text:
Here's something fun to kick off your weekend. It's a travel-themed picture puzzle. You just have to tie the photos together to make words. For example, a photo of an eye, combined with a photo of a full glass of water would be eye + full = Eiffel. Get it? (For another example, check out last week's puzzle.)
This week's puzzle is two words and represents a famous natural landmark.
Once you think you know the answer, post it below. You have until Monday, April 22, at 11:59 p.m. ET to post your response. We'll keep all comments private until then. On Tuesday morning we'll choose one winner at random to receive an IndependentTraveler.com travel mug. Note: Although all are welcome to play, we can only ship prizes to the Continental U.S.
Editor's Note: This contest has ended. The winner is Wynne, who correctly guessed that the pictogram spelled "Mount Kilimanjaro." Wynne has won an IndependentTraveler.com travel mug. Congratulations! Stay tuned for further opportunities to win.
— written and created by Dori Saltzman

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Go beyond plain paper.Apply your creativity to Xerox's vast array of custom media applications.
Help your customers stand out through innovative, printed communications. Custom media applications give them unexpected ways to showcase their brand, providing value beyond print.
Learn about Custom Media Applications.Check out our full line-up and pricing for custom media: Request pricing
Find recommended paper stock and printing media (RMLs).
View pricing and buy specialty paper and printing media:


text:
by Citrix
Aug 15, 2013
Download Android, iOS and Windows-based mobile devices - including tablets, smartphones and everything in between-play an expanding role in enterprise computing, providing new mobility and flexibility for people and IT. At the same time, they compound the challenge of maintaining effective security and privacy of business information. This white paper describes these issues and explains how they can be addressed effectively with solutions from Citrix. Download the white paper for your guide to securing mobile devices


text:
- Home
- College (N-Z)
- Texas
- Shop By Category
- Watches & Jewelry
- Texas Sport Men's Steel Band Watch
This handsome, eye-catching watch comes with a stainless steel link bracelet. A date calendar function plus a rotating bezel/timer circles the scratch resistant crystal. Sport the bold, colorful, high quality logo with pride.
Officially Licensed Product By: SunTime
Related Items
Price: $78.99
Price: $79.99
Price: $105.99
Price: $86.99
Price: $105.99
Price: $84.99


text:
Lone Star Legal Aid (Paris Office)
Who We Are
Operating for more than 60 years, Lone Star Legal Aid (LSLA) is a non-profit law firm that now serves as the fourth largest legal aid organization of its type in the United States. The firm provides free civil legal help to low-income persons who have immediate needs but cannot afford an attorney. Headquartered in Houston, the organization operates another 12 branch offices and covers one-third of the state, including 72 counties in the eastern and Gulf Coast regions of Texas, and also four counties of southwest Arkansas, and has an eligible client population of almost 1.5 million at 125% of federal poverty guidelines. LSLA is the only full-service civil legal aid provider in the region, and it offers advice/legal counsel, brief services, self-help clinics, community legal education, and referrals, as well as full representation in administrative hearings and county, state, and federal courts. Practice areas include domestic abuse, health care, housing, employment, income maintenance, unlawful trade practices, education, civil rights, and disaster relief. LSLA also manages special projects, such as food stamp outreach, language access, elder law clinics, and a legal help line. Cases are accepted on a priority basis, and current priorities include: (1) enhancing and protecting income/economic stability; (2) preserving housing and related needs; (3) improving child outcomes; (4) seeking and maintaining safety, stability, health and well-being; and (5) assisting populations with special vulnerability, such as those who have disabilities, or who are elder, homeless or have limited English language skills.
How to Get Help
You can contact this organization by:
- Contact Type
- Appointment
Who We Serve
- Area(s)
- Delta County
- Franklin County
- Hopkins County
- Lamar County
- Morris County
- Red River County
- Titus County
- Language(s) Spoken
- Spanish / Español
- Cirumstances and languages in which interpreters are provided
Whenever needed
- Income Guidelines
You must be at or under 125% of poverty level for divorce, custody, visitation and child support cases.
Program has discretion up to 150% in exceptional cases
- Your family's income should be at or below the following percentage of the federal poverty level
- 125
- Is this organization accessible by wheelchair?
- Yes
- Does this organization provide access for the hearing impaired?
- No
- Eligibility Restrictions
This program does not serve: Immigrant; Prisoner
Type of Help
- This group provides the following types of services based on your legal needs and its resources:
- Full Legal Representation
- Brief Advice
- Self-Help Materials
- Emergency Instructions
What is an Emergency? Service with papers, domestic violence, hearings, evictions.
800-925-5802 or 903-785-8711
General Contact Information
- Address
Lone Star Legal Aid (Paris Office)
115 First Street SW (Bank Building, 5th Floor) (map)Paris, TX 75460
- Phone
- 903-785-8711
- Toll Free
- 800-925-5802
- Fax
- 903-785-5990
- Website
- http://www.lonestarlegal.org


text:
To better serve our customers, our site is currently under maintenance. With our new website, you can expect:
A streamlined and easier-to-navigate user interface will help you find the information you need about wireless Internet providers and their coverage areas.
We understand that waiting for web pages to load is frustrating. To better serve our customers, we're redesigning our site to load faster so that you can get the information you need quickly.
As thought leaders in the field of wireless Internet technology, our new site will offer more informative content to help you decide which provider is right for you and your lifestyle.
Technology is constantly changing at a rapid pace. Our redesigned website will offer you the most current information on wireless Internet technology.
We remain dedicated to staying up to date with customer service trends and look forward to helping you find the latest information on wireless Internet deals and plans.
Please check back soon to see the improvements we've made to make your wireless Internet buying decision even easier.


text:
GodfatherND wrote:contract bridge
bridge out
stacipurv wrote:bridge out
out dated
olcubmaster wrote:out dated
dated expiration
pooflady wrote:dated expiration
expiration effect
GodfatherND wrote:expiration effect
effect change
pooflady wrote:effect change
change oil
stacipurv wrote:change oil
oil painting
norcalbecca wrote:oil painting
painting style
pooflady wrote:painting style
style review
KtCallista wrote:style review
review literature
pooflady wrote:review literature
literature circle
AZGman wrote:literature circle
circle back
Volunteer Moderator
Raining wrote:circle back
back pocket
dontwantaname wrote:back pocket
pocket change
olcubmaster wrote:pocket change
change over
pooflady wrote:change over
over described
(yes gman, it has been said. By my friend who was talking about a place we went on vacation.)
dontwantaname wrote:over described
(yes gman, it has been said. By my friend who was talking about a place we went on vacation.)
describe yourself
pooflady wrote:describe yourself
yourself included
AZGman wrote:yourself included
included free
dontwantaname wrote:included free
free reign
norcalbecca wrote:free reign
reign ended
pooflady wrote:reign ended
ended early
dontwantaname wrote:ended early
early childhood
pooflady wrote:early childhood
childhood disease
GodfatherND wrote:childhood disease
disease control
pooflady wrote:disease control
control caddie
KtCallista wrote:control caddie
caddie's share
AZGman wrote:caddie's share
share equally
dontwantaname wrote:share equally
equally divided
GodfatherND wrote:equally divided
divided highway
pooflady wrote:divided highway
highway robbery
olcubmaster wrote:highway robbery
robbery victim
dontwantaname wrote:robbery victim
victim support
pooflady wrote:victim support
support hose
dontwantaname wrote:support hose
hose clamp
GodfatherND wrote:hose clamp
clamp release
AZGman wrote:clamp release
release date
stacipurv wrote:release date
date palm
dontwantaname wrote:date palm
palm hair
AZGman wrote:palm hair
Young man, what were you doing that caused that?????
hair extension
View All →


text:
Quantity Discounts
Did you know Designed 2B Sweet offers quantity discounts? We know that sometimes you need a lot of certain party decorations or party favors for your party, and we are delighted to offer bulk pricing on items sold on our site. This is a great way to get a variety of themed toys that you can give away as prizes at an event, or as fun little thank you gifts to everyone who attended your event. Best of all, you can mix and match items of the same type! For example, you can mix and match different tutus of the same type to quality for this discount, allowing little girls at your party to look unique without causing you to go over your budget.
Want to know how you can take advantage of our quantity discounts? Make sure to look at each individual listing for details. You are also always welcome to contact us directly if you cannot find the information you need on specific items. With these quantity discounts, you are always able to get cute decorations and costume accessories for your event or party at a cost any company or individual can afford, saving you both time and money shopping at Designed 2B Sweet!
There are no products matching the selection. We need to work on that.


