Logan International Airport is packed today and most travelers appear to be lining up for naked body scans over the touchy pat-downs, so far shunning a national call to "opt out" of the electronic sweep.
"I don’t want anyone to touch me," said 20-year-old Onie Momoh, a Dartmouth College student flying home today.
She was one of hundreds of people lined up for the scans as the Thanksgiving rush begins. But it may be too early to call the "opt out" a dud.
“I was going to opt out because I was concerned about radiation, but then I heard it was less than what you’re exposed to with a dental X-ray,” said Holly LeCraw, 44, of Newton. “I’m more concerned about pat-downs for my kids.”
Others said the scan just appears the lesser of two evils.
“I’ve gone through the screening before, and it feels a little weird, having to hold your hands up and knowing someone can see an image of your body,” Michelle McGrath, 29, of Boston said on her way to Annapolis today. “I’m not crazy about it, but I’m not overly concerned.”
A national movement to “opt out” of the head-to-toe sweeps did have a few travelers mulling pat-downs last night.
“This is me taking my own stance,” said Boston University freshman Kira Cole, who said she was “creeped out” by the full-body scanners when she went through them in July. “I’d rather take my chances with a pat-down.”
Dorchester activist Mark O’Connor said he’ll be at Logan today urging travelers to get the “lesser of two evils” pat-down and warning them of the “dangers” of full-body scans.
“If it’s powerful enough to see through your clothes, it couldn’t be healthy,” said O’Connor, who hopes Hub travelers “stand up” for themselves.
O’Connor, 33, said he plans to take his video camera to the Hub airport and ask people whether they prefer to be “radiated” or “groped.” The video blogger will post reactions to his YouTube channel, WeAreChangeBoston.
Massport spokesman Phil Orlandella said Logan officials have been preparing for today’s national “opt out” day since rumblings of it began over a week ago.
“We’re ready for it. There’s additional manpower on. We’re prepared for anything that can happen. We don’t think anything serious is going to happen,” Orlandella said.
U.S. Sen. John Kerry said he wants to review the security changes.
“I refuse to accept the notion that we can’t keep people safe without undermining our civil liberties,’’ Kerry said.
Rebecca Colby, an MIT sophomore, has no issues with scanners being an invasion of privacy. “I’m more concerned with other civil liberties than this whole thing,” Colby said.
“It’s not like we’re cutting back civil liberties on the war on terror — it’s just reaching a new level of inconvenience for people who are normal citizens of America,” Colby said.
Carie Lemack, who lost her mom, Judy Larocque, of Framingham in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, said she’s traveling to Boston today and will gladly be scanned or patted down.
“It’s not comfortable, but necessary,” said Lemack, whose mother died on Flight 11 that took off out of Logan. “Anybody who says this is pornographic is insulting.
“Everybody in the airport needs to keep their eyes and ears open,” she added. “I think the opt-out people have forgotten 9-11."
A grassroots opt-out protest planned at airports around the country appears to have fizzled, as early reports indicate that most travelers on Wednesday were opting out of opting out of fully body scans.
The protest, called by groups such as WeWontFly.com, encouraged airline passengers to opt out of X-ray scanners and to register their disapproval of new TSA procedures for conducting physical pat-downs — the required alternative for those who opt out of the scanners. Protesters were also expected to appear at 27 airports to pass out flyers reading, “You have the right to say, ‘No radiation strip search! No groping of genitals!’ Say, ‘I opt out.’”
But at the American Airlines terminal at San Francisco International Airport security checkpoints were orderly and fast Wednesday, and no protesters were in evidence.
Passengers in one checkpoint queue were directed randomly to pass through either a standard metal detector or a ProVision millimeter wave body scanner. In a second queue, the type of screening depended on which conveyor belt the traveler lined up at: The right one went through a body scan, the left, with rare exception, put passengers through the metal detector.
Threat Level observed 30 passengers submit to the ProVision scan without obvious protest or a single opt-out, though screeners diverted one woman headed for the the naked scanner into the metal detector instead, likely because of the small dog she was carrying in her arms.
Full-body scanners are currently being used in these 68 airports, according to the TSA. Some passengers and civil liberties groups have criticized the TSA for using the scanners, citing privacy and radiation concerns. They’ve also called the pat-downs — which involve TSA agents using open hands and fingers to search genital and chest areas — invasive and humiliating.
The protest was called for Wednesday, the day before the Thanksgiving holiday and traditionally one of the busiest air travel days of the year. About 1.6 million people were expected to fly over the holiday, according to the American Automobile Association. The TSA had urged passengers not to participate in the protest, since it would slow security lines considerably if numerous passengers refused to go through the scanners, causing delays and chaos for all passengers.
But it appears those fears went unrealized as airports around the country reported no security delays and indicated few passengers were opting out of the scanners.
At La Guardia airport in New York, workers told Bloomberg they had seen no evidence of slowdowns. At Atlanta’s Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport, where 14 scanners are in use, officials reported that the wait in security lines was between 10 and 20 minutes, which was an improvement over many ordinary Monday mornings when passenger traffic is traditionally high.
At Baltimore Washington International Airport, only four passengers had opted out of scanners as of 9:30 a.m., according to Fox News. Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport was reporting only a wait of 10 minutes to get through security and said that security officers had received “lots of passenger compliments.”
