Re: X-Ray Vision Is Here

[David W Lee <lee_david_w@lanl.gov>]

	I, too, look forward to this discussion; however, I hope the coming
participants in this discussion are willing to approach the discussion with
the realization that 'that which some may consider to be 'unnecessary' is
not necessarily 'hazardous.'  3 microrem is not radiobiologically harmful.
Just as some police groups may ultimately feel 'justified' in purchasing
the Nicolet device, apparently now in its final developmental stages, in
order to protect police officers from illegally? concealed weapons carried
by others, so also other employers may feel the need to protect themselves
from employees stealing things.  EXAMPLE:  The country of South Africa uses
x-ray machines in their diamond mines which irradiate miners as they leave
to insure that the miners are not walking away with any diamonds.  To my
understanding, this situation was quietly evaluated by the IAEA in the
1995-1996 time frame.  Under the ICRP principles of justification,
limitation, and optimization, it still depends of who and what is being
justified.  A police department may indeed feel justified to protect its
officers, even though the persons sustaining the irradiation in the course
thereof may not feel the same way.  In any event, I would recommend that we
clearly keep in mind the difference between 'hazardous' and 'unnecessary.'
REGARDS  David Lee, LANL, (505) 667-8085; lee_david_w@lanl.gov.

  

At 10:50 AM 08-04-97 -0500, you wrote:
>The following article appeared in my morning newspaper, The Advocate,
>Tuesday, April 8, 1997:
> 
>                   Detectors can see through clothing
> 
>     Raleigh, N.C.  - The  next generation  of weapons detectors is
>     deadly accurate,  able to  look through  clothes to find guns,
>     explosives and even syringes and drug vials that can be tucked
>     into rolls of fat.
>          About the  size of a voting booth, a machine manufactured
>     by Nicolet  Imaging Systems  of San  Diego is  being tested at
>     North Carolina's  Central Prison and the federal courthouse in
>     Los Angeles.
>          "It is  a very low-level X-ray," Capt. Marshall Hudson, a
>     correction  officer   said  during   a  demonstration  Monday.
>     Hudson, said  the $100,000  machine is capable of showing shin
>     bones near  the skin  and even a person's private parts on the
>     "uncloak mode."
>          While police groups are intrigued, civil libertarians are
>     concerned because  the same  technology is  being developed by
>     other manufacturers  into a hand-held model, which will enable
>     police to  detect a  weapon hidden under someone's clothing up
>     to 60 feet away.
> 
>I checked  the web  site for  Nicolet Imaging  Systems and  they have  a
>SECURE 1000 Personnel Security Screening System and state:
> 
>     Each full  body scan of the SECURE 1000 produces approximately
>     3 microREMs  of emission.  This is  equivalent to the exposure
>     every  person   receives  each  five  minutes  from  naturally
>     occurring background environmental radioactivity.
> 
>This  obviously   raises  some  moral,  ethical,  radiation  safety  and
>regulatory control  issues.   Among those  a departure of the prevailing
>philosophy  of   no  purposeful   ionizing  radiation  exposures  to  an
>individual unless  there  is  an  appropriate  medical  benefit  to  the
>individual.
> 
>This should be an interesting discussion.
> 
>Roy A. Parker, Ph.D.
>E-Mail: 70472.711@compuserve.com
>Tel: 504-924-1473
>Fax: 504-924-4269
> 
>
>
>
>
David W. Lee
Radiation Protection Services Group (ESH-12)
Los Alamos National Laboratory
PO Box 1663, MS K483
Los Alamos, NM  87545
Ph:  (505) 667-8085
FAX: (505) 667-9726