Editing Transportation Security Administration (section)

=====Full body scanners=====
{{Main|Full body scanner}}
{{See also|Backscatter X-ray#Health effects|Millimeter wave scanner#Possible health effects}}
[[File:TSA Millimeter Wave Scanner avatar.jpg|thumb|160x160px|The screen operators of millimeter wave scanners now see]]
TSA has used two kinds of full body imaging technology since first deploying them in airports in 2010. Previously [[Backscatter X-ray|backscatter X-ray scanners]] were used which produced [[ionizing radiation]]. After criticism the agency now uses only [[millimeter wave scanner]]s which use [[non-ionizing radiation]].<ref>{{Cite web |last=Khan |first=Farah Naz |title=Is That Airport Security Scanner Really Safe? |url=https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/is-that-airport-security-scanner-really-safe/ |access-date=2022-12-04 |website=Scientific American Blog Network |language=en}}</ref> The TSA refers to both systems as Advanced Imaging Technologies or AIT. Critics sometimes refer to them as "naked scanners," though operators no longer see images of the actual passenger, which has been replaced by a stick figure with boxes indicating areas of concern identified by the machine.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://uk.reuters.com/article/oukin-uk-germany-bodyscanner-idUKTRE4AS1V320081129|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160104194749/http://uk.reuters.com/article/oukin-uk-germany-bodyscanner-idUKTRE4AS1V320081129|url-status=dead|archive-date=January 4, 2016|title=Germany plans lab tests for airport naked scans|date=November 29, 2008|work=Reuters UK}}</ref><ref name=":1" /> In 2022, TSA announced it will allow passengers to select the gender marker of their choice and alter algorithms used by the machines to be inclusive of transgender, nonbinary, and gender-nonconforming individuals. Previously the agency required screeners to select a male or female button based on a brief glance at the passenger as they entered the machine.<ref>{{Cite web |date=March 31, 2022 |title=TSA announces measures to implement gender-neutral screening at its checkpoints |url=https://www.tsa.gov/news/press/releases/2022/03/31/tsa-announces-measures-implement-gender-neutral-screening-its |access-date=2022-12-04 |website=TSA.gov}}</ref>[[File:Mmw large.jpg|right|thumb|160px|Screenshot from a [[millimeter wave scanner]] before they were replaced by stick figure avatars]]Passengers are directed to hold their hands above their heads for a few seconds while front and back images are created.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.propublica.org/article/tsa-removes-x-ray-body-scanners-from-major-airports|title=TSA Removes X-Ray Body Scanners From Major Airports|last=Grabell|first=Michael|date=October 19, 2012|work=Pro Publica|access-date=April 7, 2013}}</ref> If the machine indicates an anomaly to the operator, or if other problems occur, the passenger is required to receive a pat-down of that area.[[File:Tech backscatter.jpg|160px|thumb|An older Rapiscan [[X-ray backscatter|backscatter]] X-ray scanner]] [[File:Backscatter large.jpg|thumb|160px|[[X-ray backscatter]] technology produces an image that resembles a chalk etching.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.tsa.gov/approach/tech/ait/how_it_works.shtm |title=TSA: How it Works |publisher=Tsa.gov |access-date=January 16, 2012 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111221030830/http://www.tsa.gov/approach/tech/ait/how_it_works.shtm |archive-date=December 21, 2011 }}</ref>]]Full-body scanners have also proven controversial due to privacy and health concerns. The [[American Civil Liberties Union]] has called the scanners a "virtual strip search."<ref name="Puzzanghera">
Jim Puzzanghera, [https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2010-nov-22-la-na-tsa-pat-downs-20101122-story.html 'Invasive' airport pat-downs not going away for the holidays], [[Los Angeles Times]], November 22, 2010.</ref> Female passengers have complained that they are often singled out for scanning, and a review of TSA records by a local CBS affiliate in Dallas found "a pattern of women who believe that there was nothing random about the way they were selected for extra screening."<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.cbsnews.com/dfw/news/female-passengers-say-theyre-targeted-by-tsa/|title=Female Passengers Say They're Targeted By TSA|date=February 13, 2012|work=CBS Dallas|access-date=April 7, 2013}}</ref>

The TSA, on their website, states that they have "implemented strict measures to protect passenger privacy which is ensured through the anonymity of the image,"<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20120311010041/http://www.tsa.gov/approach/tech/ait/index.shtm "Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT)"] - Retrieved September 19, 2012,</ref> and additionally states that these technologies "cannot store, print, transmit or save the image, and the image is automatically deleted from the system after it is cleared by the remotely located security officer."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.tsa.gov/ait-privacy|title=AIT: Privacy|date=December 24, 2012|publisher=Transportation Security Administration|access-date=April 7, 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130215190320/http://www.tsa.gov/ait-privacy|archive-date=February 15, 2013}}</ref> This claim, however, was proven false after multiple incidents involving leaked images. The machines do in fact have the ability to "save" the images and while this function is purported to be "turned off" by the TSA in screenings, TSA training facilities have the save function turned on.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Norman|first1=Joshua|title=Naked Body Scan Images Never Saved, TSA Says|url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/naked-body-scan-images-never-saved-tsa-says/|access-date=November 23, 2014|work=CBS News|date=November 16, 2010}}</ref><ref>[https://gizmodo.com/5690749/these-are-the-first-100-leaked-body-scans One Hundred Naked Citizens: One Hundred Leaked Body Scans] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161011050549/http://gizmodo.com/5690749/these-are-the-first-100-leaked-body-scans |date=October 11, 2016 }}. Gizmodo.com. Retrieved on April 28, 2014.</ref>