text:
Every day, Transportation Security Officers interact with nearly two million travelers across the United States with a single goal in mind – ensuring the safety of the traveling public.
TSA had a busy year in 2013, screening 638,705,790 passengers in 2013 (over 1,700,000 per day), which is 1,123,668 more passengers than last year.
Sadly, this year marked the first incident where a TSA officer, Gerardo I. Hernandez, was killed in the line of duty at Los Angeles International Airport.
In many ways, Transportation Security Officers are the public face of our nation's security. It is difficult work, requiring patience, stamina, and great attention to detail. It requires extensive training and constant vigilance. This year's tragic incident reminds us that being on the frontline also comes with a great risk. It is a risk that the men and women of TSA undertake willingly knowing that in doing so they are serving a higher cause, and a noble one – protecting the men and women of the United States every day.
We wanted to share with you examples of the continued vigilance of TSA officers in protecting our nation's transportation systems, including some of the most unusual items TSA caught at the checkpoints this year.
1,813 firearms were discovered in carry-on bags at checkpoints across the country, averaging nearly five firearms per day. Of those, 1,477 (81%) were loaded. Firearms were intercepted at a total of 205 airports with Atlanta (ATL) on top of the list for the most firearms intercepted (111) in 2013.
Top Five Airports for Gun Catches in 2013
|Some of the Loaded Firearms Discovered in Carry-on Baggage in 2013
- (ATL) - 111 Guns Discovered
- (DFW) - 96 Guns Discovered
- (IAH) - 68 Guns Discovered
- (PHX) - 66 Guns Discovered
- (DEN) - 51 Guns Discovered
Here are a few of the more notable firearm incidents:
|Loaded Gun (BDL)
A loaded .45 caliber pistol with six rounds and one chambered was discovered strapped to the ankle of a Pittsburgh (PIT) passenger during a pat-down after he had opted out of AIT.
|Loaded Gun (PIT)
A passenger at Salt Lake City (SLC) received a pat-down after an anomaly was detected during advanced imaging technology screening.
During the pat-down, officers discovered a fully loaded .22 caliber firearm inside his boot.
|Loaded Gun (CID)
Using imaging technology, a .380 pistol loaded with seven rounds and one chambered was discovered in the pocket of a passenger at Dallas Fort Worth (DFW).
While resolving an alarm on checked baggage, officers at Boston Logan (BOS) discovered a fully disassembled 30-30 rifle concealed within the lining of the bag and taped to the straps. Police responded and ran a check on the serial number of the rifle, revealing that it had been stolen.
In what was believed to be an attempt to avoid declaring his firearms, a passenger at Houston (IAH) wrapped two guns in newspaper and placed them in a box of detergent powder in his checked baggage.
Seven undeclared firearms were found concealed in a checked toolbox at Miami (MIA).
A shotgun was discovered in a checked golf bag at Detroit (DTW).
An unloaded .45 caliber pistol and four magazines were hidden in a cassette deck in checked baggage.
|Left to Right: Unassembled Rifle (BOS), Shotgun in Golf Bag (DTW), Seven Firearms in Toolbox (MIA), Guns In Detergent (IAH)
|24 Pounds of Black Powder (MDW)
Ten canisters containing 24-pounds of black powder were discovered in checked baggage at Chicago Midway (MDW).
A live blasting cap was discovered along with an M60 fuse lighter in a passenger's checked bag at the Manhattan Regional Airport (MHK) in Kansas.
Over nine ounces of black powder was discovered in a carry-on bag at Cleveland (CLE).
|Blasting Cap and Fuse Initiator (MHK)
A camping stove fuel bottle with fuel was discovered in a passenger's carry-on bag at San Francisco (SFO).
After causing an alarm in checked baggage, Officers found a 3.2 ounce flask of black powder, 22 feet of fuse, a large empty CO2 cartridge, and miscellaneous ammunition in a passenger's bag at Anchorage (ANC).
While resolving an alarm in a checked bag at Honolulu (HNL), a TSA officer discovered two one-pound cans of black powder.
|Left - Right / Top - Bottom: Black Powder & Fuse (ANC), Two Pounds of Black Powder (HNL), Nine Ounces of Black Powder (CLE), and Camping Stove Fuel (SFO)
|Inert Suicide Vest (IND)
A passenger at Norfolk (ORF) had six inert pressure plates, 50 inert initiators, an inert land mine, inert explosives, and two initiation systems in the his bag.An inert Claymore mine was discovered in a checked bag at San Jose (SJC).
|Inert IED (ORD)
An inert bandolier line charge was discovered after it alarmed in checked baggage at Norfolk (ORF).
Seven inert blasting caps were discovered in checked baggage at Greenbrier County Airport (LWB).
Electricdetonators and a blockof inert C4 with duct tape and wires protruding were discovered in two separate incidents at Seattle (SEA) in checked baggage.
|Inert Claymore Mine (SJU)
A gag retirement gift designed to look like an improvisedexplosive device was discovered on the X-ray at St. Petersburg / Clearwater (PIE).
Two inert C4 demolition explosives were discovered in the carry-on bag of a passenger at Honolulu (HNL).
An inert Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) training kit was discovered at Norfolk (ORF).
Two battery-charged initiators were discovered in a carry-on bag at Minneapolis (MSP).
|Inert Bazooka Round (ORD)
A WWIIera inert bazooka round was discovered in a checked bag at Chicago O'Hare (ORD).
An inert 20mm artillery round was detected in the carry-on bag at San Diego (SAN).
136 inert/novelty/replica grenades were discovered this year at TSA checkpoints and checked baggage locations.
|Left - Right / Top - Bottom: Battery Charged Initiator (MSP), IED Training Kit (ORD), Inert Blasting Caps (LWB), Inert C-4 (HNL), Gag Gift (TPA)
|Smoke Grenade (IAD)
A live flashbang grenade was discovered in a carry-on bag at Portland (PDX).
A live smoke grenade was discovered in checked baggage at Washington Dulles (IAD).
|Flash Bang Grenade (PDX)
A live "sting ball" riot control grenade was discovered in checked baggage at John Wayne (SNA).
Live smoke and flare canisters were discovered in a checked bag at Phoenix (PHX).
|Flare Gun (HOU)
A 3-ounce Can of CS Teargas was discovered in a carry-on bag at Atlantic City (ACY).
A passenger at Houston Hobby (HOU) had a flare gun and six loose flares in his carry-on bag.
562 stun guns were discovered in carry-on bags in 2013.
|Left - Right: Smoke and Flare Canisters (PHX), Flare Gun (MDW), Teargas (ACY), Flare (JNU), Smoke Grenades (PWM)
|Non-metallic Dagger (SLC)
|Tactical Spike (DSM)
|Knife (BUR)
A knife was discovered concealed in the lower back area of a passenger who alarmed the advanced imaging technology at Burbank (BUR).
|Some Of The Throwing Knives and Stars Discovered in 2013
|Some of The Knives and Swords Discovered in 2013
The year also provided the need for travelers to surrender a few odd items:
|Human Skull (FLL)
A mace was discovered in a carry-on bag at Chicago Midway (MDW). This wasn't a plastic mace; it was solid wood and metal.
A traveler's checked bag blew open with three
|Mace (ACY)
|Pen Knife (DFW)
A multi-tool was discovered inside a computer hard drive at Birmingham (BHM).
|Multi-tool In Hard Drive (BHM)
A knife was sewn into the lining of a bag at Dulles (IAD).
A bladed multi-tool was found in a package of socks at Albuquerque (ABQ).
|Ammunition Hidden Under Pull Handle (ORF)
Nine rounds of .45 caliber ammunition were found in the pull-handle of a carry-bag at Norfolk (ORF).
Pepper spray designed to look like a lipstick case was discovered in Phoenix (PHX).
A stun gun concealed in a cane was discovered at Los Angeles (LAX).
|Pepper Spray Lipstick (PHX)
A knife was found in a toothbrush holder at Lihue (LIH).
A knife was discovered in the battery compartment of a laptop computer at Oakland (OAK).
A knife was discovered inside a pillow at Midland (MAF).
|Knife In Knee Brace (IAH)
A lipstick knife was discovered at San Antonio (SAT).
A knife was discovered inside a passenger's knee brace at Houston (IAH).
Two kitchen knives were discovered in an automotive air filter box wrapped in plastic with the air filter at Houston Intercontinental (IAH).
An 8-inch knife and a 6-inch knife were detected wrapped in plastic bags under a false bottom in a carry-on bag at Guam (GUM).
A stun gun disguised to look like lipstick was discovered at St. Louis (STL).
|Miscellaneous Items - Left to Right / Top to Bottom: Compound Bow in Carry-on (PHX), Finger Spikes (BHM), Bang Stick (KOA), BB Machine Gun (EWR), Novelty Bomb (PHX), Stun Knuckles (DEN), Gun Clock (SEA)
Follow @TSABlogTeam on Twitter and Instagram!
Bob Burns
If you have a travel related issue or question that needs an immediate answer, you can contact us by clicking here.


text:
Meet & Seat at check-in
21 March 2013 | See which travellers will be on board your KLM flight, and view their profile details – now up until 1 hour before departure.
Meet your fellow passengers
Booked your KLM flight? Then you can see who will be on board in My Trip
You can view Facebook or LinkedIn profile details from, for example, potential business partners. Meet & Seat thus offers unique possibilities for your network.
Meet & Seat is now also available during online check-in - from 30 hours until 1 hour before departure - 24 until 1 hour for flights to or from the United States.
How Meet & Seat works
By sharing your Facebook or LinkedIn profile details, you can also see those of your fellow passengers, and where they will be sitting. You can also select your own seat - and change it as often as you want.
Meet & Seat is available for bookings with 1 passenger, until 1 hour before departure for all KLM and KLM cityhopper flights.
Log in to My Trip or check in on KLM.com:
- Go to 'seat selection'
- Log in to your Facebook or LinkedIn account
- Indicate which profile details you want to share
- See who sits where and choose your seat
Your information will be visible only to passengers who also share their details. You can stop sharing your profile details at any time.


text:
|In your basket: 0 pcs in total 0 Kč
Old craft is still alive here
Old craft is still alive at Outfit4Events!
- we explore works of old masters
- and bring their replicas back to life
- with profound respect to our wise ancestors
We do not lead you by the nose
We tell you the truth!
- Our "In Stock" does NOT mean "in stock of our supplier"
- what is marked as "in stock", is physically
- in our stock and can be picked up or shipped immediately!
Marshal Historical
We provide you with exclusive merchandise
- We are one of the happy dealers, who may distribute this brand
- This brand is distinguished by excellent price-performance ratio
- We offer you more for your money, convince yourself!
We fit you out since 1997!
Our arms, armour and further equipment enjoys a good reputation
- Our services and products have been proven over time
- We are committed to the tradition of honest approach
- Thank you for your still-growing interest!
In the footsteps of old masters
Following in the footsteps of old masters we reconstruct old originals
- special original reconstructions for collectors and museums
- the public can admire our well-done replicas
- precious original works remain in safety of depositories!


