Security Full-Body Scanners: Invasive? Effective? Both?

Travel Blog  •  Rob Verger  •  02.23.09 | 11:51 AM ET

Photo by Stephen Witherden via Flickr (Creative Commons)

USA Today reported last week that Tulsa International Airport has started the use of full-body scanners in security. Passengers could decide whether to be screened in the scanner or through the traditional metal detector.

“The 35-year reign of airport metal detectors began its slow descent this week in Tulsa, where for the first time some passengers are skipping metal detectors,” the story reports. “People are instead being screened in a 9-foot-high portal with glass shields that rotate to produce vivid pictures of what is underneath passengers’ clothing.”

Each scanner costs $170,000 and produces “metallic-looking images” that “show outlines of private body parts and blur passengers’ faces.” It can detect “hidden items as small as a plastic button.”

Obviously, some are concerned about privacy, although the story reported that on a recent busy morning at the Transportation Security Administration checkpoint, only two people opted to go through the metal detector instead of the scanner. Another worry is that the full-body scanners could slow down the screening process. (The TSA has more.)

While I can understand privacy concerns, I think these new scanners sound fantastic. All airport security presents a degree of privacy invasion—you sacrifice some of the normal control you have over your body and belongings for what most would agree is a necessary (and, we hope, effective and thorough) procedure before flying. These scanners seem like an amazing step in the right direction.

Here’s a filmmaker’s vision of this kind of security from the 1990 film “Total Recall”:

Tags: Air Travel, Airports, Airworld, Travel and Security, North America, United States, Oklahoma, News and Briefs

Rob Verger

Rob Verger is a frequent contributor to World Hum and the site's former air travel blogger. His articles and photographs have appeared in the Boston Globe and other publications, and he's a former undergraduate writing instructor at Columbia University. If you like, .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) or follow him on Twitter.


6 Comments for Security Full-Body Scanners: Invasive? Effective? Both?

Chris 02.23.09 | 3:08 PM ET

They have a couple of these scanners at the SLC airport. I have never gone through one - I find the whole thing a little creepy. Unfortunately there seems to be no good way to balance security with a reasonable amount of privacy.

Eva Holland 02.23.09 | 3:38 PM ET

I’ve been meaning to ask for a clarification—the way I’ve heard them described, these things basically let whoever’s watching the screen see you naked. I already lament the fact that North American airports haven’t followed Asia’s lead in letting female passengers be patted down by another woman (one of my biggest airport pet peeves), and this magnifies that creepy factor by about 1000%.

Chris 02.23.09 | 4:49 PM ET

Here is something from the TSA blog (who knew they had a blog!): http://www.tsa.gov/blog/2008/05/you-asked-for-ityou-got-it-millimeter.html

I may have been confusing the millimeter-wave device with a very similar x-ray backscatter device they were trying last year. I remember a picture of the TSA Director being scanned - it wasn’t like seeing her in the flesh, but there were really no curves left to the imagination.

It is all very creepy, but I’m sure it is even more so for a lady getting checked by a man.

Rob Verger 02.23.09 | 9:57 PM ET

Thanks a lot for the link, Chris. Here’s the homepage for the TSA’s blog, which discusses the technology—also called Millimeter Wave—further: http://www.tsa.gov/blog And here’s an interesting 60 Minutes segment about the issue: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4680653n (They focus on the new scanners at about 9:40 in the segment.)

What separates the current program in Tulsa from the original use of the machines is that now passengers have the option to completely skip the metal detector / pat-down combo. (Previously, the use of the scanner was only secondary.) I totally hear you, Eva, that the new technology sounds creepy—as does a pat-down, especially if you’re a woman and the TSA official is a man. 60 Minutes even uses the word “creepy” when talking about the pat-downs. I guess the new technology basically lets you choose how your personal space is going to be invaded—either visually, through the scanner’s image, or potentially physically, through a pat-down.

Eva Holland 02.23.09 | 10:16 PM ET

Hmm. Interesting choice. I don’t mind the standard wand operation post-metal detector, it’s when I’ve been pulled aside for the additional full pat-down that I’ve felt a little uncomfortable. So for now, I’d probably stick with the metal detector over the scanner image.

I’ve always wondered if I have the right to ask for a female agent at that pat-down point, but—things being the way they are these days—I’m too nervous to make anything resembling a fuss at security.

David 02.24.09 | 11:59 AM ET

Maybe they should hire male & female doctors for the screening process especially for the pat down.
These doctors could also be available for anyone who becomes sick while at the terminal…..just have a medical insurance card with you.

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.