Dr Jonathan Wright
America's 'miracle' medic is now writing exclusively for our readers in the UK. Claim his 6-volume 'Library of Natural Healing' FREE!more info...
NEW! . . . SUPER FOODS FOR A SUPER-HEALTHY YOU
Unleash the secret healing power of Nature's ultimate foods - & 'programme' your body to remain free of illnessmore info...
Environmental Health
Finally! Concerns About X-Ray Scanners Are Taken Seriously
Date: 24/11/11
Keywords: adverse side effects, Cancer, environmental health, airport xray scanners, cancer radiation risk, dna damage, radiation risks
Ionized radiation, in high amounts with repeated exposure, can cause some serious biological damage, and although body scanners using backscatter X-rays use the waves in very small amounts, there is no known minimum to ensure that the rays will not damage body tissue. US research has suggested that up to 100 US airline passengers a year could get cancer from the scanners.
I'm no exhibitionist... especially when I'm passing through an airport. I'm willing to bet that apart from the odd hen or stag do party, not many of you are either. That's why I sighed with relief when I read that the European Union (EU) has now banned those awful full body scanners that make you appear naked when you pass through them at airport security checks. Yet, embarrassment isn't their biggest drawback (far from it!)... As we've reported in the past, they pose serious health risks.
Too much exposure
When they were first introduced in 2007, at Schiphol Airport, in Amsterdam, there was a massive public outcry across Europe. In the US, these body scanners sparked a heated debate over security concerns versus travellers' privacy, in autumn 2010.
In fact, the debate about their safety has been going on for some time, especially the use of backscatter X-ray technology, which detects any radiation that a given object may emit during the scan.
These scanners use ionized radiation to show a two-dimensional image that gives a clear view of any materials that may be hidden by the subject beneath their clothing. Experts say that the long-lasting negative effects of ionized radiation are a cause for major concern, particularly for people who are frequent fliers.
Ionized radiation, in high amounts with repeated exposure, can cause some serious biological damage, and although body scanners using backscatter X-rays use the waves in very small amounts, there is no known minimum to ensure that the rays will not damage body tissue. US research has suggested that up to 100 US airline passengers a year could get cancer from the scanners.
Critics of full body scanners argue that, the lack of research regarding the dangers of extended exposure to ionized X-rays is enough reason for these scanners to be removed from airports.
Consequently, the EU has told its 27 member states not to install them until the potential risks have been assessed to avoid risking "citizens' health and safety."
Some backlash
However, as always, there are those who disagree. Airports in Britain, argue that the full-body scanners are a 'proportionate response to a very real terrorist threat'. Yet, as of January 2011, there have been no reports of any terrorist arrests as a result of using body scanners. In a series of repeated tests, the body scanners were unable to detect a handgun hidden in an undercover agent's undergarments.
The UK's Health Protection Agency said: "The radiation dose from an examination of two or three scans is less than that received from two minutes flying at cruising altitude."
At Manchester Airport, in the UK, passengers selected for scanning are banned from flying if they refuse to pass through one of the scanning devices. The airport says around 10 passengers have been unable to board their flight after refusing the scan.
A spokesperson for the airport said that the UK Health Protection Agency and the US health authorities have conducted extensive tests and confirmed that back scatter body scanners 'pose negligible risks' to human health. However, they could be hit with a fine from EU courts if they ignore the ban.
Pardon me for nit-picking, but the words 'negligible risks', tell me that there are still some risks... which in my book is totally unacceptable and does not mean it is safe at all!
European legislation, issued this week, has however approved millimetre wave scanning, another form of body scanner technology, for permanent use at EU airports. Millimetre wave scanners come in two varieties: active and passive.
The key difference is that passive systems direct no energy at the subject being screened and are as safe as a digital camera for both the screener and the subject.
However, a study conducted by Boian S. Alexandrov, at the Centre for Nonlinear Studies, in the US, showed that these terahertz waves could "...unzip double-stranded DNA, creating bubbles in the double strand that could significantly interfere with processes such as gene expression and DNA replication."
In layman's terms, when you're talking about interfering with "gene expression" and "DNA replication," you're essentially talking about something that could be a risk to human health.
The US government has decided to continue using the controversial X-ray body scanners. Currently, throughout the country, 250 X-ray body scanners are used and 264 millimetre wave scanners... The US government is on track to install 1,800 new units of both technologies within three years. They intend to cover virtually every domestic airport security lane.