text:
by CA, Inc.
Jul 01, 2013
New business opportunities are taking shape as consumers across the globe are adopting new mobile devices, high-speed access and innovative mobile applications. But this proliferation of mobile devices, the development of intelligent and composite applications, the number of multi-device users, and the shift to bring your own device (BYOD) has created many challenges for businesses to effectively capitalize on mobile opportunities.
Download this white paper to explore how to:
� Grow your top-line revenue by reaching new mobile markets, enabling sales teams and improving customer service
� Reduce the risk of mobile data compromise through holistic solutions
� Reduce the total cost of ownership by deploying a unified security solution
Download this white paper to learn how selecting a unified mobile security solution that meets your application and data requirements will enable you to capitalize on new mobile market opportunities, reduce the risk of data compromise and non-compliance and reduce overall cost of ownership.


text:
Includes: Front and Back 4 pc set. All Season Custom Auto Mats. Non-fading and no cracking. Tremendous liquid holding capacity. Will keep debris. like sand. mud and rocks in place with the hexo shaped pockets. Exclusively developed compound gives the HEXOMAT a rubber feel and look. Non skid nib backing provides optimum traction. Meet ALL standards and requirements for FMVSS-302. All patterns are computer precision cut to guarantee consistency in design and fit. Manufacturer Limited Lifetime Warranty.
Additional Information


text:
Compare London taxis int Garages and Specialists in Ashington with Who Can Fix My Car.
Enter your registration to check prices and reviews, and get your London taxis int booked in today!
Compare London taxis int Garages and Specialists in Ashington with Who Can Fix My Car.
Service carried out as requested. Very efficient and friendly staff. I'd definitely use this company in the future.
very nice people and good service , will go there for my next one too
I had a price for a timing belt and water pump replacement I also asked them to do further work including welding and a rear brake caliper replacement I received a full quote and that was the price I paid I am happy with the work done the staff were very honest and helpful I would recommend them to anyone as an independent garage as giving you piece of mind.
Very happy with the work done!
Excellent job done. Extremely helpful. Convenient.
Would use again
The 50,000 miles service was carried on time and on budget, with recommendations to consider new brakes pads on the front within 1500 miles and cracked tyres on the rear were noticed, consider renewal sooner rather than later, however no pressure tactics were applied and would certianly recommend them to anyone wanting a similar service.
very good service at a reasonable price. Would recommend to friends
Excellent garage kept me informed throughout highly recommend will use again.
Great job!
Very good, car passed with flying colours!
Absolutely fine!
I am really impressed with the professional service I received. After being told by National Tyres that I needed a complete exhaust I was really chuffed that Redburn showed me I didn't need one at all. All that was wrong was one of the hangers had snapped and it simply needed welding. To carry out all the work that was required for MOT plus the MOT was £150. That included a replacement CV joint and new brake pipes and of course the exhaust hanger. I was aware that these jobs needed doing from my previous MOT so I was well pleased to get all the work done for this small sum. In addition I was treated with courtesy and nothing was too small. I would definitely recommend this company
Dropped car off on the morning was explained what work would be done .They later rang to say it was ready before the time .Had no problems with this Garage would probably use them again
Very efficient booking process and work carried promptly whilst I waited. Very pleased with the work carried out and with the price I paid.
I'm very pleased to have found this garage close to home, very efficient personal service and competitive on cost. Thank you Trevor and Trudy, I was fully confident that the work would be carried out to a high standard and will certainly be using you again. Many thanks.
"Cavendish Motor Company Limited is an independent authorised Bosch Car Servicing and Repair centre, we specialise in car servicing, air conditioning, diagnostics and MOT's in the Ashington, Cramlington, Blyth and Morpeth areas.Offering high quality servicing at a fraction of the cost of main dealer pricing. We cover most manufacturers including Audi, BMW, Citroen, Fiat, Ford, Mercedez, Mini, Nissan, Peugeot, Renault, Seat, Skoda, Vauxhall, VW, Volkswagen and more. From oil changes to Timing Belts save up to 1/3 of dealer pricing."


text:
The trio of Headshift, IDC and Tech4i2 have released their Interim report on Enterprise 2.0 in Europe. This is a fantastic piece of work in 160 pages. I had time enough go through half of it so far. It covers so many areas and compiles data on geography and economic production in countries due to e20. Thanks to @leebryant and @mikejthompson for sharing this.
Here are some of my suggestions and points:
Pg9 Table 3 - Links between participants –
For traditional enterprise aps the "peer or hierarchical" describes the structure of how people are linked overall, but for E2.0 apps, it focuses on quality of individual links.
That's two different concepts.
Option 1: include both structure and quality in each box
- Traditional Apps – "Peer or hierarchical, if linkage with others is supported at all. Members have to accept predefined links with others in their workgroup. Strength of linkage unknown
- E20 Apps – "Web of connections. Members choose who they want to link to, and strength of connection depends on interactions
Option 2: Quality only
- Traditional Apps – Members must accept predfined links to others in workgroup, and strength of linkage unknown
Option 3: Structure only
- Traditional apps - Peer or hierarchical, if linkage with others is supported at all.
- E20 - Members choose who they want to link to, and strength of connection depends on interactions
Section 2.3 pg 10
This should also indicate sources which state that Organizational Culture and culture change is a key aspect. If you want you can link to our IBM paper on adoption which stresses that this is not just technology adoption, but actual work culture change.
Table 4
I think for the Internal case, its missing: building employee loyalty, satisfaction and retention. To this take a look at Salary.com's 2009 survey of Job satisfaction, particularly at the top reason "why people stay in a company": "I like the people I work with"
An Internal>External or perhaps External case is keeping in touch with former employees/alumni. This is a variant on recruitment. By having an Alumni community, you may be able to rehire former employees which is much more cost-effective and faster in terms of integrating into the company. This saves time and money over hiring completely new people.
Section 2 & 3 overall
There seems to be a heavy reliance on McAfee's research only. It's very one sided. You should cite other sources as well. There are a whole lot of other researchers in this domain too.
Page17 Communities of Interest
A community of practice is a key component of building a "Center of Excellence" within organizations around different topics, technologies, knowledge domains and innovation directions. It identifies company-wide a select group of subject-matter-experts and organizational memory. In short developing centers of excellence within organization supports the overall innovation strategy of the company.
Pg 18 Innovation Management
IBM InnovationJam and IdeaJam system is a managed approach to ideation and discovering employees interested or committed to bringing innovative ideas to life. IBM has had various such Jams since 2001 across different populations: employees only (new product or service opportunities), employees and family (local community development, and work-life balance), and employees, customers and business partners (challenging global issues)
Pg 20 Crowdsourcing
An example is BurdaStyle by German publishing company, Hubert Burda Media. By providing a template system to allow anyone (customers) to create new clothing designs of their own. This is an example Crowdsourcing by Template; it generates new ideas that customers can sell to each other or license to the company Burda itself to produce for the mass market.
See my book "Social Networking for Business" (Wharton School Press, 2010) Chapter 4 on further details.
Pg20 Customer/Public Engagement
Use more European focused social sites. See ManyEyes and comScore data on apps per country
Pg39 4.2 The Role of Leadership
This is missing out that E2.0 allows a variety of different leadership models as microcosms within the overall organization leadership structure. I provide a variety of these models in Chapter 2 of my book.
The significance is that it creates an alternate dimension of leadership hidden underneath the official hierarchical structure of the company. These alternate models can be discovered through Social Network Analysis, or predefined for individual communities and social environments with different groupings of employees.
Pg40 Organisational size
One of the most obvious facts most people forget is that on the Internet, there is practically unlimited population that may participate in web2.0 environments. However, within an organization, there is a definite bound of all the employees involved. What this affects is the notion of the Long Tail: with a bounded employee population adoption need not be a long-tailed graph at all, since you can determine through metrics data how many people are involved, and how involved they can get. The graph changes shape significantly. On the Internet, there is an endless supply of the long-tail on ther otherhand.
Missing is a discussion on the Dunbar number limit that suggests people are able to at most recall 150 peers or friends, and a closer look at why that idea is not necessarily applicable in E20 system.
See Christopher Allen's post on this: http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2004/03/the_dunbar_numb.html
Pg77 Employee Privacy concerns
Another actor of the personal social networking is that the line between work and personal discussions is getting quite blurry. E.g., some people use their personal Facebook profile to post both personal content and work related content. It thus becomes harder to tell how people are working because it requires detailed context to decide if any content posted is work related or personal.
Furthermore often employees use their corporate social environment to casually discuss personal ideas, projects and activities. This is not a negative, because it creates opportunities for other employees to find commonality and like-minded peers; in other words it improves chances of building stronger employee-to-employee bonds.
Pg78 "Eat your own dog-food"
How about "Drink your own Champagne" – a more pleasant prospect.
Pg80 Does E20 matter
For 1) or perhaps 3) there are some existing evidence / studies on the impact of e20 on productivity and growth. See Wu, Lin, Aral and Brynjolfsson (MIT & IBM)
It quantifies exact value gain per employee from stronger relationships through e20.
Pg81 Maslow's ROI Hierarchy of Enterprise 2.0 chart
I know Hutch based this on Maslow's theory, but using that title for the chart is very incorrect because it suggests that Abraham Maslow (now dead) defined that Hierarchy.
A better name would be "ROI Hierarchy of Enterprise 2.0 based on Maslow's Hierarchy of needs theory"


