Discussion in 'Aviation Passenger Security in the USA' started by Fisher1949, May 8, 2012.
Not really, I disagree with some things the TSA says but I wouldn't say 99.9%.
Or an engineering background. It's not that you can't have an opinion, rather the question is what degree of credibility will be ascribed to your opinion.
Well considering no independent third party testing of any of the scanners, I wont go anywhere near them...Way to many unknowns.
Expired means you were taught under the old guidelines, take the class, lots changed since your last class. Go with AHA as ARC is a bit behind the times.
And whether you're stating that opinion as a private citizen, or under the color of authority involved in your occupation. That's where I have concerns -- if you're wearing a uniform and operating imaging equipment, people may assume you are more knowledgeable than you are. So you may just think you're offering an opinion, but people assume credible authority on the subject.
What observation period have you established post-scanner? To how many significant figures are your measurements of calibration and dosage accurate? Have you run a checksum on the pump's software after scanner exposure? Checked sensor calibrations before and after exposure?
I'd be willing to bet that your "experience" is limited to not seeing anyone wearing a pump collapsing between the scanner and the gate to their flight.
Would you find it reasonable that given how often people wearing the pump go through the scanners, that if there was a problem there'd be significantly more news or complaints about it?
No. Given the nature of the beast, there's no way to know how many pump failures (or simple minor variations in dosage) have been caused by TSA employees giving medical advice in contradiction to the orders of a doctor and the pump manufacturer. Pumps fail and do odd things all the time. The reason the manufacturers advise patients not to go through the scanners is because they haven't been allowed to test them under those conditions. Add in the abominable maintenance schedules for TSA equipment, and you've got a recipe for disaster.
No, I'm referring to every person who uses an insulin pump and goes through the body scanner.
It's like talking to a brick wall. And this is the caliber of person protecting us from the evil-doers.
In other words, I disagree with you and you haven't persuaded me to change my mind.
They are all cut out of the same cloth. We've seen it time and time again. Not one of them can admit to perhaps being wrong.
Ciarin, several people in this thread have listed their sources, repeatedly.
Amidst all the meandering, defensive posturing, evasions, and tangents, one thing remains true: the scanners have not been independently tested for safety. This is a fact. And no amount of dancing around changes that fact.
After reading that info would you still suggest people with Insulin Pumps be screened by Strip Search Machine?
Of course. TSA does not care about human beings or their health and well-being. All TSA cares about is blind obedience to their ("administratively" overinflated and wholly illegitimate) authority. If the high-and-mighty USA TSA TSO SSI SOP says "Thou shalt be scanned, for thine insulin pump will not be harmed" then by Dagon it must be true.
The doctors who prescribe the use of these pumps, and the manufacturers of the pumps themselves, need to communicate to their patients to always use the words "opt out" and just give the broken-record treatment to smurf-clerks. They should realize that the patients will be dealing with incredibly stupid lifeforms at the checkpoint, so broken-record is really their best shot at getting the screener to understand "no means no, I will not go through your untested and hazardous contribution to Michael Chertoff's retirement fund."
It might also be a good idea to give the airport police some basic information regarding these situations so they can step in on the patient's behalf. A smurf-clerk who doesn't seem to understand "opt out" (after all, 2 monosyllabic words can pose quite a challenge to the average TSC) might do better with "Put that passenger through the scanner and you get taser barbs to the face."
I'm not sure a Taser to the face would have the slightest effect on the attitude displayed by TSA employees. I originally referred to them as ignorant. These days, I refer to them as stupid because they apparently like being ignorant.
Trying to change their mind is futile - because it's apparently SOP to hire those without one, or possibly surgically remove it on hiring if they had one.
It is clear that Insulin pump manufacturers have concerns with Whole Body Imaging systems and I don't think it is the role of a TSA "Clerk" to be asking what brand of pump a person is using. I doubt greatly that any TSA screener is educated in the possible issues with Insulin Pumps and their interaction with screening devices.
I believe strongly that TSA employees should be liable, both financially and legally, for their actions when on duty. It certainly doesn't seem that some TSA screeners are very concerned with the health of travelers which should be of a concern to TSA management. Being personally liable would quickly end this crap of playing doctor at the checkpoint.
Another pointed example of the unqualified TSA screeners.
I am a little surprised that there haven't been more complaints about pumps being damaged by the scanners. I've read the comments on the articles about this incident and there have been several pump users who have gone through the scanners without problems. Maybe there is no danger, maybe their pumps can withstand the scanners, or maybe they have been lucky and damage will occur eventually. On the other hand, maybe this girl was unlucky, maybe her pump model can't handle the scanner, or maybe her pump was orientated in a way that makes the pump more likely to be damaged. Another possibilty is that most pump users are told not to use the scanners by the manufacturers and aren't coerced to use them.
The pumps could be getting damaged and the user may not know it until later. They might not attribute it to the scanner if they don't check the pump until later. I don't usually check my pump unless it is at a meal.
I would be interested to know if the TSA will allow or has offered the pump manufacturers the ability to test the scanners. If the TSA hasn't, then the pump manufacturers have to tell their users not to go through the scanners. This incident tells me that my pump is much more likely to be damaged by the scanners than a plane being destroyed by terrorists, so I will continue to opt-out.
The problem is that, given your lack of medical & engineering credentials, what's in your mind doesn't mattter much.
Since the TSA hasn't allowed anyone to do an independent test on the scanners, then you know that they haven't offered pump manufacturers the chance to test them either.
No. You are not responding to a number of arguments here because you think your limited observations (nobody has dropped dead in front of you) are everything you need to know.
Wrong again bob. I've responded to a number of arguments, even when I think they're irrelevant. The fact that you guys aren't able to admit it's reasonable to think that more incidences of broken pumps would be in the news if the scanners actually damaged the pumps tells me this discussion isn't really productive, it's just a another way to complain about the TSA.
Anyone find out if the broken pump was actually broken, like the headlines imply?
Separate names with a comma.