It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


TSA, X-Rays, HIPAAS... Is this LEGAL?

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 04:02 PM
These new scanners are X RAY MACHINES

In any medical environment they place lead shielding on your private parts to prevent overdose of radiation in order to prevent sterility.

Even dental x-rays it has now been found can cause thyroid cancer so the medical profession is taking precautions to prevent that from happening

But X-rays have always required a COMPETENT QUALIFIED Medical professional to handle this dangerous equipment. These professionals also leave the room so they do not get exposure.

There is a maximum allowable dose that you can receive per year and still be considered 'safe'

Dental X-rays can lead to thyroid cancer--study

[ex[The risk of developing thyroid cancer [abnormal cells that divide without control, which can invade nearby tissues or spread through the bloodstream and lymphatic system to other parts of the body. ] is relatively high in patients who are X-rayed at the dentist at least 10 times.

Located in the neck area, the thyroid gland is highly exposed to radiations erupting from many dental X-rays. Dental radiography, a source of low-dose diagnostic radiation, too is a risk to the gland, researchers report.

Only 10 times?

Repeated Dental X-Rays Can Cause Thyroid Cancer

Research Reveals Dental X-rays Can Cause Thyroid Cancer

Dental X-rays May Increase Risk of Thyroid Cancer

From a post in another thread... but relevant here

RADIATION X-Rays Are they good for you?

So... if you fly a couple times a year... you don't need to worry too much about exposure to radiation right? But if your a frequent flier... well hope you don't mind sterility or cancer a few years from now. I mean why do the hospitals cover your privates with LEAD SHIELDING and the tech leaves the room? And how do x-rays effect the brain? X-ray techs, QUAZLIFIED x-ray techs take extreme precautions when taking x-rays... Are these TSA goons QUALIFIED x-ray techs? Are these machines, which the ex head of DHS got a $350 Million contract for compliant with x-ray tech safety?

Well lets look at that shall we?

Originally posted by RelentlessLurker
kind of like how the TSA's biggest mouthpiece (janet napolitano) came out and said that the hopkins university claims the machines are safe.

...and for those of you who still cherish honesty:

DHS claim to safety

DHS's own source claiming otherwise

Since when have x-rays become 'safe'?

So how about a frequent flyer that makes several business flights a week? Has anyone at TSa even considered the accumulated dosage of x-rays? Is anyone checking if you have already flown enough times this year and you are now AT RISK of an overdose? Have they included info on other medical doses you have had this year?

And they x-ray your head as well? And no one is concerned about all this radiation that for decades the medical profession has been taken pains to avoid over exposing people and staff?

I see people saying that the terrorists now rule.. NO it is our FEAR of POTENTIAL terrorists that has done this.
When did America become a nation of WUSSIES?

Okay so I looked... and here it is in TSA's own report

So how do they determine if a frequent flier has reached the maximum annual dosage to maintain safety? At this rate we won't need to worry about the terrorists bombs... because in the interest of safety everyone gets NUKED

No one concerned about this?

HIPAA The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Action

We have seen many examples of people with medical conditions being exposed in a very insensitive and embarrassing way during these invasive pat downs. Like the woman forced to remove her prosthetic breast and have to state she is a breast cancer survivor and the man soaked in his own urine when they handled his urine sac.

How does TSA get away with violating our rights under HIPAA? Are they exempt? An the x-rays, do they not now put private medical info into the hands of those that have no right or business to them? Never mind exposing a persons medical condition to the public.

Surely there has to be a way to stop that using the HIPAA laws

Well here is the HIPAA official site that explains our rights

HIPAA Enforcement

Here is the link to file an official complaint about any violation of those rights. Perhaps if enough people send in a complaint to this organization, someone will take notice. Another non-violent, within our current rights means of protest

How to File a Patient Safety Confidentiality Complaint

Originally posted by new_here

If everyone demanded a copy of their x-rays on the spot, citing 'Freedom of Info Act' or else 'right to obtain copies of medical personal records' which falls under HIPAA (It's an X-ray, for heavensake!) And furthermore, the more I think about it, this whole fiasco may be in violation of HIPAA, which deals with the privacy of medical information. Remember the person who had to show her prosthetic breast? What if an X-ray displays a known health condition? I had to sign permission at my doctors' office for them to share ANY health info with ANYBODY. It was very specific.

