Full body scanners for use at airports are in the news again, but I am not sure why. It may be that the holidays bring about more travel and the realness of this security measure is becoming more apparent. It could also be that more airports have installed the scanners. To the best of my knowledge, a traveler is still able to refuse the full body scan and have a "pat down" instead. Why would someone go the more invasive route? The two reasons most often given are fear of being seen "naked" on the display and fear of radiation. I fall into the second category and absolutely will NOT expose myself to the extra radiation. The people who tell us the level is low or the level is safe have not always been right about these sorts of things. They have at times minimized what an exposure can do and how exposures can add up. (exposure being radiation, air pollution, tobacco smoke, etc) In fact, radiation exposure has become a greater concern especially in that medical imaging, as it begins in children, is a cause of adult cancer.
But back to airport scanners - I will be flying for both Thanksgiving and the Christmas Holiday. My travels will involve three airports - SO - I will let you know if I do indeed have to be searched. Me and my lunch box - HA - fun times.
But I write today (in the midst of crazy semester ending madness) because I heard a report on the radio during which some airline employees were bulking at having to be scanned. One of the responses given to them was that they were exposed to low levels of radiation every day while flying. This was supposed to make them feel BETTER? With regard to radiation and its effect on the human molecular system - MORE is MORE!!! That was the nuttiest defense of radiation I have ever heard - well, "I don't know what you're complaining about, you already get more exposure than the average person, what's a little more." That little more just might be the sufficient dose to induce cancer -