http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40351426/ns/travel

What if you are pregnant and you don't know it?

__________________
You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows - Robert A. Zimmerman

I just plan to eat a huge plate of lentils with lots of hot sauce. Maybe top it off with a few pickled eggs. Then head to the airport and request a patdown-- timing is everything.

__________________

Current:
2014 VW Tiguan SEL 4Motion 43,000 miles.

2016 Hyundai Santa Fe Sport (wife's).

Past:
2006 Jetta TDI 135,970 miles. Sold Nov. '13.
1995 E-320 Special Edition. 220,200 miles. Sold Sept. '07.
1987 190-E 16 valve. 153,000 miles. Sold Feb. '06.
1980 300-D 225,000 miles. Donated to the National Kidney Foundation.
1980 240-D manual, 297,500 miles. Totaled by inattentive driver.

Ba ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

__________________
For the Saved, this world is the worst it will ever get.
For the unSaved, this world is the best it will ever get.

Clk's Ebay Stuff BUY SOMETHING NOW!!!

Don't use a cell phone and don't fly.

Millimeter wave technology emits about 1/10000th of the radio waves of a cell phone

Backscatter X-Ray emits about 2 mins worth of radiation exposure of a commercial flight.

People hear X-Rays and they think of mutant kids and body parts falling off.

__________________
01 Ford Excursion Powerstroke
99 E300 Turbodiesel
91 Vette with 383 motor
05 Polaris Sportsman 800 EFI
06 Polaris Sportsman 500 EFI
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Red
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Yellow
04 Tailgator 21 ft Toy Hauler
11 Harley Davidson 883 SuperLow

People blindly repeat the above, who have no clue what they are talking about. Dismissing the risks outright, is pure ignorance.

First off - perhaps you could supply your educational, scientific and/or medical credentials. Perhaps you have more credibility than four esteemed scientists/doctors at UCSF, one of the premier medical and imaging centers in the world who share a slightly different opinion on the subject from you.

But hey - I'll even give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume you're more all knowing in the field than these experts. Let's assume your risk assessment is correct.

If so, the number floating about by the naysayers is that "only" 1 in 30 million people will contract cancer from a single backscatter machine exposure. Given that over 800 million people fly each year, the TSA is responsible for killing only 27 folks. So, the TSA kills more people than terrorists from the scans alone.

Of course, it doesn't stop there. With the increased number of people refusing to fly while this nonsense is going on, they increase their chances of death by taking riskier modes of transportation. And, all of the exposure data is based on a properly calibrated machine, delivering a specific dose - something only an idiot would trust, given the trained monkeys who run the things.

But go on believing what you wish, leaving us paranoid and ignorant folks as the only ones doubting the TSA's glowing credentials and expertise.

I think the number of people killed by TSA each year is a bit off. I thought I read some where (I'll have to look where) that only 2% or 3% of passengers will be subject to the scanner. If that's true, the umber of TSA murders would be quite a bit less right?

__________________
Sent from an agnostic abacus

2014 C250 21,XXX my new DD ** 2013 GLK 350 18,000 Wife's new DD**

- With out god, life is everything.
- God is an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance that's getting smaller and smaller as time moves on..." Neil DeGrasse Tyson
- You can pray for me, I'll think for you.
- When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.

And simply accepting that there is danger just because somebody THINKS there might be a potential problem?

If that is all you have, I am certainly not concerned. They are raising possibilities. They are calling for an impartial panel to look at it. Do you have a copy of that panel's report? Or has it even been formed yet? As soon as they declare that there IS a real problem, I'll believe it.

You got the paranoid part right. There are all kinds of dangers we breathe in, drink and eat that are real and those that are not. I believe the risk of 2nd hand smoke is real. I don't believe this one is real yet. That is, unless you do have proof. Great men used to believe we couldn't go below the level of the atom but we have done that. The sound barrier could not be broken either. BTDT. Just because they are great men of science doesn't automatically mean we should worship and swallow whole each of their concerns. By all means, we should have an independent panel evaluate it. I don't say no to that. I don't believe that simply because someone in the top of their field raises a concern I should drop everything and follow their doubts about something WITHOUT proper tests. Again, if you have something more concrete than concerns, I welcome your input.

