TSA screening and PCa

I've been reading about the new TSA screening procedures, with a choice between low-level radiation screening or invasive pat-downs. While they talk about how minimal the radiation exposure is, I feel like I'm already fighting cancer and even though part of that will involve targeted radiation treatments, I don't need to add in additional radiation run by non-medical personnel and with unknown calibration standards.

On top of that, if I wind up with a penile implant (which I view as likely within the next few years), I really don't care to discuss that with some TSA flunky in public before going through one of these machines. That's a point where medical privacy should come into play.

Of course you can opt-out in favor of a pat-down but I view it as absurd that we're expected to consent to a stranger's hands inside my pants, and even underwear (not sure if this is routine but I've read multiple accounts of it happening), as a condition to travel on a plane.

Yeah, that doesn't work so well when you need to travel across the country and back over the course of a few days. I'll happily drive for trips under 500 miles, but when you're talking about 2000 or more there isn't another realistic option.

I wandered into this thread expecting a funny "I've had a bazillion DREs over the past few years, having a TSA flunky fondle my junk is no big deal" thread.

I'm leaving disappointed. ;-)

Well....guess I will say this.

No one absolutely no one is going to pat down my wife...and she will not be scanned to have it visible to everyone. A simple search on the internet and you can find all sorts of photos of scans taken. It just isn't secure in my opinion.

Les - how will your wife get to where you are going then since she will not be on the plane with you? No scan or no pat down = no boarding.

I've searched the internet for these scans and only find the ones published by some media outlet. These scans are about as sexy as a bunch of farm girls in flannel (nothing against farm girls - raised on a farm and married a farm girl). But really???

The only concern I would have is the amount of radiation each time you are scanned and how do they keep the machines calibrated.

Just waiting for those wanting to wreck havoc on us is a way to get the explosive up the wazzo and board the plane.

David:

I'm already booked to Tampa.

I guess I'll report on the pat-down.

Mel

Hey! I'm incontinent! Wait till they see my full pee pad in the scan. I wonder if it will look like an underwear bomb.
"Please don't squeeze it! Please don't squeez...Oops! Is there a bathroom around here?"

Jeff (the leaking one)

I flew with a Foley Catheter and a leg bag hooked up with a huge rubber hose, they never mentioned my gear, they were obsessed with my
loafers at the time. Let's see, that particular leg bag could hold 500 ml of liquid anything. Interesting.

An interesting statistic -- Your chances of getting cancer from a TSA scan are about equal to your chances of dieing on a plane because of a terrorist bomb. Interestingly, your chances of getting hit by lightening are ten times either of the above.

TSA forces cancer survivor to show prosthetic breast
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40278427/ns/travel-news

A longtime Charlotte, N.C., flight attendant and cancer survivor told a local television station  that she was forced to show her prosthetic breast during a pat-down.

 

compiler said... Casey indicates it is truly minimal (less than we get from the plane flight itself). I have not seen any source to confirm that. C’mon, Mel.   You should know by now that I don’t shoot from the hip...       Cosmic, ionizing radiation is a part of our natural environment, and we are constantly exposed to low levels.   Get in a plane and you get more radiation than on the earth's surface because at higher altitudes there is less shielding from the earth’s atmosphere.   In fact, fly close to the equator and you will get more than if you fly closer to the poles because of the angle of incidence.   A full-body x-ray security system delivers less radiation than the dose a person receives during 4 minutes of airline flight .   Read-up here:   http://www.fda.gov/Radiation-EmittingProducts/RadiationEmittingProductsandProcedures/SecuritySystems/ucm227201.htm   I know that sensatinalism grabs headlines and attention, but there's nothing like data to squash some of the recklessness flying around; witness, for example, pogmothion's reference to "unknown calibration standards" in the initial posting.

Mel,

If the scan gives you the radiation of one xray, and the RT gives you the radiation of 500,000 xrays (I'm not checking the validity of those statements), then you will get either 2 or 4 extra against 500,000. (You might change planes and have an extra).

In my mind the choice to do the 500,000 makes the 2 absurdly irrelevant for a normal holiday traveler - if you did it every day, the question is very different. Cutting out two is a nice "less radiation" banner to wave, but is it significant? I do not think so.

The real question should be the level of the search. I fear that the pads seen in the scan will trigger the pat down, which will then delay everything while I am turned inside out and have explain the pads in a most public place. But, while all this is going on, your personal stuff, bag, watch, wallet, etc., is in a box on the belt where anyone can just pick it up and keep walking. That has happened to me multiple times, even just walking through the detector.

 

I've read plenty of info on how minimal the radiation exposure is supposed to be. That makes the presumption that all the machines always function properly. These things are in high-volume usage, far more than a typical x-ray machine at a hospital. They're being operated by people that don't have an impressive level of training for this type of equipment. Any radiation-generating equipment in a medical setting has expensive maintenance routines and regular calibration. I don't exactly have confidence that they'll all operate as advertised, and since I'm already fighting cancer I do see that as an unnecessary risk.

I'd also rather not show off a damp Depends or (in my likely future) a penile implant. I feel like HIPAA privacy standards are tossed out the window if we're supposed to talk about this sort of stuff in public with non-medical personnel.

This isn't meant to be a political thread, but to discuss the hazards and impact of this kind of screening on guys in our situation.