What's everyone's thoughts on going through an airport scanner during pregnancy? Are you requesting a pat down instead? Doing some air traveling soon and am hearing mixed things.
@cramser Sorry, I'm unsure of those machines. Pregnant or not, I get the pat down. That is just my super conservative opinion. In reality it is probably fine. When you look at the amount of radiation you're already receiving from the sun, being outside, living in a valley or in a basement, you're already receiving a fair amount of natural radiation. That being said, in my humble opinion, I tend to think any extra radiation is radiation I don't want. On the scale of radiation that you receive from the machine and waiting in line, compared to everything, it's a small amount. I feel like everyone likes to look at radiation in a vacuum and not realize that we live in radiation naturally and man made. So is it safe? I haven't seen any lawsuits yet. Depending on where you live, you already receive between 3-6 mSv from simply living (https://www.health.com/health/article/0,,20410979,00.html) in our environment. An airplane flight is something like 0.01-0.03 mSv. I thought I read somewhere you receive about the same on the airport scanner. If you ask advocates of the scanner, they will probably say that it is insignificant to the amount you receive from a day to day perspective. This was also another source: https://www.radiationanswers.org/radiation-blog/Airport_xray_scanners.html. I'm just skeptical.
I wouldn't....there's not a lot of research on it and it does emit radiation. Course if you don't travel a lot it's probably not enough to cause any issues. But TSA doesn't question you if you ask to use the metal detector and say you're pregnant. And the pat down I always got was not the invasive one so I always do that when I fly.
I'm not a radiation expert but this says they use non-ionizing radiation for ultrasounds. I believe most airport scanners used are non-ionizing too. Don't ask me what ionizing radiation is but, regardless, they are recognized as being safe.
Feb '16 Siggy Challenge: Favorite Thing About Fall: Haunted Houses and Scary Movies!
Ultrasounds still use radiation- it's just non-ionizing meaning there's enough energy to move atoms in a molecule but not electrons... Ionizing radiation uses more energy.
The scanners currently used by the tsa are also use nom-ionizing radiation -so both ultrasounds and airport scanners are considered safe.
Feb '16 Siggy Challenge: Favorite Thing About Fall: Haunted Houses and Scary Movies!
Ionizing radiation comes from particles that have enough energy to cause ionization. This type of radiation is, if you have too much, not good for you. On average we receive this from the sun, air planes, bananas, life. The airport scanners can be ionizing if they are back scatter machines or they can be non ionizing if they are use radio frequency. Some of these scanners do give you ionizing radiation but on the scale of what you get on a day to day basis it is extremely low and for that, most proponents of the scanners believe they are fine. https://www3.epa.gov/radtown/airport-security-scanning.html
Ionizing radiation comes from particles that have enough energy to cause ionization. This type of radiation is, if you have too much, not good for you. On average we receive this from the sun, air planes, bananas, life. The airport scanners can be ionizing if they are back scatter machines or they can be non ionizing if they are use radio frequency. Some of these scanners do give you ionizing radiation but on the scale of what you get on a day to day basis it is extremely low and for that, most proponents of the scanners believe they are fine. https://www3.epa.gov/radtown/airport-security-scanning.html
Yes read this about back scatter scans but I believe the tsa phased these out. And now use only non-ionizing machines.
We sound like we are on same page
Feb '16 Siggy Challenge: Favorite Thing About Fall: Haunted Houses and Scary Movies!
I felt comforted by this one during my last pregnancy:
"Measurements made on two scanners in active use at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX), as well as seven other scanners not in active use at the time of measurement, found that full-body scanners deliver a radiation dose equivalent to what a standard man receives every 1.8 minutes on the ground, or every 12 seconds during an airplane flight."
I don't go through them while pregnant. Even though technically they're safe, I'd rather just get the pat down and avoid something that still comes under question frequently for safety. It really isn't any big deal to do the pat down. My CNM said she declined the scanner while pregnant as well.
I'll throw this out there as well: I was chatting with the TSA agent while she was doing my pat down and I said, "this must be a pain to have to do this". Her response was, "it's no problem, I wouldn't go through that thing if I was pregnant, either". So, there's that.
My rule of thumb is if it's going to make me worry after I've done it, whether it's go through the scanner, eat something questionable (like a soft cheese that may be iffy), or anything at all; don't do it. Give yourself peace of mind. I have opted out of the scanner just because I felt better about it, even though I read and was told it was safe.
My doc specifically told me to opt out. She gave me a note and I got the pat-down. No hassle. Why would you go through the scanner if you can opt out? There's no benefit to going through it--at least not that I'm aware of...(?)
S & A married 8.12.2013 Expecting Saulie O 2.12.2016
I got the pat down. I read the scans were "most likely" safe, but that not enough research has been done. There's also the off chance a scanner could malfunction. The pat downs aren't that bad and not too much of a hassle, so why not?
I'm going to check with my ob on this because I fly a lot and no offense to the TSA but well...I dont really trust them to know the inner workings of that machine. I really hope this comment doesn't get me on some list lol. I went through one this week not thinking about it but now I'm wondering if I should.
I do the pat down too even though I know it's probably safe. If I was really pressed for time Id just go through the scanner. However, I've never had to wait more than a few mins to get a female agent and the pat down is quick, too. They do run the back of their hands by your boobs and pretty high inside the thigh though so if you're uncomfortable with that it's something to consider.
