Why do people give in so easy to the "The scanner are safe" crap?

[KansasVoter]

So the government has never lied to us before?

Why are people so damn complacent?

This "scanners are safe" crap is one of those thing that in about 10 years we will hear that they were wrong and did not understand the dangers.

Wow, people are like sheep and the government loves it.

[DrDan]

1. Christie Whitman told us the air was safe after 9-11 . . . . and it was

oh - wait . . . .

[CreekDog]

2. And the downwinders exposed to fallout from atomic testing

what were they told about their exposure?

[cbdo2007]

3. You mean like the "Cigarettes are safe" crap and the "Cellphones are safe" crap?

[hlthe2b]

4. Good question...

Maybe because they give us half truths and we fail to question further.... I don't doubt that they are correct in saying the total scanning radiation equates to that received from a few minutes of air travel. But, what they aren't telling you, is that it is DIRECTED radiation, with genitalia and head getting a major targeted dose--something that DOES NOT happen in the air. The scatter effect may well damage DNA and they know it.

Nothing in life is free of risk, but a standard risk-benefit assessment should be expected to be completed. Given the astronomically LOW risk of being the victim of a terrorist's fatal attack, there is not way even the infinitesimally low risk they ascribe to the scanning would make it worth it. Damn it, CDC ALWAYS has to perform in depth risk-benefit studies of new vaccines before they can ever be considered for FDA approval or for addition to childhood or adult recommended vaccine schedules. Why the hell is this non-science based agency immune from doing so as well?

:mad:

[truedelphi]

36. Great statement in your post...

Nothing in life is free of risk, but a standard risk-benefit assessment should be expected to be completed.

And how hard would that be to do? Given that for the following nine years after nine/eleven it did not seem necessary to do this to us, what would one more year mean?

[Orrex]

5. I'm still waiting for them to give me super hulk-like powers

Nothing so far...

[Glassunion]

9. Wrong type of radiation...

So instead of turning into a strong super human creature when you feel angry... At best you will just end up with some slight discolartion of your testicles when you feel disappointed.

[Orrex]

30. Hell, you don't need radiation for that.

[flyarm]

6. There are serious questions right now about these machines, that's why Pilots fought to be exempt!

Flight attendants as well!

Only a fool would expose themselves to someone in charge of a machine like these with no serious technical training in Xray equipment.


Go look up the training for TSA agents..and ask yourself..is this someone you want X-Raying you or groping you and your family?

Do so at your own peril.

From a retired Flight crew.

[dixiegrrrrl]

12. I find your perspective valuable. Please keep sharing it.

:hi:

[Glassunion]

7. Agreed...

[City Lights]

8. They're conditioned to believe anything the government tells them.

We're a nation of lemmings.

[BrklynLiberal]

10. Sheeple...you got it. Everything encourages folks to sit down and shut up...

Just go along to get along. Don't rock the boat. Don't cause trouble. As long as we got jobs, we should keep quiet.
Don't be an individual. Don't object no matter how obvious the danger/problem is. "1984"..We are there.

Oh yes..Complicit, corporate owned media is a big enabler to this as well.

[Motown_Johnny]

11. They say that the radiation is equal to about 2 minutes of flying

This is a measurable quantity


Feel free to disprove them


Until there is some evidence to the contrary I am staying with reality and dismissing the unfounded accusations

[Glassunion]

14. The problem with that analogy is that the radiation types are different and

they are not focused and pass through your entire body mass. These x-ray machines take focused radiation and apply it to a single organ(skin) on your body.

The same people that you label as "They" are the same ones that told workers at the World Trade Center that the air was safe to breathe. Never mind that the dust particles had a chemical similarity to ammonia.

[TheWraith]

20. X-rays are easily measured.

And there's no real fundamental difference between x-rays and gamma rays when it comes to measuring radiation. If you want to take a dosimeter badge through airport security, I don't see why they'd stop you.

[KansasVoter]

17. Not out long enough to do any study. But believe what you want.

[LostInAnomie]

25. +1

[flyarm]

48. who is "THEY SAY"?? That is bullshit.. If "THEY SAY" that "They" don't know WTF "they " are talking

about!

Why can pregnant women fly if that is the case? Why can Preg flight attendants fly for work? But are being advised not to go through the XRAY machines?????????

Do you go to an airport for a broken bone? No , You go to a hospital for expert Techs to xray your bones..you go to doctors, not unqualified people running Xray machines.

Do you have any idea how long it takes to qualify to run Xray technology in a hospital? or Doctors office?

Do you know what the training is for a TSA agent to zap you with raditiation?

