This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

'No scan, no flight' at Heathrow and Manchester!

What happens when you have to body scan a child? Technically, it is child pornography.

And if a young couple have to go through the legal procees after getting pictures of their child developed in the bath, what would this be classed as? After all, you would have security officials looking at a naked child.

Reply 121

Straightpath

8

People seem to forget that these machines aren't even proven to be completely effective. One guy some time back came on the BBC and clearly said that it isn't beyond terrorists to get past these if they wanted to.

Imagine that this does turn out to be the case and someone slips past after having been scanned, what would the government do then, make physical all body viewing compulsory?

Reply 122

in_jeopardy

Straightpath

People seem to forget that these machines aren't even proven to be completely effective. One guy some time back came on the BBC and clearly said that it isn't beyond terrorists to get past these if they wanted to.

Imagine that this does turn out to be the case and someone slips past after having been scanned, what would the government do then, make physical all body viewing compulsory?

Exactly.

It's a half way measure, they know it sucks, but if the government can push it through people will get used to it... leaving them free to move on to whatever else.

Reply 123

Frieza

11

Itchynscratchy

I would imagine it would be medical physicists, just like they would in a hospital. It would not be difficult to measure the radiation output of the machine.

Ok, so every single machine, before being brought to the airport, should be first analysed and receive an approval from an independent body. And finger crosses that no corruption is involved.

But even if you find an article saying that those machine are safe - it's just what the producers said it.

Even if someone would analyse them, who guarantees you that the machine used in the airport is not simply malfunctioning and emitting a completely different deal of radiations/whatever they are.

And why should I just risk my health, btw?
I fly often to and from Europe. Why should I be forced to undergo a treatment that nobody can guarantee safe FOR ABSOLUTELY NO REASON AT ALL.

You know how many terrorist attacks have been made on planes flying within Europe, in the last 20 years?

0

you know how many people have been killed by terrorist bombing EU planes?

0

And here people are talking as if we got bombed once a week.

You don't believe that those machines may be harmful.
I don't believe in terrorism.

Reply 124

shark67

13

Wouldn't it be more wise if only blacks and muslims are scanned?

Reply 125

Itchynscratchy

10

Frieza

Ok, so every single machine, before being brought to the airport, should be first analysed and receive an approval from an independent body. And finger crosses that no corruption is involved.

why on earth would anyone in their right mind intentionally mess up the QA test? take off the tin foil hat

But even if you find an article saying that those machine are safe - it's just what the producers said it.

No, because you can measure the radiation output and hence declare it safe. You don't just take the manufacturers word, you measure it!

Even if someone would analyse them, who guarantees you that the machine used in the airport is not simply malfunctioning and emitting a completely different deal of radiations/whatever they are.

''radiations/whatever they are''? Do you have any idea about what you are talking about at all?

Assuming it works the same as in hospitals, the machines will be tested regularly to ensure they are calibrated properly

And why should I just risk my health, btw?
I fly often to and from Europe. Why should I be forced to undergo a treatment that nobody can guarantee safe FOR ABSOLUTELY NO REASON AT ALL.

You are not risking your health, for the third time in this thread the dose received from one scan is 20 times less than the dose you recieve during a regular day. It's the equivalent of 3 minutes flight, so if you fly often the actual act of flying is far more dangerous to your health.

You know how many terrorist attacks have been made on planes flying within Europe, in the last 20 years?

0

you know how many people have been killed by terrorist bombing EU planes?

0

And here people are talking as if we got bombed once a week.

You don't believe that those machines may be harmful.
I don't believe in terrorism.

I have never argued whether or not they are a necessity, I am just saying the histeria about the dose is total nonsense. It's just another panic by people who have no knowledge of science at all.

Reply 126

kjc_us

14

If it reduces the risk of me being blown up on a flight, then I'm cool with it.

Reply 127

UGeNe

14

shark67

Wouldn't it be more wise if only blacks and muslims are scanned?

That's what is going to happen anyway because they don't have the capacity to scan everyone in a timely fashion.