I honestly believe the law applies to anybody with access to medical info on a citizen. (As a teacher, I know for a fact I am bound by the Laws surrounding HIPAA.)

HIPAA Enforcement

HHS’ Office for Civil Rights is responsible for enforcing the Privacy and Security Rules. Enforcement of the Privacy Rule began April 14, 2003 for most HIPAA covered entities. Since 2003, OCR's enforcement activities have obtained significant results that have improved the privacy practices of covered entities. The corrective actions obtained by OCR from covered entities have resulted in systemic change that has improved the privacy protection of health information for all individuals they serve.

HIPAA covered entities were required to comply with the Security Rule beginning on April 20, 2005. OCR became responsible for enforcing the Security Rule on July 27, 2009.

Civil Rights

The Civil Rights Division (CRD) in the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) promotes and ensures that people have equal access to and opportunity to participate in certain health care and human services programs without facing unlawful discrimination. CRD carries out this mission by enforcing Federal laws and regulations that prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, disability, age and, in certain circumstances, sex and religion, in programs and activities that receive financial assistance from HHS. CRD also enforces a Federal law and regulation that prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability in health care and social service programs of state and local governments.

edit on 24-11-2010 by zorgon because: AARGGGGGGG

posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 04:12 PM
From it for whatever you may:

The radiation you get from body scanners is the same as what you get in two minutes in an airplane at 30,000 feet.

posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 04:44 PM
the paragraph below is taken from wikipedia. consider the wording on the single check as being probably
A recent development is the controversial use of Full body scanners to detect hidden weapons and
explosives on passengers. These devices, which use Compton scattering, require that the passenger
stand close to a flat panel and produce a high resolution image.[4] There are misunderstandings
about how x-ray backscatter personnel scanners function, but they do use ionizing radiation and
the x-rays emitted from them penetrate skin as well as clothing. While the risk of cancer from
a single backscatter check is probably low, the cumulative risk of repeated exposure to radiation
is a threat to public health, especially for people working in the airline industry and frequent
also i zoomed in on the frequency of use and location in
a snippet below from within the context of medical scanners and
imo equally applicable to airport compton scattering devices.
It must be remembered, however, that many facilities are not fully leaded. Often, minimal lead
shielding is utilized which meets legal requirements but which does not fully prevent the transmission
of scatter radiation. The amount of legally required shielding depends on the exposure settings of
the radiographs which are produced, the radiographic workload during the week, distance from other
personnel work areas, the types of use expected from surrounding areas, and the construction materials
of the office. This evaluation would have to be made by a qualified radiation control specialist
because the doctor or technologist would likely have no way of knowing the precise but varying rules
for each given situation or measuring whether or not there was any transmission of scatter radiation.

posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 04:55 PM
reply to post by zorgon

ARTICLE, 6th January, 2010:

(Reuters) - The radiation risk from full-body scanners used to improve airport security is low and unlikely to raise an individual's risk of cancer, U.S. experts said on Wednesday.


The United States has tested 40 whole-body scanners as part of a pilot program started after the September 11 attacks, and this past October ordered 150 more.

There are two types of machines -- millimeter wavelength imaging and backscatter X-ray scanners. Both are used to see under clothes and identify unusual objects.

Only one -- backscatter X-ray machines -- expose individuals to ionizing radiation such as that used in common medical X-rays.

But the radiation levels are well below the threshold that could be considered a risk to an individual's health, said Dr. James Thrall of the American College of Radiology and chief of radiology at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston.

Also, an article in USAToday, 24th November...Section 'A', page 5, has a chart showing locations of the two types of scanners...for reference. Can't find a link.....

posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 04:58 PM
So the dosage figures from the TSA's own document is less relevant than these stories?


posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 05:12 PM
i think the jury is gonna be out for a while on this one regarding millimetre scanners.

posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 05:16 PM

Originally posted by Aggie Man
From it for whatever you may:

The radiation you get from body scanners is the same as what you get in two minutes in an airplane at 30,000 feet.