text:
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
I would love to see the study that validated that the radiation from these machines actually goes through the body, rather than concentrates on the skin.
Also, no one ever claimed that one dose of radiation today will give you cancer tomorrow. It's incremental, and happens over many years.
So, unless your studies were 20+ years in length, can you really say with certainty that the machines are safe? We won't know until it's too late. And by then, I have a feeling health care costs will have gone up already, and now we'll have higher cancer rates too!
1) Why aren't the machines marked with radioactive materials signage?
2) Why don't the TSOs wear radiation badges?
3) Is an inspection every 12 months sufficient for machines that will process 1000s of people a day?
4) There have been no studies of the effect of this type of radiation on mass numbers of people, especially children. Isn't TSA conducting a vast experiment here?
So why don't your TSA screeners wear radiation dosimeter badges or lead vests like other that work around x-ray equipment?
Why aren't your employees allowed to wear dosimeters? I'll choose being groped over being given cancer, I suppose, but only under duress.
Yet the backscatter technology is basically a huge experiment that is being conducted on the traveling public. Radiation concentrated in the skin? How many additional cases of melanoma are we going to have 10 years from now? Ask the residents of Bikini Atoll about that...oh wait, they're all dead from radiation poisoning or displaced because the island is still uninhabitable. And yet we are supposed to trust you?
The TSA is turning a public safety issue into a public health issue.
There was never an issue with baggage x-ray equipment and there is no comparison between that particular application and human imaging using Compton-effect backscatter x-ray machines. The TSA is still vague on this even in the face of overwhelming information available on exposure and potential adverse health effects. Just because the equipment emissions fall within the government-created "specifications" doesn't make it safe for passengers or workers. Ship the machines back to the manufacturers and get the taxpayer's money back.
What about the connection between Michael Chertoff and the company that makes these scanners? That's too much of a conflict of interest to ignore. It taints anything else the TSA says about the scanners.
My wife works for TSA and I'm very concerned about radiation. Her mother died of Breast Cancer and she is more likely to get it then other women. I read what you wrote her but I would feel better if she wore some kind of radiation badge that indicated how much radiation she was exposed to.
She has too much to worry about on her job. She doesn't need to worry about radiation.
Blogger Bob, will you please explain why TSA employees are prevented from wearing radiation badges? And if your answer is that they are not prevented from wearing them, then please explain why TSA employees are not required to wear them.
This still doesn't address our concerns regarding radiation safety of the backscatter x ray machines. There is conflicting scientific literature out there that indicates any amount of ionizing radiation is not good especially if it is only absorbed to the skin versus through the whole body by x-ray. I don't think enough studies by independent organizations have been done. I will not submit to these machines and will opt out evertime!
TSA, are we your guinea pigs? I don't think so, you underestimated the American people!
Is it true employees who try to wear radiation badges are disciplined and/or fired?
How are these machines calibrated and maintained? Who fixes them when something goes wrong?
The TSA had explosive sniffing machines once before but scrapped them because they were too expensive to maintain. Lighters were banned then unbanned after the TSA found out they were too expensive to dispose of properly.
Was this NIOSH report posted for TSA workers to see?
Where did you pull the quotes in the first block from? There is no link.
Hi Bob,
Thanks for the comprehensive update.
The only thing that worries me here is this
"The regular preventive maintenance checks, including radiation safety surveys, are performed at least once every 12 months; after any maintenance that affects the radiation shielding, shutter mechanism, or x-ray production components; after any incident that may have damaged the system; after a system is moved or at the request of any employee. "
This means it's possible for a machine to be in operation for 12 months with no safety check, other than the dosimeters situated around it? If there is a fault with the machine that causes it to increase it's output then that won't be caught until the doismeters show it up.
I would have expected daily checks on these machines...?
Also, can you provide any links to studies showing that ionising radiation on the surface of the skin is safe?
"Safe" is a relative term. The fact is that low levels of radiation on a very large population will lead to disease in a number of persons over time. Even though the number of persons is low percentage-wise, it still exists, and is much, much larger than the number of terrorists caught with these machines.
After deciding to use new technology that has proven to be safe
Meeting standards does not prove something is safe. See cigarettes.
The regular preventive maintenance checks, including radiation safety surveys, are performed at least once every 12 months;
Then the TSA should have no problem releasing these reports.
So why are they refusing to do so.
could it be because:
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) conducted an investigation back in 2003 and 2004 exposing several X-ray machines that were in violation of federal radiation standards.
When investigators with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's workplace safety team visited a dozen airports in 2003 and 2004, what they found was disturbing - at least to federal airport workers.
Although most radiation levels around baggage X-ray machines were low, six of 281 machines used to screen checked luggage violated federal radiation standards, some emitting two or three times the allowed limit, the CDC found.
Perhaps most troubling, the CDC had found what the Transportation Security Administration hadn't noticed. The TSA and its contractors had failed to identify the machines that were emitting excessive radiation -
"The regular preventive maintenance checks, including radiation safety surveys, are performed at least once every 12 months; '
Not according to the CDC report.
Once again the TSA looses credibility with this blog post by not directly addressing this report.
The public just can't count on this blog for facts.
Bob says "So, I'd like to use this post to address those questions with facts provided by TSA's director of occupational safety, health and environment, Jill Segraves..."
Talk about the Fox guarding the hen-house.Plenty of non TSA medical sources out there saying the opposite.These machines are a health hazard and any TSO reading this better be getting danger money to stand next to em all day.Hope you guys have solid health plans...your gonna need em.
Nice attempt to distract from the real concern about backscatter x-ray being used on *people* by focusing on the safety standards for well-established baggage x-ray technology.
Why didn't you have your Health Physicists evaluate the backscatter x-ray?
Why did TSA insist on choosing backscatter for most checkpoints over the much much safer millimeter wave?
Why do you refuse to let your screeners wear dosimeters when on duty? Do you also prohibit passengers from wearing dosimeters through the backscatter or in the checkpoint vicinity?
Are the backscatter machines in compliance with state laws on devices that emit radiation? Are the TSO's operating the backscatter certified as x-ray technicians?
Can you cite a single independent study that says that shooting x-rays at innocent passengers is 100% safe? Can you cite a single practicing board-certified physician who says that the risks of subjecting thousands of passengers to backscatter x-ray are justified based on the infinitesimally small risk of terrorist attack?
You'd be more trustworthy, Blogger Bob, if you included the bad news with the good in your attempts to spin.
And what has the TSA done to make amends to the passenger?
If I bring a prohibited item to the checkpoint, the fines start at $300 and work their way up from there, plus possibility of arrest.
If I "interfere with the screening process", $300 and up. "Interfere" covers a lot of ground -- that's can be one of those "we don't like the way he combs his hair" situations.
If I make "non physical contact" with a screener, $300 and up again. (How do you make "non physical contact" anyway? Use the Force?)
If I get asked "do you want to fly today", and I answer "not any more", the fine is $10,000 (or is it $11,000?) for not completing screening.
OTOH, on the occasions where the TSA looks into even blatant screener abuse, the passenger might get an apology. The public gets the standard bromides about retraining, never mind "you can't fix stupid." (Thank you Ron While.) I doubt you can fix power tripping jerk, either.
If the TSA were subject to the same financial sanctions as a passenger, they might take matters a bit more seriously.
qui custodiet ipsos custodes
I find it something close to ironic that the TSA is more concerned about the airplane in general than the passengers inside of said airplanes.
We have to go through the scanners, enhanced pat-downs, metal detectors and magnetometers to make sure we don't so something to the *airplane*.
At the same time, we are getting dosed with radiation from equipment that is inspected only once yearly and inspected by a company that has a vested interest in placing the machines. I think the cliche is something about a fox and a hen-house.
I'm not a genius, I'm not even really that smart, but it seems like a simple lead-lined (lead paint?) wall on either side of the scanners would be a huge step up in controlling 'stray' radiation from the machine blasting bystanders including the TSO's.
In late November, USA TODAY requested current inspection reports for the 4,080 X-ray machines used to examine checked and carry-on bags, and for the 221 new full-body X-ray scanners.
The TSA insists that all have passed radiation inspections conducted by contractors but has thus far been unwilling to release the reports.
The TSA's lack of transparency troubles agency workers, according to the union that represents them.
Blogger Bob, why won't the TSA release the inspection reports? This is very troubling to the average person - as "not releasing" equates to "hiding" which can equate to "danger, danger".
As a skin cancer survivor, I refuse to go through the body scanners at my doctor's recommendation. As he said, there has not been long-term studies done on the new scanners to show if they present a danger or not. (I'm a frequent flyer.)
Does the TSA allow pregnant and cancer survivor agents not to work near these machines without loss of job or pay level?
I note that nowhere in this post is a study of the backscatter machines mentioned, simply a 'did they install it right' survey.
Passengers are not subjected to the luggage or carry-on screening, but they *are* subjected to the backscatter machines, and the only documentation relating to the safety of these machines is so heavily redacted as to become useless.
Until the same kind of testing is applied to the machines that actually scan people that is applied to the machine which scans my luggage, I'm opting for the pat down.
No, Bob. I read it. Your organization still doesn't care at all about safety. If they did, they'd scrap every BXR and replace it with MMW.
The BXR is simply unsafe. MMW is safer, although we do need long term studies to back up the claim to safety. But the BXR really is truly unsafe.
I'll tell you a story. Many years ago when I was in the military, still in training, we had to do Physical Training three times a week, and that meant running. Air Force Regulations had us not run under certain weather conditions (black flag, red flag, determined by heat and humidity). It was widely known that if it was red flag the Drill Sergeants (or as we called the MTMs) would simply lie and put up a yellow flag, and if it was black flag they wouldn't put up a flag at all.
If questioned about the temperature and humidity before we went running, and there was no flag up, they'd say "I don't see a black flag, do you?"
Now the whole point is that they would get caught with their lies if they put up the wrong flag, so they didn't put up a flag at all and could act as if the flag was whatever color they wanted it to be.
Now why aren't the TSOs wearing dosimeters? Are you simply not putting up the black weather flag and claiming that it must be green weather since the black flag is not up?
Plus, BXR is still unsafe. It simply is, from start to finish.
Trust, but verify.
We have your word that these machines are safe. Your word is not even remotely good enough. Not when X rays are concerned. Malfunctioning software controlled X ray machines have killed people. At a very minimum, the screeners operating these machines should wear dosimeter badges. Your anti-dosimeter policy makes yoru assurances worthless.
You only check these machines once every 12 months? So if something goes wrong, you could be unknowingly giving people deadly amounts of radiation for several months?
Also, based on your mandatory human experimentation radiation trials with your employees, how many years can they work before the radiation levels become deadly? Or is your turnover so high that this will never be an issue?
Who you going to believe, some guy from the Center for Disease Control or the experts at TSA?
"When the technology operates as designed..."
And what about when it doesn't? The "member of the general public" gets radiation burns, cancers, an ice cream sandwich, what? What about the employees when the shielding fails or the beam tracks outside of parameters? They get an ice cream sandwich too?
"The regular preventive maintenance checks, including radiation safety surveys, are performed at least once every 12 months..."
On all machines or some machines? As in, are all machines given the surveys or are only a representative sample given the surveys? What's the expected MTBF for these scanners/components and is a yearly check frequent enough?
"mounting dosimeters...on certain equipment..."
Only on certain equipment, not necessarily on all ionizing radiation emitting equipment? Which equipment has the dosimeter, which doesn't and can a "member of the general public" view that meter?
"over the past year...to date reveal that TSA systems are in compliance with safety standards"
So only recently have they been compliant? Or only recently TSA has confirmed they are compliant? This one might seem like I'm just trying to parse words, but the way it's written sounds like your saying you just started checking in the last year, which doesn't imply good things about the TSA's awareness of radiation risk and handling prior to 2010 or that TSA is really ready to begin irradiating the public at this time.
"Increasing the number of service technicians equipped with radiation survey meters..."
But not the employees who are exposed to the machines all day? Really? Just the guy who gets to work on the machine mostly when it's powered off gets a dosimeter, but not the poor schmoe who gets to stand next to it all day? Really? I must be reading this wrong. Please help me understand that you are not saying what I think you're saying.
"undergoes an initial radiation survey upon installation and an annual radiation survey..."
I thought it was at least every year, not just every year. See above. Which is it? Annually or "at least" annually? All machines or some? How frequent is the "regular preventative maintenance" while we're at it? Also yearly?
Seriously guys - if you can't provide actual information, then don't bother providing anything at all. Every press release the TSA does on these things, the more I'm resolved to never get near one.
It seems even Congress is ignored. Is TSA an agency of men, not of law?
If my doctor says I should avoid x-rays, are you saying your x-rays are safe?
Folks, I don't blog for the TSA, but the answers to these questions are obvious:
1) Why aren't the machines marked with radioactive materials signage?
Answer: They don't use radioactive materials. The X-rays are made electrically, like almost all medical, dental, and industrial X-rays.
2) Why don't the TSOs wear radiation badges (or lead suits)?
Answer: Because the levels are below the exposure levels where individual tracking (or protection) is mandated by OSHA.
3) Is an inspection every 12 months sufficient for machines that will process 1000s of people a day?
He clearly said 12 months was the maximum time between tests. They test them after repairs and a bunch of other things.
4) There have been no studies of the effect of this type of radiation on mass numbers of people, especially children. Isn't TSA conducting a vast experiment here?