__________________
01 Ford Excursion Powerstroke
99 E300 Turbodiesel
91 Vette with 383 motor
05 Polaris Sportsman 800 EFI
06 Polaris Sportsman 500 EFI
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Red
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Yellow
04 Tailgator 21 ft Toy Hauler
11 Harley Davidson 883 SuperLow

Correction - four somebodies, from a prestigious institution, with impeccable credentials and wide respect from their peers, with far more knowledge than some guy on the Internet regurgitating talking points.

OK. 4 somebodies. Happy? Even your 4 somebodies don't really KNOW and are recommending an independent panel look into it. Or did you miss that part with regurgitating talking points?

Again, I am not against dissent. The problem is that you are saying that we have to worship the 4 somebodies and go with their "maybes". Even they are not certain and recommend some independent panel look into it. Or do you believe that we should halt things simply because 4 prestigious somebodies have doubts? Do you entertain the possibility that they could be wrong? I do. Could the original people who manufactured this system be wrong? Of course.

One more time for clarity: If you believe the current work is not quite right, look into it thoroughly. When you have information from your research and testing, act.

__________________
01 Ford Excursion Powerstroke
99 E300 Turbodiesel
91 Vette with 383 motor
05 Polaris Sportsman 800 EFI
06 Polaris Sportsman 500 EFI
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Red
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Yellow
04 Tailgator 21 ft Toy Hauler
11 Harley Davidson 883 SuperLow

Until you provide anything remotely resembling their credentials or experience, yeah - I think I'll go with them.

Paranoid, I know.

I would say that the developers of the system would have some reasonably qualified people behind it. What reason is there to trust 4 guys with a theory who have NOT even started their homework? 6 months ago, the answer was "no", hence the recommending for the formation of an independent panel to investigate it. Again, if that panel or another panel can come up with more than an "I Think" or "maybe", I will be glad to see it. As I said, even they were not certain so what is there to go on? If that panel can come up with the decision after doing proper investigation that it is bad, I'll be the first to say that the system has to go and now. I assume the peddlers of the system have to come up with some tests to show it is fine. Until there is something to contradict that, I am not sure what the opinions out there are but I don't think we should simply jump the gun.

Paranoid doesn't cover that. Maybe these 4 know something the rest of the world doesn't know. I don't say "no" to that. Until they have done some more work than a guess, what have we to go on? A "maybe"?

Edit: Just so we are clear, is there any issue with the millimeter wave stuff or just the backscatter X-ray?

__________________
01 Ford Excursion Powerstroke
99 E300 Turbodiesel
91 Vette with 383 motor
05 Polaris Sportsman 800 EFI
06 Polaris Sportsman 500 EFI
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Red
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Yellow
04 Tailgator 21 ft Toy Hauler
11 Harley Davidson 883 SuperLow

Think this through carefully. The back scatter Xray machines are brought to you by the same government that blew up nuclear bombs in the Nevada desert back in the 1950's and told everyone it was 'safe'.

http://articles.cnn.com/2002-03-01/us/nuclear.fallout_1_nuclear-tests-fallout-hot-spots?_s=PM:US

What you folks are talking around is commonly know as the "zero-threshold theory." This theory states that any amount of radiation exposer is harmful to humans. It has never been proven or disproven and is the subject of spirited debate. The potential risks at very low levels are very difficult to observe, compared to all the other risk factors that we are exposed to every day. For example, I probably get about 300 mrem of background exposure every year and I might get another 50 mrem of occupational exposure. If I develop cancer at age 65, who's to know if that small amount of additional exposure was what made the difference.

And we should investigate it. Here is what it boils down. One side (TSA and makers of the system) have their own paperwork to say it is safe and on the other side, we have a "Maybe" who has not done work yet. Go investigate it and get back to us as to the safety. It MIGHT be that 5 exposures will make your ding dong fall off. OTOH, it MIGHT be that 10 exposures is no more dangerous than breathing air in any major city for 10 mins. But until there is data on the other side, simply saying it is dangerous and wanting to scrap the system that was declared safe cannot even be described as paranoid. It begins to sound like something Jesse Ventura would have on his show.

__________________
01 Ford Excursion Powerstroke
99 E300 Turbodiesel
91 Vette with 383 motor
05 Polaris Sportsman 800 EFI
06 Polaris Sportsman 500 EFI
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Red
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Yellow
04 Tailgator 21 ft Toy Hauler
11 Harley Davidson 883 SuperLow