The simple fact is that even a “low” X-ray exposure increases cancer risk, if only by a small amount. If you fly frequently, those small amounts add up. And that’s not even including the government agency seeing me naked side of the issue. But the radiation risk is enough for EU regulators, who declared the following this week:
In order not to risk jeopardising citizens’ health and safety, only security scanners which do not use X-ray technology are added to the list of authorised methods for passenger screening at EU airports. All other technologies, such as that used for mobiles phones and others, can be used provided that they comply with EU security standards.
Backscatter machines are particularly risky because the radiation bursts are absorbed directly into the outer tissue of the body, not distributed evenly throughout. This concentrated absorption has made doctors and cancer experts around the world question the US government’s Ah, c’mon guys, it’s fine! attitude. Last year, NPR quoted one from Columbia University’s centre for Radiological Research:
“There really is no other technology around where we’re planning to X-ray such an enormous number of individuals. It’s really unprecedented in the radiation world.”
So the EU’s done the smart thing and decided to remove from the world yet another thing that can maybe give you cancer someday. There’s no need to use them. Radiowave scanners that pose no cancer threat work well, and there’s always the old pat-down — I’ll happily take a guy’s hands on my crotch over X-rays on my crotch.
Now, the US ought to follow. If we can’t make the people operating the machines smart, we can at least make the machines better. [Mother Jones and Europa.eu]
jj
Thursday, November 17, 2011 at 11:55 AMI am glad of this. after having been x-rayed in Washington DC I felt a little dizzy the remainder of the day. If I had a ‘real’ choice I would have said no however there was a woman with her daughter at the side being told to wait for a pat down for at least 10 minutes because she refused the xray, and she was becoming more anxious probably going to miss a flight. I think the TSA people like their power roles and if you don’t conform they will give you a hard time. A family member recently was scanned at LAX and said they didn’t feel quite right for the next day after it also. We are both scientists and understand the Placebo affect, and are quite rational.
Just This Guy ...
Thursday, November 17, 2011 at 1:31 PMI already cancelled plans to go to the U.S. as soon as they made those X-ray scanners effectively mandatory.
The place simply isn’t worth risking radiation over.
Glad to see that at least someone somewhere has come to their senses.
MD
Friday, November 18, 2011 at 1:14 AMAgree with the existence of a placebo effect, and more than that, the stress reaction at having to go through an “Ordeal” not of your choosing.
There would be NO physiological response at passing through the scanner…
(Have you ever had an X-ray or CAT scan, well those doses are a lot higher, (though the x-Rays are hard, instead of soft)…)
That aside the risk to public health remains..
The energies in the X-rays for backscatter scanning are very low, (probably around 5-10 KeV, (Mammography uses around 20-30 keV, while rays use 60-120 keV))
In radiation, generally the lower the energy, the higher the absorbed dose for a given exposure.
In this form of scanning, ALL (well most) of the radiation is stopped in the clothing and shallow tissues, leading to a higher dose to these areas.
Note, Mammography (transmission x-ray) also results in a significantly high radiation exposure to the glandular tissue…. Not necessarily Good.
Back in the 1920′s to 1960′s, people used X-rays to fit shoes…
Now that is banned…. Why??
Because of the Significant risk of harm with no beneficial outcome (health wise) same for this technology…