Outraged by TSA

There was yet another story in the news last week (NY Times) about people undergoing a form of radiation treatment which went wrong leaving irreversible damage.  One woman is in a near coma now.  Again the issue was that no one knew the machine wasn't doing what it was supposed to be doing for quite some time - several people were badly hurt.  Not that I had any intention of going through the scanner, but it becomes scarier and scarier.  Virtually every doctor who has spoken out on them has advised against going through and directs his/her own family to avoid. Amazing to me that anyone thinks these are okay.  I've also heard of concerns with the millimeter wave scanner. While I am completely creeped out by getting an enhanced pat down, at least once that's over it's done with.  If the machine malfunctions on you there's no going back.  I just can't understand how so many people blindly walk through these things simply because the govt. says they are safe. Frankly, even if they were to find a problem with the machine I doubt they would be quick to admit it publicly.

Anniealso, you said:  "They cannot "see" anything explicitly either, with those body scanners.  Only outlines.  So no worries on showing up naked.  The pat downs are not inside underwear or bras."  I'm not sure where you are getting your information, but it's not consistent with what the TSA itself is telling people. I've posted these images before, but I guess I need to put them up again.

Here's the image the TSA says its employees see with the millimeter wave scanner.  The pic is from the TSA's website:  http://www.tsa.gov/graphics/images/approach/mmw_large.jpg

And, here's the image the TSA says its employees see with the backscatter X-ray machine.  Once again, this is from the TSA's own website: http://www.tsa.gov/graphics/images/approach/backscatter_large.jpg

People who have actually seen the images produced by the TSA's backscatter X-ray machines claim the one on the TSA's website (posted above) has been "altered" digitally.  Supposedly, the real image is much clearer. Those people say the reason why the TSA no longer puts the real (un-altered) X-ray images on its site is because they are too graphic (too revealing).

The following image is also from a TSA backscatter X-ray machine.  It was used during the early months of TSA's campaign to convince people of the value of the machines.  The TSA eventually quit using it and switched to the altered image I've posted above.  The TSA has asked news sites to stop using the clearer image (below), because it shows the woman's face.  Apparently, the backscatter X-ray images viewed at TSA checkpoints are altered so the facial features of the person being scanned are not recognizable.  IIRC, nothing else has changed, however.  http://www.scottosphere.org/images/backscatter-xray-scan.jpg

Now, maybe it's just me, but I think all those images are way beyond "outlines".  They're pretty darn explicit.  I've seen the exact same images shown on TV during news broadcasts and "talk shows," and the breasts and crotches have been covered up with black bars (i.e., censored).  It's really not that difficult to tell which ones are male and which are female, is it?  People who have discussed the scans with TSA officials have been told the images will show whether a woman is wearing a sanitary napkin or a breast prosthesis.

And, as to whether TSA employees put their hands down into people's pants... At least at some airports' checkpoints, TSA screeners ask people to pull out their waistbands so the screener can run his/her hands around the inside the pants at the waistband. They d*mn well better not try to put their hands inside my underwear.

I am sick of this.  People are going to believe what they want to believe.  The TSA will not tell anyone what its screeners are allowed to do, and what is off-limits; and what its official screening and pat-down procedures are supposed to be.  So, all we have to go on are accounts from passengers who experienced TSA screenings and were offended or felt violated by the procedures.  The accounts are available all over the place -- in news reports, on the ACLU testamonial web page, as Youtube videos, and from flyers' boards and blogs.

I have no reason to think these are "tales" people have made up or personal insults they have imagined.  And, although they might not meet the legal definition of rape, they sure as h*ll would be sexual assault under any other circumstances.

otter

I already emailed my congresspeople...received a form email which said nothing. I live in Pennsylvania. Perhaps if more people email concern it will have an effect. I certainly hope so.

I flew from Paris to Albuquerque after Thanksgiving. I did have to go through a scanner at de Gaulle, but only a metal detector on my return trip. No pat-downs, enhanced or otherwise. I traveled during one of the least traveled weeks of the year and it showed: lots of empty seats on the planes, almost empty airports and no lines at security. I wasn't happy about the scanners, but the US wasn't allowing anyone in who didn't go through it. I had more anxiety about airport security than anything else, and was greatly relieved. But, I'm still very skeptical about the extra rads received. I too have written congressmen (I'm also a US citizen), but received responses amounting to nothing as well.

flyingdutchess:  I can understand your concern about the xray machines causing cancer . . . makes me wonder, too, if anyone other than shoe salesmen got cancer from them.  Would that be online somewhere?  Maybe Google would have more info.

