[ RadSafe ] Airport X-Ray scanners
reuven99 at gmail.com
Thu Dec 2 04:58:38 CST 2010
Hi Mr. Perle:
I posed a simple and srteightforword question: were TLD and / or film badge
radiation measurements made on those machines?
Your did not answer in the same way.
I will be surprised if ANYBODY, be it the manufacturer or an FDA operative
bothered to take
an ACR mammography phantom and a mammography film / cassette, or a set of
TLDs to perform
initial, crude test for EVALUATIONS, are the scanners safe or do they pose
radiation risks to the public?
The RapiScan 1000 is manufactured in LA or San Diego. I presume that if the
manufacturer had indeed used TLDs etc. - you would have known about it.
I have studied the first published "Assessment of the Rapiscan Secure 1000"
by Frank Cerra, July 21, 2006, and I can assure you that TLD / film were NOT
Mr. Cerra utilized a Monte Carlo software (PCXMC) which needs to be fed
several parameters before it can run. These parameters were ESTIMATED by Mr.
Cerra without proving the validity of his assumptions / estimations. I have
not checked the this software yet, but I suspect that like any other Monte
Carlo software I know, it deals with STATIC source of radiation.
In the next few days I'm going to study the more recent Assessment from John
Hopkins University, physics dept. Knowing my physicists colleagues, I will
be deeply surprised if the John Hopkins guys used an ACR mammography phantom
with mammography cassette and / or TLD to
"Assess" the magnitude of radiation in these scanners!
Reading the RadSafe about these scanners conjures in my mind an Academic
Tea-Party version chanting in a trans: "X-Ray Airport scanners are safe and
GOOD for ya!"
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 18:02:41 -0600
From: "Perle, Sandy" <SPerle at mirion.com>
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] TSA Scanner is Health Risk
To: "The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing
List" <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
Message-ID: <A9138597-C0A9-4A2A-9DB4-BA44CB996F86 at mirion.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I am confident that there is a lot of data regarding these units. The
primary issue for someone other than the government or the manufacturer to
monitor these units with TLD or other dosimeter is that the TSA must
authorize the placing of these devices on a person entering the unit. The
pilot unions wanted to test but at that point in time, the TSA would not
allow dosimeters be in the unit. If you've ever been through one, they make
you take everything out of your pockets, including currency bills, wallet,
etc. A dosimeter is a no-no.
This list has provided links to studies and I have no quarrels with the data
presented that demonstrates that the dose received by an individual is
small. I traveled all day today and the airports I went through did not have
these scanners. I would have gladly been scanned rather than the hand-on
Sander C. Perle
Dosimetry Services Division
2652 McGaw Avenue
Irvine, CA 92614
+1 (949) 296-2306 (Office)
+1 (949) 296-1144 (Fax)
Mirion Technologies: http://www.mirion.com/
On Nov 30, 2010, at 12:53 PM, ReuvenGmail wrote:
> Dear Mr. Perle,
> Do you happen to know if there are ANY measurements results
> using TLD monitors or film badge monitors to inform us with scientifically
> derived results about the radiation exposure / absorption levels of
> x-ray scanners to passengers?
> In the absence of such rudimentary measurements, nobody in this forum has
> the grounds to "approve" or "disprove" these machines.
> With the obvious track record of the FDA, I would caution, though, any
> passenger, to avoid ANY x-ray exposure!
> The scanners operate at 50 KvP (!)
> Here is an example of reincarnation: Xeromammography, that has been quite
> dead for the past 40 years, is gaining a tremendous and profitable
> in the transmogrifyed "X-Ray Back Scatter Scanner..."
> Reuven Zach
> Medical Radiation Physicist
More information about the RadSafe