As an aggregate whole body dose, measured in millirem or msieverts, the statement is correct. But Compton effect backscatter, to be effective as a scanner, must be narrowly focused. The cosmic radiation at 30,000 feet is spread out throught your 80 or however many kilograms and 1.5 or so cubic meters of volume. All of the scanner radiation is focused on the outer layers of skin, so sperm producing glands, which are near the skin, corneas, women's breast tissue, etc receive a concentrated dose. It's a mutagenic dose of ionizing radiation hitting the outer 8 cm of tissue. Hello, basil cell carcinoma and melanoma.
Let's examine another statistic showing how the TSA is killing Americans. By ordering these oppresive measures, Tsa has caused some people to forego flying. Let's say it's only 2% of trips. That is 9.72 billion passenger seat miles by car rather than airline. The automobile death rate in the US is a little over 1/100 million passenger miles (2009), so one would expect 97 more people to die in car wrecks because of TSA

posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 05:23 PM
I admire your passion, but I don't think anyone will get very far on the HIPPA issue.Your medical info IS allowed to be shared with other persons or parties that require that information in order to do their jobs (doctors, EMTs, insurance companies, pharmacies,etc).
So you know if it ever got to court the TSA will just say "Well, we needed to know XYZ about Mrs.Smith in order to do our jobs and ensure she was not a security risk"...

posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 05:28 PM
not convinced of the health effects myself, but id definatly feel it an intrusion of my human rights if some man or woman got to see my member dangling in my boxer shorts everytime i needed to travel, and refusing and being strip searched i would definatly feel violated.
just got hope that the america public keep kicking up a fuss and they will do away with them and they will never go live in other countries.

posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 07:30 PM
And I guess the "opt out protest" that some guy was trying to get people to do today didn't happen.....

posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 07:37 PM
reply to post by Skippy1138

There is a thread on that somewhere. Many tweets of folks saying that very few are getting selected today for the 'random screenings'. Seems like a majority of folks are simply being filed through the metal detectors. Funny how that works isn't it? So there is a possability that the TSA have defused the situation by simply not offering a venue for a lot of folks to opt out.
edit on 24-11-2010 by ProvehitoInAltum because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 08:17 PM

Originally posted by ProvehitoInAltum
Funny how that works isn't it? So there is a possability that the TSA have defused the situation by simply not offering a venue for a lot of folks to opt out.

I was expecting that they would do that.
Since they had warning about the 'plan'. then pleaded for us not to do it, seems just opening the cattle gate would be a logic solution

posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 09:04 PM

Originally posted by Skippy1138
I admire your passion, but I don't think anyone will get very far on the HIPPA issue.Your medical info IS allowed to be shared with other persons or parties that require that information in order to do their jobs (doctors, EMTs, insurance companies, pharmacies,etc)...

I dont think it is that clear cut. I have to undergo HIPPA training every year and I have had to represent nurses who accidently violated HIPPA rules (They were fired BTW.).

You have to be advised of your rights and authorize the use of your protected medical information to those NOT involved in your care. The TSA goon IS not providing you with care PERIOD. What they will claim I'm sure is that you are giving them consent by electing to do either.

I will have a chat with our HIPPA compliance officer next week and see if they can shed any light on the issue.

posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 09:42 PM

Originally posted by Skippy1138
I admire your passion, but I don't think anyone will get very far on the HIPPA issue.Your medical info IS allowed to be shared with other persons or parties that require that information in order to do their jobs (doctors, EMTs, insurance companies, pharmacies,etc).

My medical info IS allowed to be shared ONLY if I sign a consent form. I absolutely know this to be true, for two reasons:

First: My doctor's office presented me two documents about a year ago (even though I've been their patient for over a decade.) One was a cover letter stating my rights to privacy regarding my medical information-- and it referred to HIPAA Law as the genesis of this new mandate to obtain permission. The other document was the actual "sign here" consent form. It named specific entities (pharmacies, Health Insurance companies, even my home phone answering machine!) It asked for a list of persons I would allow them to communicate with (such as spouse, parent) in case of an emergency. It also allowed me deny their communication with my Insurance Company, pharmacy, etc. (Of course it explained how this might hurt my quality of care or insurance coverage.) All of these options were available to me BEFORE I signed my name.

