is it safe?
A: One scan is equivalent to approximately 10 microRem of radiation. This is equivalent to the exposure each person receives in about two minutes of airplane flight at altitude or each person receives every 15 minutes from naturally occurring background radiation.

The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) developed a standard for X-raying human subjects for security purposes using back-scatter X-ray technology. The National Council on Radiation Protection (NCRP) states that a person receiving 1000 microRem (100 scans) per year is still considered a negligible individual dose. In addition, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and NCRP have advised that the CastScope is safe to use on anyone ages 5 and up regardless of gender or any medical condition.

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




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
somone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-20-10 07:54 PM
Response to Original message
1. The people who suffer the most in this are the disabled and the elderly
Fucking sadists.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ananda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-20-10 08:01 PM
Response to Original message
2. This is so fucking nuts!
SCREAM
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-20-10 08:13 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. and there's this too:
""I thought security screening was a hassle until a screener in Canada saw my prosthetic and let me go through without even wanding me," Yaeger says."

http://travel.usatoday.com/flights/2010-08-25-airportscreening25_ST_N.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-20-10 08:18 PM
Response to Original message
4. Fascinating...from "Popular Mechanics"...FIGHTING BACK
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-20-10 08:23 PM
Response to Original message
5. My best friends Grand daughter 5 years old has an artificial leg..
this would be a nightmare for that precious child... who has been through enough!

Bad enough other children say they are afraid of her..now flying she would be made to feel adults are afraid of her!

This is beyond absurd.

fly, a retired 33 yr flight crew of one of the 9/11 airlines.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RainDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-20-10 08:30 PM
Response to Original message
6. this is all so unnecessary
and knowing it's making Chertoff a shitload of money is maddening.

or rather, makes the think the reason this goes forward is sort of like Rumfeld's big money maker with Cipro. yeah, I'm that cynical.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbieo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-20-10 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. I will never fly again - I have 2 hips and one knee replacement. I'd
be in that GD machine for a long, long time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Jan 13th 2025, 11:16 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC