We're so offensive we're banned in Kazakhstan
|
|
|
Nanotechnology could be harmful
A REPORT PUBLISHED today warns that urgent action is needed on the testing and regulation of nanomaterials as they could be dangerous to both humans and the environment.
The report, issued by the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (RCEP) states that not enough is known about this rapidly expanding technology – which is a concern as we are using it in everyday situations.
Although up until now no evidence has been found to suggest that these nanomaterials are dangerous, the RCEP wants to highlight that, at the rate this technology is advancing, we just can’t predict the environmental impact, or the health risks.
Sir John Lawton, Chair of the Commission, said that while they welcome the research by the government and other organisations, "There is an urgent need for more research and testing of nanomaterials."
It will be necessary to extend the coverage within the European Union of the existing regulatory regime for chemicals (REACH) which should be taken as a matter of urgency, he adds.
The report strongly hints that there could be a risk, as it states that some nanomaterials have properties which "could cause concern".
It is due to this recent development that the RCEP is pushing for further research into these materials concentrating on three main priorities – the functionality of nanomaterials, the gathering of important information on nanotechnology and adaptive management of this research.
Even though these concerns have arisen due to nanotechnology’s presence in products such as sun creams and clothing, the RCEP says it will not be pushing for the removal of any such products from the market yet.
So, this could all be a fuss over nothing, with the government yet again trying to cover its backside – still, if these materials are dangerous we’re just going to have to blindly use them until more evidence turns up. µ
L'Inq
RCEP
Share this:
Share
nanotech seems to be the buzzword of nowadays item , nano food , nano tech both used in food, electronics, cosmetics

especially food, can it be one day the food ingredient sip into another parts of organ where it not suppose to go since its NANOly measured and supposingly can pass through certain wall of certain density?
Anyone with a medical education could easily spot at least two obvious problems that could come from conventional nanotechnology.

1) Theoretically, loose carbon nanotubes, if inhaled, could be as problematic as inhaled asbestos crystals. Preliminary studies are supporting this idea.

2) Nanopollution - accidentally created clouds of airborne or water-borne microparticles - could be even more deadly than conventional air or water pollution. Microparticles in city air are believed to be the primary cause for recent increases in incidence of heart disease and asthma. This is because tiny particles in the air can pass through the lungs and enter the bloodstream, triggering immune responses such as inflammation in both the lungs and cardiovascular system.

You don't need to have smart, self-replicating nanomachines in order to have a health care problem. Just dumb bits of micro stuff could be enough to do you in.
We're not in any endanger of being turned into the consistency of custard by self-replicating nano-machines designed to digest organic matter. Because by the time we have that level of technology we would be able to build a counter-attack nano-bots to eat its own kind.
So if it turns out that nanotech is dangerous, there is an important question. If you think about how ineffectively we deal with polution clean up currently, even considering the advantages of using chemistry (heavy metals in soil, water, oil spills etc). How the hell do you clean up polution from nanotechnology?
...that we are in danger of being converted into Borg drones by out of control nanoprobes?