So you want to see me naked at the airport?

Unbuckle the belt. Slip off the shoes. Step into the full-body scanning booth.

Many American travelers may need some time to get used to that last command.

But those scanners are coming to many American airports, as part of the federal government's response to the Christmas Day attempted bombing of a Northwest Airlines jet over Detroit. The Nigerian suspect, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, hid explosive materials in his underwear and boarded the plane undetected.

The new scanners use low-level X-rays or radio frequencies to see through clothing and find threats that metal detectors cannot, like ceramic knives and bomb components. Such a body scan would have helped screeners detect the explosive packet carried by Abdulmutallab, says Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and security experts.

Napolitano recently said she would speed up the installation and deployment of hundreds of the machines at airports across the country. Nineteen U.S. airports already use them.

O'Hare International Airport should get its first scanners in the next six months, according to Chicago Aviation Commissioner Rosemarie Andolino.

So, travelers, get ready.

The photo here gives you an idea of what you'll be revealing.

There has been an intense debate about the safety and effectiveness of these machines and about how much they invade your privacy.

The safety issues seem easy to answer. Some of the machines use minimal X-rays, the equivalent of your exposure from just two minutes of flying on an airplane, the Transportation Security Administration says. Other models use radio wave transmissions that emit much less energy than a typical cell phone transmission. So they're safe.

Effective? Yes, to a point. They can't detect contraband that is smuggled inside a body cavity.

Privacy? This is a real concern. Federal officials say the machines will blur your face and groin area. The machines will not store, print, transmit or send your image. It must be deleted by the operator before another image will appear.

Still, the scanners are incredibly intrusive. They also will likely lengthen security lines and add waiting time.

That's why the machines should be used as a secondary line of screening, as they were when first introduced a few years ago. They should be used on passengers who require additional scrutiny, not on everyone in line, as the TSA plans to do.

The TSA also needs to offer more choices for people who refuse to be scanned. Right now, people can ask for a pat-down instead of a scan. How about giving passengers the option of having a bomb-sniffing dog take a whiff? About 700 dogs currently work at airports. They're trained to detect lots of different explosive compounds, including the one that authorities say Abdulmutallab smuggled on board. Training more bomb-detecting dogs is a cheap and effective way to enhance airport security.

Scanners are useful, but no single system or device will stymie every attempt. Terrorists always probe for vulnerabilities, seeking new avenues of attack. With luck and determination, we'll develop new ways to thwart them.

And on it goes

What do you think about Airport scanners?