Intelligent Design by jurvetson, on Flickr
If you are fascinated with the science and tech behind nanotechnology, or if you want to know what it is, how it works, what consumer products (nearing 10,000 some estimates say) contain it and why you should care, there is a new site that has all these answers and more.
I was so very excited when @TomPhilpott sent a tweet around:
Small isn’t always beautiful: Everyone should check out Andrew Schnieder’s blockbuster series on nanotech http://www.aolnews.com/category/nanotech/
I rushed right over, but it took me hours to read it all. Schnieder has done just an excellent job laying it all out for us average Joes. I didn’t see where he addressed the scariest issue yet as far as I’m concerned: that nanotech particles cross both the blood/brain barrier, depositing nanotech in your delicate brain and the placental barrier, which can carry these particles to an unborn baby!
So, if you or someone you know wants more information about nanotechnology, at last there is a place to send them for reliable information.
This post is part of Fight Back Fridays, hosted by Food Renegade.
The Dark Side of Fat Loss
3 comments
Comments feed for this article
April 9, 2010 at 2:28 pm
John
So I want to start out with the statement that I’m a big believer in keeping as many things out of your body that nature didn’t intend to be there. However you, and the author of this study, have painted nanotech and particles with a very broad brush.
In my day job I’m a cancer researcher and have kept up pretty well on the subject of nanotech and particles as it’s being used to develop new treatments for the disease.
Now the statement that nanoparticle enter the body through all the pathways is not true for all nanoparticles. There are many which do, in fact it’s part of their attraction, if anyone can come up with a good way to get things across the blood brain barrier (BBB) it make the treatment of so many diseases more likely it would be amazing.
Again we have to reconsider with particles whether the crossing of the is a true fear, there are systems in place in the human brain to clear things, so their entrance into the brain doesn’t mean they will accumulate in it. Again it depends on the individual material.
So yes there are concerns, yes the FDA should regulate, and yes both industry (for profit reasons) and academia (cause its new and to use the term we tend to use “sexy”, i’m serious that sexy is used by the way) it’s easily fundable for us. However to take the stance that it’s all unknown or bad is too broad. There are very few studies that indicate a toxic effect in animal models from nano particle. I’ll point you to the work of a Dr. Dick Peterson and Dr. Warren Heideman at the U of Wisconsin Madison as they’ve started to take a look at the effects in fish models, don’t know how much they’ve published yet.
Anyways I guess what I’m saying is the article you site seems a little unspecific and while easy to understand gives the idea that all nanoparticles and techs are the same, they’re not, and while there are many worries there are people looking for these things in science and again there are lots of other possible good things that can come from nano particles.
April 9, 2010 at 2:37 pm
John
oh hey wanted to follow up, I know dick peterson he’s in the same department as I. I also am friends with the students in his lab, there are other people doing this work too, I just know them the best. Showing any biases I have. Also my work is on naturally occurring compounds and their use as cancer treatments so people don’t think I’m pumping up my own work.
April 11, 2010 at 10:53 am
localnourishment
Hi, John, thanks for the comment. It would be so cool if nanotech could do what it promises with absolutely no negative impact, wouldn’t it? But while most people are sitting around, waiting for more research on safety, they aren’t aware of the facts.
Nanotech IS already in our food supply without long-term safety testing, following the same path as GMOs. The FDA is taking no steps to regulate or test nano at this point. Many people have no idea what a genetically modified organism is, how it is created, the purpose it serves vs. what it was intended to serve, the clear danger to the environment and the increasingly likely danger to the body through ingestion. Nanotechnology is following the precedent set by GMOs: being established in consumer and medical products without testing or certainty that the tech can meet its goals without harm to human or environment. There is a growing groundswell of consumers who are fighting against GMOs, trying to undo the damage they have already done. We don’t want to have to recreate the wheel with nanotech by waiting until it is firmly established in the marketplace to discover problems that have to be solved through the courts. We are trying to be proactive toward nanotech. Please forgive us for being overly cautious, but once burned, twice shy. And you must admit, nanotech producers aren’t taking out ad space to tell us how amazing it is that our pizza boxes and other food wrappers are coated with these substances. Silence makes us all the more wary.
I’m sure, as a scientific researcher, you are familiar with the concept of unintended consequences. Sure, ethanol sounded like a great idea at the time, but the resulting monocropping, increased fertilizer and pesticide use and food shortages caused by using food as fuel have sounded alarm bells. Farm subsidies were heralded as an end to hunger in America during Earl Butz’s tenure, but have proven to be disastrous for the overall health of our nation. We can’t look 20 years into the future to see if nanosilver in socks will cause even more unnecessary harm to our teetering aquaculture. We can trust medical science that those nanotech particles that cross the blood brain barrier can be cleared by the brain (to go where? Water supply through urine? Attachment in the liver or kidney?) but certainly not until proper testing has been done. Years of testing. Decades of testing. Life cycle analysis testing that studies the full impact of the creation, insertion, and elimination of these substances.
Your excitement about nanotech is ever so reminiscent of what they told us about GMOs. Cure world hunger, they said. Grow food in the desert, they said. Food so cheap all could eat well, they said. Less fertilizer, less herbicide, less pesticide, they said. It’s all been a lie, a twenty-year lie perpetrated on consumers who just want to eat clean food. Please forgive my suspicion, but it’s just a new verse to the same old song.