Possible Health Effects of Airport Scanning Technology

The December 25 bombing attempt on Northwest Airlines flight 253 in 2009 has prompted the U.S. officials to revise the way air passengers are screened in the airports when entering the United States. The new airport security measures include backscatter x-ray scanners that allow the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to effectively anticipate potential terrorist attacks. However, in light of the new measures there has been a lot of discussion about the possible health risks of airport body scanners.

Are there reasons to be concerned about airport screening?

Airport body scanners are security devices designed to give airport security officials a full image of the passenger's entire body in order to detect weapons, guns, knives and liquid explosives that are possibly strapped on the body. Because they are scanning the entire body, many air passengers are concerned about the radiation received by the x-ray. However, expert doctors, researchers, engineers and health organizations don't seem to alert the public. On the contrary, they are all inclined to agree that the health risks of the screening are rather small.

Dr. Sanjay Gupta, chief medical correspondent for the Health, Medical & Wellness unit at CNN, says that the backscatter x-ray scanners are very similar to medical x-ray machines but the energy used for their operation is much lower. This automatically means that the radiation to which air passengers are exposed to is also lower than that received from a medical x-ray. Besides, the radiation does not go through the passenger's skin or organs like in the case of medical x-rays. Instead, backscatter scanners bounce off the exterior of the body with the x-rays and generate its picture.

According to the Radiation Safety Institute of Canada, the health risks associated with radiation exposure from airport scanning technology are insignificant. The manufacturer of backscatter x-ray scanners, American Science & Engineering (AS&E) claims that each passenger receives less than 0.1 micro sievert (µSv) per scan. On the contrary, for a typical dental x-ray a patient would receive 10 µSv. Besides, the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) claims that 0.1 µSv of radiation per year is not considered dangerous for human health.

The manufacturer of backscatter x-ray scanners in Canada, L-3 Communications, suggests that airport scanners are risk-free because they release non-ionizing radiation. Instead, ionizing radiation is the most dangerous kind of radiation and is emitted by x-rays and the UV rays of the sun. If passengers were exposed to ionizing radiation, they would possibly face health issues including DNA disruption and tissue damage.

In spite of the positive attitude of medical professionals and several organizations to airport scanning technology, including the World Health Organization, the European Commission, Nuclear Energy Agency and the International Atomic Energy Agency, air passengers should be informed about the possible health risks of airport body screenings. Although they all agree that the radiation dose is extremely low, there is absolutely no objection that pregnant women and children should not be scanned. Therefore, the US government, but also any government that uses body scanners should explain its decisions to the public as, one way or another, the public is exposed to radiation.

Sources:

http://pagingdrgupta.blogs.cnn .com/2010/01/07/could-airport- scanners-give-too-much-radiation/
http://www.radiationsafety.ca/ airport-backscatter-x-ray
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/Arti cleNews/story/CTVNews/20100107 /scanners_safety_100110/201001 10?hub=
http://www.dailytribune.com/ar ticles/2010/02/22/news/srv0000 007643987.txt