Answer: FALSE. This kind of radiation is common in nature, particularly in space. In fact, flying in planes exposes passengers to the same part of the energy band by putting you above 35,000 feet of protective air.
The real question is "Is this worth it?" Let's say that 350,000,000 scans per year causes 5 cases of cancer in the subjects. That's not far-fetched, lots of things have a 1:70,000,000 chance of causing cancer. That's a generally acceptable level of radiation exposure risk. Nothing is completely free of cancer risk.
During these 350,000,000 scans, how many terrorists will be caught? Terrorists are a lot less common than air travelers. I'll even grant we might catch one, even though the TSA has not caught a single terrorist at the screening station in 10 years of trying.
Under these conditions, you give 5 people cancer for every terrorist you catch. That might not be an acceptable level of cancer for the American public. Yet not giving those 5 people cancer means not "doing everything we can" to catch that one terrorist.
The TSA is being wrongfully attacked for using "scary radiation". Normally, folks in this situation can fall back on science and proven statistics to defend themselves. The TSA only finds itself in this bizarre Catch-22 because the very statistics that prove that their X-ray and naked scanners are safe also prove that the machines aren't worth it. Bummer.
If the machines are so safe, please tell us why they are not made available to doctors for independent peer review study? Also, please tell us what precautions are in check to ensure that the machines' software or hardware does not "glitch," resulting in radically higher levels of radiation exposure to each passenger.
I would like to see the long term in vivo studies proving the safety of these machines on human skin.
Two comments.
First to be acceptable, the risk from these machines has to be lower than the risk of getting killed by a terrorist. Since that's almost zero, you will have a tough time proving that your machine is safer.
Second, even if the machines are safe, they are sill unacceptable from a personal privacy standpoint.
Bob -
Why dont you use it ISCON 1000D which uses completely harmless IR, does not see through clothing, and DOES detect liquid explosives?
Or use the MILLIVISION scanner which uses passive waves? Again no radiation, no through clothing, and can detect liquid explosives?
This would also allow the TSA to get rid of the secondary "viewing" rooms. A screener could simply stand next to the machine and view the silhouette. This would save time and money, and more people would use the damn things.
You have the resources to defuse this whole situation yet the TSA keeps going out of its way to defend the purchase of the radiation scanners.
And don't ever use the FDA as proof that something is "safe". Independent scientific study needs to be conducted.
You guys are doing this to yourself.
For those asking why the machines aren't tested more often than once every 12 months, I'd like to point out that the X-Ray machine dentists use are only inspected every 3 years in Virginia. http://www.vdh.state.va.us/epidemiology/radiologicalhealth/xray/dental.htm
You check these machines once a year? Once a year? How many people are zapped by electronic strip-searching ionizing radiation in a year? You call this safe?
Seems like it would make more sense to give the money used for these body scanners to the FBI to use for real terrorism combat, like the FBI has already been doing. Maybe if they had more funds for resources they would have followed up better on the Christmas bomber. These scanners wouldn't have caught him anyways, but profiling would have.
Beefing up TSA resources because of these scanners seems like such a waste, especially given the irradiation and strip searching of common Americans (not criminals).
I also read that funding for FBI will decrease because of funds the TSA needs to increase their staffing because of these scanners. Seems like backwards logic!
Maybe TSA should take all of the machines out of the airports and physically pat down everyone and thouroughly search their belongings. You would not have to worry about radiation or terrorist. You might have to arrive at the airport 4-6 hours early though to wait your turn. There's the solution for all of you bandwagon complaintants. :)
Bob-Because I work around these machines daily, I believe I have a vested interest in how safe the radiation levels REALLY are. If the machines are safe, have been declared safe, and are known to be safe, then why not give TSA employees peace of mind and allow us to wear radiation exposure badges even if only during a test period to show that radiation levels are too low to cause harm to us? Also, the cabinet x-ray systems used in many airports (Rapiscan systems) are old and mostly outdated, plagued with maintnance issues, and so the exposure levels of those machines cannot possibly be known without radiation exposure badges. If TSA is truly concerned about the occupational safety of its employees and the safety of the traveling public at large, then why not provide these badges to show that a study has been conducted to disprove any claims that exposure levels are high and or unsafe? It's just the right thing to do Bob.
So we can trust TSA to write contract specs like they did for the Puffer ETP machines, those machines that TSA could not make work.
Then the post talks mainly about baggage xray systems, and to be truthful I don't care how many TSA employees you guys fry.
Studies from 2006 certainly don't cover Backscatter Human Xray Devices so have no purpose in this discussion.
TSA has posted nothing that demonstrates Backscatter safety. Nothing.
TSA cannot be trusted except to line the pockets of Chertoff by buying deadly Backscatter Human Xray Devices.
Why would you publish information about radiation with information supplied by a TSA Director? The TSA does not get it - you have lost your credibility with a large percentage of Americans. Any information supplied by the TSA needs to be verified and supplied by an independent third party, especially when it comes to privacy and health concerns.
Trust and respect have to be earned and cannot be commanded. It seems like people who have spent their careers in the government forget, or never learn, that very important fact.
The negative reactions that many Americans have toward the TSA originate by the interactions that frequent travelers, like myself, observe across the country at TSA checkpoints. Start treating the taxpayers like people who deserve respect - you might be surprised how public perception improves.
I've seen conflicting claims of the exact dose of radiation per scan. Could you clear this up for me please?
How many mrems are emitted (or absorbed) during the average scan, or at least what is the target calibration in terms of mrems per scan?
You can say over and over that ionizing radiation is "safe", but with no metric of accumulated radiation, how can that be a valid claim? The fact is that ionizing radiation emits particles that can damage or kill cells, with the potential for mutagenic results. How is that "safe" in high doses?
People can make this decision for themselves if you'd only publish how many mrems of radiation is emitted (or absorbed) per scan. For a reference point, it is said the national average absorption, per person, is 360 mrems.
Why aren't your employees allowed to wear dosimeters?
Dental x-ray machines aren't used as frequently as body scanners, and can hardly be used as an adequate comparison. We are talking about hundreds and millions of scans - the TSA's goal.
Plus, body scanners scan your entire person, skin, eyes, breasts, genitals, etc., and a dental x-ray scans your mouth while you wear a lead blanket.
They are hardly comparable.
For those who suggest removing all security, or separate unsecured planes, etc., in response to Americans "complaining" re the new scanners and "enhanced" pat-downs, are really the ones that come across as unreasonable and generally flippant.
Please understand no one is asking for no security, just security that considers privacy, health, and the constitution(!). The American Public at large is not a terrorist group. Yet this is what the TSA believes and this tone trickles down to the TSO's at check-in.
There are cheaper more effective methods, and these scanners don't even detect bombs.. they just show your naked image and anything that might be attached to your body or in your clothes.
So in that case, a general frisk + metal detector makes more sense.
Seeing "TSA" and "Facts" in the same sentence is a bit of a laugh!
You just carry on with your kabuki theater boys, nobody is buying it but hey, Chertoff is making a mint.
Over 12 years in military service and this is what things are reduced to? The TSA is in complete violation of the constitution of the United States with both the x-ray machine and pat-downs. I swore to defend the constitution not allow you to tear it to shreds. Having worked in nuclear power production I can tell you that the machines are NOT safe.
I will NOT fly commercial so long as this unconstituational policy remains and will continue to argue against it.
It DOES NOT make anyone safer in ANY way shape or form! The only things that are effective at this are behavioral profiling and dogs.
Congratulations to the TSA by the way on effectivly becoming the enemy of the United States through the destruction of the constitution. Have fun with that one TSA.
Thromby's new scanner is a WIN-WIN device... get a nice tan or a soothing automated grope. Air travel has never been so much fun!
In Touch With Security
If these x-ray machines are so safe, as you oft claim, then, then why can't any TSO wanting to wear their own personally bought, self-monitored and self-paid for radiation detecting dosimeter at TSA?
Why the utter hypocracy when your own annual employee surveys repeatedly reveal that your TSOs don't trust officials?
TSA says one thing, but shows no real compassion to all its TSOs to alleviate their dedicated concern about being radiated. SPIN BABY SPIN!!!
But your TSA employees don't need a union nor collective bargaining contract, also according to you at TSA. Lol!
So...TSOs routinely forced to work these new not so scientifically tested full body X-ray scanning devices for a full 6 to 7 hours each shift, 3 to 5 days per week, are also only getting one incrementally tiny does of unharmful radiation.
Is TSA's eternal spin mission one of it trying to routinely sell its employees swampland in some far off mysterious place?
All jerking of our chain aside on TSA's part, if there really is absolutely nothing for TSOs to fear, why do your STSOs and managers all bully TSOs [without any written TSA policy telling them they can't] into not being allowed to buy a radiation detecting dosimeter, wear it and self-pay to have medical experts test it...as a daily part of any desiring TSO's worn uniform?
WHY?...Because you are afraid of being sued for forcibly harming them, making them sick, and/or,
incidentally killing them in the line of duty as they bravely serve their nation. Way to go TSA!!!
This is Example 1 in how not to
try inspring an employee to a) trust you and b) want to make TSA their career. Lol!
Remember even with the machines in the dentist office the techs LEAVE THE ROOM when the machine is in operation..
I don't think I would want to be around an active x-ray machine for 8 hours a day 5 days a week even if it is at very low levels.
TSA has refused to allow employees to wear dosimeter badges, claiming the technology is safe and the badges are not needed. The American Federation of Government Employees OFFERED to buy the badges and supply them to TSOs free of charge, but TSA refused to allow Officers to wear "non TSA issued" equipment. Why?
Wow Bob, the "tin-hat" crowd is really out in force on this one.
The information on these systems is available for those who can be honest enough to actually go look for it. Much of it has been posted to this blog, with links to the relevant data, but as usual the tin-hatters have no interest in the facts but only in the hyperbole that they enjoy so much. These systems may be fairly new, but the components that actually emit the x-ray beams have been around since the 90's. If you had actually read the information, you would know this.
If you folks can't take the time to look for the information (very little of it from TSA and most of it from independent sources) when its provided by the bloggers here, then stop whining. Your ignorance is your own fault, and its curable, if you take the time to cure it.
Well, Bob, it seems you approved posts I made later and either rejected or held up a post I made earlier in this very subject.
Which is it?
Anonymous said...
TSA has refused to allow employees to wear dosimeter badges, claiming the technology is safe and the badges are not needed. The American Federation of Government Employees OFFERED to buy the badges and supply them to TSOs free of charge, but TSA refused to allow Officers to wear "non TSA issued" equipment. Why?
Because AFGE is a UNION, and TSO's are not currently represented by a union. TSA can not appear in any way to be endorsing one union over another, or even endorse a union of any kind.
But you already knew that.
Care to comment on this article Bob?
Is it true that TSOs can turn up the power to get "extra detail" and increase the death risk to CAT-scan levels for subjects you consider disrespectful?
@Anonymous: TSA has refused to allow employees to wear dosimeter badges, claiming the technology is safe and the badges are not needed.
1. Why should we believe this? How does the public know you're not wearing concealed dosimeters?
2. You don't walk through the machines. When you or your families travel, you just flash your DHS badge to get past the line anyway. So, why would you be at any risk of exposure anyway?
Of course, I don't expect that Officer Blogger Bob will approve a comment critical of DHS, so why would I bother to write this?
Submitting millions of people to low doses of X-rays will generate disease in a few of them, even if the doses are below the levels considered safe for medical equipment.
And that does not even start to address the problem with maintenance issues (every 12 months is not enough).
And that does not even start to address privacy issues. No one should be seen naked to board a plane.
And that does not even start to address effectiveness issues (detects personal objects that can´t be resolved by image alone, does not detect anything inside body cavities).
is this in response to the washingtontimes article reporting Leon Kaufman and Joseph W. Carlson, both former professors of physics at the University of California, San Francisco's findings?
That article is no longer available on the washingtontimes website despite it only being 2 days old!
"the X-Ray machine dentists use are only inspected every 3 years in Virginia."
My dentist has one chair with an x-ray machine and 3 chairs without. After taking an x-ray, the staff usually moves me to one of the other chairs for the rest of the appointment. I usually spend at least 30 minutes at the dentist. At full capacity, working an 8-hour day, my dentist can irradiate 64 patients maximum per day.
How quickly can the TSA scanners irradiate passengers? If we assume that a scan takes 5 minutes, that's 12 passengers per hour, 24 hours a day: 192 passengers per day.
Note that my estimates are generous in both directions. I doubt that my dentist sees 60 patients per day, and he definitely doesn't x-ray all of them. 5 minutes per screening scan is a long time; TSA probably x-rays more than 200 people per scanner per day.
But even based on these generous estimates, the TSA machines irradiate 3 times as many people as the dental machines, and should be inspected at least 3 times as often.
"· After deciding to use new technology that has proven to be safe and meets applicable standards, the manufacturer then will conduct validation tests on each individual unit in the factory during their quality assurance process before the unit is shipped to TSA."
Outright lie. It is impossible to show this technology as "proven to be safe" in such a short period of time. When dealing with radiation and potential cancer issues, a long-term study is required. In effect, this policy is the long term study and we are the test subject.
TSORon said... Anonymous said...
TSA has refused to allow employees to wear dosimeter badges, claiming the technology is safe and the badges are not needed. The American Federation of Government Employees OFFERED to buy the badges and supply them to TSOs free of charge, but TSA refused to allow Officers to wear "non TSA issued" equipment. Why?
Because AFGE is a UNION, and TSO's are not currently represented by a union. TSA can not appear in any way to be endorsing one union over another, or even endorse a union of any kind.
But you already knew that.