Look it up and please stop making baseless comments on what you are not qualfied to state.

"They Say" doesn't know what the fuck "they" are talking about!

Does anyone use common sense anymore??????????????

[Rochester]

13. Because they are afraid to challenge this rule or any other...

...knowing that they will be turned away from the planes, not get one red cent of their plane ticket back, lose their vacation or business trip, and most likely lose in court if they have the initiative and money to try to pursue the fight further. And that's if the goons decide that turning them away is enough.

These are the same people who huff and puff when their cable company raises its rates; they scream and protest and then they write the larger checks.

They've drunken too much of the Kool-aid served up by conservatives and libertarians, and they've accepted and internalized the notion that those organizations larger, stronger, richer, better-connected, more powerful, etc. than themselves - big business, governments, etc. - are "free" to make things many people consider routinized or almost even take for granted, conditional on waiving constitutional or legal rights, submission to degrading procedures, outlandish fees, and so on... in other words, the people have accepted and internalized the transformation of "personal responsibility" into "shit rolls downhill", and they don't seem to care that they are at the bottom of that hill, or that they are in effect being told to like it or lump it.

It's time for things to change.

[hollowdweller]

15. People use brain cancer inducing cellphones, think global warming is no problem,

eat all kinds of bad food.

[TheWraith]

22. And people believe crap like the idea that cell phones cause brain cancer.

Whereas there's absolutely no scientific evidence to show that.

[WinkyDink]

45. You DO know the companies have added fine-print warnings? That France bans sales to minors?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/devra-davis-phd/cell-phones-and-brain-can_b_585992.html

http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-10-cell-pose-health-devra-davis.html

In any case, I'm sure you are aware of the decades-long denial by tobacco firms that there was no absolute link between smoking and cancer.

Tricky thing, science and human health. Not quite like in-your-face cause-and-effect sometimes.

[Recursion]

53. OTOH, people fretted about crack babies for years

before it turned out they actually don't do any worse than other kids.

Cell phones transmit at 1 GHz so they are essentially unfocused microwave ovens. They do warm tissues, but there is simply no evidence that they facilitate tumors (I don't say "cause" because, you're right, looking for a single cause of most health problems is pointless.

[WinkyDink]

60. The analogy would be to crack users.

[krabigirl]

16. Many reasons..ignorance, being authoritarian followers, and so on.

[dixiegrrrrl]

18. Conditioning starts in school.

I was reminded again of that when I watched my neighbor's child, who at age 4 was precocious, outgoing, lively, bubbly and curious, but by Jan. of her first grade year, has become shy, quiet, and deeply unhappy.
It does not help that she lives in a Fundie family with an authoritarian father.

Being "different", standing out from the crowd, is not a supported value in our culture for kids and young adults.
Certainly independent thinking is not supported.

The worst part is, for those who ARE independent thinkers, smart, curious, and aware, being surrounded by lemmings is
maddening beyond belief.

[Rochester]

19. You said it!

"The worst part is, for those who ARE independent thinkers, smart, curious, and aware, being surrounded by lemmings is maddening beyond belief."

YES!!!!

[dixiegrrrrl]

32. My sons have been saying "' arrgghhh" about that for years and years.

At times I have no words to comfort them, esp. when the stupidometer has hit a particularly high level out there in the world.

( Once I did ask them if they would have been happier if they had inherited their Dad's brains..

( the ex..)

..but only once):evilgrin:

[ThatsMyBarack]

21. If I choose the scanner....

Do I avoid a groping? :shrug:

[LisaL]

23. Not necessarily.

Many passengers have reported being patted down after the scan, including one senator, I believe.

[spanone]

24. most people are too busy living their lives.

[intheflow]

26. Radiation is good for you!

Why, doctors give it to cancer patients and they get better! Sometimes. But still. Just suck it up and you won't ever get cancer. Ever. Trust us.

:eyes:

[Individualist]

27. You'll find the answer in a Goering quote

"After all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."

[Mimosa]

28. Thanks. That's a quote nobody should forget, Individualist. n/t

[Swamp Rat]

35. +1

:thumbsup:

[Skittles]

29. my guess is they ARE safe, unless you're a frequent flier

alas, there are a lot of frequent fliers

[spin]

31. But what if you are? ...

Can we trust the TSA?

I understand that they do not change their gloves in between pat downs. If this is true, they might spread serious diseases and the TSA management has little knowledge of medical protocol.

As usual I suspect that money and power are at the heart of the scanner fiasco.

[quaker bill]

33. Because I understand technology

and honestly if someone wants to see me naked, they are welcome to look. The scanners are certainly safer than riding on an aircraft with a bomb.