Reply 128

Frieza

11

Itchynscratchy

why on earth would anyone in their right mind intentionally mess up the QA test? take off the tin foil hat
Because each machine cost more than 1 million each?
Any idea of how much money someone is making?

Itchynscratchy

No, because you can measure the radiation output and hence declare it safe. You don't just take the manufacturers word, you measure it!
You mean that you shouldn't, but in actual fact, they did take the manufacturers word.

Itchynscratchy

''radiations/whatever they are''? Do you have any idea about what you are talking about at all?
This has already been posted:
http://www.naturalnews.com/027913_full-body_scanners_DNA.html

Itchynscratchy

Assuming it works the same as in hospitals, the machines will be tested regularly to ensure they are calibrated properly
Oh, that's odd. This is the first time I hear that the machine will be tested and checked regularly by some independent authority.

Itchynscratchy

You are not risking your health, for the third time in this thread the dose received from one scan is 20 times less than the dose you recieve during a regular day. It's the equivalent of 3 minutes flight, so if you fly often the actual act of flying is far more dangerous to your health.

Dose of terahertz photons?
There are 2 different technologies, so it's not so as easy as you try to make it. The long-term health risks are completely unknown to the scientific community.
And of course, nothing guarantees that the machine malfunctions and starts shooting x times the radiations that is supposed to.

But please, try to see the discussion from my point of view.
I don't know if those machine are harmful, or can be harmful, perhaps in the long run - or not. In fact, nobody knows.
So, I am arguing how a thing that is not proven safe should not be enforced, expecially because there are no reasons at all.

But on the other hand, there's a user on TSR that apparently knows, somehow, that these machines are completely safe.

Reply 129

Frieza

11

kjc_us

If it reduces the risk of me being blown up on a flight, then I'm cool with it.

And just out of curiousity, could you quantify the risk of "being blown up" ?

Reply 130

fox_the_fix

13

I don't mind if they take a picture of me. My body is akin to that of a greek god. Infact, if they took a pic I would like a copy to put on facebook.

Reply 131

The1truebelieber

Frieza

This has already been posted:
http://www.naturalnews.com/027913_full-body_scanners_DNA.html

This website's other leading articles:

Heal yourself in 15 days!
http://www.naturalnews.com/028067_self_healing_digestion.html

Radiation treatment for brain tumors may cause memory & attention problems!
http://www.naturalnews.com/028065_radiation_therapy_brain.html

Cocaine & Spices in water! :eek3:

http://www.naturalnews.com/028066_drinking_water_hormones.html

Realiable non-biased source. Please.

Further articles from the website:

Big-Pharma kills another celeb.
http://www.naturalnews.com/027781_Brittany_Murphy_drugs.html

Study verifies breast cancer screening...causes...cancer :rofl:

http://www.naturalnews.com/027742_mammography_radiation.html

Article on 'The Aid "Myth"'
http://www.naturalnews.com/027631_AIDS_House_of_Numbers.html

Chemotherapy for Testicular cancer causes neurological disorders
http://www.naturalnews.com/027600_chemotherapy_testicular_cancer.html

Best one:

Colloidal Silver Better Than Anti-Biotics!
http://www.naturalnews.com/027474_colloidal_silver_antibiotics.html

You know....despite reports of its toxicity...:rolleyes"

Reply 132

emilyyy

1

Tell you what, if you don't like it, don't fly. You effectively get given your choice as to whether or not you want to participate when you book your flight.

Reply 133

Itchynscratchy

10

Frieza

Because each machine cost more than 1 million each?
Any idea of how much money someone is making?

They will be checked multiple times, by different people who are nothing to do with the company involved

You mean that you shouldn't, but in actual fact, they did take the manufacturers word.

No they didn't, an independent person will measure the radiation output they don't just read the manual and assume it's true. an independent person does an experiment to check

This has already been posted:
http://www.naturalnews.com/027913_full-body_scanners_DNA.html

pseudo-scientific nonsense journalism from a website with an obvious extreme bias. I have already read the article that supposedly shows this phenomenon and said earlier that they also say that the effect is only noticeable after exposures of 6 hours!

