informationliberation
The news you're not supposed to know...


An Introduction to Austrian Economics: Understand Economics, Understand Everything

The Obama Deception: The Mask Comes Off
The Century of the Self: The Untold History of Controlling the Masses Through the Manipulation of Unconscious Desires
The Disappearing Male: From Virility to Sterility

Fall of the Republic: America's Last Stand
Operation Gladio: "One of the most secret programs that ever existed"
The Age of Transitions: The Dystopia Planned For Our Future
(more)
Article posted Jun 29 2010, 11:32 PM Category: Brave New World Source: Prison Planet Print

Columbia University: Body Scanners Increase Risk Of Skin Cancer

X-ray dose up to 20 times higher than originally estimated – more evidence that devices are dangerous, illegal, and need to be removed from airports immediately
Paul Joseph Watson


Airport body scanners could lead to an increase in skin cancers according to scientists at Columbia University, who warn that the dose emitted by the naked x-ray devices could be up to 20 times higher than originally estimated, in another clear example of how the scanners are completely illegal, dangerous to public health, and need to be removed immediately.

Dr David Brenner, head of Columbia University’s centre for radiological research, warns that children and people with gene mutations whose bodies are less able to repair damage to their DNA are most at risk.

“If all 800 million people who use airports every year were screened with X-rays then the very small individual risk multiplied by the large number of screened people might imply a potential public health or societal risk. The population risk has the potential to be significant,” said Brenner.

Brenner’s research shows that the scanners will likely contribute to an increase in a common type of skin cancer called basal cell carcinoma which affects the head and neck.

“If there are increases in cancers as a result of irradiation of children, they would most likely appear some decades in the future. It would be prudent not to scan the head and neck,” added Brenner.

Brenner has urged medical authorities to look at his work, pointing to the dangerous notion of mass scanning millions of people without proper oversight.

“There really is no other technology around where we’re planning to X-ray such an enormous number of individuals. It’s really unprecedented in the radiation world,” said Brenner.

Similar concerns to those explored in the Columbia University study were voiced back in February by the influential Inter-Agency Committee on Radiation Safety, who warned in a report that the scanners increase the risk of cancer and birth defects and should not be used on pregnant women or children.

Despite governments claiming that backscatter x-ray systems produce radiation too low to pose a threat, the organization concluded in their report that governments must justify the use of the scanners and that a more accurate assessment of the health risks is needed.

Pregnant women and children should not be subject to scanning, according to the report, adding that governments should consider "other techniques to achieve the same end without the use of ionizing radiation."

"The Committee cited the IAEA's 1996 Basic Safety Standards agreement, drafted over three decades, that protects people from radiation. Frequent exposure to low doses of radiation can lead to cancer and birth defects, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency," reported Bloomberg.

In the United States, people can refuse the body scanner and opt for an aggressive and intrusive hand-search, but people traveling out of the UK and other areas of Europe don’t even get the choice – they are forced to go through the scanner if asked and cannot refuse or they are banned from traveling. Despite the media reporting universal acceptance of the scanners, in reality 600 formal complaints had been made about the devices in the first two months of their usage alone.

The alarming health concerns surrounding body scanners have been equaled by the shaky legality of the devices. In the UK, the scanners break child porn laws which forbid the production of indecent images of children, but the UK transport authorities have broken the law and mandated that children be required to pass through the machines.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) also wrote a letter to the UK government warning that the scanners broke privacy laws.

As we have highlighted, not only do the body scanners pose health risks but they also violate the fundamental human right of the innocent to be protected against strip-searches.

Despite official denials that the images produced by the devices show details of genitalia, journalists who have investigated trials of the technology have reported that details of sexual organs are "eerily visible".

Indeed, as we have previously highlighted, when the scanners were first introduced at Australian airports in 2008 it was admitted that the X-ray backscatter devices don't work properly unless the genitals of people going through them are visible. "It will show the private parts of people, but what we've decided is that we're not going to blur those out, because it severely limits the detection capabilities," said Melbourne Airport's Office of Transport Security manager Cheryl Johnson.

Attempts to keep this under wraps by lying about the images produced are an effort to head off challenges to the legality of the devices. Historically, civil lawsuits where an individual has been strip searched by a member of the opposite sex have proven to be successful in North America.

Courts have consistently found that strip searches are only legal when performed on a person who has already been found guilty of a crime or on arrestees pending trial where a reasonable suspicion has to exist that they are carrying a weapon. Subjecting masses of people to blanket strip searches in airports reverses the very notion of innocent until proven guilty.

Barring people from flying and essentially treating them like terrorists for refusing to be humiliated by the virtual strip search is a clear breach of the basic human right of freedom of movement.