Secondly, if radiation is your concern, you will apparently get a bigger dose from going that high into the atmosphere and staying there for a bit. But of course, that's all natural and organic cosmic rays, I am sure they are far better.

[Individualist]

38. Do you understand this...

"It works like a charm. A fearful people are the easiest to govern. Their freedom and liberty can be taken away, and they can be convinced to believe that it was done for their own good - to give them security. They can be convinced to give up their liberty - voluntarily." --Gene E. Franchini, retired Chief Justice of the New Mexico Supreme Court

[quaker bill]

46. Which liberty is being threatened?

Other than the liberty to wear a bomb or some other flight contraband (say a box cutter) under your clothes? You can still fly anywhere you want and they are not checking for items related to political speech, just potentially harmful devices.

I do not feel my liberties being threatened here, but then I was never going to bring a knife, gun, bomb or for that matter, any illicit item on a plane. Check all you like as far as I am concerned. If I want to ride on a plane to get somewhere then I will comply with procedures to do that.

I live under the approach to a runway and am happy to see all the planes flying safely over my house as opposed to attempting to emergency land in my neighborhood...

[Shandris]

66. By the same token though...

...when you become so paranoid of everything that is going on around you because THEY (as opposed to THEM, which is a race of giant ants) said its safe and THEY lie, then you've become the VERY SAME fearful population that you're decrying.

[flyarm]

40. Because I understand being a flight crew, you are sorely mistaken on what you believe is security!

as a now retired flight crew Ny based when I retired with one of the 9/11 airlines..and having flown for 33 years professionally..your premise is a crock of crap.

Let me explain to you, the shoe bomber came on an international flight. No one in Europe is required to take their shoes off to go through security..only sheeple Americans take their shoes off to go through security in Europe..although not asked to or required to and they are laughed at, and told to put their damn shoes back on!

The non Underwear bomber..went to the ticket counter in Europe and got a boarding pass with
no passport
( yeah fucking right! not possible)

The underwear bomber checked his bags in Europe ..with no passport....( yeah fucking right..not possible)

If the underwear bomber did not have a bag to check he woud have been required extra security checks, and he would not have gone anywhere ..with no passport!!

The Underwear bomber got through the private
security questioning in line for security with no passport.. ( yeah ficking right ..not possible)

Then the Underwear bomber ( choke) got through security with no passport ( yeah fucking right..not possible)

Then surprise of all surprises ..the Underwear bomber was allowed to board a USA BOUND Airliner and aircraft..with NO FUCKING PASSPORT!!!!!!!!!!!!! ..NOT FUCKING POSSIBLE!!!..UNLESS..THERE WAS A GOVERNMENT ORDER TO LET HIM ON THAT AIRCRAFT..WITHOUT A PASSPORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I fly to Europe approx 12 times a year, now retired ,and when and as a flight crew at least 3 times a month for 20 years.

There is no possible way that so called Underwear bomber got through all that security and all the checks needed to board a USA bound aircraft or Airline without a passport..no way no fucking how..unless there was a government order and escort to that aircraft!

So if you think when your overnment is lying their ass off to you and you are going through these bogus machines and you are being groped you are safer..you are then a damn fool!

Since these bombers came in to the USA on International flights, why are Eurpoean and International flights not getting this treatment?
And why are only we getting this treatment domestically???????

I just returned 1 1/2 weeks ago from Berlin, I got none of this treatment. I had traveled to Prague and was asked nothing about my travel in Europe, nor were my traveling companions! I was in Paris in Sept and last May..nope none of this nasty unconstitutional treatment , I got none of this treatment..I was treated with respect
..but I assure you I would not have gotten one step towards my flights without a Passport!

[quaker bill]

47. Whatever

The scans do no harm and might add a bit of security, or not. The bottom line is that there is no adequate defense, ever, because attackers always have options that security professionals have not considered. One cannot protect everything, all the time, from every and any imagined threat.

I do not need security, and no amount of it ever makes me feel more secure. We had the largest, most expensive and best equiped defense department the world had ever seen on 9/11 and it was precisely useless, because everything was pointed in the wrong direction, purposefully or not is irrelevant.

All that said, if they want a scan of me naked, they are welcome to it. I rather expect they will hit the delete button as promptly as possible.

[flyarm]

69. it is not correct that the machines cause no harm. Pilots and Flight attendants just got exonerated

from going through these machines, one of the major argumets they used with Homeland security and the FAA & TSA was exposure to too much radiation!

It has not been proven that these machines cause no harm, quite the contrary !

