On Monday, I am headed to the airport to fly to New York City (for the first time, not flying, but to the city!). I will be 20 weeks and 6 days at the time of travel. I know that if my flight is longer then 2 hours I have to get up and walk the aisle so I can stretch and prevent blood clots. Something I didn't think about though was the full body scanner they have in place for security measures.
What do I do? Do I ask for the pat down or just go ahead with the scan? What would you do?And here I thought I had everything ready to go!
Recommend
Comments (22)
Ask your Dr. and then to be safe get a second opinion. And then to be triple safe call your airline and see what they recommend.
My best friend's wife was 28wks with twins and the airport security refused to do scans on a pregnant women, so she got the pat down and quick check with the wand thingy by a female security officer.
I'd take the pat down.
You will be exposed to more radiation from being high in the air than you will from the scanner.
Source: http://hps.org/documents/airport_screening_fact_sheet.pdf
what @RockabyeParents@twitter said. personally i wouldn't feel comfortable going through the scanner while pregnant. but i also wouldn't feel comfortable flying while pregnant either lol. if i did though i would opt for the pat down.
best of luck to you!
I will give you my opinion which is backed up by the fact that I spent 3 years studying radiation in college, and 10 years working in radiology (from x-rays to CT scans, etc).
Radiation that enters the body never leaves the body. The damages caused by radiation are not only (or most often) from a single extremely large dose at once. It is caused by a build-up of it over time.
I have heard what, @lifeonacitybusem4@xanga - said. While I am not sure of the numbers, the main thing is this: There is radiation that we we receive all the time that we must accept because we live on this planet. However, when it can be avoided, it is always a healthier option. Most especially for a growing baby, whose cells are replicating so rapidly.
As a non-pregnant woman, I would never accept a full-body scan. If I were pregnant? Even more emphatically the answer would be no. Yes there is radiation on the plane. BUT it is not directed through your body. It is background radiation and therefore less damaging (although the numbers may technically be higher) than a scan of your body. No. No. No.
Accept what you have to and avoid what you don't. It's a good rule in general for radiation.
I went through the scanner while I was pregnant..it was fine
@sarahsmurfette@xanga - Oh my goodness, I wished I knew this before I had my three CT scans within a year....
@In_Anguish@xanga - Well, if your CT scans were necessary, then you can't regret (or undo) them. Know what I mean? Your doctor decided that the benefit to you getting the scans outweighed the risk of the scans themselves (what he knew about them anyways. Because the sad thing is that most physicians are not trained in the safety and dangers specifically involved with radiation - they get like a chapter in a book worth's education on it). It's good just to be aware of the radiation, you're your best health advocate. The truth is that, yes, CT scans are the highest form of non-accidental radiation exposure. But, when things are necessary, they are necessary. Don't stress it.
@LupusInvictus@xanga - It takes on average 20+ years before radiation mutates enough to directly cause cancer etc. But, it doesn't happen to everyone.
It's good to be cautious, but not fearful. I wouldn't want to cause fear at all, just information.
I would go with the pat down, you don't wanna risk it =\
When I flew with my last pregnancy (I flew three times, I think) I was put through the regular security each time and not patted down at all. The TSA people were super nice to me too. They also didn't make my children go through the scanner nor did they pat them down. That was out of LAX too, which is a huge airport.
Pat down.
Here's a tip: don't fly if you're pregnant. I wouldn't trust it and plus if I did, I would probably go in premature labor from being so anxious.
@sarahsmurfette@xanga - "Yes there is radiation on the plane. BUT it is not directed through your body. It is background radiation and therefore less damaging (although the numbers may technically be higher) than a scan of your body."
That makes no sense. It is absolutely "directed through your body". Earlier you stated that a small amount over a long period of time can be dangerous. How is background radiation not exactly that? There are studies showing that airline workers suffer higher cancer rates for this reason.
I have no idea what you mean when you say that technically the numbers are higher, but it's less damaging. The numbers I cited are in units of mrem, which are DEFINED as the effectiveness of the radiation to cause damage. So to say that a higher number doesn't mean more damage is saying that the whole radiation science is wrong, and I don't think you are in any position to say that.
Spending hours at high altitudes is absolutely more dangerous than a few seconds spent in a back scatter scanner.
My information comes from the Health Physics Society and the fact that I am a working physicist.
@lifeonacitybusem4@xanga - To clarify, my response was more along the lines of the safety to her unborn child. Normal background radiation will not pass to her baby because the radiation is not passing through her body. It would be attenuated into the skin because it is low energy.
The body scanners must pass some of the energy through the body in order to create an image. Therefore, it could potentially interact with the cellular structure of her baby and the placenta.
The measurement of the radiation in expressed in many different terms, from mrem, to gray, to sieverts, and more. They are not all equal, nor is the science which determines what is an acceptable risk.
The less radiation you expose yourself to, the better. My comment was not incorrect, although maybe (for you) I should have clarified more.
@sarahsmurfette@xanga - The number I sourced was in mrem. The fact that being high in the atmosphere does more damage than the back scatter scan still stands.
I agree, less exposure is better. But if you are going to be flying anyway, you might as well come to terms with the fact that flying is worse than a scan that you probably won't have to endure anyway.
@lifeonacitybusem4@xanga - I am aware that you stated in mrem. You can research all day long and will not find that exposure measurements are equal. First of all, the measured and adjusted dose would be different for the same amount of radiation based on the body part irradiated. Example, the eyes are highly radiosensitive. The adjusted dose measurement for an eye would be higher than the adjusted dose measurement for, say, your lungs which are less radiosensitive. All of this is besides the point that the question was not whether or not she should fly, but whether or not, should the situation occur, she should opt for the scan or the pat down.
We will have to agree to disagree. It is my opinion that the attenuation of ionizing radiation is more damaging than atmospherical backscatter.
Why risk the exposure? Just get the pat down.
Honestly? I'd say see if there's any other mode of transportation you can possibly take. It's absurd to think that you should have to make a choice between having naked pictures of yourself taken as well as being exposed to harmful radiation or being sexually assaulted by a stranger just to get from point A to point B.
I took a long car ride (4 hours) and my midwife said I needed to get out and stretch every half hour to prevent blood clots. Maybe I was farther along than you are, but you might want to look it up.
I'd be suspicious of those body scans. It concentrates all the scan onto your face and your feet... it goes on your skin.
So to update (while I sit waiting for my flight home) - how about just the metal detector? At the 3 airports I've traveled to/through, they had me just go through a metal detector. Actually, when I got to the first airport to depart for the first time, I didn't do anything! I was surprised, but followed their orders. There was another pregnant woman who was headed to the full body scanner and the TSA agent told her no and to step to the side and had her go through the metal detector. Not sure if the TSA agent being a female made a difference or not LOL
I am headed home though and all done with security!