Re: Airport X-ray Security Scanner

[Al Tschaeche <antatnsu@pacbell.net>]

I have a number of children, grandchildren and great grandchildren.  I, too,
would have no problem if each of them were to be scanned daily a number of
times by such machines.  If just one children's death were prevented by such
scanner use, it would be worth all the dose.  When one considers that we
spend billions to prevent a death from nuclear power plants, a few million
and a little dose is a small price to pay for a child's life even if there
were real risk from such low doses.  Who knows, using such machines, we
probably would even be improving each child's life by hormesis.

The public will never accept "this position" unless they are assisted in
knowing the whole story as we know it about low dose effects.  I find, in
talking with the public, they completely understand the benefits of such
machines and, when told of the low, if any, risk information, readily accept
the use of such machines.  Al Tschaeche antatnsu@pacbell.net

Glenn Roberts wrote:

>  I would go out on a limb and risk
> severe criticism by saying that I would not object to my own children
> being scanned (<1 millirem/yr for 333 scans at the stated dose per scan)
> going to school.  I realize that I speak for no one else and the public
> would never except this position.
>
begin:vcard 
n:Tschaeche;Al
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
org:Nuclear Standards Unlimited
version:2.1
email;internet:antatnsu@postoffice.pacbell.net
title:CEO
x-mozilla-cpt:;0
fn:Al Tschaeche
end:vcard