Ron, please explain to me HOW accepting an offer from anyone, even a union, an offer that would afford employee safety, and by the way, the UNION does and has represented employees at all levels accept collective bargaining in front of management...but please explain to me how allowing TSOs to wear dosimeters that were purchased by an independent organization would be "endorsing a union"? There is no explanation, Ron accept that TSA does not want us to wear the dosimeter badges, period.
Let me begin by saying that I'm sure my post is going to be attacked. It does not agree with what appears to be the majority opinion. That's ok. I'm not here to really debate the issue. I'm just offering another perspective that maybe has not been thought of.
I understand people's concerns about safety. I also understand the mistrust of the government. It often seems that the government has it's own agenda and that agenda doesn't always seem to have the public welfare in mind.
However, after looking up the facts, I've found that every study conducted shows backscatter technology to be safely within every single standard given. Millimeter wave doesn't even use radiation of any type. I'm not saying that there is no risk posed at all. I'm saying that every single indication shows that the risk is minimal. Nothing is without risk. At one point, metal detectors were considered a possible health risk. Now, they are integrated into most places as a minimal point of security.
Let's not forget the real objective. The real objective is to minimize the chance of a terrorist attack. Is it possible to eliminate that? No. However, the TSA is just trying to use the technology available to perform their sole function as best they can. We should stop complaining and accept this as the next logical step in security screening technology.
Rafael said: However, the TSA is just trying to use the technology available to perform their sole function as best they can. We should stop complaining and accept this as the next logical step in security screening technology.
Haven't you heard, there's such a thing as securing our 4th amendment rights and having "security" BALANCED with those rights. What's being done now is not balanced nor logical. TSA can't just provide for their "sole function" and trash the rest of our rights.
Also, its been proven that these naked scanners don't serve their actual purpose, and that the real terrorists have most likely adapted to them.
The next "logical step" will be profiling (according to an interview with the TSA), which will be layered on top of these naked scanners anyway. Wouldn't it have been more logical to start with that and reconfigure + improve the BDO program for what it was supposed to be doing rather than push out technology that doesn't work, wasn't adequately tested, and trashes our rights in the process.
Rafael wrote: "We should stop complaining and accept this as the next logical step in security screening technology."
Why should we accept that technology that simply does not work operated by people who aren't trained to use it properly in the first place is a "logical step?"
"Even if exposure were to be increased significantly, normal anatomy would make a dangerous amount of plastic explosive with tapered edges difficult if not impossible to detect. "
And what does the TSA have to say about this paper by Leon Kaufman and Joseph W. Carlson published in the Journal of Transportation Security, exposing a number of shortcomings for the X-Ray Backscatter machines?
Selected quotes include: "[...] the machines have glaring blind-spots and have difficulty distinguishing explosives from human tissue" and "[...] an object such as a wire or a boxcutter blade, taped to the side of the body, or even a small gun in the same location, will be invisible."
Curious in Kansas said in part
As a skin cancer survivor, I refuse to go through the body scanners at my doctor's recommendation. As he said, there has not been long-term studies done on the new scanners to show if they present a danger or not. (I'm a frequent flyer.)
December 8, 2010 10:10 AM
But i'll bet you take every pill he prescribes to you without question. It's not like the side effects of most medication won't kill you. But since most Dr.s get kickbacks from the Pharma Co.s they must be ok.
Anonymous said...
But i'll bet you take every pill he prescribes to you without question. It's not like the side effects of most medication won't kill you. But since most Dr.s get kickbacks from the Pharma Co.s they must be ok.
This comment doesn't make much sense. Dr.'s have years upon years of education and training and the industry is fairly regulated. TSO's have just about 1-2 weeks of training. People quite often get second opinions from their doctors. If a passenger has for a supervisor to clarify anything, retaliation is usually feared (or occurs).
And the TSA has stated that they don't follow the 4th amendment because they are not law enforcement. That basically means the TSA feels its apparently above the law even though it operates like a sub-law enforcement organization.
While I understand the govt does want to ultimately keep us safe, thinking of short v. long term is necessary. Instilling confidence with passengers that procedures and operations are reasonable and will indeed keep us safe without harming us at the same time, is indeed a reasonable expectation.
Going to the airport and expecting to be irradiated and/or sexually assaulted is not a reasonable expectation with respect to security safety.
"This is a lot of information to read through, but after reading, I'm sure you'll find that TSA is doing its part to ensure the safety of its employees and the traveling public."
Nope, I don't find that, not even remotely.
Most of the information cited relates to carry on screening. My laptop and clothes have a high tolerance to radiation. My children, not so much.
There is absolutely no reason for the TSA to not release its data on radiation levels, TSA dosimetry, etc. Citing national security is laughable on its face.
Recall when Americans were unknowlingly exposed to syphillis, radiation and other toxins. These monstrous acts were justified on what basis? Not surprisingly, it was national security.
Man up, TSA: You've been assessed and found to be deficient. Stop playing at security and get good at it.
We're waiting and running out of patience. It's rapidly becoming obvious that the adults need to come in and take over.
Simple Science said:
4) There have been no studies of the effect of this type of radiation on mass numbers of people, especially children. Isn't TSA conducting a vast experiment here?
Answer: FALSE. This kind of radiation is common in nature, particularly in space. In fact, flying in planes exposes passengers to the same part of the energy band by putting you above 35,000 feet of protective air."
Completely, totally misleading. The problem is that concentrated radiation exposure has been shown to have totally different effects than radiation "found in nature."
As for the suggestion that flying at 35000 ft exposes someone to the same radiation found in space, not a word of that is true. The space environment - not that it has anything to do with the discussion at hand - is completely different and casts a pall on everything in this post.
Only a stupid person would let him/herself go through such procedure.
Of course the chance of getting cancer is negligible, but nevertheless nonzero.
So go on, perhaps you'll be the lucky person who hits the jackpot ;)
I am an MD/PhD, and recommend that my patients keep away from these machines. The mutagenic effects of backscatter rays from them have not been tested even on bacteria (not even a simple Ames test!). Why should I risk them on my patients?
The chances of the backscatter X-ray causing cancer are apparently higher than the chances of the backscatter X-ray catching an actual terrorist.
Bob, exactly how many years of accumulated studies has TSA amassed on the safety of Backscatter Strip Search Machines?
How many of these studies were conducted by groups not associated with TSA or not from TSA requests?
Are any of these studies in the public domain?
I am extremely worried about the X-ray machines and will not subject myself to be scanned every time I travel, which is at least twice per week. I'd like to see an independently conducted scientific study on whether these machines actually are safe. A mere assurance from TSA will not suffice for me. This study would have to go on for many years before I'd trust it. Decades ago, I'm sure there were people thinking that Asbestos was harmless as well…
Anonymous said...
I am extremely worried about the X-ray machines and will not subject myself to be scanned every time I travel, which is at least twice per week. I'd like to see an independently conducted scientific study on whether these machines actually are safe. A mere assurance from TSA will not suffice for me. This study would have to go on for many years before I'd trust it. Decades ago, I'm sure there were people thinking that Asbestos was harmless as well…
December 15, 2010 3:46 PM
I can guarantee 100% safety from TSA Backscatter Strip Search Machines.
Turn them all off and tell Chertoff the American public demands its money back.
I don't understand how backscatter x-ray radiation can be compared to air travel radiation. This is the example that the TSA has put forth, but backscatter concentrates on the skin, eyes, genitals... air travel radiation doesn't concentrate on anything, and moves around the whole body. So how is that comparable? Too many doctors and scientists have put forth information to site this, plus we have no independent studies of these machines. Since there doesn't seem to be a concern with strip-searching the general public, it seems like a few casualties to radiation cancer is deemed an acceptable risk! craziness.
i won't fly anymore
OK, let's try this again. I wrote comments about the recent reports that the AIT machines DO NOT DETECT THE EXPLOSIVES THAT THEY WERE INSTALLED TO DETECT. They regularly miss thin pieces of plastic explosives.
So........ Why are they being used? Because CHERTOFF is making MILLIONS off of the machines, and when Napolitano leaves office she will makes MILLIONS as a lobbyist too.
We are getting lied to and propagandized about all of this every day from the TSA and the media.
I seriously doubt that the TSA censor squad will allow this message to be seen, but I hope that they at least have the intellectual honesty to publish it.
What about the study by Boian Alexandrov at the Center for Nonlinear Studies at Los Alamos National Laboratory?
From the article: Alexandrov and his team discovered is that the resonant effects of the THz waves bombarding humans unzips the double-stranded DNA molecule. This ripping apart of the twisted chain of DNA creates bubbles between the genes that can interfere with the processes of life itself: normal DNA replication and critical gene expression.
It kills me that some people walk around with a bluetooth strapped to their head all day -- a devise that hasn't been around long enough to really see the effects of -- and those same people are up-in-arms over the very brief radiation exposure they receive when they walk through security.
"Curious in Kansas said in part
As a skin cancer survivor, I refuse to go through the body scanners at my doctor's recommendation. As he said, there has not been long-term studies done on the new scanners to show if they present a danger or not. (I'm a frequent flyer.)
December 8, 2010 10:10 AM
But i'll bet you take every pill he prescribes to you without question. It's not like the side effects of most medication won't kill you. But since most Dr.s get kickbacks from the Pharma Co.s they must be ok."
It's safe to assume that a doctor has the patient's best interest at heart. The TSA does not. Questions?
The simple facts are that the AITs use radiation, and according to several university studies, these machines will cause cancer in a small minority of the flying population. And since some of those people will die as a result of their exposure, the TSA is essentially picking people at random and killing them in the name of safety. Since we all know by the GAO and media accounts that TSA security is ineffective at stopping the teroist threat, this small group of victims will have died for nothing. That there is a 100 percent chance that people will develop cancer from these machines is not a fringe rant but verifiable fact. Please respond Blogger Bob.
J. Avalokitesvera
Seems these "Facts on TSA X-ray Safety" may not be so factual.
"But that's not the case, Fran Szrom, a certified health physicist with the Army Health Command, told AOL News.
Two-person teams from the Army unit performed surveys of the Advance Image Technology X-ray scanners at just three airports -- in Boston, Los Angeles and Cincinnati, she said. And that was all that the TSA asked the Army to do this year.
"They found no problem with excessive radiation exposure, but none of the 15 machines examined had the required warning label 'Caution: X-Rays Produced When Energized,'" added Szrom, whose command has physicians, nurses, veterinarians, toxicologists and other public health specialists with scientific expertise in 60 different health and safety areas."
and the story continues with multiple remarks that TSA is not telling the truth (again!)
With the 113th Congress soon to be seated, write your Representative and Senators to demand more tansparency from the TSA. So much information that is kept from the public could be revealed with ZERO impact on security. As leaked information suggests, much of this information is kept classified (or the TSA cop out, "SSI") to avoid bureaucratic embarassment.
I suspect John "flying is a privilege" Pistole's days are numbered at TSA.
"It kills me that some people walk around with a bluetooth strapped to their head all day -- a devise that hasn't been around long enough to really see the effects of -- and those same people are up-in-arms over the very brief radiation exposure they receive when they walk through security."
Yes, don't you just *hate* it when Americans exercise their own judgement on what risks they care to take? I used BT technology because it makes my life easier. I reject the AIT because it exposes me to radiation but doesn't make me safer.
What about this article? It claims that there is no actual independent verification of device safety and that TSA is misrepresenting the so-called independent studies performed by APL.
But the Hopkins work did nothing to ensure consistent safety of those exposed to radiation from the scanners.
"APL's role was to measure radiation coming off the body scanners to verify that it fell within [accepted] standards. We were testing equipment and in no way determined its safety to humans," said Helen Worth, the lab's head of public affairs. "Many news articles have said we declared the equipment to be safe, but that was not what we were tasked to do."
Moreover, the study said APL scientists were unable to test a ready-for-TSA scanner because the manufacturer would not supply one. Instead, tests were performed on a scanner cobbled together from spare parts in manufacturer Rapiscan Systems' California warehouse.
"The system evaluated may be configured different than the system deployed to the operational environment," the report said. APL found two areas in the mock-up where escaping radiation could cause exposure to the public that exceeded annual safe limits.
And there's A LOT more complaints about the safety screening that this post does not address.
I would like to see an official response to the claims made in this article:
If true, it invalidates nearly every point made in this blog post.
Johen said:
I would like to see an official response to the claims made in this article:
As would many others, I presume. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), for example.
I really could care less about the radiation issue.
The bigger issue here is the fact that American airports are now 4th Amendment free zones.
As long as you people are being paid to give AMERICAN CITIZENS the humiliating choice between being nude models and being sexually assaulted, radiation is the least of our concerns as citizens.
I hope you're all being paid well to sell out your countrymen.
Hey Blogger Bob, why won't the TSA require all TSO's to wear docimeters? What is the agency afraid of? If the machines are safe, prove it by showing you are not afraid of the results, which may or may not suit the purposes of the agency. Put your money where your mouth is.
MIT says ionizing radiation rips apart the DNA.
I find it ironic that these machines which are supposedly there to "protect the people" are instead hastening death on a massive proportion in excess of dozens and dozens of planeloads of people by causing and/or helping diseases form in the bodies of the air traveling population.
Instead of defending a indefensible position (I can hardly wait till 60 minutes doe an expose in a few years) get rid of these early-death causing machines.
"No amount of radiation s safe."
"Radioactive damage is cumulative."
"The DNA unraveling is irreversible"
So stop using these killer machines!
Machines should narked radioactive materials signage to keep us harm!
I really could care less about the radiation issue.I hope you're all being paid well to sell out your countrymen.


