TSA- Radiation levels in full body scanners

We will be traveling to Puerto Rico at the end of this month to visit family and I'm going through some anxiety about whether I should go through those stupid scanners or elect for the pat down.

Like so:

It seems to me that most pregnant women hear RADIATION and throw a fit and demand the pat-down option immediately. Being pregnant myself, my gut (ha ha) tells me that I should probably avoid any unnecessary radiation and avoid the body scan.

So that was easy, I'll just opt for the pat down. Well. Not so fast. What did I do instead? I started to research. Granted my research consisted of googling "pregnancy and scanners" and "TSA radiation pregnancy" so I'm not going to pretend that I scoured through hours of scholarly journals to make an informed decision about the TSA body scanners. But, nevertheless I researched and here is what I found:

First of all, don't worry America. The Transportation Security Administration assures us in one concise sentence that:

"Note: Advanced imaging technology screening is safe for all passengers, including children, pregnant women, and individuals with medical implants."

http://www.tsa.gov/approach/tech/ait/safety.shtm

Perfect. My research is done. I now pick the scanner. Right? Well let's continue.

So then I learn that the TSA uses two different types of imaging technology:

1. millimeter wave and

2. back scatter



Long story short, the millimeter wave machine hits the surface of the body with safer radio waves (no x-rays involved), while it's the back scatter machine that uses low density x-ray beams over your entire body that everyone is worried about.

Despite assurances from the TSA and FDA that the technology is safe, some professionals have expressed concern over the actual amount of radiation exposure. There were some experts recently from the University of California, San Francisco who voiced their concerns and wrote a letter in April 2010 to the President's technology adviser that landed them in the news. They basically expressed concern about the widespread exposure to specific populations, like those more susceptible to radiation and those who travel frequently.

The FDA responded and other professionals came to their defense such as a professor from John Hopkins who basically said that "a single backscatter scan is equivalent to 30 minutes of natural background radiation, or about 4 to 5 minutes of air travel".

WHOA wait a minute. So opting out of the scanner would be great as long as I opted out of the actual flight as well? Well that won't work obviously.

Other people have also stated similar claims like the actual head of the TSA, John Pistole who during a November 2010 interview said:

"radiation coming from those machines are equivalent to about three minutes' worth of air travel by anybody, say, at 30,000 feet."

For a deeper understanding of what this means in terms of actual exposure to microrems of radiation see the article above. Blah blah blah, it appears it would take over 3,000 body scans to amount to one chest x-ray. Not to mention the fact that we're all exposed to radiation by performing some of our favorite every day activities. Like say, doing nothing.

And upon further research, according to a bunch of scientists like those at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, yes it would take about 3 minutes of air travel to reach the level of radiation you'd be exposed to if you went through a full body scanner.

So. Ladies and Gentlemen after all my research. My decision is clear and rational.

No way will I be exposing my baby to a miniscule amount of radiation that will probably cause him/her no damage...even though we will be exposed to more radiation in the first 3 minutes of the flight.

After all, the machine COULD backfire in the exact moment I'm being scanned causing an enormous amount of radiation to harm me and my unborn child. Of course.