Airline passenger news and views

Fascinating. My mother used to say that I had to wear clean underwear in case I got run over by a bus. Will future generations use the scanner argument?

Certainly a sign of the times, I think this a very impressive technological security measure. It seems a lot less intrusive than a physical airport security search. It could certainly help identify concealed non-metallic weapons/bombs and the like. This is a big step forward in tackling terrorist threats.

They tested one of these full body scanners at Luton airport a year or two ago. I was directed to it, stood as described, it made a "woop woop" sound as two columns swept from side to side around me and I was asked to step forward and out. I was immediately asked what was in my back pocket - my wallet.

The scanner clearly works!

One of the greatest minds in the security field Bruce Schneier has said it many times before. These measures are worthless because they only stop the terrorist tactics that have already been used.

There could be a significant risk of radiation exposure for frequent flyers. They will have to be scanned every time they board the plane.

One would expect the accumulative dose of radiation to increase over time.

I think this is a step forward. We must make full use of technology that is available and surely it can only be a deterant to terrorists. It is also a less intrusive way of being serached rather than being frisked in full view of other travellers.

Some studies bring to question if the cost of the scanners is worth the payback in security benefits. There have been demonstrations to showcase the ineffectiveness of the scanner in its ability to detect any dangerous object a subject may attempt to smuggle though. There has yet to be a report of a successful terrorist capture by a body scanner.

I approve of the new airport scanners as long as they have safeguards to ensure that images from the scanners, including those of celebrities, do not end up on the internet.

Airport whole body scans should make terrorist attacks more difficult. Nothing is 100 percent but the more difficult you make it for someone to conceal weapons, the fewer people who are going to be willing or capable of concealment.

Whole body scanners are incapable of revealing explosives hidden in body cavities, which has been an age-old method for smuggling contraband. Future terrorist plots are likely to include such efforts, and have the potential to get-around body scanners.

The real body scanner privacy argument is of course that some people will be deterred from flying due to cultural sensitivities to being seen naked especially by members of the opposite sex.

Aakifah has a point. I read recently about two women who were stopped from boarding a plane at Manchester Airport after refusing to undergo a full body scan. One, who was believed to be a Muslim, refused on religious reasons and the other cited health grounds.

They are thought to be the first people to refuse to use the scanners since they became compulsory.

We have trialed these in the States and they seem to have been accepted. I guess we do not grumble as much as you Brits do.

Since the awful events of 9/11 our Homeland Security has had a pretty free hand to bring in measures that it considers necessary. Somehow we seem to manage without the human rights issues that are so big here and in France.

I think that body scanners should be used and unfortunately if it stops people from travelling then so be it, surely safer travel has to be paramount.

I agree with Marcia, with the horrific acts of terrorism that the US has suffered in recent years, the human rights issues we have with the full body scanners are minor in comparison.

Reading up on this, there is an alternative technology to the full body scanner they say could provide the same, or better, level of screening without the privacy issues. The 'Puffer', a machine first developed by General Electric that can detect chemical particles a person may have on their body and analyse whether or not they are harmful. The machine works by blowing puffs of chemically sensitive air around the individual.

No single technology can keep terrorists from boarding airplanes with bomb materials. That’s why expensive full-body scanners are not cure-alls for security breaches. It’s wise to expand the use of scanners, but only as part of a broader strategy to make flying safer.

I am all for full body scanners, if it means the end to the more intrusive airport security 'pat down'. I can see the technology developing fast, they will be able to mask your private areas and I am sure the detection rate will improve.

This is a very expensive and intrusive security measure. Why can we not adopt an 'Ethnic profiling' system like Israil? They have a 100% success rate in preventing terrorist attacks by just asking a few profiling questions to each passenger. You do not get scanned, have to take your shoes and belts off etc this is a much more streamlined and cost effective solution to 'full body scanners' in airports.