text:
Wrong search query
Profile History
No results
Your search returned no results. Seems one or more of queries doesn't match your search. Please change them and try again.
+ Your query must be at least 3 letters long.
+ Make sure you spelled it right. 90% of all errors are wrong spelling.
+ Probably, we don't have what you're looking for [which is truly amazing, lol]


text:
I am not a pro boarder. In fact I am a very late fan of the sport. This is more a diary than anything else, although comments and suggestions are appreciated. I'm going to try to keep track of how I do (and what I do) from season to season; what works and what fails; and how I improve over time.
Donutz has no blog entries to display.


text:
Items in Your Cart
With GearNuts.com's InstaPlay, you can get the gear you need now and pay for it in three budget-friendly payments. All you need is a current credit card. It's easy and interest free!Learn More
How would you like to pay?
Before placing your order, please read the following terms of the GearNuts.com InstaPlay plan:
'' WOW!!! I WON, I WON. Gearnuts kicks a**, I can't believe I actually won the January giveaway, a beautiful EG-1 Traveler Guitar. Got it fast, unpacked it and after very little tuning it played great, I love it and need it, Perfect. Thanks again I am a repeat customer and will be getting a Gibson real soon from you. '' – Earl Snyder, Miami, FL
Earl, you're an inspiration to everyone who says they never win anything! (Except the Crew here at GearNuts, because we're not ALLOWED to win any of our contests. Sigh.)
© 2017 Gear Nuts, LLC. All rights reserved. Terms of Use. Privacy Policy.
Can we help? E-mail us!
|Today's Payment:
Includes $10 processing fee.
|Payment 2:
In approx. 30 days
|Payment 3:
In approx. 60 days
GearNuts.com's InstaPlay is a convenient, interest-free way to buy gear. With InstaPlay, you can stretch the cost of your purchase across three budget-friendly payments. All you need is a current MasterCard, Visa, Discover, American Express, Diners Club, or JCB card. Just select "InstaPlay" as your payment option. A $10 processing fee will be added to the first installment. The InstaPlay offer is valid on purchases up to $2,000, or on the first $2,000 of a larger purchase. This program is subject to credit approval. We may pull a copy of your credit report to approve your application. Your Social Security Number may be required in order to process your application. NOTE: Apple products are not eligible for the InstaPlay offer.


