Government Ignored 1998 Report Finding up to 100 Cancer Deaths from TSA Naked Body Scanners Per Year

In 1998, a panel of radiation safety experts got together to analyze a new security device called the Secure 1000, which was designed specifically to beam X-rays at people to see underneath their clothing. The experts pointed out in their evaluation that the machine violated a basic principle of radiation safety — they stated that humans simply should not be X-rayed unless there is a specific medical benefit.

Apparently the police state agenda we are witnessing coming into being does not care about whom they harm in their quest to set a new era for the world.

Source & story

Wow, thats pretty darn scary, But how did they link the cancer deaths to just the scanners.

reply to post by Humint1


Uh...these things weren't even put into use until after 9-11-01. How can this report be from 1998?

reply to post by webpirate


These X-Ray body scanners arent new tech, and im sure someone thought they could make a buck under the guise of saftey then, just like some one DID now.

Those machines are not cheep, but for some reason health risks are overlooked now a days, I think it has more to do with lower morals and less to do with saftey.

I dont need to check the source to know these things are not safe.

No levels of unnatural radiation is safe for the human body. All it takes is one cell being damaged in the right place and not dying, to cause cancer.

Originally posted by webpirate
reply to post by Humint1

 

Uh...these things weren't even put into use until after 9-11-01. How can this report be from 1998?

Because the backscatter radiation technology used in the Secure 1000 Nude-o-scope was patented in 1993 by Rapiscan and marketing began then. It wasn't until Chertoff left the DHS and was employed by Rapiscan that the TSA bought them.

reply to post by sicksonezer0


I'm not disagreeing they are unsafe. I fully believe they are. I'm arguing with the facts here. They have been around for a while after doing some research, but they were only used in very highly guarded places before the mid 2000's. Very few people were actually going through them. If this report is to be believed in 1998, then that's a very very large percentage of people who used them who got cancer. And they would have gotten it very quickly too.

In 1998 the type of scanners used now was new technology. They were not used in airports, courthouses, or other places we see them used today.

On 23 September 1998, the device's inventor, Steven Smith, assauged the concerns of radiation security experts dubious about the possible risk posed by the device, saying "The places I think you are not going to see these in the next five years is lower-security facilities, particularly power plants, embassies, courthouses, airports and governments... I would be extremely surprised in the next five to 10 years if the Secure 1000 is sold to any of these."

Source

There is NO way anyone had the data to support 100 death per year at the time this report supposedly came out.
I think this report is a fabrication. Or exaggeration at the least. They only started being used to screen humans in 1986. So I will say again...there is no way there were 100 deaths a year associated with these in very limited use in 1998. They could have called them unsafe, but not had the numbers to back it up.

Originally posted by F4guy

Originally posted by webpirate
reply to post by Humint1

 

Uh...these things weren't even put into use until after 9-11-01. How can this report be from 1998?

Because the backscatter radiation technology used in the Secure 1000 Nude-o-scope was patented in 1993 by Rapiscan and marketing began then. It wasn't until Chertoff left the DHS and was employed by Rapiscan that the TSA bought them.

That's my point exactly. Your showing only 5 years of use from 1993 to 1998. Cancer takes years and years to develop. There is no way in hell anyone had the data in that short a period of time to come up with 100 deaths a year. They were used but hardly anywhere most people would have ever been then.

Using the OP's own source, the report says

An explosive report has exposed the carcinogenic effects of X-ray body scanners, finding that up to 100 United States airline passengers each year could get cancer from the machines. Despite the report coming out years ago, millions of Americans still walk through the carcinogenic TSA X-ray body scanners, also known as naked body scanners.

They WERE NOT used in airports in 1998. As I showed earlier even the companies owner didn't even expect them in 1998 to be used in airports anytime in the foreseeable future.

In 1998 there were only 20 machines used in the entire country. And they were in prisons. The had decided people shouldn't be x-rayed unless there was medical benefit.
Source

The actual statistics are estimates TODAY based on 800 million or so people who pass through these machines each year now.
My entire point is the OP's title reads that 100 people a year in 1998 got cancer associated with these in airports then. This was not the case. And the source he is citing is flawed and only loosely paraphrases the actual article i just linked.

