Legit Reviews

This is interesting...

LONDON, England (Reuters) -- A new X-ray machine at London's Heathrow airport, which sees through passengers' clothes, has been attacked by civil liberties campaigners as a "voyeur's charter."

The machine uses low-level radiation to see through clothing, producing an anatomically detailed black and white image of the body underneath.

Capable of detecting solid objects concealed under clothing, it started a four month trial in October.

What do you guys think of this? Would you be offended if someone saw your figure naked or would you be against having low level radiation at the airport. Those who fly weekly would have hundreds of "low" level radiation... not sure how that will work in that group of travelers.

Linky

hmm... this is interesting... I'm not sure how I feel about this right now... I'll post again later after I get a chance to think about it.

My initial reaction is that it probably would increase safety. I don't think that this kind of image is really that bad -- it's not like pornagraphy and it is not saved.

However, the whole radiation thing could be a problem. They should do long-term studies of people who are exposed to low doses of radiation like this on a frequent basis. After I see the results of that study, I'll form an opinion one way or the other.

Since only a small percentage of passengers would ever be screened this way, and the dose must be very low if it doesn't even penetrate the skin, I doubt radiation is a major consideration (given that you already receive 4-5 times 'normal' background by taking a cross country flight, maybe you should stay home, or take a train)
Given the lack of ability of some TSA employees to properly run a metal detector, I would worry more about accidently over exposures, and frequent fliers/flight crews recieving many inspections over time.
Also how does medical equipment (pacemakers, insulin pumps, etc.) react, and how do they determine who should be exempt/get alternate screening.
This is more of a privacy issue.
It wouldn't bother me, but I can foresee cases where it could cause embarassment.

Amy wrote:My initial reaction is that it probably would increase safety. I don't think that this kind of image is really that bad -- it's not like pornagraphy and it is not saved.

.

Why would it never be saved? wouldn't it be needed in court to show why a give person was taken for a strip search?
I'm sure at some point,some screener might choose to snap a photo of the screen for porn or other use.

What I want to know is, where do I apply to get the job to run the x-ray................. I'm just a dirty old man at heart................

T-Shirt wrote:

Amy wrote:My initial reaction is that it probably would increase safety. I don't think that this kind of image is really that bad -- it's not like pornagraphy and it is not saved.

.

Why would it never be saved? wouldn't it be needed in court to show why a give person was taken for a strip search?
I'm sure at some point,some screener might choose to snap a photo of the screen for porn or other use.

I don't think it would have to be saved. If they find something, just like in a metal detector, they confiscate it. The proof for court is the weapon they found, not the picture of it on their body.

Also, I was under the impression that it is only screening a few passengers as a trial run for now. I thought they were seeing if it would be useful to use it instead of metal detectors...

The only thing I really worry about is mutation and cancer. With more and more devices transmitting radiation in our houses do we really need x-ray systems in every airport? Honestly I don’t know and I don’t have an opinion. But cancer sure does scare the hell out of me, when i went to buy a new cell phone I ended up getting one that was 1 ounce heavier just because it creates less radiation than the one I originally wanted.

cell phones( because it's close to your body/head), cell towers(lots of transmitters at higher power)satellite radio ground relays (high output) broadcast towers (AM,FM,TV) blue-tooth, WLAN,WiFi, radar, microwave (ovens and transmitters)and cordless phones ALL are releasing an ever higher level of radiation.
It's is a potentially serious problem.
and it's everywhere whether you use the products or not. I'm very aware of this as my father is fighting the construction of a 170k watt+ anntena farm next to his house. reading the studies as to the effect of long term radio wave radiation (particularly the 2.4 to 6 GHz) are positively linked to cateracts and maybe macular degeneration and probably(not yet proven except in rats) to assorted tumors including cancer.
Bio don't put your head between the dish and the satellite
and cell phone users (especailly if you make alot of calls) should consider a wired headset,speaker phone or hands free setup (even a couple feet makes a big difference in your exposure)