Second: I've been an educator for 20+ years. HIPAA is all the talk in the last couple of years. If a student is HIV positive, I have no right to know that unless I am granted the right, in writing, by the parent/guardian. If I have been granted the right to know of a medical condition, or even told of a condition by a parent, I am bound by HIPAA Law to NOT divulge that information to ANYONE. (Even ADHD) It would be illegal. The best I could do, if I felt it was in the child's best interest, is encourage the parent to share the information with a third party.

This HIPAA stuff is all relatively new. I've experienced its emergence in my personal and professional life. I don't mess around with HIPAA Law... I could lose my job. So yeah, it's real. And it may be the answer to this airport lunacy!

Sorry for so lengthy a post! But now a QUESTION please...
Anybody know of any statistics on just how many terrorists have been apprehended since the X-Rays & invasive pat-downs have come about? I'd really like to know.

posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 09:52 PM
reply to post by zorgon

HIPPA refers to confidential medical records and visits.

I don't believe it would apply based on my education on the law.

posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 10:12 PM
To Fred and new-here- yes I had forgotten about the written consent form- and since I'm pretty sure people aren't signing these at the airport, I guess somebody might have a legitimate case against the TSA..
(And Fred- can you ask the compliance officer his or her thoughts on if someone could actually have a chance of winning in court? If so, this could bring the whole thing to a screeching halt!!
I find it odd though, that with the hours and hours of media coverage given to this story, I have not heard it mentioned once by any pundit,newscaster, etc that what they are doing violates HIPPA.....

posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 10:26 PM
reply to post by Skippy1138

I think it's a complete stretch.. Think of it. Say someone has Tourettes, and they think it's embarassing.. So you're in the grocery store and you hear this guy or girl shouting swear wierd, making sudden odd noise or hand twitches.

Did you just violate HIPAA? No probably not, because he's in public and not behind the closed doors of an office, or under the care of EMTs, ect and you're not looking at his private medical files. I don't see why it would be any different with TSA agents that discover something during a pat down or a scan.. Unless they took those scanned images (aren't they supposed to be deleted immediately?) off the job site..

posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 11:39 PM
I'm taking Health Care Law this semester of law school, so here's what I gather from my experience with HIPAA.

I imagine the TSA could escape HIPAA regulations on a few different grounds here. One is the expectation of privacy. You only have legally enforceable privacy rights where you have the reasonable expectation of privacy. The TSA would certainly argue that knowing the screening processes they use, one does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in a public airport after making the personal decision to fly when other alternatives were available.

HIPAA also generally relates to the sharing of medical information by providers. Going through the TSA checkpoint, it's unlikely they'll be calling your doctor for information. HIPAA only applies to certain providers. As long as the info comes from you rather than a doctor or hospital, it's not necessarily covered by HIPAA.

HIPAA also permits release of information where required by law (i.e. law enforcement). TSA would argue that they need certain medical info to ensure safety, and that this is authorized or required by law.

TSA will escape HIPAA regulations here as long as they're not calling your doctor before they allow you to fly. We should still fight the scans and pat downs, but HIPAA won't get you very far in doing so.

posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 01:50 PM
Great thread, and suprised more people haven't posted. I've been aware of the issue of the dangers and also the disease spreading capapcity of unwashed gloves, bare feet, flesh eating virus's and fungi. Its horrific what they're doing, and they want to impose these risks of mobile scans and radiation at check points, random drive by your home, you car, malls, sports arenas, concerts, soon it could be lectures or book stores, or anywhere. What they're doing is terrorism!

This video is worth a thread of its own, but I'm not up to it myself.

Big Sis Wants Behavior Scanners At Sports Events, Malls - Alex Jones Tv
edit on 25-11-2010 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 03:00 PM
So it begins... the virus spreads...

Kiwi refuses 'naked' body scan

A New Zealander who was held up at Heathrow Airport for a day after refusing to get a body scan is returning home after being put onto another flight. .... In New Zealand the body scanners are prohibited under the Aviation Crimes Act.

GO NZ !!!!!

new topics

<<   2 >>

log in