The word nanotechnology is usually associated with innovation, cutting edge, and often revolutionary ideas. The multi-faceted concept and the various fields of research involved are often seen as new-age solutions to the new-age problems and obstacles that come about. But with so much promotion and investment by the corporations to integrate nanotech into every part of our lives, how can we be sure that this new “nano-remedy” doesn’t come with side effects?
Nanoparticles, the building blocks of nanotechnology, are beginning to show up in a large variety of industry including cosmetics, food packaging, electronics, construction, and chemical manufacturing. While the use of various new types of nanoparticles increases, safety testing, follow-up investigations, and protective legislation are lagging behind. It is a situation reminiscent of asbestos and DDT where the drive to create new efficient solutions surpassed the prudent sensibility of testing for detrimental effects.
There are problems associated with safety testing nanoparticles that are far more confounding than those of DDT and asbestos. For one, it is extremely difficult to isolate the particles from the surrounding matrix. Another issue is the size associated properties of various particles and their potential toxicity. While by itself, a specific nanoparticle may be harmless, its interaction with the various chemicals in the environment and body may cause serious problems. Due to the innumerable combination of interactions, it is practically impossible to study all potential harmful effects of nanoparticles. Perhaps the largest hurdle to the study of nanoparticle safety is the miniscule portion of research devoted to such a focus.
The all too familiar problem with regulation seems to lie with the incentives and ultimately the funding. Most of the grants provided for research are given for development, rather than follow-up testing, and safety monitoring—this is because development is more lucrative and more popular. Secondly, any funding for nanotechnology research coming from corporations is going to be directed at applications and development as well. It is hard to see how regulation and risk assessment will ever approach development on a free market schema. It is ultimately up to the legislators to push for safety evaluations and regulations—and hopefully not in retrospect.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/11/081113100710.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071031103352.htmhttp://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/04/070417154357.htm
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Here's another article you might be interested in reading: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/11/science/11nano.html
According to this article, a coalition that includes the Environmental Defense Fund and the American Chemistry Council are calling on the EPA to work with the National Academy to better monitor nano-research.
Hey stan, i just posted an article that came out form the Australian union asking for more strict regulation of the particles. There was alot of talk about it vs. asbestos but I couldnt find any actual scientific articles comparing the two.
Post a Comment