[quaker bill]

71. Incorrect

1. Flight crews control the gd airplane. If they want to be a terrorist, they do not need to carry something on board in their underwear. They just take the controls and fly the thing into the ground or whatever. So, there is no point to the scan.

2. A further argument is that flight crews are already at elevated risk from radiation exposure from spending long hours constantly being exposed to increased dosages of cosmic rays from flying high in the atmosphere.

So, there is no enhancement to security gained scanning flight crews, which are heavily vetted and have control of the damn aircraft already. The scan would add a small incremental risk to a population already at vastly more substantial risk from chronic radiation exposure.

Physics are what physics are, you get vastly more exposure to ionizing radiation from the flight than the scan. Further, the scanner is designed to emit a wavelength that largely bounces off the skin. Cosmic rays don't.

[flyarm]

73. dispute this:

http://myhelicaltryst.blogspot.com/2010/11/tsa-x-ray-ba...

some of what you just posted correct but the radiation was a huge factor!

[jberryhill]

54. The "no passport" thing is false

He had a visa to visit the US.

The visa was, of course, in his passport.

"UNLESS..THERE WAS A GOVERNMENT ORDER"

A Dutch government order?

Yah, sure.

[flyarm]

70. No a US Government order! eom

[jberryhill]

75. The US government doesn't run Schiphol

Kurt Haskell's story is a crock of shit.

[Incitatus]

63. Good questions

There were over 90 million flights in the US since 9/11 and not one single flight originating in the US was boarded by a terrorist with explosives, yet on every flight some passengers will have to be strip searched or have their privates handled by a stranger.

It's sad how many cowards here buy into the fear propaganda and simply say you have no right to fly so if you don't like it don't fly.

[defendandprotect]

34. Many people prefer to be on the side of power ....that's always true ...!!

[sarcasmo]

37. The reason our government keeps rolling over our rights. The sheep nod and say yes overlords

you are always right, when is survivor on?

[jeff47]

39. It doesn't help that there are two kinds of scanners

Backscatter X-Ray design: Use X-Rays. X-Rays are known to be dangerous in large doses, but this machine uses low doses, which AFAIK haven't really been studied long-term. Right now, the assertion is you'll get more high-energy EM from the flight itself than the scanner (cosmic and X-Rays can penetrate the atmosphere down to where planes fly). But those assurances make me a little iffy on long-term exposure...they're assuming no effective leakage from the machine, for example.

Terahertz radiation design: Uses EM that's between microwaves and infrared light. The only known harmful mechanism is in sufficiently high doses it can cause heating. But the scanners use low doses. Since the laws of physics say it can't break chemical bonds, they're safe.

Unfortunately, there isn't a good way to tell which kind of machine it is while you're in line.

[DemocraticPilgrim]

41. I think they are safe I've been through a scanner no aches &pains prolonged wifi use different story

[LibDemAlways]

42. Who should the public believe? The government, which has a

vested interest in the machines, or a UCSF professor who is a member of the National Academy of Sciences and has issued a public statement on the matter?

http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20022541-281.html

I'll go with the scientist.

Beyond the issue of safety with the machines themselves, there is also the question of the qualifications of those operating the machines. Do we really want to put our bodies at the mercy of personnel who are not competent to use x-ray equipment? Each state has a set of laws governing the training and licensing of x-ray technicians. Clearly, TSA is operating outside of those regulations. I personally am not going to allow myself to be x-rayed by someone who was recruited from a pizza box ad. No way.

This is a big scam being perpetrated on the public. It's as though they are actually determined to harm us - either physically with the x-rays or psychologically with the gropes.

[lib_wit_it]

43. 100% agree! I will avoid air travel like the plague from now on. At present I have no need to fly,

so rare circumstances could make it necessary, but until such an event, I'm not willing to be a player in this potentially gene-mutating police state security theater.

[WinkyDink]

44. Same reason they accept that cell-phones are safe; electro-magnetic fields are safe; etc.

I guess ya had to live through the Thalidomide days.

[Recursion]

57. "electro-magnetic fields"?

:eyes:

[WinkyDink]

59. You heard me. Your rolled eyes do not impress.

http://www.who.int/peh-emf/en/

http://ewh.ieee.org/soc/embs/comar/Hypersensitivity.htm

http://www.suite101.com/content/electromagnetic-waves-and-your-health-a69103

[demodonkey]

49. Ah, but the government's poorly-tested paperless voting machines count all votes PERFECTLY.....

...so we should trust these poorly tested x-ray machines not to cause cancer or otherwise injure us.

