Remember those full body X-Ray scanning machines in the movie Total Recall? Well, they're not just science fiction any more.

Let's set aside the questionable constitutionality of a virtual strip search without probable cause for a moment...which is a tough order, I know, but I have another concern.

The current round of "voluntary testing" described in the article below doesn't mention anything about a proper study of the health risks associated with such a frequent exposure to X-Rays (despite their claims of using "low power X-rays").

Last I checked, any repeated exposure to any kind of X-Rays isn't a good idea. The only reason the X-Rays that our chiropractors and dentists use on us aren't harmful is because we are only exposed to them infrequently; No more than once a year of either kind is a good idea. This is why the person operating the equipment needs to stay behind the protective window when they flick the switch (the dangers of repeated exposure).

I hope our government isn't seriously considering frying all of us under these systems and waiting to find out later what the health risks are.

I hope the people volunteering to be searched by such systems are warned adequately in advance about the possible health risks involved.

If there aren't any risks involved, and I'm worrying for nothing, I'd like to see a report from someone objective and reputable confirming this beyond a shadow of a doubt.

See the AP story by Mike Branom:
New Security Devices at Fla. Airport.

One system, the Rapiscan Secure 1000, uses low-energy X-rays to search a person through clothing. When Rapiscan project manager Bryan Allman scanned himself, detected was a plastic knife hidden in his shirt pocket.

However, the outline of his body — every inch of it — also was clearly visible. Perhaps proving the machine's revealing nature, airport officials refused to put a woman in the scanner.

Security officials said the scanner would only be used when a passenger shows an "anomaly." Also, the security worker examining the scan would be the same sex as the person being searched.

The potential for complaints about the invasiveness of the search didn't seem to bother Allman.

"Everybody has to learn that the world has changed since Sept. 11, and the world needs a much more thorough type of screening," Allman said.

But the American Civil Liberties Union (news - web sites) says the scan is too intrusive.

"This, of course, is a virtual strip-search," ACLU associate director Barry Steinhardt said. "There's no question this has tremendous potential for embarrassment."

Steinhardt pointed out there have been incidents across the nation where male security workers harassed female passengers during hands-on searches.

"We fear this is going to be indiscriminately used," Steinhardt said. "We know that even less-invasive searches are being abused at airports."

Another system, a little larger than a phone booth, blows quick bursts of air at a person, then "sniffs" the air to detect any traces of explosives. The Barringer Ionscan 400B has a library of 40 types of explosives against which it can judge results.

The Ionscan also can be quickly adjusted to test for 60 types of drug residue, which Hood praised as a bonus stemming from the war on terrorism. "The ability to use technology to be able to stop some of the drug trafficking, we're always looking for the opportunity to deal with that war, as well," Hood said.

But Steinhardt asked: "Do we really want to be turning airport security personnel into the DEA?" He added that searching for drugs would distract checkpoint workers from their true purpose: keeping planes safe.