Several examples of airport security staff abusing the use of the devices have already come to light since their introduction earlier this year.

Indian film star Shahrukh Khan told a BBC talk show that naked images of his body from the scanner were printed out and circulated by airport staff at Heathrow in London. Heathrow denied the claim but Khan himself never retracted the story, and had no apparent motive for making it up.

Heathrow authorities were unable to deny a later example of the scanners being abused, when it emerged that a Heathrow worker had perved over a naked image of a female colleague after she passed through one of the devices, before commenting, "I love those gigantic tits".

Jo Margetson, 29, reported John Laker, 25, to the police after she had entered the x-ray machine by mistake and Laker took the image before making lewd comments.

In Miami, a TSA worker in Miami attacked a colleague who had made fun of his small penis after he passed through a scanner device. The story again emphasized the fact that authorities were brazenly lying in claiming that the images produced by the devices did not show intimate details of genitalia.


SHARE:



Latest Brave New World
- Finland Suspends Swine Flu Shots After Vaccine Linked With Neurological Disorder
- 52% Concerned About Safety of Vaccines
- Did government measles vaccine kill 4 children?
- Doctors Advised to Avoid One Flu Shot Brand for Young Kids
- Precocious puberty strikes more 7-year-old girls
- Teenagers want fluoride-free water
- The Truth About Fluoride Hits Mainstream Television in Australia
- In 2006 Article White House Science Czar Still Talks Population Reduction and a "Substantial Carbon Tax"









Comments Add Comment Page 1 of 1
Anonymous

Posted: Jul 31 2010, 4:29 PM

Link
90203 "Jo Margetson, 29, reported John Laker, 25, to the police after she had entered the x-ray machine by mistake and Laker took the image before making lewd comments."

No Jo did not enter the scanner by mistake or purposely put herself in that position.

The original story was falsely reported pls see

http://www.pcc.org.uk/advanced_search.html?keywords=jo+margetson&page=1&num=10&publication=x&decision=x&image.x=5&image.y=15


Add Comment
Name
Comment

* No HTML


Verification *
Please Enter the Verification Code Seen Below
 


PLEASE NOTE
Please read our About Page, our Disclaimer, and our Comments Policy.

Please note: InformationLiberation is neither liberal or conservative. When one takes the time to research the "liberal elite," whom the conservatives oppose, and the "conservative elite," whom the liberals oppose, one finds both "elite" are one and the same. "Liberal" or "Conservative" is not a substantive choice, it is only the carefully crafted illusion of a choice, for both parties come together when they are instructed to.

"The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the Government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson."
A letter written by FDR to Colonel House, November 21st, 1933

"Fifty men have run America, and that's a high figure."
Joseph Kennedy, father of JFK, in the July 26th, 1936 issue of The New York Times.

If you care to know who runs the world you live in, view these films. If you care not then I leave you with this quote to ponder:

"There will be, in the next generation or so, a pharmacological method of making people love their servitude, and producing dictatorship without tears, so to speak, producing a kind of painless concentration camp for entire societies, so that people will in fact have their liberties taken away from them, but will rather enjoy it, because they will be distracted from any desire to rebel by propaganda or brainwashing, or brainwashing enhanced by pharmacological methods. And this seems to be the final revolution."
Aldous Huxley, Tavistock Group, California Medical School, 1961 Audio - Transcript


FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.

About Us - Disclaimer

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill


Advanced Search
Username:

Password:

Remember Me
Forgot Password?
Register

What would we do without the government protecting us?! - 09/04Hostage Taker Besieges Discovery Channel, Posts Demands on Web - 09/01Cop Fires Twelve Shots at Dog, Hits Two Animal Control Workers Instead - 09/04Noise Complaint Leads to Police Shooting, Killing 17-Year-Old - 09/04California Cops Taser Senior Citizen in His Own Home - 09/03ABC News Nightline Runs Piece on Alex Jones - 09/03NYPD Suspends Cop Who Stopped Mom of Dying Girl - 09/02Full Text of Enviro-Nazi James Lee's Socialist Screed from his Website - 09/01

ACTA: The War on Progress, Freedom, and Human CivilizationValedictorian Speaks Out Against Schooling in Graduation SpeechFeds Ignore Due Process, First Amendment, Shut Down 73,000 BlogsObama Administration Announces Massive Piracy CrackdownNew Bill Gives Obama 'Kill Switch' To Shut Down The InternetThe "Tax Mahal": A Shrine to Corporate SocialismBilderberg 2010: Between the sword and the wallObama: Life Imprisonment Without Trial
(more)

 
Top