Scares like this are whipped up by the media all the time to scare people who don't know any better (see the MMR scare for a better example)

Oh, that's odd. This is the first time I hear that the machine will be tested and checked regularly by some independent authority.

Of course they will be. The International Radiation Regulations act 1999 forces them to. It's in government legislation.

Dose of terahertz photons?
There are 2 different technologies, so it's not so as easy as you try to make it. The long-term health risks are completely unknown to the scientific community.
And of course, nothing guarantees that the machine malfunctions and starts shooting x times the radiations that is supposed to.

It's not unknown at all, the output is well known. It has been tested, it will be tested. 1 paper said there might be a chance of harm if you are in there for hours at once and idiot websites like the one you have quoted jumped on that to whip up a storm that you are falling for.

But please, try to see the discussion from my point of view.
I don't know if those machine are harmful, or can be harmful, perhaps in the long run - or not. In fact, nobody knows.
So, I am arguing how a thing that is not proven safe should not be enforced, expecially because there are no reasons at all.

But on the other hand, there's a user on TSR that apparently knows, somehow, that these machines are completely safe.

I study medical physics, and you (presumably) don't. That puts me at a better chance of understanding the risks than someone who has read a load of media scaremongering.

Reply 134

The1truebelieber

P.s.

WRT T-Rays.

THIS is where they got their info from.

Read it.

Spoiler

In other words:

We have a theory which is based on a computer model. We have no information beyond that, we have no solid proof.

Oh, and btw - you create OMGZ TETRUHURTZ RADIASHUN when you unpeel tape. Might wanna stop doing that.

Reply 135

atheistwithfaith

14

I'd like to live in a world where we don't have to use body scanners, though previously being a major advocate of the privacy campaigners I now don't see so much of a problem with it. The image is hardly revealing and as long as you have no contraband you should suffer no problem, its no different really from being frisked if you set off a metal detector.

Reply 136

jordan200888

4

for the 'selection' of people to be fair they need to say someting like scan every 100th person (interval sampling) for example, rather than just picking people from the crowd, that way they cant be accused of discrimination or targeting certain people or anything, i dont like the idea of them pointing a finger at people in a crowd and selecting them this way.... wether they claim its random or not and making people do it, they need to make sure it is completely random and that is not done by just picking people out of a crowd....or do a lottery type thing so a computer generates random numbers (random sampling if i remember my statistcis lesson right *puts on boffin cap*) so person number 56, 112, 204 etc.... that goes through security is scanned

Reply 137

The1truebelieber

jordan200888

for the 'selection' of people to be fair they need to say someting like scan every 100th person (interval sampling) for example, rather than just picking people from the crowd, that way they cant be accused of discrimination or targeting certain people or anything, i dont like the idea of them pointing a finger at people in a crowd and selecting them this way.... wether they claim its random or not and making people do it, they need to make sure it is completely random and that is not done by just picking people out of a crowd....or do a lottery type thing so a computer generates random numbers (random sampling if i remember my statistcis lesson right *puts on boffin cap*) so person number 56, 112, 204 etc.... that goes through security is scanned

+ Opt in pretty please :yep:

Like I've said before, I've had enthusiastic frisks before....TOO enthusiastic.....I'd much rather a scan.

Reply 138

UGeNe

14

HDS

+ Opt in pretty please :yep:

Like I've said before, I've had enthusiastic frisks before....TOO enthusiastic.....I'd much rather a scan.

You should do what I do.

Ask to be searched before they have the opportunity to ask you.

I never get searched. I just act too excited about the whole experience. :yep:

Reply 139

lazza

15

What a wonderful read this was

Personally I want to travel safely. If that now means metal detectors at tube stations and scanners at airports i don't care because Ive got nothing to hide. Unfortunatly because of a tiny number of nutters who believe we're all evil westerners who need slaughtered, this is what has to happen. Flying isn't a right it's a privilege. If you don't like their security policies, don't do it. As an added bonus you can say you're saving the planet too.

'No scan, no flight' at Heathrow and Manchester!

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you