As early as 2010, the TSA began to test scanners that would produce less intrusive "stick figures".<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.npr.org/2010/11/19/131450769/airport-body-scanners-transform-travelers-into-stick-figures|title=Airport Scanners Transform Bodies Into Stick Figures: NPR|last=Smith|first=Novia|date=November 19, 2010|work=[[NPR]]|access-date=April 7, 2013}}</ref> In February 2011, the TSA began testing new software on the millimeter-wave machines already used at Amsterdam's [[Schiphol Airport]] that automatically detects potential threats on a passenger without the need for having an officer review actual images. Instead, one generic figure is used for all passengers and small yellow boxes are placed on areas of the body requiring additional screening.<ref name=":1">[http://news.cheapflights.com/2011/02/tsa-tests-modesty-saving-threat-detection-software/ News.cheapflights.com] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110723181430/http://news.cheapflights.com/2011/02/tsa-tests-modesty-saving-threat-detection-software/ |date=July 23, 2011 }}</ref> The TSA announced in 2013 that the [[Rapiscan Systems|Rapiscan's]] backscatter scanners would no longer be used since the manufacturer of the machines could not produce "privacy software" to abstract the near-nude images that agents view and turn them into stick-like figures. The TSA continues to use other full-body scanners.<ref>[https://archive.today/20130409115649/http://www.federaltimes.com/article/20130121/TRAVEL02/301210002/TSA-dumps-near-naked-Rapiscan-body-scanners]"TSA dumps near-naked Rapiscan
body scanners"</ref>

Health concerns have been raised about both scanning technologies.

With regards to exposure to [[radiation]] emitted by backscatter X-rays, and there are fears that people will be exposed to a "dangerous level of radiation if they get backscattered too often". Ionizing radiation is considered a non-threshold [[carcinogen]], but it is difficult to quantify the risk of low radiation exposures.<ref>{{cite journal |author1=Leon Mullenders |author2=Mike Atkinson |author3=Herwig Paretzke |author4=Laure Sabatier |author5=Simon Bouffler |title=Assessing cancer risks of low-dose radiation |journal=Nature Reviews Cancer |volume=9 |issue=8 |pages=596–604 |year=2009 |doi=10.1038/nrc2677 |pmid=19629073 |s2cid=10610131}}</ref> Active millimeter wave scanners emit radiation which is non-ionizing, does not have enough energy to directly damage DNA, and is not known to be [[genotoxic]].<ref name="Cancer.org">{{cite web |title=Radiation Exposure and Cancer |url=http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/CancerCauses/OtherCarcinogens/MedicalTreatments/radiation-exposure-and-cancer |publisher=cancer.org |access-date=December 1, 2011 |archive-date=April 6, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140406123124/http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/othercarcinogens/medicaltreatments/radiation-exposure-and-cancer |url-status=dead}}</ref><ref name="Ryan 2000">{{cite journal |vauthors=Ryan KL, D'Andrea JA, Jauchem JR, Mason PA |title=Radio frequency radiation of millimeter wave length: potential occupational safety issues relating to surface heating |journal=[[Health Physics (journal)|Health Physics]] |volume=78 |issue=2 |pages=170–81 |date=February 2000 |pmid=10647983 |doi=10.1097/00004032-200002000-00006 |url=https://zenodo.org/record/1234790}} ''"Thus, it is clear that RF radiation is not genotoxic and therefore cannot initiate cancer... the majority of such studies have shown that chronic exposure of animals to RF in the range of 435 to 2,450 MHz did not significantly alter the development of tumors in a number of animal cancer models... the same acceleration of skin cancer development and reduction in survival occurred in animals exposed to chronic confinement stress in the absence of RF exposure, suggesting that the RF effect could possibly be due to a non-specific stress reaction."''</ref><ref name=carcinogenesis>{{cite journal|author1=Patrick Mason |author2=Thomas J. Walters |author3=John DiGiovanni |author4=Charles W. Beason |author5=James R. Jauchem |author6=Edward J. Dick Jr |author7=Kavita Mahajan |author8=Steven J. Dusch |author9=Beth A. Shields |author10=James H. Merritt |author11=Michael R. Murphy |author12=Kathy L. Ryan |title=Lack of effect of 94&nbsp;GHz radio frequency radiation exposure in an animal model of skin carcinogenesis|journal=Carcinogenesis|date=June 14, 2001|volume=22|issue=10|pages=1701–1708|doi=10.1093/carcin/22.10.1701|pmid=11577012 |doi-access=free }}</ref>