4 ms·

Those X-ray machines are not DIY. They are specifically designed for the purpose. And FDA requires reporting from manufacturers. http://www.fda.gov/Radiation-E

Those X-ray machines are not DIY. They are specifically designed for the purpose. And FDA requires reporting from manufacturers. http://www.fda.gov/Radiation-EmittingProducts/RadiationEmittingProductsandProcedures/SecuritySystems/ucm227201.htm http://www.fda.gov/Radiation-EmittingProducts/RadiationEmitt...

lostlogin 10y ago
Self reporting. Excuse my scepticism, it doesn't have a great track record. Additionally, the users are not exactly experts on radiation safety or knowledgable about radiation dosage, and I don't see how manufacturer reporting can cover what happens in the field.
CamperBob2 10y ago
Everyone from dental hygienists to radiologists must undergo health physics training before being allowed to use an X-ray machine on human subjects. Everyone, that is, but law enforcement. Thanks, FDA. Good job.
- gohrt 10y ago
  Because the law enforcement devices emit such a tiny rate of dose that it is impossible to harm someone while using it. "A person would have to be screened more than a thousand times in one year in order to exceed the annual radiation dose limit"
  - AstralStorm 10y ago
    Easily achievable with indiscriminate screening. How many times a year do you pass under the speed meter?
  - bayesian_horse 10y ago
    Or once with the wrong settings or too long of an exposure. Or the operators get the scattering effects wrong...
  - CamperBob2 10y ago
    Oh, well, that's different, then. As long as the cops and TSA goons are qualified to tell when the machine is malfunctioning, miscalibrated, or otherwise going full-Therac 25 on us, we're good.
    - TeMPOraL 10y ago
      Those machines should be built to be at least as annoying as new cars - i.e. if anything breaks, any diagnostic fails, the machine should not start. They probably aren't built that way though because - unlike with cars - there isn't a profit motive to do it this way there.
  - stordoff 10y ago
    If you'd said, say, 50000 times, I might be more swayed, but a thousand seems easy to hit if these are widely used. If they're used daily, just passing two on a commute is enough to go over the limit.

lostlogin 10y ago

Self reporting. Excuse my scepticism, it doesn't have a great track record. Additionally, the users are not exactly experts on radiation safety or knowledgable about radiation dosage, and I don't see how manufacturer reporting can cover what happens in the field.

CamperBob2 10y ago

Everyone from dental hygienists to radiologists must undergo health physics training before being allowed to use an X-ray machine on human subjects. Everyone, that is, but law enforcement. Thanks, FDA. Good job.

gohrt 10y ago
Because the law enforcement devices emit such a tiny rate of dose that it is impossible to harm someone while using it. "A person would have to be screened more than a thousand times in one year in order to exceed the annual radiation dose limit"
- AstralStorm 10y ago
  Easily achievable with indiscriminate screening. How many times a year do you pass under the speed meter?
- bayesian_horse 10y ago
  Or once with the wrong settings or too long of an exposure. Or the operators get the scattering effects wrong...
- CamperBob2 10y ago
  Oh, well, that's different, then. As long as the cops and TSA goons are qualified to tell when the machine is malfunctioning, miscalibrated, or otherwise going full-Therac 25 on us, we're good.
  - TeMPOraL 10y ago
    Those machines should be built to be at least as annoying as new cars - i.e. if anything breaks, any diagnostic fails, the machine should not start. They probably aren't built that way though because - unlike with cars - there isn't a profit motive to do it this way there.
- stordoff 10y ago
  If you'd said, say, 50000 times, I might be more swayed, but a thousand seems easy to hit if these are widely used. If they're used daily, just passing two on a commute is enough to go over the limit.