Julie

Can anyone share their experiences with TSA while wearing their TE's?

I'm flying for the 1st time with TE's in February and I'm kind of nervous about that.

Thanks

Jan

I don't know what this means....but I recently had to fly to San Francisco and was really worried about the scanner and my silicone prosthesis.  As it turned out, I had several hours to kill before boarding the plane in SFO and after much deliberation about what to do, I decided to go through their blipping scanner just to see what would happen.  I was traveling alone, so embarrassment wasn't such an issue.  Got into the thing, raised my arms, got out, was told to wait for 3 seconds and was let go!!  Has something changed??  Did someone finally get the memo about prosthesis??  Or was this just a fluke??   It would be really nice if they finally got the darn stuff figured out so as not to harass cancer victims.   Now the radiation issue is a different story...but as I rarely travel, I am not too worried.

Does anyone know if you can put a weighted breastform in your carry on? I'm going to fly this week and want to wear my silicone foob and take my light one in the carryon. Is it weighted with metal? I'm not checking a bag...

River_Rat, I just came across a link to the Alaska state rep story elsewhere, and was a little puzzled by it.  I thought the really intrusive patdowns were limited to those people who declined to go through the scanner (though even as I write that, I realize there will be a wide range of opinions as to how intrusive is "very" intrusive, colored in some cases by painful personal histories, strong libertarian beliefs, etc.). 

The news reports I've read on this particular incident are a little inconsistent.  This one makes it sound as though she was scanned, was told she would require a full body patdown, and refused.  Other coverage I've seen (and the rep's blog) make it sound as though she declined to go through the scanner at all, fearing a follow-up patdown.  (I believe she had a very bad patdown experience on a trip a few months back.)

My own experience has been very different.  I have a unilateral mastectomy and wear a prosthesis, and I've gone through the scanners at least a half dozen times now.  Sometimes I'm cleared immediately with no follow-up.  Sometimes I've had a follow-up pat-down of my bra area (very quick - sort of a swoosh across my chest - which I would not personally characterize as a "groping"), followed by a hand swab.  And once, they ignored my chest and just ran a hand down my arm (again followed by a hand swab).  I've never had a full-body patdown.

I'm puzzled by the magnitude of the variation in screening practices, and wonder how much is the result of training (or lack thereof).

Linda

SherryG: I agree. It is not ok with me if they have to touch and see a prothesis.  Believe me, the terroriists are laughing at us.

TSA should be able to see a mastectomy scar with the scanners.  They'll at least be able to see the absence of a "normal" breast.  The scanner images are very detailed. 

TSA is supposedly working on some computer software that will analyze the image and mark where the computer thinks there is something suspicious.  If the new system is adopted, the screeners won't see images of naked bodies anymore.  All they will see is a standardized, androgynous stick-figure that has boxes where the suspicious areas are.  And, supposedly, the follow-up patdowns will only involve the areas the computer has marked with boxes.

Originally (as of November 2010), there were 4 situations in which travelers might be subjected to "enhanced" patdowns.  1) Any passenger who was directed by TSA to go through a whole-body scanner (backscatter X-ray or millimeter wave) but declined -- "opted out" -- would be required to undergo an enhanced patdown.  2) Anyone who went through a whole-body scanner and had something on his/her body that looked suspicious to the guy in the dark room would need to undergo an enhanced patdown.  3) Anyone who was directed to go through a walk-through metal detector and triggered the alarm would have to undergo an enhanced patdown.  And, 4) a few people would be selected at random for an enhanced patdown, even if they went through the metal detector or the scanner and did not set off any alarms.

Originally (as of Nov. 2010, when the new TSA procedures were implemented), there were not supposed to be any more "partial" patdowns.  Anyone receiving a patdown would be given a full-body "enhanced" patdown, regardless of the location of the suspicious area.  Also, there weren't supposed to be any more "wandings" if someone set off the walk-through metal detector.  If the alarm went off, the person would get an enhanced patdown.  And, the enhanced patdown was supposed to include probing of the crotch "until resistance was met," running fingers around the inside of the waist band of the pants, and pressing fingers around, against, and between the breasts.  The TSA refused to disclose any details about "standard procedures" -- everything I've cited here is from travelers' personal descriptions or from question-and-answer sessions with individual screeners interviewed by reporters.

