I admit, this post is only tangentially related to librarianship. But I’m writing it because of a message that came out over the AkLA listserv, mentioning that San Diego’s airport has those awful backscatter machines and describing some of the implications of that. And because one of our medical librarians sent out a bibliography of research on the health effects of terahertz radiation (also called “millimeter wave radiation”)—I linked to the articles she sent out, below. And also because, if librarians aren’t fighting for civil liberties, what’s the point of us?
The blog post linked from the AkLA message is rather harrowing. It has audio captures of what happened. TL;DR (“too long; didn’t read”) version: your options are submitting to a “demeaning” (the word belongs to Dave Bates, the head of the Allied Pilots Association) search that borders on illegal, or exposing yourself (unfortunately, I mean that very literally) to a technology which has had insufficient safety research done on it and which is arguably an unnecessary invasion of privacy, to boot.
And let’s not put too fine a point on it: we don’t know if it’s safe. The upshot of all of those articles: there’s some evidence that millimeter waves disrupt DNA; it’s not definite, but it’s sure not definite that they don’t, either. We do know that the president of the Allied Pilots Association has advised pilots not to submit to backscatter machines—via Techdirt and Ars Technica (with a different harrowing story linked from there); here’s a copy of the letter.
I don’t think this is right. As many bloggers before me have pointed out, this is hardly a foolproof method of ensuring air safety, and it costs too much, in terms of personal dignity and possibly health, to be worth doing. I would encourage my library colleagues attending Midwinter—or traveling anywhere else, for that matter—to opt out. Don’t fly out of San Diego, if you can help it. If you absolutely must fly out of there, then I would recommend opting out of the backscatter machine, awful though the patdown is. Doubly so if you are pregnant or planning to have children in the near future. We just don’t know enough about this technology, yet.
By my estimation, it is more reasonable to be afraid of the backscatter machine than it is to be afraid of terrorists.
I’m going to start flying based as much (or more!) on what airports lack this invasive and possibly dangerous technology as I do the other variables I’ve usually looked at (price, number of connections, etc.). And, if I’m unlucky enough to be caught in one that does, I guess I’ll choose the pat-down. In public. Because I think people deserve to see what our culture of fear has led us into.
Edit: I didn’t have all the facts—nor do I, now, as so much is still being revealed on this topic. It turns out not all of the machines use the same technology. This article incorrectly refers to the radio wave machines that I was discussing above as safe, but calls out the fact that many of the machines use the same technology as X-rays, just with a lower power. The concern with X-rays is that the studies done on them are old and have to do with a different application and exposure level altogether. The ones used by these machines shouldn’t penetrate far below the skin; however, as the article points out, some tissues sensitive to cancer risk lie just below the skin, too.
It all comes out to the same: the safety of these machines is unproven, and exposing travelers to them for the marginal increase in detection of weapons they might give us is irresponsible.
Be First to Comment