Because I don't know a loosing battle when I see it

[crossfire]

Looks like I was wrong in my previous post. I said that there wasn't enough science to back up worries that the radiation exposure from the new full-body airport scanners is harmful. And I tried to put things into perspective by talking about relative radiation doses. Where I was wrong is that there is evidence and study about the harm that these

Comments

[elusis]

Interesting material - I feel like I need to read more to understand.

The other people who might perhaps have concerns would be, of course, the TSA staff. A commenter on my post says her husband developed cancer while doing x-ray screenings (possibly of bags?) but it's hard to prove a link. She says they were refused dosimeters and told wearing their own could result in termination.

Googling provides more anecdote than overview, but it looks like Ira Flatow of Science Friday weighed in a couple of months ago, and the AFL-CIO has raised an alarm about this as well even though TSOs are barred from unionizing by statute.

[shellynoir]

I chatted with my dental hygienist about this. She told me about a nearby dental school that had been shut down. The students were having trouble seeing things on the x-rays so the upped the contrast a little. A little more. Just a tiny bit more.
BAM their six-month inspection came along, their x-ray machines were set too high and everyone's out of a job. This was huge news in the dental community and everyone made sure their machines were set low enough.
No one at the airport scanners ever got tested, ever, no one inspects TSA. Those people are lucky to have a high school edumication. I can bet you the contrast is getting upped upped upped a lot.

I'm glad they got rid of those things.