Are you willing to be exposed to potential DNA damage that can significantly increase your risk of cancer?
Sources:
Europe Bans Airport X-Ray Scanners that U.S. Still Uses, published online 17.11.11, newsfeed.time.com
EU bans 'naked' airport scanners over fears they cause cancer, published online 17.11.11, dailymail.co.uk
TSA Body Scanners: Are They Safe? published online, xraytech.com
Full-body scanners used on air passengers may damage human DNA, published online, 11.01.10, naturalnews.com
Back to topToo much exposure
When they were first introduced in 2007, at Schiphol Airport, in Amsterdam, there was a massive public outcry across Europe. In the US, these body scanners sparked a heated debate over security concerns versus travellers' privacy, in autumn 2010.
In fact, the debate about their safety has been going on for some time, especially the use of backscatter X-ray technology, which detects any radiation that a given object may emit during the scan.
These scanners use ionized radiation to show a two-dimensional image that gives a clear view of any materials that may be hidden by the subject beneath their clothing. Experts say that the long-lasting negative effects of ionized radiation are a cause for major concern, particularly for people who are frequent fliers.
Ionized radiation, in high amounts with repeated exposure, can cause some serious biological damage, and although body scanners using backscatter X-rays use the waves in very small amounts, there is no known minimum to ensure that the rays will not damage body tissue. US research has suggested that up to 100 US airline passengers a year could get cancer from the scanners.
Critics of full body scanners argue that, the lack of research regarding the dangers of extended exposure to ionized X-rays is enough reason for these scanners to be removed from airports.
Consequently, the EU has told its 27 member states not to install them until the potential risks have been assessed to avoid risking "citizens' health and safety."
Some backlash
However, as always, there are those who disagree. Airports in Britain, argue that the full-body scanners are a 'proportionate response to a very real terrorist threat'. Yet, as of January 2011, there have been no reports of any terrorist arrests as a result of using body scanners. In a series of repeated tests, the body scanners were unable to detect a handgun hidden in an undercover agent's undergarments.
The UK's Health Protection Agency said: "The radiation dose from an examination of two or three scans is less than that received from two minutes flying at cruising altitude."
At Manchester Airport, in the UK, passengers selected for scanning are banned from flying if they refuse to pass through one of the scanning devices. The airport says around 10 passengers have been unable to board their flight after refusing the scan.
A spokesperson for the airport said that the UK Health Protection Agency and the US health authorities have conducted extensive tests and confirmed that back scatter body scanners 'pose negligible risks' to human health. However, they could be hit with a fine from EU courts if they ignore the ban.
Pardon me for nit-picking, but the words 'negligible risks', tell me that there are still some risks... which in my book is totally unacceptable and does not mean it is safe at all!
European legislation, issued this week, has however approved millimetre wave scanning, another form of body scanner technology, for permanent use at EU airports. Millimetre wave scanners come in two varieties: active and passive.
- * Active scanners direct millimetre wave energy by emitting terahertz photons — high-frequency energy "particles" that can pass through clothing and body tissue, which then interpret the reflected energy.
* Passive systems read only the raw energy that is naturally emitted from the human body or objects concealed on the body.
The key difference is that passive systems direct no energy at the subject being screened and are as safe as a digital camera for both the screener and the subject.
However, a study conducted by Boian S. Alexandrov, at the Centre for Nonlinear Studies, in the US, showed that these terahertz waves could "...unzip double-stranded DNA, creating bubbles in the double strand that could significantly interfere with processes such as gene expression and DNA replication."
In layman's terms, when you're talking about interfering with "gene expression" and "DNA replication," you're essentially talking about something that could be a risk to human health.
The US government has decided to continue using the controversial X-ray body scanners. Currently, throughout the country, 250 X-ray body scanners are used and 264 millimetre wave scanners... The US government is on track to install 1,800 new units of both technologies within three years. They intend to cover virtually every domestic airport security lane.
Are you willing to be exposed to potential DNA damage that can significantly increase your risk of cancer?
Sources:
Europe Bans Airport X-Ray Scanners that U.S. Still Uses, published online 17.11.11, newsfeed.time.com
EU bans 'naked' airport scanners over fears they cause cancer, published online 17.11.11, dailymail.co.uk
TSA Body Scanners: Are They Safe? published online, xraytech.com
Full-body scanners used on air passengers may damage human DNA, published online, 11.01.10, naturalnews.com
Click here to send to a friendShare thisPrinter friendly version
