Sensible Erection | Baby Almost Put Through X-Ray at LAX

Wednesday, 20 December 2006

quote [ In the several seconds the baby spent in the machine, he was exposed to as much radiation as he would get in a day from cosmic rays... ]

Thumb is of Franklin Richards. Article in the extended

Grandmother Puts 1-Month-Old In X-ray Machine At LAX Airport

LOS ANGELES, Decemeber 20, 2006 - A woman going through security at LAX over the weekend put her month-old grandson into a plastic bin intended for carry-on items and slid it into an X-ray machine, prompting astonished officials to order the child medically evaluated .

The infant was taken to Centinela Hospital, where doctors determined he had not received a dangerous dose of radiation, the Los Angeles Times reported.

In the several seconds the baby spent in the machine, he was exposed to as much radiation as he would get in a day from cosmic rays, or high energy from outer space said, Dr. James Borgstede, a Colorado diagnostic radiologist and president of the American College of Radiology.

The early Saturday accident bizarre but not unprecedented caught airport workers by surprise, even though the security line was not busy at the time, said officials.

A screener watching the machine's monitor immediately noticed the outline of a baby and pulled the bin backward on the conveyor belt.

Officials, who declined to release the 56-year-old woman's name, told reporters she spoke only Spanish.

She initially didn't want the baby transported to a hospital, but security officials called paramedics and insisted the child be examined by a doctor, according to reports. The woman and child were later allowed to board an Alaska Airlines flight to Mexico City.

Transportation Security Administration spokesman Nico Melendez said his agency, which manages LAX screeners, does not want such an incident to recur.

"We're trying to figure out what changes we can make, short of putting up signs saying, `Don't put your baby through the X-ray machine,' " said Melendez.

[by Rainbow Randolf@10:57amGMT] [+10 WTF]

Comments

Tektike said @ 11:05am GMT on 20th Dec
Great. Now Dr. Doom is going to be killing us all in 40 years.

paul_austin0816 said @ 11:05am GMT on 20th Dec
and on top of that....the dumbshit missed her flight, theres an interesting phone call

phunkeybuddha said @ 11:07am GMT on 20th Dec
"We're trying to figure out what changes we can make, short of putting up signs saying, `Don't put your baby through the X-ray machine,' " said Melendez.

Idiots like her are the reason we have instructions on shampoo.

luluchan said @ 11:16am GMT on 20th Dec
she speaks only spanish

Rainbow Randolf said @ 11:18am GMT on 20th Dec
Perhaps they should use some sort of universal "don't put your baby in here" sign. Maybe a picture of an aligator. No one would put their baby near an aligator.

Copperhead said @ 11:29am GMT on 20th Dec
They do, big signs with the danger symbol, the radiation symbol and the "no hands in here" symbol.

Apparently, if you speak spanish pictures are still too complex for you.

phunkeybuddha said @ 12:03pm GMT on 20th Dec
That's not a valid excuse. If she didn't know the purpose of the xray screener (even after 9/11), all she had to do was ask. Given the proximity of California to Mexico, I'm pretty sure that someone at LAX who spoke some form of spanish would have been able to tell her that putting a 1 month old baby inside just might not be the best idea. If she did know the purpose of the xray machine (inspect for dangerous items) and was unsure how to present the baby (in the xray or through the metal detector), again all she had to do was ask. She'd be seen as somewhat dim but at least a lot smarter than putting a baby through an xray machine. Seriously, how difficult is it to ask?

luluchan said @ 12:35pm GMT on 20th Dec
i'm guessing this is her first time flying.

Rainbow Randolf said @ 12:36pm GMT on 20th Dec
Also quite possibly the first time she has ever seen or heard of an X-ray machine.

phunkeybuddha said @ 1:14pm GMT on 20th Dec
Even still, if it was her first time flying as well as seeing an x-ray machine, I would think she would be more cautious around strange/unfamiliar machinery and ask its purpose. I'm betting she didn't want to be seen as some country bumpkin so her pride prevented her from asking. Unfortunately for her, the baby maneuver she pulled put her squarely in the country bumpkin spotlight.

601 said @ 11:09am GMT on 20th Dec
This is how all those ridiculous warning labels get put on stuff. One giant idiot does something that everybody knows you shouldn't do.

Makopelli said @ 11:11am GMT on 20th Dec
Sounds to me like it didn't almost go through... it did go through.

Rainbow Randolf said @ 11:14am GMT on 20th Dec
A screener watching the machine's monitor immediately noticed the outline of a baby and pulled the bin backward on the conveyor belt.

Tough to say, I looked at a bunch of articles to determine which was the best one and this one seemed to be slightly more credible than others. They all say that the baby was stopped from going all the way through the machine. I suppose I should put the article in the extended...

Makopelli said @ 11:41am GMT on 20th Dec
Well, I read the article, but I suppose you're right, being put all the way through is different from simply being placed inside of it, especially in terms of length of exposure.

Bob LLama said @ 11:29am GMT on 20th Dec [Score:2]
In the several seconds the baby spent in the machine, he was exposed to as much radiation as he would get in a day from cosmic rays, or high energy from outer space said, Dr. James Borgstede, a Colorado diagnostic radiologist and president of the American College of Radiology.

What in the fuck does that have to do with anything? I'm sure if you are intimately familiar with cosmic energy and it's subsequent effect on babies then it's extremely relevant.

To you average John Q. Reader, what in the fucking god-damned diarrhea hell of poop are we supposed to get from that? Is it good? Is it bad? Who the fuck knows?!

God this sort of pointless, almost misleading, "info" really gets my goat.

Professor John Q. Frink said @ 11:44am GMT on 20th Dec
Foolish simpleton!

nysv said @ 12:02pm GMT on 20th Dec
He is a radiologist. He doesn't want to use the standard way N x-rays worth of radiation, because that would tip people to the fact that taking x-rays exposes them to harmful radiation, which would make his job harder.

Bob LLama said @ 12:06pm GMT on 20th Dec
Why is this in the article? What relevance does it have for the average reader?

nysv said @ 12:10pm GMT on 20th Dec
They asked a radiologist how much radiation that was, because it's their job to know.
They then had to run with the bullshit figure as they didn't know how to convert it to anything meaningful.

Bob LLama said @ 12:13pm GMT on 20th Dec
You still haven't answered my question(s).

Bullshit figure or not, why is it in the article? They can't ask him to convert it to a more meaningful figure? They can't call a different radiologist? It would be like inserting a paragraph on the minutiae of javascript in an article about how youtube is a new internet fad.

robotroadkill said @ 6:31pm GMT on 20th Dec
I think it's just reassuring people that what happened to the kid isn't a big deal. It's like a day's worth of living, as far as being exposed to that radiation is concerned. If they quantified it, only a few people would even understand the units, or the implications of that number. I wouldn't be one of them.

v0idmagus said @ 2:20pm GMT on 20th Dec
X-rays exposing us to harmful radiation?! Oh No!

Personally, I always thought the heavy lead apron over my balls was a strong indicator that SOMETHING not good came from the x-ray machine.

tomble said @ 12:03pm GMT on 20th Dec
It basically means that the baby probably got less radiation exposure than it would if it had sat too close to the TV, sat next to someone using a cell phone, lived near a cell tower etc, lived on Earth for one day. In other words, sweet fuck all radiation.

Oh yeah, but RADIATION!!ONE!!! OMGZ.

Bob LLama said @ 12:05pm GMT on 20th Dec
And how do you know this? Did you get this information from the article? Because that's my point: they throw out some absolutely random statement with no context whatsoever.

Rainbow Randolf said @ 12:22pm GMT on 20th Dec
Cell phones do not produce radiation.

Rainbow Randolf said @ 12:22pm GMT on 20th Dec
Rather, they do not produce harmful radiation.

tomble said @ 10:47pm GMT on 20th Dec
True, it's non ionizing radiation. I love pointing this out to people who go on about the dangers of mobile phones.

Naruki said @ 12:55pm GMT on 20th Dec
But COSMIC RAY radiation! He could become an X-Men.

theolypse said @ 6:58pm GMT on 20th Dec
Multiple Man, judging by your case.

Roulette1337 said @ 11:28am GMT on 21st Dec
Wasnt that fantastic 4?

Phaedrine said @ 12:51pm GMT on 20th Dec
The radiologist quite clearly states that the baby got the same amount of radiation from the machine as the baby normally gets in a single day from standard background radiation. Sure he phrases it a bit strangely, but it still isn't hard to understand.

Bob LLama said @ 1:01pm GMT on 20th Dec
How do cosmic rays differ from solar radiation? Is it worse? Not as bad?

Standing outside in direct sunlight all day is bad. Very bad. Especially for babies. How does one differentiate between solar radiation and cosmic radiation? I sure as hell can't.

asdf5678 said @ 1:18pm GMT on 20th Dec
Who gives a shit? He's basically saying that in the seconds that he was in there, he got a day's worth of radiation. Maybe you think that this is some random fact - oh, he got put in an xray thinger, and among other things, he got blasted with this particularly interesting radiation. No, he's giving us an approximation of the sort of exposure the baby got. That's important and relevant. So uh...

Misanthrope said @ 9:22pm GMT on 20th Dec
Lets see. Exposure to the sun all day causes sun burns. So that implies UV radiation. UV radiation does not penetrate the skin. X-rays penetrate the skin. So one difference.
Solar radiation does not affect us at night. Cosmic radiation does.
Just become something is labeled as radiation does not automatically make it harmful.

JOECAM said @ 2:46pm GMT on 20th Dec
There is no threshold for radiation, the smallest amount produces celluar damage. Radiation is accumlative, everytime you're exposed, you are adding to the damage..........

Sente said @ 8:58pm GMT on 20th Dec
The responsible expert is trying to explain that the baby only got exposed to as much radiation as it would get in a normal day from a natural source, and no harm was done.

The reporter is trying to use creative editing to make it sound scary and dangerous so the article seems exciting and his media outlet appears to be a source of vitally important information you need for your family's safety.

Frankly, I think your goat wanted it. Goating around in front of everybody, just waiting to be got.

Nick said @ 11:44am GMT on 20th Dec
security at LAX

I'm seeing these guys...

Nick said @ 11:45am GMT on 20th Dec [Score:2]

Tektike said @ 12:03pm GMT on 20th Dec
Is that Konan in the middle there?

Nick said @ 12:18pm GMT on 20th Dec
Yep.

Rainbow Randolf said @ 12:41pm GMT on 20th Dec
WHOA! Is that recent?!

loomspace said @ 2:12pm GMT on 20th Dec [Score:2 Funny]
Is he doing the 'I got your nose' with his right hand?

Makopelli said @ 2:14pm GMT on 20th Dec [Score:1 Funny]
I... think... he's trying to make an "L" "A" with his fingers, but managed to do it backwards.

EmperorOPC said @ 12:22pm GMT on 20th Dec
¡Arriba la raza!

maryyugo said @ 2:21pm GMT on 20th Dec
damn, what a stupid, vapid, moroning look for 2 examples of putrid humanity.

maryyugo said @ 2:21pm GMT on 20th Dec
moronic not moroning (or maybe both)

Misanthrope said @ 9:26pm GMT on 20th Dec
2?

tomble said @ 10:52pm GMT on 20th Dec
The gesture he is making with his right hand is called `the fig' or `mano fico', it dates back centuries, and represents women's genitals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_gesture#Fig_sign

revchoppy said @ 11:47am GMT on 20th Dec [Score:1 Insightful]
"We're trying to figure out what changes we can make, short of putting up signs saying, `Don't put your baby through the X-ray machine,' " said Melendez.

Um... OR, you can GLANCE at the plastic bins before they enter the machine. You know, a half second look at the conveyor belt before it gets blasted with x-rays.

everytime I've flown, there were 4 or 5 TSA guys hanging around watching everything, with 2 on the x-ray machine. ONE of them can't, oh, I don't know, NOTICE WHAT THE FUCK IS ENTERING THE MACHINE?

Barnabas_Truman said @ 12:42pm GMT on 20th Dec
According to the article the woman HERSELF not only put the baby in the plastic bin but also slid it into the machine.

revchoppy said @ 5:08am GMT on 21st Dec
You can STILL have one of the useless TSA guys hanging around, getting paid for doing nothing, look at what's going on in front of them.

Tang said @ 2:56pm GMT on 20th Dec [Score:3 Funny]

Jestyr said @ 5:19pm GMT on 20th Dec
and the mountain of evidence pointing to a need for plus +1 laser keeps piling up...

Anti-fuites said @ 6:02pm GMT on 20th Dec [Score:1 Insightful]
Honestly, it would be abused to the point of becoming meaningless.

Pirate_Monkey said @ 5:04pm GMT on 20th Dec [Score:1 Funny]
Brian and Rebecca Banner were never remembered for their parenting skills.

stoned_sheitan said @ 9:05pm GMT on 20th Dec
You may be thinking of gamma rays.

tomble said @ 10:49pm GMT on 20th Dec
Just wait until the first baby bomb brings down a passenger jet. Then it will be MANDATORY to x-ray your baby.