Airport body scanners - would you use them or ask for an alternative?

[misssmilla1]

I flew a bit in early pregnancy and each time asked for an alternative to the full body scanners they use in the airport (the imaging ones, not the metal detectors) cue much stropping and huffing from the security agents at the gates (all based in the US)

I'm now 16 weeks and due to fly this weekend and still debating whether or not to bite the bullet and just go in for the scan instead of the 'intimate patdown' in front of an airport full of people; keeping flyers dignity is not a strong point for the TSA!

I don't recall reading anything definitive about whether to keep avoiding them or not and the advice is a bit contradictory as some of the machines use low level radiation, and others don't but i wouldn't trust the security agents to know the difference about which is installed.

Can anyone shed any light / info on whether this is a(nother) thing to watch out for, or whether it's ok

It didn't bother me and I was 13 weeks.

I avoided them. I dont know about studies on the effect on pregnancies though.
Tbh in the us the security ppl were more understanding that in the uk. And the pat down was not that bad imo.

I looked into this when travelling in the USA during early pregnancy, the levels within the scanners are a very small proportion of what you would normally be subjected to in everyday life.

Isn't the amount of radiation you are exposed to add on a trans Atlantic flight the same as a chest xray? I imagine the level of radiation in those machines is less than a chest xray... interesting. I have a friend who is a radiographer. I'll ask her.

You are subjected to more radiation on the flight than the actual scanners.

It's perfectly OK to ask for a pat-down instead, which afaik is routine for pregnant women in the US. It's backscatter radiation, which can increase the risk of skin cancer, apparently. Dd always gets a pat-down instead of a scan because we insist on it.

Seriously nothing to worry about.
You will be getting loads more radiation during the flight and nobody ever questions that!
(If you're concerned about that level of radiation you should also stop eating bananas or brazil nuts, never visit Cornwall or a hospital and certainly never fly!)

What's up with Cornwall?!

Cornwall = high levels of radon gas. Naturally occurring radiation

Why not Cornwall?! Was it built on a radiation site or something?!

Cornwall is one of the most radioactive parts of the UK.

You're worried about the split second you are in the scanner? Pull the other one - what about the actual flight?

perfectly valid question imo, asI'm worried about all of it, flight included. I asked for info on whether there was any proven risk or known issue as the research I'd read was contradictory and a grey area on the radiation part of it, given there are different types of machines.

I fly a lot and refuse to be scanned while pg. I am really concerned that the original, backscatter technology scanners that were 'perfectly safe' have already been superseded by the 'much safer' millimetre wave scanners...this strongly implies that the original ones were in someway unsafe. I have little confidence that even these newer ones are without any risk.

IMO, there is a big difference between 'no evidence that this causes harm' and 'this is proven to be safe'. Nothing has been proven safe in pregnancy, and these scanners hold no benefit to you or your baby.

Glitter I would agree it is a perfectly valid question, OP was concerned for the health of her baby so is trying to find out how she can limit any harm - it's what these boards are for. OP I'd ask for the pat-down, tough-luck on airport security if it makes them pout their bottom lip.

They're not exactly operated or maintained by trained radiographers, either.

Re radiation during the flight - that one is always trotted out, as if we should all accept extra doses of radiation regardless, instead of keeping dosage to a minimum.