Nav: Home

Airport security measures not backed by solid evidence

December 20, 2007

There is no solid evidence that the huge amounts of money spent on airport security screening measures since September 11th are effective, argue researchers in this week's Christmas issue of the BMJ.

Most screening programmes around the world are closely evaluated and heavily regulated before implementation. They rely on sound scientific and cost-benefit evidence before they are put into practice. Is airport security screening an exception, ask Eleni Linos and colleagues?

They reviewed evidence for the effectiveness of airport security screening measures, comparing it to the evidence required by the UK National Screening Committee criteria to justify medical screening programmes.

Despite worldwide airport protection costing an estimated $5.6 billion every year, they found no comprehensive studies evaluating the effectiveness of passenger or hand luggage x-ray screening, metal detectors or explosive detection devices. There was also no clear evidence of testing accuracy.

The US Transportation Security Administration (TSA) defends its measures by reporting that more than 13 million prohibited items were intercepted in one year. But, argue the authors, there is no way of knowing what proportion of these items would have led to serious harm.

This raises several questions, they say, such as what is the sensitivity of the screening question: 'Did you pack all your bags yourself?' and has anyone ever said 'no'? What are the ethical implications of pre-selecting high risk groups? Are new technologies that 'see' through clothes acceptable and what hazards should we screen for?

While there may be other benefits to rigorous airport screening, the absence of publicly available evidence to satisfy even the most basic criteria of a good screening programme concerns us, they write.

They call for airport security screening to be open to public and academic debate.

Rigorously evaluating the current system is only the first step for building a future airport security programme that is more user-friendly, cost-effective and, ultimately, protects passengers from realistic threats, they conclude.
-end-


BMJ

Related Airport Security Screening Articles:

Researchers reveal ultra-fast bomb detection method that could upgrade airport security
Researchers from the University of Surrey have revealed a new ultra-fast method to detect materials that could be used to build explosives.
UBC study: Publicizing a firm's security levels may strengthen security over time
New research from the UBC Sauder School of Business has quantified the security levels of more than 1,200 Pan-Asian companies in order to determine whether increased awareness of one's security levels leads to improved defense levels against cybercrime.
Optimizing airport flight patterns take a toll on human health
Health costs associated with noise from changing flight patterns over populated urban landscapes far outweigh the benefits of reduced flight times, according to a new study.
People with false-positive cancer screening results may be more likely to receive future screening
An analysis of electronic medical records indicates that patients who previously had a false-positive breast or prostate cancer screening test are more likely to obtain future recommended cancer screenings.
The cause of low-level turbulence around Hong Kong International Airport
The occurrence of low-level turbulence around Hong Kong International Airport, which can influence the landing and departure of aircraft and is closely related to aviation safety, is an important topic of study.
More Airport Security Screening News and Airport Security Screening Current Events

Best Science Podcasts 2019

We have hand picked the best science podcasts for 2019. Sit back and enjoy new science podcasts updated daily from your favorite science news services and scientists.
Now Playing: TED Radio Hour

Rethinking Anger
Anger is universal and complex: it can be quiet, festering, justified, vengeful, and destructive. This hour, TED speakers explore the many sides of anger, why we need it, and who's allowed to feel it. Guests include psychologists Ryan Martin and Russell Kolts, writer Soraya Chemaly, former talk radio host Lisa Fritsch, and business professor Dan Moshavi.
Now Playing: Science for the People

#537 Science Journalism, Hold the Hype
Everyone's seen a piece of science getting over-exaggerated in the media. Most people would be quick to blame journalists and big media for getting in wrong. In many cases, you'd be right. But there's other sources of hype in science journalism. and one of them can be found in the humble, and little-known press release. We're talking with Chris Chambers about doing science about science journalism, and where the hype creeps in. Related links: The association between exaggeration in health related science news and academic press releases: retrospective observational study Claims of causality in health news: a randomised trial This...