I am sorry, however a healthy Japanese man gets bathed in radiation dies of leukemia and it has nothing to do with the rad exposure... then they are going to say that 0.56-0.25usv of upper dermis exposure is going to cause lethal cancer in 100 people a year... the yearly limit for human exposure is about 50,000usv.

This is propaganda... not that I agree with the widespread deployment of scatter systems, however the science is that this exposure is so freakin low that you would have to sit in one of these machines while it microwaved you for 150hrs to get a lethal dose...

this is just more crap to keep people mad about something else than the lack of government we have at the moment

Originally posted by LanternOfDiogenes
I am sorry, however a healthy Japanese man gets bathed in radiation dies of leukemia and it has nothing to do with the rad exposure... then they are going to say that 0.56-0.25usv of upper dermis exposure is going to cause lethal cancer in 100 people a year... the yearly limit for human exposure is about 50,000usv.

This is propaganda... not that I agree with the widespread deployment of scatter systems, however the science is that this exposure is so freakin low that you would have to sit in one of these machines while it microwaved you for 150hrs to get a lethal dose...

this is just more crap to keep people mad about something else than the lack of government we have at the moment

edit on 12/08/11 by LanternOfDiogenes because: (no reason given)

You have just highlighted the problem of minimally educated people looking at scientific reports. These machines don't "microwave" you. Backscatter x-ray is an entirely different part of the EM spectrum. And the fact that these machines are designed to concentrate the radiation in the upper dermis makes comparisons to whole body exposure limits meaningless. Think UV from the sun versus whole body cosmic alpha particles.

Originally posted by F4guy

Originally posted by LanternOfDiogenes
I am sorry, however a healthy Japanese man gets bathed in radiation dies of leukemia and it has nothing to do with the rad exposure... then they are going to say that 0.56-0.25usv of upper dermis exposure is going to cause lethal cancer in 100 people a year... the yearly limit for human exposure is about 50,000usv.

This is propaganda... not that I agree with the widespread deployment of scatter systems, however the science is that this exposure is so freakin low that you would have to sit in one of these machines while it microwaved you for 150hrs to get a lethal dose...

this is just more crap to keep people mad about something else than the lack of government we have at the moment

edit on 12/08/11 by LanternOfDiogenes because: (no reason given)

You have just highlighted the problem of minimally educated people looking at scientific reports. These machines don't "microwave" you. Backscatter x-ray is an entirely different part of the EM spectrum. And the fact that these machines are designed to concentrate the radiation in the upper dermis makes comparisons to whole body exposure limits meaningless. Think UV from the sun versus whole body cosmic alpha particles.

LOl you are going to sight under educated because I made a joke or worse yet used sarcasm silly silly.
Nice jump though, that is the point I was making. thanks for the troll droppings.

Originally posted by LanternOfDiogenes

Originally posted by F4guy

Originally posted by LanternOfDiogenes
I am sorry, however a healthy Japanese man gets bathed in radiation dies of leukemia and it has nothing to do with the rad exposure... then they are going to say that 0.56-0.25usv of upper dermis exposure is going to cause lethal cancer in 100 people a year... the yearly limit for human exposure is about 50,000usv.

This is propaganda... not that I agree with the widespread deployment of scatter systems, however the science is that this exposure is so freakin low that you would have to sit in one of these machines while it microwaved you for 150hrs to get a lethal dose...

this is just more crap to keep people mad about something else than the lack of government we have at the moment

edit on 12/08/11 by LanternOfDiogenes because: (no reason given)

You have just highlighted the problem of minimally educated people looking at scientific reports. These machines don't "microwave" you. Backscatter x-ray is an entirely different part of the EM spectrum. And the fact that these machines are designed to concentrate the radiation in the upper dermis makes comparisons to whole body exposure limits meaningless. Think UV from the sun versus whole body cosmic alpha particles.

LOl you are going to sight under educated because I made a joke or worse yet used sarcasm silly silly.
Nice jump though, that is the point I was making. thanks for the troll droppings.

edit on 12/08/11 by LanternOfDiogenes because: (no reason given)

If you're going to talk about education, you might want to learn how to spell "cite."