Officials at other airports in New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Virginia said that wait times were minimal and also reported supportive feedback from passengers.
Airlines have reported no delays or other impact from passengers opting out of scanners and indicated that ticket cancellations are at normal levels. All airlines that spoke with Bloomberg, except Southwest, said they would not delay planes for passengers caught in security lines.
All airlines that spoke with Bloomberg, except Southwest, said they would not delay planes for passengers caught in security lines.
That shows that even the airline industry approves of these TSA methods.
From what I am seeing in the news reports, traffic at airports is lower than expected.
TSA says they screen 2 million passengers per day on average.
Estimates say 1.6 million passengers flying today.
Most news reports say that airports are virtual ghost towns.
So it would appear that people are opting out of flying. According to other reports, train stations are packed like crazy, particularly Penn Station and reporters are getting comments like "F**k the TSA" from passengers.
AAA says 94% of people who plan to travel this weekend will do so by automobile. Compared to 2000 when only 80% traveled by automobile, it would appear that people are opting-out of flying.
That is fine. If the airlines start losing revenue, then things will change.
According to the folks who were advocating National Opt-Out Day, they said "Just opt-out of flying altogether" and it would appear that people have done JUST THAT.
If the airlines start losing revenue, then things will change.
According to the folks who were advocating National Opt-Out Day, they said "Just opt-out of flying altogether" and it would appear that people have done JUST THAT.
Yeah, the airlines will be nationalized.
Dr. Blaylock: Body Scanners More Dangerous Than Feds Admit Wednesday, November 24, 2010 By Dr. Russell Blaylock
Dr. Russell Blaylock is a nationally recognized board-certified neurosurgeon, health practitioner, author, lecturer, and editor of The Blaylock Wellness Report.
The growing outrage over the Transportation Security Administration’s new policy of backscatter scanning of airline passengers and “enhanced pat-downs” brings to mind these wise words from President Ronald Reagan: “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help you.’”
So, what is all the concern really about — will these radiation scanners increase your risk of cancer or other diseases? A group of scientists and professors from the University of California at San Francisco voiced their concern to Obama’s science and technology adviser John Holdren in a well-stated letter back in April.
The group included experts in radiation biology, biophysics, and imaging, who expressed “serious concerns” about the “dangerously high” dose of radiation to the skin.
Radiation increases cancer risk by damaging the DNA and various components within the cells. Much of the damage is caused by high concentrations of free radicals generated by the radiation. Most scientists think that the most damaging radiation types are those that have high penetration, such as gamma-rays, but in fact, some of the most damaging radiation barely penetrates the skin.
One of the main concerns is that most of the energy from the airport scanners is concentrated on the surface of the skin and a few millimeters into the skin. Some very radiation-sensitive tissues are close to the skin — such as the testes, eyes, and circulating blood cells in the skin.
This is why defenders using such analogies as the dose being “1,000-times less than a chest X-ray” and “far less than what passengers are exposed to in-flight” are deceptive. Radiation damage depends on the volume of tissue exposed. Chest X-rays and gamma-radiation from outer space is diffused over the entire body so that the dose to the skin is extremely small. Of note, outer space radiation does increase cancer rates in passengers, pilots, and flight attendants.
We also know that certain groups of people are at a much higher risk than others. These include babies, small children, pregnant women, the elderly, people with impaired immunity (those with HIV infection, cancer patients, people with immune deficiency diseases, and people with abnormal DNA repair mechanism, just to name a few).
As we grow older, our DNA accumulates a considerable amount of unrepaired damage, and under such circumstances even low doses of radiation can trigger the development of skin cancers, including the deadly melanoma. I would also be concerned about exposing the eyes, since this could increase one’s risk of developing cataracts.
About 5 percent of the population have undiagnosed abnormal DNA repair mechanism. When exposed to radiation, this can put them at a cancer risk hundreds of times greater than normal people.
It also has been determined that when skin is next to certain metals, such as gold, the radiation dose is magnified 100-fold higher. What if you have a mole next to your gold jewelry? Will the radiation convert it to a melanoma? Deficiencies in certain vitamins can dramatically increase your sensitivity to radiation carcinogenesis, as can certain prescription medications.
As for the assurances we have been given by such organization as the American College of Radiology, we must keep in mind that they assured us that the CT scans were safe and that the radiation was equal to one chest X-ray. Forty years later we learn that the dose is extremely high, it is thought to have caused cancer in a significant number of people, and the dose is actually equal to 1,000 chest X-rays.
Based on these assurances, tens of thousands of children have been exposed to radiation doses from CT scanners, which will ruin the children's lives. I have two friends who were high-ranking Environmental Protection Agency scientists, and they assure me that in government safety agencies, politics most often override the scientists’ real concerns about such issues.
This government shares House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s view when she urged passage of the Obamacare bill sight unseen — “Let’s just pass the bill, and we will find out what is in it later.”
When the real effects of these scanners on health become known, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano and the rest of the gang who insist the scanners are safe will be long gone. http://www.newsmaxhealth.com/health_...mo_code=B2F7-1
Remember, the Government said asbestos was safe. They also said that the fallout from nuclear weapons testing in Nevada was safe. Agent Orange was safe. Hundreds of now-recalled prescription drugs were deemed safe by FDA.