Monthly Archives: May 2011

UK team works on anti-counterfeiting using Morpho butterfly and jewel beetles as inspiration

The Morpho butterfly, peacock feather, and beetle shells exert a fascination for scientists these days. What they have in common is iridescence and that optical property is being pursued with single-minded passion. A research team from Sheffield University in the UK is the latest to come up with a prototype film which exploits the nanostructures making iridescent colour possible. From the May 18, 2011 news item on Nanowerk,

Scientists from the University of Sheffield have developed pigment-free, intensely coloured polymer materials, which could provide new, anti-counterfeit devices on passports or banknotes due to their difficulty to copy (“Continuously tuneable optical filters from self-assembled block copolymer blends”).

The polymers do not use pigments but instead exhibit intense colour due to their structure, similar to the way nature creates colour for beetle shells and butterfly wings.

Dr Andrew Parnell, from the University of Sheffield’s Department of Physics and Astronomy, said: “Our aim was to mimic the wonderful and funky coloured patterns found in nature, such as Peacock feathers. We now have a painter’s palette of colours that we can choose from using just two polymers to do this. We think that these materials have huge potential to be used commercially.”

Here’s a video of the work (there’s no explanation of what you’re seeing; the silence is total),

A minute and half of shiny stuff, I love the zen quality. Although I don’t really understand it, I do enjoy not knowing, just seeing.

There are two teams in Canada working along the same lines, Opalux (a spin-off company from the University of Toronto) about which I posted on Jan. 21, 2011 and Nanotech Security Corporation (a spin-off company from Simon Fraser University) about which I posted on Jan. 17, 2011. Both companies are also working to create films useful in anti-counterfeiting strategies.

Math, YouTube, and opening science

There’s a charming post (May 17, 2011) by James Grime, mathematician, at the Guardian Science Blogs about his and other science communicators’ YouTube videos. From the posting,

I’m a mathematician – and have the chalk marks to prove it – but I do not come from a family of academics. Growing up, my only access to that world was through the television. I remember Johnny Ball jumping up and down talking excitedly about the parabolic path of projectiles; Horizon’s documentary on the Andrew Wiles’ proof of Fermat’s Last Theorem; and at Christmas the theme music of the Royal Institution’s Christmas Lectures filled me with even more excitement than the bike that came with six sound effects.

Today the profile of science communication on TV may be at an all time high. My mum may not know what the Large Hadron Collider does, but she knows who Brian Cox is. But television remains a very 20th century method of communication. A channel will gear their science programming towards their perceived audience, be that BBC1 , BBC4 or a Channel 4 audience.

However, with the rise of new media, like YouTube, you no longer need to chase the audience. They find you.

He goes on to share one of his videos and a selection from other science communicators. It’s a great read and has attracted comments that include links to even more science videos.

Clearly, Grime’s main focus in this post is educational/popularizing/awareness raising for the general public.

Some scientists are trying to use social media such as YouTube to better communicate with each other. There are science videos (not many) wherein scientific papers are given video abstracts. For example materials scientists are doing this on their Materials’s Views Channel on YouTube. This is all part of a movement to make science more open through social media.

Science has been been opened up before according to the Open Science Manifesto,

In 1665, the first two scientific journals were published, and science was dragged out of its dark age of cryptic anagrams, secret discoveries, and bitter turf wars. Today we are living in another dark age of science: pay-per-access journals, unreleased code and data, prestige-based metrics, and irreproducible experiments.

As I kept on digging (clicking on the link to the dark ages reference), I found Michael Nielsen, previously an academic working in quantum computation (he has a PhD in physics according to Wikipedia) and now the writer of a forthcoming book, Reinventing Discovery, from the Princeton University Press in November 2011. He advocates strongly for the use of social media amongst scientists as you can see in this approximately 16 mins. March 2011 TED talk at Waterloo (Ontario, Canada),

I notice that his focus is on scientists using social media as a means of communication amongst themselves (and anyone else who may choose to join in) but control remains firmly with the scientists. In other words, science is practiced by scientists and there’s no discussion of citizen scientists where people reach beyond their general science awareness for some form of science activity. I believe it’s an unconscious assumption that the experts (scientists) are the only ones expected to participate while the rest of us gaze on. This is true too of James Grime’s piece where the rest of us are more or less passive viewers of his science videos and not expected to practice science.

There’s nothing wrong with these approaches and, most of the time, I’m perfectly to have scientists do their work and I’m hugely happy when they choose to share it with me.

However, when scientists talk about opening up science they usually mean that the public should learn more about their work (i.e. we are the tabula rasa and not expected to be able to reciprocate; our role is to listen and to be educated by the expert) or that research should be more easily available (mostly amongst themselves). There are some crowdsourced science projects (e.g. Foldit, which boasted some 50,000 authors and there’s also the recently launched Phylo at McGill University [my most recent posting on these projects] amongst others) where members of the public are invited to participate in science activities directly related to answering research questions.

My point is that ‘open science’ means more than one thing.

