Do airport body-scans have radiation risk?

Some individuals will apparently get cancer from these scans, but the risk of any individual getting cancer is very small.

Some scientists and two major airline pilots unions contend not enough is known about the effects of the small doses of X-ray radiation emitted by one of the two types of airport scanning machines.
The Transportation Security Administration’s advanced imaging technology machines use two separate means of creating images of passengers — backscatter X-ray technology and millimeter-wave technology.
At the end of October, 189 backscatter units and 152 millimeter-wave machines were in use in more than 65 airports. The total number of imaging machines is expected to near 1,000 by the end of 2011, according to the TSA. . . .
“If you think of the entire population of, shall we say a billion people per year going through these scanners, it’s very likely that some number of those will develop cancer from the radiation from these scanners,” Brenner [director of the Center for Radiological Research at Columbia University and a professor of radiation biophysics] said.
Skin cancer would likely be the primary concern, he said. Each time the same person receives a backscatter scan, the small risk associated with the low dose of radiation is multiplied by the number of exposures.
Brenner said the risk to an individual is “very small indeed” for a single scan. He said he is most concerned about frequent fliers, pilots and young people, because children are more sensitive to radiation.. . . .

See this also:

Some US scientists warned Friday that the full-body, graphic-image X-ray scanners now being used to screen passengers and airline crews at airports around the country may be unsafe.

They say the risk is minimal, but statistically someone is going to get skin cancer from these X-rays,” Dr Michael Love, who runs an X-ray lab at the department of biophysics and biophysical chemistry at Johns Hopkins University school of medicine, told AFP.

“No exposure to X-ray is considered beneficial. We know X-rays are hazardous but we have a situation at the airports where people are so eager to fly that they will risk their lives in this manner,” he said.

The possible health dangers posed by the scanners add to passengers’ and airline crews’ concerns about the devices, which have been dubbed “naked” scanners because of the graphic image they give of a person’s body, genitalia and all. . . .

And also this discussion.

Stepped-up security screening at airports in the wake of foiled terrorism plots has provoked an outcry from airline pilots and travelers, including parents of children who say they are too intrusive.

With the busiest holiday travel season nearing, fliers face long security lines and new rigorous patdown checks begun in recent weeks aimed at discovering hidden explosives. As a result, some travelers are questioning whether to fly at all. . . .

BY JOHN LOTT ON NOVEMBER 17TH, 2010

Posted at Back to Basics

Airports to begin strip-searching passengers

You might want to take a minute to say goodbye to your personal liberties. They're flying right out the window -- and, as usual, it's all in the name of "protecting the public." You knew this was coming... After the failed terror attempt on Christmas day, the federal Transportation Security Agency (TSA) has decided to step up its security screenings. Their solution? Strip-search every passenger. It's not by hand, mind you, but it may as well be. The TSA plans to begin using full-body X-ray scanners that would essentially strip passengers of their clothing -- and their dignity. With these new scanners, no details would be left to the imagination -- which is just how the feds like it. Yup, Big Brother is a big perv. (And this will not solve the problem, nor is it necessary and it ads a new threat) But I'm not sure which is worse: The threat to your privacy or the threat to your health. Like X-rays, the new machines use radiation to create these indecent exposures. The experts claim that the low dose of radiation is perfectly safe -- even for children and pregnant women. That is absolutely untrue! Baloney. Exposing pregnant women to radiation can lead to grossly disfigured babies or can even cause women to miscarry. It's no coincidence that five female security guards had miscarriages after working with these supposedly safe machines. And it's not much safer for adults. Radiation can damage DNA and cause structural damage to your cells -- both of which can lead to cancer. In fact, Dr. John Gofman, Professor Emeritus of Molecular and Cell Biology at the University of California, Berkeley, believes that 50 percent of all cancers are caused by the radiation from medical tests -- the same ones meant to "protect" you by detecting cancer early! Bottom line: If you don't want to be fried with ionizing radiation every time you fly -- and if you'd rather not have airport workers paid to be peeping toms...you won't stand for this outright invasion of your rights. When it comes to these full-body X-rays, I don't care how low the dose is. There is no safe level of ionizing radiation. Period.

Dr. William Campbell Douglass II, M.D.

It is time Americans began using some common sense, stop giving up their liberties for protection or the illusion of safety (which never helps or works out well), stop letting the government endanger our health and start demanding that the government worry about Americans and their rights and health instead of what “the world” thinks us!

We need to be proactive not reactive and insist the government use methods that work to insure homeland security and stop endangering us and our children with half-backed ideas and so-called medical, chemical, and electronic methods that actually damage our health and take away our freedoms!