It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

TSA employees diagnosed with cancer, naked body scanners to blame.

page: 5
60
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 11:19 PM
link   
reply to post by dethduck
 


I have to agree. It's hard to feel any compassion for these thugs. You can't abuse your fellow man then justify it by saying you were just doing your job. Here's an idea scumbags; get another job. Anybody who performs a job that goes against their beliefs and morals, all in the name of the almighty dollar, is bordering on evil. If George Soros put thousands at risk in the interest of making money, he'd be considered evil, so what is the difference?

I'm sure there are TSA officers reading these forums from time to time; well here's a shout out to you; burn in hell.

edit on 28-6-2011 by General.Lee because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 11:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by gladtobehere
So the naked body scanners are not safe... Our government lied to us??? I’m in shock.

edit on 28-6-2011 by gladtobehere because: (no reason given)


I knew it was dangerous. I've had dental x-rays and a chest x ray where a lead apron was put around me for protection. TSA agents are standing right next to these machines being radiated all day long. This goes to show that the govt cares nothing about even these workers. I would not wish cancer on anyone, no matter how horrible they may be.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 11:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash


There is even quite a debate about Ultrasound being dangerous going on.


I've been reading where the 3D ones emit higher levels of radiation, yet you have all these women going to these free standing centers where they do these and it worries me. My mom was telling me that a long time ago, it was routine for pregnant women to have one full pelvic x ray during pregnancy, until they figured out how dangerous that was.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 11:36 PM
link   
Slow painful death caused by Cancer from radiation? or the off chance of a quick perhaps painless death by a terrorist attack?

Stretching out the grief, pain and distress seems to suck even more than being blown to bits, and the chances of a terrorist highjacking an airplane I think are very very slim.

Your choice, let the government and it's agencies kill us off slowly, or take a chance with the scare tactic of a terrorist?

I rather keep my liberty and take my chances.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 11:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
Radiation induced cancer does not appear until years after exposure.

Radiation (and other agent) induced cancer always are associated with a latent period (2 --> 40 years or more)

www.uic.edu...
The body scanners have been in use for how long? Less than a year? If TSA workers are getting occupational cancer it's not from the body scanners.

The NIST did not say it did no testing. It said it did not test for "product safety". Product safety testing would involve testing for things like this: ulstandardsinfonet.ul.com...

The NIST did test the radiation dose of the machine and found it within standards.


Then why bother with wearing a lead apron when you get an xray? In fact, the radiologists insist on this. I'm not buying that at all.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Jezus
 

As far as cancer goes, ionizing radiation is ionizing radiation.
Can you show me a study or two which shows radiation induced cancer appearing in less than a year?


The TSA agents coming up with cancer are the study. They are the guinea pigs in this ongoing "study".



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 11:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by boondock-saint
i think some may be missing the point here
while patronizing their emotions.

Demonizing the scanners to create a health
hazard just means they will do more pat downs.
This info will not stop the Gestapo.


This could be very possible, same as the recent flash mobs walking into stores to steal. Could be a means to present a reason for more police presence and possible pat downs.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 11:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by SirClem
 

I'm not the topic of the thread.

I received more than 4,000 rads of x-rays 29 years ago. No cancer since. Chew on that for a while.



Proof, please. I'd like to see this if you can.
2nd line



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 12:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Thunder heart woman
 

Like what? My medical chart?
I don't think so.



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 12:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Danbones

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Danbones
 

Childhood occurs quite a while after pregnancy but that's one reason why prenatal radiological examinations are very rarely done.


sure if the TSA machines are doing the unzipping type damage
10 percent of the people involved
is a lot of people


I didn't say the TSA machines used the tera hertz wave
i said IF they are causing damage like typical x ray scanners do then typical damags statistics would indicate a large amount of damage

from the nist report

All results confirm that the radiation dose from the scanner studied was below that set by the American National Standards Institute standard for safety. The effective dose to a subject being screened varies depending on the age and size of the person. For the AS&E SmartCheck scanner, an adult would receive an effective dose of about 6.2 μrem per frontal scan. A small child would receive an effective dose of about 7.4 μrem per frontal scan. An infant would receive a dose of about 7.2 μrem per frontal scan. In order to be compliant with the ANSI/HPS N43.17-2009 standard, the effective dose should not exceed 25 μrem per screening (which may involve more than one scan) at the point of maximum exposure but no closer than 30 cm from the “beam exit surface.” All exposure measurements outside of the primary beam, due to scatter from the screened individual or leakage from the cabinet, were below the ANSI/HPS N43.17-2009 limits for dose to bystanders and operators.
www.nist.gov...

it seems that they based the stats on a single scan on properly calibrated machines
so how do these people avoid repeat exposures and stay completely protected?


NO safe minimum dose of radiation....
A Panel of the US national acadamey of sciences charged to investigate the dangers of low dose ionizing radiation has concluded "that it is unlikely thata threshold exists for the induction of cancers...further, there are exztensive data on radiation-induced transmissible mutations in mice and other organisms. the reis no reason to believe that humans believe that humans would be immune to this sort of harm"

www.nirs.org...

a standard way of producing mutations in disease organismsis to irradiate a host that the disease is present in... so there are potential problems you are not addressing here Phage
edit on 29-6-2011 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-6-2011 by Danbones because: added achademy of sciences quote and link and fixed a couple typos



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 12:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 

Here are the reports on every machine. I can't find any leakage, maybe you can.
www.tsa.gov...



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 12:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


you read em all?


The TSA funded NIST to

from the nist report link above
nist has done questioable work before
edit on 29-6-2011 by Danbones because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 01:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 

Nope.
Be my guest.



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 01:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


then how can you say there is no leakage reported there?



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 01:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 

I didn't say that.
Did I?



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 01:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Danbones
 

I can't find any leakage,
www.tsa.gov...



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 01:10 AM
link   

TSA did not alter or edit the reports. Names were redacted to protect privacy and several pages were incorrectly marked as SSI, but other than that, the reports are there, warts and all.





from the TSA blog


TSA Releases Radiation Testing Reports
Well, while looking over these reports, we found some inaccuracies in contractor reporting that affected the documentation of some of the test results.
•Lack of notation for the latest calibration date for the machine being tested or the most recent calibration date noted had expired on survey meters
•Information missing regarding warning labels and other required labels on machines
•Calculation errors not impacting safety
•Missing survey point readings (e.g., If the test procedure required 13 points around the machine to be tested, in some cases, readings for only 11 points were reported)
•Inconsistent responses to survey questions
•No reading of background radiation noted
•Missing other non-measurement related information
While these inaccuracies didn’t impact the overall assessment that the technology is safe, they are still unacceptable.

blog.tsa.gov...


edit on 29-6-2011 by Danbones because: fixed quote box

edit on 29-6-2011 by Danbones because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 01:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Danbones
 

Here are the reports on every machine. I can't find any leakage, maybe you can.
www.tsa.gov...


You need to do better than that. You link to a TSA site with hand-written measurements. Yeah, sure ...
Now I believe the machines are totally safe and there is no leakage ...



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 01:14 AM
link   
reply to post by AllIsOne
 

I don't see a problem with hand written field reports. I'd sort of trust them as much as typed ones but scroll down to the current reports.

edit on 6/29/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 01:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Thunder heart woman
 

Like what? My medical chart?
I don't think so.


No problem, just please don't make claims you're not willing to back up. I'm not saying that I don't believe you, but if you have been exposed to radiation for 29 years and do not have cancer, that doesn't mean it can't happen to someone else being exposed. Hysteria in this country is creating a huge mess. Who will suffer in the end...



new topics

top topics



 
60
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join