I have to admit that I am glad to hear things are changing.  I don't think people would have put up with the intrusiveness of the enhanced patdowns if they had been applied as uniformly as the TSA had originally intended.  Surveys of travelers indicated that most people would rather be screened by the whole-body scanners than undergo an enhanced patdown.  Some were not aware they were still at risk of a patdown, even if they agreed to be scanned.  Apparently, the people who willingly went through the scanners were less concerned about someone seeing their bodies without clothing than being felt-up by a stranger. And, apparently, they weren't as concerned about the radiation risk from the backscatter X-ray machines as I still am.

Fortunately, I haven't had to fly commercially since all this nonsense began last year.  My dh and I are willing to drive nearly anywhere to avoid the hassle of commercial flying.  It used to be fun. I used to look forward to commercial air travel, and I flew at least 4 or 5 times a year.  Not any more.

otter

lewing/Linda, you are correct on all counts, based on what I've read and heard.  It does seem that the intensity of the patdowns might have diminished since the Nov. 2010 implementation date.

Yes, there are 2 different types of whole-body scanners being used at airports in the U.S. 

One is the millimeter wave scanner, which uses ... dang it, now I have to go look that up again... Anyway, it uses something akin to radiofrequency waves (I think).  The risk of bad things happening in those devices has been compared to use of a cell phone.  ("You'd get more exposure from using a cell phone" etc.)  The millimeter wave scanners apparently have curved panels. I haven't seen one in-person, but I've seen photos and drawings.  Kind of reminds me of a revolving door, if you take out the revolving part and just imagine the curved sides.  I think the traveler stands in the middle and the walls move around.  (Not sure about that.)  The images from the millimeter wave scanners look like naked mannequins painted with aluminum.

The backscatter X-ray scanners are two flat walls that are arranged parallel to one another.  The traveler stands in between the walls.  Nothing moves, although I do think the TSA screeners ask the person to face one wall, then turn around and face the other wall.  The backscatter images look like naked human bodies but the density -- the skin -- is ghostly. That's because the X-rays penetrate through the clothing and outer layer(s) of skin.

People who are concerned about safety of the scanners are mostly worried about the backscatter X-ray devices.  If the equipment is set, calibrated, and maintained correctly, there isn't supposed to be much radiation exposure from a single scan.  The concern is that the scanners are not being calibrated and maintained properly.  The government regulations that assure the safety of medical X-ray devices do not apply to scanners at TSA checkpoints, because those are not medical devices.  Apparently -- incredibly -- there are no "rules" governing the use of backscatter X-ray devices used by the TSA.  Congress has tried to get involved, but TSA has (so far) refused to release information or give details about their certification and inspection protocols. 

Also, there could be greater risk to people who travel a lot and get exposed in the backscatter devices more often than ... well, nobody knows how much is too much because there are no data.  Finally, there is concern among some physicians that people with skin problems or with predisposition to skin cancer could be at greater risk, because all the radiation from the backscatter machines is focused at the level of the skin.

<sigh>  I just wish they would go away, since there is good, scientific evidence documenting that the scanners cannot detect prohibited devices or materials that are concealed in certain ways.  And, I think I just read last week about a law enforcement person who (accidentally) carried his firearm through a TSA checkpoint.  He went through a whole-body scanner and was "cleared" -- the guy in the dark room apparently did not see the handgun, so the traveler was not stopped for a patdown.

Hubs and I haven't limited our travels -- we've just changed the means of transportation.  "See the USA in your Chevrolet!" and all that.  Not a bad idea, when it's possible.  And, disgust with the TSA was not a factor in my decision to let two of our chemo sisters represent us at EyesOTex's memorial service this week.

otter

I wonder if HIPPA health info privacy applies to the TSA as it does to hospitals and health care offices.  My next trip will likely be by train, mostly becuase I need to avoid more radiaiton exposure (was over-exposed during rads therapy) and I don't want to have to display my scars and announce my diagnosis in a public setting in front of strangers.  There must be SOME protection for my privacy in all this, somewhere. 

Has anyone goling through one of the machines asked how much radiation you get from them, exactly?  Does anyone know where I can get that info? 

Well I will be flying in April.  Yes, I need to read all the posts before I react but I plan on not wearing my prosthesis when I fly in April for the very reason that it may send off alarms and make a big scene. I don't like the idea of a stranger seeing my scar through the scanner if I end up having to go through it. It will be embarressing and humiliating but the whole deal has been this way for me in a way soo I suppose I will just live with it. Now I will read the posts...there are soo many....