Tony Y: Second post
Topic: Health
Title: Airport Scanners are Safe, Government Says
Author: Anahad O'Connor
Publication Name: NY Times
Date of Publication: February 29th, 2012
Length of Article: 565 words
The Homeland Security Department issued a report last week concluding that full body X-ray machines used in airports are safe because they use an extremely low dose of radiation. Full body scanners have been used at 29 airports, which contain about 250 machines, since airport security has tightened. These body scanners are necessary because they are the only way to detect certain plastic explosives. The report says that a passenger would need to be screened 17,000 times in a 12 month period to go over the yearly limits of radiation exposure set by the American National Standards Institute. This means that a person would need to get scanned 47 times every day for a whole year to go over the limit. Every full body scan exposes people to 1.46 microrems of radiation, which is very little compared to dental X-rays, which release up to 15,000 microrems. A flight from New York to Los Angeles would even expose a passenger to more radiation(about 3000 microrems). Still, some are still skeptical that the body scans would have a greater effect on pregnant women, airport workers, and frequent fliers. The report forced screeners to make sure that the machines were calibrated so that passengers would not be accidentally exposed to higher radiation levels. Senator Susan Collins of Maine wants an independent study of the machines to examine the risks they may pose to more vulnerable populations, like the pregnant women.
Full body airport scanners have been controversial ever since they have first been used, and were banned by the European Union because of questions about their safety. It is a very good sign that the amount of radiation they release is not significant enough to be harmful to people. Still, more research should be done to make sure that these scanners are safe for everyone. In the mean time, people can still opt out for a pat-down, but privacy has been an issue regarding both pat downs and the full body scanners. Hopefully, further research will show that these machines are a safe way to detect for potential bomb threats for everyone.
It is somewhat comforting to hear that airport scanners are safe, and that one has to get scanned forty-seven times every day for a whole year to go over the radiation limit. However, the effect of radiation is usually not immediately shown and there can still be potential health risks. Besides safety, privacy is certainly another controversial issue about these scanners. However, I think they should still be used anyway because airport security is also very important.
ReplyDeleteThere is much controversy over whether full-body scanners should be used in airports. I am sure that everyone wants their flight to be safe and secure every time, but there comes a point where security measures go too far and inconvenience everyone involved. The fact that these scanners are safe -- it delievers only 1.46 microrems per scan, compared to 15000 microrems in a tooth X-ray -- makes full body scanners a lot safer in most people's eyes, adding to its cause. However, there are other issues with full-body scanners, such as privacy -- many people don't feel comfortable having their body exposed. There needs to be stringent security measures, but they shouldn't be intrusive or too inconvenient to anyone -- the right balance has to be found.
ReplyDelete