http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/09/health/09scanner.html?ref=science
Cancer Risks Debated for Type of X-Ray Scan
In this article scientists and political leaders are debating whether or not to put full body X-Rays in airports. Most scientists say that it has radioactivity and the waves can cause cancer. This debate mainly came forth on December 25, when a plane was attempted to bombed from Amsterdam to Detroit. The American Civil Liberties Union denounced these scanners as a “visual strip search.” They think that this would be a violation of peoples privacy. Some airports already have this equipment for their random special security checks. Another issue is the amount of radiation. The less radiation they use in the scanners, the less effective and visual the x-rays will be. Its been said that the billion people that use these scanners there will only be ten more deaths a year from the radioactivity. It was said that those deaths would represent only a tiny increment over the existing cancer rate, just as the extra dose was a tiny fraction of the natural background dose of radiation people get from everyday exposures, but they should still be considered.
I chose this article because I’ve heard a lot about the airplane traveling and attempted bombing. Also I went on a trip in and out of the country while this cenario was going on. The security was very on their feet because of this man, getting through security and on to a plane with this bomb.
This article was written well. It was easy to understand. It also did not have too much scientific wording that was difficult for me to comprehend. Also, it was on a topic that I was interested and knew most of the vocabulary from when I had heard this previously.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Bailey's article review was very interesting as it is very relevant recently because of the bomb scare and terrorist threats. Her choice in article was excellent and I was completely intrigued by this article throughout most of it. The cancer risks really had me conflicted with emotions as I cannot decide whether to agree with the installation of these X-ray machines or to be against the idea because of cancer causing risks. Because of this debating aspect, I found it to be very interesting topic and choice of article, especially because of its relevance.
ReplyDeleteI thought that her summarizing made the article a little lacking in details and Bailey could have afforded to incorporate more details in this review. I also think that more chemical examples or comparisons would have been helpful to really draw the reader in and make sure that they understand it completely. She could have incorporated what the percent may be for the risk of cancer, but it doesn't seem to necessary. Other than that I do not feel that much negativity is needed as this article is very well done.
I was impressed by, again, her use of relevance and as I fly long distance quite frequently, I found this to be extra interesting. By hearing about all the terrorist threats and attacks, I feel that this article will really have people guessing.
By olivia Estes
I really liked how Bailey chose a scientific article that had to do with some sort of scientific debate. I think she did a great job at spotting each side of the argument, and why people think full body x rays are either necessary or harmful. I also like how she ties this article into her own life, as we all go through airport security when we travel. I think she could have talked a little more about why airports want full body x rays. I also believe she could have emphasized on the point if scientists have any proof that these full body x rays can cause cancer. In all I think she did a great job at showing both arguments of this debate.
ReplyDelete