Airport scanners

[Sarah041190]

I queried this a few weeks ago and it's got me thinking, how many airports actually use the new millimetre wave full body scanners at the airport as their main form of screening? Does your local airport? Or do they use the old fashioned metal detectors still?

I flew last week and they have changed in the last year from the walk through scanners to the body scanners that you stand in still with your arms out whilst they scan you. BRS

Ours uses the new ones now. Has done fully for maybe a year now.

@Yellowcakestand and @Topseyt123, how do you guys feel about them? Do you think they are safe? Do they use them for the kids too or just the adults? I'm not really a flyer so just getting the info I can before we do go ourselves!

They're very low powered transmitters that use radio waves. Their emissions are totally drowned out by those from your phone and everyone else's around you.

Metal detectors also work on similar technology as do anti theft systems in shops.

Agree with @Bjorkdidit about the very low power relative to other items you might be carrying around all the time.

Some of the info from the Uk Civil Aviation Authority that’s in this link may help:

https://www.caa.co.uk/passengers-and-public/before-you-fly/am-i-fit-to-fly/health-information-for-passengers/passenger-health-faqs-at-the-airport/

@Bjorkdidit and @notimagain, would you be happy for your children to use them? Tia x

Of course. What is your concern? Read the CAA link posted above.

They work using very low level millimetre waves, which are a subset of radio waves.

Short of completely switching off from modern society and living in a cave, we're constantly bombarded with radio waves from multiple sources (wireless communications including mobile phones, TV and radio transmitters, emergency services radios etc).

You've probably exposed your children to more electromagnetic radiation by posting on this thread than they'd receive from being searched by one of these scanners.

Absolutely and they have on multiple occasions.

FWIW if it really bothers you I think you can still decline to go through the scanners ex-UK (the CAA article states that is still the case) and instead opt for a manual search, with all that entails.

For info though leaving some countries where security use scanners it used to be the case (might still be) that if you won’t go through them you simply don’t fly. I think Aus was one example, there might well be others.

My DD is cabin crew so goes through them every day she's working as crew go through security too. There are restrictions on how many hours she can fly in a year due to background radiation so if the scanners posed a risk there would be an alternative for crew! I'd have no issues with my kids going when they were younger (both are adults now)

@notimagain, thanks for your reply. How old are your children? Mine are only 3 and 6 so they seem so little for something so invasive! It may just be me overthinking this but there seems to be a fair few online who feel similiar and who believd they haven't been studied enough to know for sure they are safe, etc. I'm just trying to educate myself on them before using as I always think it's then an informed decision isn't it 😂 knowledge is power and all that!

@Bjorkdidit, how old are your children if you don't mind me asking? I just know at one point they only used these kind of machines for children over 12 and now they say anyone over 1 metre. I just wonder why at one point the younger children were not able to use it and now all of a sudden they can! X

@Sarah041190

I think @Iamanunsafebuilding makes a couple of important points…many crew go through these things every working day…I know there was a bit of controversy about crew doing that in the early days but it’s become the norm where required, even though crew are limited in their radiation exposure.

That kind of brings in the next important point that TBH if you are worried about the scanners you also need to consider that the act of flying itself increases your kids’ exposure to ionizing radiation…

@Sarah041190 They aren't invasive. Have either of your children sat in the same room as a radio, held your phone or watched TV? If so, they have have already been exposed to more.

The benefits of a child getting to travel, see the world etc are huge. Don't let your children miss out because of misplaced anxiety. A manual search would be much less pleasant for them too imo

@CactusUmbrella, thanks for your response. I would never allow my children to miss out. They've had numerous holidays, one that was an abroad holiday, we are just yet to come across the scanners but know they are being implemented, that it all. I felt uneasy at the fact they used to say a child had to be at least 12 to use one but all of a sudden children of any age can use them? So I just like to make sure I've done my bit of research before coming across something new.

@Sarah041190 The reason for implementing the 12 and over rule was not related to risks to the child from a health perspective but because risk assessment suggests that children under 12 pose less of a terrorism threat. For the extra stress it would cause families/children, it was decided that those under 12 wouldn't be required to do so. But a 12 year old can be many different heights and sizes. The 1m rule makes more sense as anyone 1m or smaller is probably too young to be smuggling any amount of prohibited or terrorism related stuff!

They’re not remotely invasive - I’m confused by your terminology? I travel through Heathrow and they have them - kids use them no problem at all.

@Sarah041190

Are you aware that there's more than one type of scanner? (Source - I've done H&S consultancy work for a lot of companies that use and manufacturer this type of equipment).

The ones in use on the public travelling through airports work on similar technology to anti theft equipment at the entrance to many shops, as well as using non ionising radiation that we are constantly exposed to from many sources. Including the device you are using to post on MN.

There was an initial trial with back scatter X-ray scanners but these have been replaced with the millimetre wave technology because they don't involve ionising radiation, despite the amount of X-rays from the backscatter scanners being many times lower than the amount of radiation you receive on a flight, or indeed from a few days of background radiation.

Neither of the above are 'invasive'. The waves bounce off the body. There is another type of 'transmission' scanner but that is only used to detect internally concealed contraband in cases of suspected smuggling or theft from places like diamond mines.

They have to search everyone going through airports because sadly, if they didn't search children, terrorists and other criminals would use children and their equipment like pushchairs to hide explosives/weapons etc.

@Bjorkdidit

Thanks for all the extra info.

There was an initial trial with back scatter X-ray scanners but these have been replaced with the millimetre wave technology because they don't involve ionising radiation,

Yes I remember that going on and some of the flying crew unions being very unhappy at the even the thought of the X-ray scanners being used, regardless of the very very very very etc etc low exposure.

@Bjorkdidit I flew in the summer with a fractured elbow so my arm was in a sling and my sling was drug wiped at security! I suppose people will use anything as a ruse to try and smuggle stuff