I flew only a week after finding out I was pregnant and didn't even think about the scanner possibly being harmful until after going through it. I freaked out afterwards but my husband looked it up and said everything he found said it was not harmful. Regardless, I still chose to opt out on my flight home! The TSA agent didn't hesitate for a second when I said I was pregnant.
I flew about 8 weeks pregnant and I totally didn't think about it at all, and went through it. I'm not to worried though, I feel like if it was really dangerous there would be more of an effort to educate women and let them know not to do it.
Also, if you have a while before your trip, you can sign up for TSA PreCheck. It's a really easy process and you get to go through an expedited line and only a regular metal detector instead of the giant X-ray scanner. Way faster, lasts beyond pregnancy, and fewer radiation worries... Win win win.
Update on my last post- I just flew out of Heathrow and they straight up refused to let me have a pat down. I asked twice and the first guy directed me to a woman who said "scanner is perfectly safe" and pointed me in. I was kind of shocked because anytime I've flown out of the US it was no problem and TSA was super nice. I repeated myself for her (super polite btw) and explained I would prefer a pat down because I was pregnant. She literally looked at me and just said "no" and pointed me into the scanner again. If I wasn't such a rule follower I might have put up a bigger fight but I also know they are considered safe and it wasn't worth it. However, I really didn't appreciate having the choice taken away from me and I was pissed! Also she was super rude.
When I was pregnant with my first I asked my doctor this. He said the metal detectors were fine, but not the body scanners. He actually even gave me a letter that I was pregnant and couldn't go through it in the event they gave me a hard time, because I wasn't showing yet.
I asked my OB at my appointment this week because I'll be flying over the weekend, and she said not to do the full body scan. She tends to be very cautious about everything, but better safe than sorry!
I opted for the pat down, why risk it when you have options? I read they should be fine, but they do emit radiation; and what if one malfunctions. Better safe than sorry in my book.
Update on my last post- I just flew out of Heathrow and they straight up refused to let me have a pat down. I asked twice and the first guy directed me to a woman who said "scanner is perfectly safe" and pointed me in. I was kind of shocked because anytime I've flown out of the US it was no problem and TSA was super nice. I repeated myself for her (super polite btw) and explained I would prefer a pat down because I was pregnant. She literally looked at me and just said "no" and pointed me into the scanner again. If I wasn't such a rule follower I might have put up a bigger fight but I also know they are considered safe and it wasn't worth it. However, I really didn't appreciate having the choice taken away from me and I was pissed! Also she was super rude.
That's weird, I wonder if you can complain to their management or if it would do no good
Update on my last post- I just flew out of Heathrow and they straight up refused to let me have a pat down. I asked twice and the first guy directed me to a woman who said "scanner is perfectly safe" and pointed me in. I was kind of shocked because anytime I've flown out of the US it was no problem and TSA was super nice. I repeated myself for her (super polite btw) and explained I would prefer a pat down because I was pregnant. She literally looked at me and just said "no" and pointed me into the scanner again. If I wasn't such a rule follower I might have put up a bigger fight but I also know they are considered safe and it wasn't worth it. However, I really didn't appreciate having the choice taken away from me and I was pissed! Also she was super rude.
That's weird, I wonder if you can complain to their management or if it would do no good
I really wanted to! I was practically in tears I was so pissed! My husband convinced me to take a couple of deep breaths and let it go, lol. Took about an hour but I got over it. In my mind, I decided the rude woman was having a really bad day...and I was flying home after a week long vacation so I had nothing to really complain about in the large scheme of things.
@charliegoldengirl That is SO effed. I'm sorry to hear that. I can hardly believe it. Maybe that's why my doctor gave me a note. I didn't have to use it, but if they refused a pat-down then, I would have definitely cried and probably also complained to someone until they told me to STFU based on some law.
ETA k found stuff about the rule... Guess the U.S. actually treats us better in ONE way...
Re: Airport scanner safety
If you are getting ultrasounds, you can go through an airport scanner.
https://www.epa.gov/radiation/understand/ionize_nonionize.html
Ultrasounds still use radiation- it's just non-ionizing meaning there's enough energy to move atoms in a molecule but not electrons... Ionizing radiation uses more energy.
The scanners currently used by the tsa are also use nom-ionizing radiation -so both ultrasounds and airport scanners are considered safe.
Yes read this about back scatter scans but I believe the tsa phased these out. And now use only non-ionizing machines.
We sound like we are on same page
"Measurements made on two scanners in active use at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX), as well as seven other scanners not in active use at the time of measurement, found that full-body scanners deliver a radiation dose equivalent to what a standard man receives every 1.8 minutes on the ground, or every 12 seconds during an airplane flight."
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/06/130627151642.htm
So, the real question is...should you really be flying if you're truly worried about limiting exposure?
this". Her response was, "it's no problem, I wouldn't go through that thing if I was pregnant, either". So, there's that.
Expecting Saulie O 2.12.2016
Isabella {09-02-05} & Savannah {03-02-07} & Bradley {02-06-10}
I really wanted to! I was practically in tears I was so pissed! My husband convinced me to take a couple of deep breaths and let it go, lol. Took about an hour but I got over it. In my mind, I decided the rude woman was having a really bad day...and I was flying home after a week long vacation so I had nothing to really complain about in the large scheme of things.
ETA k found stuff about the rule... Guess the U.S. actually treats us better in ONE way...
https://www.civilrightsmovement.co.uk/consequences-for-refusing-full-airport-body-scan.html
Expecting Saulie O 2.12.2016