NOT.

Scan ballots, not bodies.

[LanternWaste]

50. I worked in an outpatient cancer treatment center for seven years

I worked in an outpatient cancer treatment center for seven years-- wore the dosage badge day in and day out. Received more than my fair share of radiation, but then again, not quite as much as the patients. Went in five days a week for seven years.

Although I feel healthy, and although every six month physical I go to results in little more than" eat better and work out", I suppose it's more indicative than not that I'm just another sheep.

[LisaL]

51. Most people will do what those in a position of authority told them to do.

[Recursion]

52. Part of being an electrical engineer is I tune out popular reporting about "radiation"

Because it's always very wrong.

[felix_numinous]

55. Not many people understand radiation.

The reports of safety compare backscatter machine radiation exposure to cosmic radiation obtained from flying, but these are two different energies. In order to understand radiation you have to talk about two different things, the amount of radiation or number of photons being emitted, and the penetration power of those photons. Cosmic radiation has more penetrating power than the soft rays being emitted by the backscatter machine. So just talking about the amount of the rays is misleading, it is the penetrating power we need to be concerned about. The backscatter machines use low energy rays that are not strong enough to go further than the skin--they interact with skin--and this is the concern.

Skin, eyes, testicles are superficial organs and should not be exposed to these soft rays if at all possible.

I know this is confusing because cosmic radiation can also cause skin cancer, it does contain some low energy radiation too, but that is only part of the whole spectrum being emitted, so to compare backscatter to cosmic radiation, one has to compare only the low penetrating rays of each and compare the skin dose.

This is why we do not want any other source of radiation if we can help it. I hope this explanation helps a little bit.

I wanted to add that medical xray equipment has filters that screen out these undesirable soft rays for the reasons above. Some medical procedures that go on for a long time like angiography and cardiac catheterization, and some CAT scans have had reports of overexposure due to long exposure times. This is why the use of ionizing radiation comes with such a large responsibility to the general public, it's use should only come with a benefit that outweighs the risk.

[Recursion]

56. "Soft" rays?

What makes a ray of a given frequency and intensity "softer" than another? Or are these some sort of "low-frequency X-ray" (whatever that would mean)?

[WinkyDink]

61. Google.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:lzp2U15K-MkJ:xrayweb.chem.ou.edu/notes/safety.html+soft+x-rays+and+health&cd=6&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

[Recursion]

65. So, the latter

They're saying lower-energy X-rays, which go through less of your body, are doing more damage.

I'll file that away for future inspiration.

[AsahinaKimi]

58. Just stand here soldiers..

The Nuclear test will go off half a mile away, you don't have to worry about Radiation.
Ten Years later..

[krabigirl]

62. Why did so many people (and so many Dems) go right along with the WMD lies?

And the war in Iraq? Because people are afraid to be seen as not conforming.

[TheKentuckian]

64. Being in the majority in America on any issue should give one pause if there was no heavy lifting

and long suffering by the "small people" to forge such a consensus.

Might not be wrong but it is best to think long, deep, and hard because as a people we like to start wrong and buy lies.

The strip search machines are not even remotely justifiable and are clearly unnecessary from a security standpoint because the fuckers turned them off on the biggest day of the year to avoid bad press and blow back.

[Honeycombe8]

67. So glad it's not just me with this question. I thought maybe I was paranoid. In all the talk

about the radiation I hear on TV, I haven't heard the one thing I WANT to hear: the exact amount of radiation coming from the scanner. Maybe they think we're too stupid to Google the amount to see the effects of that amount. Or maybe they don't want to name the number. (There are 2 types of machines, so there are 2 levels of radiation, I understand.)

What is more important to me, though, than the amount of radiation from that one machine that one time, is the added amount to the cumulative amount we receive from a host of things in our modern world: microwaves, airplanes, mammograms, dental x-rays, whatever.

And how much is the amount for the frequent business traveler?

I heard on TV that the amount from the scanner is less than a person receives from simply flying in the plane. But there's that cumulative effect I'm wondering about. And also, flying may be necessary, while the scanner isn't necessarily necessary.

[Raine]

68. one word .... FEAR

Keep them scared they will agree to literally ANYTHING. :scared: This country has become a nation of cowards. If this was hundred and fifty years ago there sure would have been no westward movement (which may have been a good thing but still ... just saying)

[Forkboy]

72. Simple. Despite any protestations to the contrary, people prefer to be lead.

[LisaL]

74. People generally will do what authorities tell them to do.

Candid camera show was able to get airport passengers to go through a fake x-ray machine as if they were baggage, and that was before 9/11.