TSA Full Body Scanners

¶ … Body Imaging

Integrating the Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) newly proposed full-body scanners with its vast information systems certainly presents a difficult and arduous task. Without doubt, the extensive scrutiny of airline passengers does have its benefits, though this process also comes with some significant disadvantages. Many controversies have recently arisen involving personal privacy and health issues. While the technology is certainly innovative, the risks associated with it need to be effectively managed in order for its implementation to be successful.

The historical background surrounding the United States' implementation of full-body imaging originated from the call for increased TSA intervention as a result of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 (Weisblott, 2011). However, the first plans for such devices began much earlier and the original model for this technology was actually developed in 1992 by engineer Dr. Steven Smith (Smith, 2009). Although, many subsequent developments and copyright transfers have since been made. Today, various models exist and new more health-friendly devices continue to be researched.

The actual technological process of full-body scanners involves bouncing high frequency radio waves off of an individual in order to acquire an accurate image of the body (Laskey, 2010). This process allows TSA employees to notice inaccuracies and personal objects that are not likely to be regularly detected. This type of technology is certainly innovative, but the costs of just one single unit can be significant; as much as $150,000 dollars per unit (Electronic Privacy Information Center, 2010).

Despite the ghastly price tag, this TSA tool does have its advantages. For instance, the process of a full-body scanner is exponentially shorter than that of a comparatively effective strip search (Tessler, 2009). Another advantage arises from the fact that people do not have to be touched in a manner in which many feel to be intrusive and offensive (Tessler, 2009). However, as implied above this technology also comes with a substantial set of disadvantages. For instance, at present, full-body imaging is used on a regular basis and thus disregards probable cause, which some claim to be unconstitutional (Daanen & Water, 1999). Furthermore, the true extent of the long-term health risks associated with this type of radiating procedure still remains to be seen (Brenner & Elliston, 2004).

The aforementioned disadvantages of full-body scanning have certainly created a great deal of controversy. The violation of one's personal privacy is one such example of this type of negative consumer feedback (McCullagh, 2010). Another controversial aspect of this system revolves around the various health risks connected with this method (Brenner & Elliston, 2004).

In keeping within the topic of public health, many suspect that this technology, when utilized consistently, can expose travelers to potential radiation poisoning. (Jones, 2009). Several experts believe that full-body scanning machines can deliver heavy doses of the extremely harmful "ionic radiation" (Jones, 2009, p. 1). Therefore, this makes women more vulnerable to subsequent long-term risks of breast cancer (Moore, 2010). Also, customers with thyroid glandular issues run the increased risk of future health problems (Moore, 2010).