View Single Post
Old 01-08-2010, 11:02 AM  
borked
Totally Borked
 
borked's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 6,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Heron View Post
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE60553920100106
Probably more likely to get cancer from the actual flying than the scanners...

I dislike adding more 'screening' that is really just lip service. You'll never be safe and I know it so lets stop the bs and just accept it and move on. Or do like Isreal and do it right.
yeah but when David Brenner, director of the Center for Radiological Research at Columbia University Medical Center casts doubt like this....

Quote:
"From an individual's point of view, the risks are going to be small," Brenner said in a phone interview.

"If very large numbers of people would be exposed to a small risk, then you've got a population problem."
you cannot ignore

Gotta love population problems... all it takes is a slight but significant increase in cancer-related problems with frequent flyers like air stewards/stewardesses and hell will break loose since it is above the already-established risk of increase in flying in that population.

But then that's at least 20-30 years down the road, so let's cross that bridge when we come to it and get this shit puished out today.

For our security.
__________________

For coding work - hit me up on andy // borkedcoder // com
(consider figuring out the email as test #1)



All models are wrong, but some are useful. George E.P. Box. p202
borked is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote