Click on a label to read posts from that part of the world.
Click on a label to read posts from that part of the world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
More from AOL Travel:
Airline tickets,
Hotel reservations,
Car rental,
Vacation packages,
Discount cruises,
Last-Minute Deals
Travel Guides:
Las Vegas,
New York City,
Los Angeles,
Boston,
Chicago,
Washington, DC,
London,
Rome,
Paris,
Tokyo,
Minneapolis,
Phoenix,
Austin,
Charlotte,
San Diego,
Mexico City,
Copenhagen,
Sydney,
Bangkok,
Bogota,
Toronto,
Costa Rica,
Bermuda,
Puerto Rico
© 2012 AOL Inc. All rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks | AOL A-Z HELP | Advertise With Us | About Our Ads
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
10-28-2008 @ 4:16AM
Vispilä said...
In fact the radiation dosage in majority of these equpments is not much more than the natural background radiation. One scan is equivalent to approx. 5 min exposure to natural radiation taking place everywhere.
People are getting higher exposures during the actual flight since the radiation levels are much higher in high altitudes than on the ground.
I do agree that people should have a choice, but using radiation exposure as an excuse is not valid in this case...