Guess which study the authorities will be quoting...

From todays Australian:

Suddenly I feel so safe..

haha Mr.Hat,

yeah I know, next they will say Fukishima is fine!
Ann coulter said it is!....:ugh:


infowars.com

Everything effects you
 

What is it with these "safe levels". No-one bloody well knows for sure - they are just using their best guess.

Have a read of "Bad Medicine" by John Archer.

He reports on how inaccurate many radiation machines are, their lack of maintenance, poor calibration and operators who aren't even aware of the dose that you will be receiving.

As he says, "All ionising radiation damages human chromosomes. There is no safe level. The lower the dose the less likelihood of damage. All xray examinations, whether they are dental or medical, are cumulative and each exam increases the risk of several types of cancer"

So who will be maintaining the detectors? The same ones looking after the medical equipment?

I'll cop a known grope over an unknown level of radiation exposure any day.

Everything your body is exposed to either contributes to your health or harms it.

It still doesn't adress the invasion of people's privacy with no reasonable grounds by private contractors. Obviously they're going to hammer the 'they don't hurt you' mantra and hope everyone forgets about the other issues.

He is absolutely correct. Every medical doctor knows that.

Ionising radiation damages DNA in cells - that's a cold hard scientific fact. Our bodies do their best to repair that damage. Sometimes they can, sometimes they can't. The risks are greater when you are younger.

The very latest high quality studies on x-ray risks have led to some hospitals in Australia requiring informed consent for even a single CT scan for children, for example.

Of course, everything is a balance of risks. You absolutely need an x-ray if you have suspected broken bones or any of a number of other medical conditions. But do x-ray body scans seriously/significantly reduce the terror risk? I doubt it very much.

And yes, Ann Coulter is a moron, and has severely misinterpreted what the studies say. But then again, she thinks the current scientific evidence proves the earth is 6000 years old too.

That bit is being addressed

Body scanners or anything else for that matter are only there for the honest terrorists. Like doors/window locks with thieves if they really want to get in they will pick the weakest link in any security system & it ain't the silly body scanners at airports either!

Trouble is the terrorists main aim is to create fear & panic, that's exactly what they have achieved especially since 9/11. Killing all those 9/11 people wasn't their main aim I reckon although utterly tragic for sure it was the shear terror that we saw live on peoples faces on CNN etc, that was what they wanted too achieve.

I personally don't have a problem with having such devices (scanners) 'cause if it stops just one total idiot whom could bring a plane down then they are worth it as we live in an insane world these days but for crying out loud I see no point in scanning flight crew, that's the dumbest thing about all this, the rule makers are as stupid as the idiots that try to get thru:ugh::ugh:

A bit off trk I know but it's all related.

Wmk2

Spot on Wally there is absolutely no point and I think that we (the Pilots of Australia) should take the opportunity of the introduction of scanning to make a united stand against flight crew screening.

The single most important security check on flight crew should be to make sure we are who we say we are i.e have a look at ASIC cards. How often is this done? I have never had anyone check my ASIC, security is to busy checking my bags for everything that I wouldn't need if I wanted to kill everyone.

F.Nose, agreed mate but for some reason, the pilot groups seem to be under represented when decisions on aviation security are made. Instead, the airlines send along their band of retired cops and defence people now masquerading as security experts.