As this is all the rage (in both senses) in the US, what do you think?

I've heard people are concerned about effects upon your health, but I'm not sure if that is just classic FUD. From what I heard, something about the frequency they're using knocking electrons off skin and stuff?

IMO, the "pat downs" if you object seem worse, though I don't see how either is helping anyone?

They're x-rays, so they're harmful. Pretty sure I saw something about the odds of dying of cancer from going through one of these machines is pretty much the same as the odds as dying in a terrorist attack on the plane.

These security measures have a basic 70% failure rate.

In other words, this is something known as security theatre - a big song and dance to make people feel safe without actually being remotely effective. A pointless waste of everyone's money, time and dignity.

I saw an article on Giz a while back about how Israeli (?) airports do things, and they seemed to have the right idea. It basically boiled down to extreme profiling - a lot of well trained staff looking for the tells of a terrorist (nervousness etc). It was all fit into the check in process, so minimal hassle to the people just wanting to go about their business. It involved really innocuous questions, like what people were on the flight for etc that could lead to an obvious tell. I think they still had the simple things, like bag scanners and metal detectors, but nothing majorly delaying and undignified.

TLDR: TSA security measures are pointless and ineffective.

I thought these had been out for a while now?

They've been around a couple of months, but they're getting more of an issue. Also, they more recently introduced "enhanced pat downs" which are pretty bad.

If you have nothing to hide there's nothing to be scared of.

Sure, but it also seems you have little to be scared of if you do have something to hide. They don't work and they're a massive undignified waste of time and money. It's also actually a violation of a whole bunch of laws, but the TSA have exemptions, which just seems wrong.

Maybe I should just put the straight to the point question here... patdown or scanner, which would you choose

I have no objections to being both scanned and patted down.

TBH, I'd rather just avoid the US :p

If you don't like it don't go to the USA.

Whilst not very effective, that's not the point. If it puts some people off carrying out any terrorism then it serves a purpose.

Extreme shit example as the same: XAC. It catches no cheaters ever. But it puts people off cheating because there's a RISK of being caught.

In an exam it would be np to cheat in reality. Like you could get away with it not being caught. But the risk simply means most people won't ever cheat.