Nano risk news and a nano haiku

The International Standards Organization (ISO) has published a new document on risk: Nanotechnologies — Nanomaterial risk evaluation (ISO/TR 13121:2011). From the May 17, 2011 news item on Nanowerk,

ISO/TR 13121:2011 describes a process for identifying, evaluating, addressing, making decisions about, and communicating the potential risks of developing and using manufactured nanomaterials, in order to protect the health and safety of the public, consumers, workers and the environment.

It’s just been released so I have not been able to locate any discussion about it yet. If you’re inclined to read it, the document (paper or PDF) costs 150 Swiss francs.

I got my NISE (Nanoscale Informal Science Education) Net (Network) newsletter a few weeks back and found this related item,

2011 Risk Science Symposium
The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor will host the 2011 Risk Science Symposium on September 20-21. This symposium will bring together leading thinkers to explore new ideas on integrative approaches to health risks, uncertainty and innovation, as people look to develop sustainable solutions to global challenges in an increasingly fragile world.

You can also visit the NISE Net website here or Andrew Maynard’s (he will be chairing the symposium) 2020Science blog here.

Here’s the nano haiku for May 2011 (from the NISE Net newsletter),

Nano Haiku

Viruses align
Carbon nanotubes for the
Thinnest solar cell

by Anna Lindgren-Streicher of the Museum of Science, Boston.

Science and Arts Expo on May 17, 2011 in Victoria, BC

They’ve billed it as an arts/science expo but really, it’s a careers day event with a strong focus on science and industries such as entertainment media and mining. It’s being hosted by the Year of Science (a BC government initiative) and held from 10 am to 7 pm today, May 17, 2011, at the Royal British Columbia Museum. The sponsors for the event are Pfizer and an organization named, Canada’s research-based pharmaceutical companies. (For those who don’t know, Pfizer is a pharmaceuticals company.)

I was excited until I read the programme and realized it’s pretty much like to going to Science World. You can ooh and aah at the exhibits and demos but there’s nothing really engaging for either a child or an adult. It contrasts strongly with some of the projects I see elsewhere as I noted in my March 3, 2011 posting where amongst others, I profiled Blackawton bees, a paper that was peer-reviewed and published in the highly reputable Royal Society’s Biology Letters. The authors ranged in age from eight to 10 years old. They were not in a gifted class but they were being taught by a scientist who decided that the best way to share his passion for science was to encourage these kids to ask their own science question and answer it through experimentation.

‘Show and tell’ science events can be quite pleasurable and informative but there are other ways engage in and share science which you’d never know by attending a science event in BC.

Vive Nano and the American Chemistry Council Award and a philosphy of awards

Vive Nano recently received a 2011 Responsible Care Performance Award from the American Chemistry Council. From the May 11, 2011 news release,

The Responsible Care Performance Award recognizes those member companies who excelled at helping ACC meet industry-wide safety and product stewardship targets. ACC Responsible Care award winners qualify based on exemplary performance, and are selected by an external expert committee. Other award winners this year include Chevron Phillips Chemical Company, ExxonMobil Chemical Company, Nova Chemicals and Honeywell.

At this point I want to make a distinction between Vive Nano’s acceptance of the award and the award’s credibility and to make a personal confession. First the confession, I don’t probe too deeply when I win award and I probably should. Now onto the issue of an award’s credibility. Something in the news release caught my attention,

“Responsible Care is the chemical industry’s commitment to sustainability, enabling us to enhance environmental protection and public health, as well as improve worker safety and plant security,” said Greg Babe, chair of ACC’s Board Committee on Responsible Care and president and CEO of Bayer Corp. [emphases mine]

One of the Bayer companies (Babe is the Chief Executive Officer of the parent corporation), Bayer CropScience has a product used as a pesticide which has been strongly implicated as a factor in the calamitous collapse of bee colonies in North America and elsewhere. From a Dec. 14, 2010 article by Ariel Schwartz for Fast Company,

Beekeepers across the U.S. are reporting record low honey crops as their bees fail to make it through the winter. One-third of American agriculture, which relies on bee pollination, is at stake. And the problem may be at least partially attributable to clothianidin, a Bayer-branded pesticide used on corn and other crops.

But as we revealed last week, the EPA knew that clothianidin could be toxic when the product came on the market in 2003. So why is it still on the market?

The bee-toxic pesticide problem can be traced back to 1994, when the first neonicotinoid pesticide (Imidacloprid) was released. Neonicotinoids like imidacloprid and clothianidin disrupt the central nervous system of pest insects, and are supposed to be relatively non-toxic to other animals. But there’s a problem: The neonicotinoids coat plant seeds, releasing insecticides permanently into the plant. The toxins are then released in pollen and nectar–where they may cause bees to become disoriented and die.

….

The EPA first brought up the link between clothianidin and bees before the pesticide’s release in February 2003. The agency originally planned to withhold registration of the pesticide because of concerns about toxicity in bees, going so far as to suggest that the product come with a warning label (PDF): “This compound is toxic to honey bees. The persistance [sic] of residues and the expression clothianidin in nectar and pollen suggest the possibility of chronic toxic risk to honey bee larvae and the eventual stability of the hive.”

