30 Jan False positive

An apparently random swab test of Contrarian‘s new MacBook Pro at the Stanfield International Airport screening area this morning detected traces of nitroglycerin.

The CATSA agent who conducted the test summoned a supervisor who explained, pleasantly, that the machine had triggered an alarm. She proceeded to check my identification and ask a series of questions about medication, chemicals, and hand creams. My negative answers turned up no obvious source of nitro, resulting in a further swab test of my iPhone, a complete physical check of every item in my carry-on bag, and a rigorous, 90% pat-down.*

In all, my case drew upon the efforts of four CATSA agents, whose demeanor ranged from polite to cheerful. After half an hour, CATSA deemed Contrarian fit to fly.

Regular readers will know that I am no fan of airport security theatre. While I found this rigorous screening unpleasant, my initial reaction is that secondary, intensive screening following a positive indication for nitroglycerin probably falls into the small subset of CATSA protocols that actually make planes safer.

I am baffled as to what triggered the false positive result. The screen cleaning wipes I bought recently? A certain person’s hand cream? The pleasant supervisor said traces of nitro can be persistent, so I now wonder if I should allow an extra half hour for the flight home.

*The pat-down was 90% in the sense that it would not have caught the Christmas Day bomber, if you catch my drift.