The holidays are here, and for many of us, that means trips to the airport. Going through security checkpoints sucks. A recent experience at the airport security line got me thinking: Why can't we take full-sized tubes of toothpaste through the checkpoints? It turns out, there's a legit reason. But, there's also hope that someday soon, we could move beyond those little clear bags of travel-sized liquids.

Before we begin, would you do me a favor? Please share this story with friends, family, social followers, and anyone else who you think might find it interesting. Not subscribed? You can fix that with one click.

Why the TSA Still Bans Liquids From Carry-Ons

And why there may be hope for your full-sized toothpaste tubes, soon.

If you've ever made the mistake of purchasing a bottle of water or a can of soda before entering the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) checkpoint line at the airport, you know first-hand that there is a liquids ban at America's airports.

I was reminded of this on a recent flight back from Denver when my carry-on bag was diverted from the security scanner. A TSA agent had me unlock my duffel so she could search for the contraband. The offending item: A full-sized tube of Arm & Hammer toothpaste.

For more than 15 years, flyers have had to comply with the 3-1-1 rule for liquids and gels. We're limited to carrying on liquid and gel products of no more than 3.4 ounces (100 milliliters for our metric friends) per item — the 3. All those products must fit in a single reusable quart-sized bag — the first 1. And each passenger is limited to one of these bags — the second 1. (You can get around this rule in one of two ways: By checking the bag which contains the larger products, or by freezing the products solid.)

Considering the everyday blandness of toothpaste, deodorant, and bottled water, it feels a bit arbitrary to label them as security threats, but the restrictions arose from real threats to global safety.

Two specific events are often cited by global security experts as the impetus for the ban. In 2006, British MI5 officials foiled a terror plot to blow up several transatlantic jets mid-flight using liquid-based explosives. Officials arrested 21 people who were connected to the scheme to hide liquid explosives in carry-on luggage on up to 10 flights leaving from London Heathrow Airport.

CNN reported at the time that a senior U.S. congressional source told them "it is believed the plotters were to carry a 'British version of Gatorade' onto the planes and then mix it with a gel-like substance. The explosives were to be triggered by an iPod or a cell phone, the source said.

The idea wasn't new.

A similar incident in 1995, known as the Bojinka plot, involved a plan to blow up a dozen planes flying across the Pacific. The nephew of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the man identified as the mastermind behind the Sept. 11 attacks, concocted a plan to blow up 11 U.S.-bound airplanes using virtually undetectable explosives.

In a world where terrorists were weaponizing modern sports drinks, placing limits on what size and how many liquids we brought onto planes was a simple and effective way to beef up security. It costs governments almost nothing to implement. And it provides a minor inconvenience to travelers.

Your water bottles, tubes of toothpaste, and other liquids were seen as real threats to global security.

But technology advances quickly. Nearly 16 years after the 3-1-1 rule went into effect, the world has beefed up airport security. We now have metal detectors and full-body scanners, which offer TSA agents a 3D visual of any potential security threats (and no, they don't show your naked body). For bags, some airports in other parts of the world have recently adopted state-of-the-art computed tomography (CT) scanners, which allow airport security agencies to do away with liquid bans and other annoyances (like removing laptops from bags).

If you fly through Shannon Airport in Ireland, the new CT scanners offer a 3D picture of what is inside your bag. The airport estimated at the time of its implementation the new tech would cut wait times to get through security by as much as half.

"From a security point of view, they're able to make very accurate decisions about what the materials are in your bag: Is it a likely threat material or is it benign. That's better security, better decisions," a security official told CNN earlier this year.

Shannon isn't the only airport to adopt these new scanners in recent years. As early as 2018, major airports the world over, including JFK International in New York, began trialing the new tech. Since then, both London Heathrow and London Southend have adopted these new scanners.

So why don't we have these scanners in America's airports? I tried asking the TSA this exact question.

According to Lorie Dankers, a spokesperson with the Transportation Security Administration, the agency has installed some of these scanners in checkpoints nationwide. But she was unable to confirm how many airports have them and did not address questions about any timelines to remove the 3-1-1 rule.

She did offer some hope of faster travel times, though: According to Dankers, when utilizing these new scanners, travelers can leave everything in their carry-on bag, including laptops and cameras. But that also includes "travel-size liquids," according to Dankers. So it seems the 3-1-1 rule isn't leaving America's airports anytime soon.For now, leave those full-sized tubes of toothpaste at home or in your checked luggage. I'd recommend skipping attempts to freeze it. I hear frozen toothpaste sucks worse than waiting in a TSA line.

How are you liking Feed Your Curiosity! so far?

I'd love to hear what you think of this newsletter so far. Please take this super short survey to share your opinions (and story ideas).

Share Feed Your Curiosity! with your friends

This holiday season, give the gift of knowledge: Share this story (and this newsletter) with a friend. I rely exclusively on word-of-mouth to grow this newsletter. It's a passion project for me, so any recommendations are greatly appreciated.