text:
We do not rent or sell your email address to third parties. See our Privacy Policy for details. You can unsubscribe at any time.
You'll receive email newsletters at the following address:
All sizes
Udo's Oil is formulated by Udo Erasmus, PhD, an internationally acclaimed authority on the subject of essential fatty acids and author of the groundbreaking book Fats That Heal Fats That Kill.
Udo's Oil blend is fresh-pressed in a state-of-the-art, low heat, light and oxygen-free environment and packaged in an environmentally friendly glass bottle. Udo's Oil has a pleasant, nutty, buttery taste and can be added unheated to foods such as cereal, salad, pasta or stir fried vegetables, and even poured over dessert.
|Amount Per Serving
|% Daily Value
|Calories from Fat
|Total Fat
|14 g
|Saturated Fat
|1.5 g
|Polyunsaturated Fat
|9 g
|Monounsaturated Fat
|2.5 g
|Omega-3 ALA (Alpha-Linolenic Acid)
|6 g
|Omega-6 LA Llinoleic Acid)
|3 g
|GLA (Gamma-Linolenic Acid)
|13 mg
|Omega-9 OA (Oleic Acid)
|2.5 g
For best results, substitute other sources of dietary fat with Udo's Oil.
The cloudy layer in the oil is unique to this blend. To obtain its benefits, shake bottle gently before each use.
Do not heat or use for frying. Once opened use within 2 months.
Stir it into cottage cheese, apple sauce, protein shakes, juices and homemade soup (after cooking).
Drizzle it over steamed vegetables, rice, pasta, and baked or mashed potatoes.
Blend it with extra virgin olive oil in dishes such as hummus and tabouleh, or serve with balsamic vinegar for dipping.
Combine it with fresh vegetable or fruit juices, for a nutritious, energy-boosting drink.
|Udo's Oil 3-6-9 Blend
|17 Fluid Ounces
|Save 20%
|In stock
|Udo's Oil 3-6-9 Blend
|32 Fluid Ounces
|Save 20%
|In stock
|1 Tablespoon (15 ml) Contains:
|and more
Servings: 33
Serving Price: $0.71
Price Per Tablespoon: $0.70
Order by Phone 800-338-7979 24 hours | Customer Service 800-754-8000
†Compare price is the price compared to the manufacturer's suggested retail price or estimated selling price of the same or similar item at full-price stores. See Pricing Policy for details.
Information provided on this site is solely for informational purposes only. It is not a substitute for professional medical advice. Do not use this information for diagnosing or treating a health problem or disease, or prescribing of any medications or supplements. Only your healthcare provider should diagnose your healthcare problems and prescribe treatment. None of our statements or information, including health claims, articles, advertising or product information have been evaluated or approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The products or ingredients referred to on this site are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease. Please consult your healthcare provider before starting any supplement, diet or exercise program, before taking any medications or receiving treatment, particularly if you are currently under medical care. Make sure you carefully read all product labeling and packaging prior to use. If you have or suspect you may have a health problem, do not take any supplements without first consulting and obtaining the approval of your healthcare provider. California Consumers – Proposition 65 requires sellers to notify California consumers of substances that are in many foods, plants, herbs and supplements with the following warning. WARNING: These products contain chemicals known to the State of California to cause birth defects or other reproductive harm.©2000-2017 Nutrition Express Corporation. All rights reserved.


text:
A soft, refreshing OIL FREE eye make-up remover capable of removing all traces of make-up, including waterproof mascara.
The Talika + :
1 - The Lash Conditioning Cleanser is the first non-oily eye make-up remover that is capable of removing waterproof mascaras
2 - Its dual performance is also unique, combining high cleansing power with lash treatment and conditioning.
The eyes are perfectly cleansed and lashes are strengthened, you won't loose them anymore during your cleansing.
Cornflower extract : Softening, astringent
Silk proteins : In-depth treatment to improve lashes structure
Natural cleansing
How to use it
Massage gently into eyelids and lashes using cotton wool soaked in two pumps of product. No need to rinse.
Lash conditioning cleanser
Oil-free and soft Make-up remover
Inspired by make-up artists techniques
More details >
Removes all mascaras even waterproof, Soothes and softens eye contour
15,90 €
Product variations:


text:
The date of this event has passed. Please return to the Health Connection Calendar of Events for more information about upcoming support group meetings, classes and additional health education programs in your community.
Ministry Good Samaritan Health Center
Menard Center
Ministry Good Samaritan Health Center hosts a blood drive by the Community Blood Center every Monday from Noon - 6:30 p.m. Advance donation appointments are highly recommended, and may be made by calling the Community Blood Center at 800.280.4102 or visiting www.save3lives.org. Walk-in donors are welcome, but scheduling an appointment keeps the total time required for a donation to less than an hour. Blood donors must be at least 17 years old (16 with parental permission), weigh at least 110 pounds, be in general good health, and bring a photo ID. Donors are encouraged to eat a regular meal and drink plenty of fluids prior to donating.
Community Blood Drive
Ministry Health Care