The TSA Controversy: How It All Went Down

CBS/ Sharyl Attkisson

While covering the body scanner controversy, I spoke to a TSA official and made several trips to Reagan National Airport to observe use of the machines there. Here's some of what I saw and learned:

Body Scanning: Fast Facts

• The machines were not labeled as "body scanners," nor were there any images posted by or on them showing what they do. Several seasoned travelers told us they didn't realize they were in a body scanner until they were asked to raise their arms.
• About half of the passengers we spoke to were unaware that body scanners were in use, or were even part of a controversy.
• The TSA reports 99 percent of travelers consent to the body scanners. However, the consent is neither verbal nor written (in other words, nobody will ask you if it's okay). Your consent is presumed if you walk into the machine without objecting.
• Body scanning took about the same time as passing through the adjacent metal detector; less when you count those sent through the metal detectors for a second try after removing a belt or pocket items.
• Only occasionally were passengers routed to body scanners. The vast majority went through metal detectors only. TSA agents present would not say how passengers were selected for scanning.
• Nobody "opted out" of the body scanners. It's also interesting to note that no opt-out choices were presented. In other words, to opt out, a traveler would have to realize he was being directed into a body scanner, understand that he had a choice, and stop and speak up to a TSA agent.
• As of last weekend, 400 body scanners were in use at 69 of America's 453 airports.

Types of Scanners: Both Safe

According to the FDA, two types of scanners are in use at US airports: general-use X-ray security systems and millimeter wave security systems. Both are considered extremely safe. (Reagan National uses millimeter wave technology).

• General use X-ray machines (also called backscatter systems) emit small amounts of X-rays. The FDA says the radiation dose is equivalent to what people are exposed to in 42 minutes of everyday living. Manufacturers say it's one-thousandth of what you would receive from a dental X-ray. According to published reports, Columbia University's Dr. David Brenner, head of the university's center for radiological research, says researchers should conduct more tests to see how the machines affect specific groups who could be more sensitive to radiation. Children and passengers with gene mutations are said to be less able to repair X-ray damage to their DNA. Peter Rez, Professor of Physics, Arizona State University agrees the machines are very safe. He puts the chances of receiving a life-threatening cancer at approximately 1 in 30 million, as long as the machines are working properly and do not jam. No studies have been done to determine how frequent low-dose X-ray exposure in frequent travelers could affect their individual health.
• Millimeter wave machines are either "active," exposing passengers to small amounts of millimeter wave energy; or "passive," which measure natural millimeter wave emissions from the body. The FDA says there are "no known adverse health effects" and that millimeter waves do not appear to cause cancer. However, "chronic exposure to lower frequencies of microwaves in some animal studies have been correlated with accelerated development of existing tumors."  **See Footnote

Puffers: Into Thin Air

Remember those puffer machines? Officially, they were called explosive trace portals. TSA spent about $30 million for 207 of the bomb-detecting devices. More than half were never deployed. And now the rest are scrapped. Seems they didn't work that well, broke down frequently, and cost too much to fix.

**Ryan KL, D'Andrea JA, Jauchem JR, Mason PA

(February 2000). "Radio frequency radiation of millimeter wave length: potential occupational safety issues relating to surface heating". Health Physics 78 (2): 170-81. PMID 10647983. 

---

Sharyl Attkisson is a CBS News Investigative Correspondent based in Washington. You can read more of her posts in Hotsheet here.

[cardamom1]

Can we take a page out of the Stanford Prison Experiment to wake up to the reality that the current security measures that are in place are crossing the lines of American civil liberties.

http://prisonexp.org/

[helen7246]

Sharyl Attkisson, It's nice to see real reporters still exist. Thank you for this report. I'm concerned that Michael Chertoff, former DHS director, profited from the scanners. Therefore, he's not a reliable person to recommend the scanners. I also noticed that he's on the board of company that would let people bypass scanners by giving up their biometric information. Amazing. Chertoff causes a problem, profits from it and then he offers a solution and profits from that too.

I also wonder why the scanners, if they are really so wonderful, were turned off the day before Thanksgiving and why they are not used in Congress. If they are safe and we need them, then how about using them in congressional office buildings and scanning each member of Congress as well as their staff members?

[reece758]

what exactly is the problem with these scanners? i guess you all forgot about the underwear bomber. oh...and the shoe bomber. i want to see the day you people send your kids or anyone you care about to fly out with no security. i dread the day tsa workers simply stop screening due to the unappreciative civilians of our nation. oh yeah...thats right.... you all would have something to say about that too. its a no win situation for tsa workers. blame the terroists, not the tsa. for the peole talking about getting cancer from the radiation from the machines; you get 5 times more radiation from drinking 3 glasses of water for a year than the amount of radiation from the machines. do your research idiots. here's a link to my source. guess who? http://www.cbsnews.com/2300-204_162-10005685.html

[helen7246]

How funny you say "do your research idiots" wen you haven't done the basic research to realize that the scanners would not have caught the underwear bomber. Also, perhaps someone should have listened when the underwear bomber's father alerted authorities. Or perhaps the underwear bomber should not have been let onto the plane with a one-way ticket *without* a passport. Perhaps following some elementary security measures would have helped.

[cardamom1]

Here's some research for you: Fetuses between 2 and 15 weeks' gestation are considerably more sensitive to adverse radiation effects, the most common of which are microcephaly (sometimes combined with mental retardation), other central nervous system defects, and growth retardation. http://www.radiologytoday.net/archive/rt_011209p24.shtml
You too might want to research before you respond. No one is saying to opt out of security screening, but invasive screening at any cost is not o.k. BTW you also might want to research the holocaust while you are at it.

[cardamom1]

It is most disturbing when the lines begin to blur as to the fear over the threat of terrorists, and the concern over TSA. TSA somehow actually managed to get a pass on this plot to strip, demean,demoralize, dehumanize, and impose unprotected radiation exposure to American civilian masses.

[pepeknamornik]

I was scanned few weeks ago before the outburst of public outrage. I was briefly explained that I am randomly selected for further screening and I need to position myself in the scanner. Not being offered any alternatives, I went along with it without much concern. If you asked me on the spot whether I approve new security measures I would probably say "Of course, safety comes first".

The following day, when I researched the scanners, I was in shock and disbelief to learn that the scanners produce strikingly detailed image of travellers naked body in vulnerable and demeaning surrender position fully exposing their breasts and genitals. To add more humiliation, this image is scrutinized in real time by a security person.

Would I opt out now that I have this information? Not likely since the aggressive pat down is arguably even more intrusive. Do I approve this technology knowing all the facts? Absolutely no!

Before making objective call, participants of the poll need to preview the images of their own naked body that are visible and scrutinized by security personnel. So please stop using the invalid polls to defend this perverted screening method.

[tsigili]

The point is......air travel has become a miserable experience, and there is little point in subjecting yourself to that miserable experience.