But in April 2003, the EPA decided to give Bayer conditional registration. Bayer could sell the product and seed processors could freely use it, with the proviso that Bayer complete a life cycle study of clothianidin on corn by December 2004. Bayer was granted an extension until May 2005 (and permission to use canola instead of corn in its tests), but didn’t complete the study until August 2007. The EPA continued to allow the sale of clothianidin, and once the Bayer study finally came out, it was flawed.

There’s more about the bees and Bayer both in this article and in a Dec. 17, 2010 article by Schwartz for Fast Company.

Here’s an excerpt from the company’s Dec. 22, 2010 response to the concerns,

Bayer CropScience was recently made aware of an unauthorized release [emphasis mine] from within the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of a document regarding the seed treatment product, clothianidin, which is sold in the United States corn market. Bayer CropScience disagrees with the claims by some environmental groups against this product and we believe these are incorrect and unwarranted with regard to honey bee concerns.

The study referenced in the document is important research, conducted by independent experts and published in a major peer-reviewed scientific journal. The long-term field study conducted in accordance with Good Laboratory Practices (GLP) by independent experts using clothianidin-treated seed showed that there were no effects on bee mortality, weight gain, worker longevity, brood development, honey yield and over-winter survival. The EPA reviewed and approved the study protocol prior to its initiation and it was peer-reviewed and published in the Journal of Economic Entomology*. Upon reviewing the results of the long-term trial, the Agency noted the study as “scientifically sound and satisfies the guideline requirements for a field toxicity test with honey bees.

According to Schwartz, the ‘unauthorized release’ was in response to a freedom of information (FOI) query.

If the product is suspected of being unsafe, why not make the data available for analysis by respected scientists who are not associated with Bayer in any way? Given the magnitude of the problem, shouldn’t the company go above and beyond? And, what does this mean for its commitment to the American Chemistry Council’s Responsible Care program?

The issue is not Vive Nano; it’s the credibility of the award. For example, the Nobel Peace Prize is funded from the proceeds of a fortune derived from the invention of dynamite, amongst other things. (I was not able to confirm that Alfred Nobel was a munitions manufacturer although I’ve heard that any number of times.) Does the source for the funding matter or has the Nobel Peace Prize accrued credibility over the years from the reputations of the award recipients?

Could Vive Nano and companies like it (assuming they are genuinely living up to the standards of the Responsible Care program) possibly give the award credibility over time?

There you have it. An award is not just an award; it is a complex interplay between the recipient, the organization giving the award, and reputation.

International Year of Chemistry

ChemQuest 2011, an event honouring the International Year of Chemistry, is being hosted by Year of Science BC, Simon Fraser University, and Douglas College on May 14, 2011 from 1 pm to 4 pm on the Academic Quadrangle at Simon Fraser University’s Burnaby Campus.

This isn’t the only such event in Canada. Last week, there was a chemistry marathon (part of a larger initiative, 24 heures de science), La chimie pour tous (Chemistry for everyone) from 12 noon to 12 midnight at Université de Montréal. Isabelle Burgun wrote up an interview, for Agence Science-Presse, that she had with the chemist leading this public engagement event, Andreea Schmitzer. From the interview,

ASP – À qui s’adresse cette activité?

AS — Nous désirons sensibiliser la population et insuffler aux jeunes le goût de devenir chimiste! Mais nous visons surtout les plus jeunes, car le goût pour la science s’acquiert très jeune et puis, voir l’émerveillement scientifique dans les jeux [sic] d’un enfant n’a pas de prix!

ASP — La chimie, vous êtes tombée dedans quand vous étiez petite…

AS — J’ai effectivement découvert la chimie enfant, avec mon grand-père, qui était un passionné de science, la physique et la chimie en particulier. On faisait ensemble toutes sortes de manipulation dans le garage. À 6 ans, j’étais fascinée par tout ce qu’on pouvait apprendre et comprendre en manipulant des molécules, et c’est exactement ce que je fais aujourd’hui en recherche. Cette passion héritée de mon grand-père, j’ai à mon tour le goût de la transmettre aux jeunes et aux moins jeunes.

My rough translation:

Who is your audience for this event?

We want to raise public awareness and we want to inculcate in youth the desire to become chemists. But we’re particularly interested in inspiring young children because one acquires an interest in science at a young age and seeing the wonder at science in a child’s eyes has no price.

You were very young when you tumbled into a passion for chemistry.

I discovered chemistry very young, with my grandfather who was passionate about science, physics and chemistry in particular. We performed all kinds of experiments in the garage. At the age of six, I was fascinated by what you could learn and understand by manipulating molecules and that’s exactly what I do in my research today. This passion I inherited from my grandfather is what I want to pass on to the young and the not so young.

That’s it, I’m in a rush this morning. I’ll come back later to fix mistakes. Meanwhile, hope to see you at Northern Voice today or tomorrow.

ArboraNano focuses on NCC

I found this May 10, 2011 news item about AboraNano’s plan to launch nine new research and development (R&D) projects on Nanowerk and noted that seven of these projects are going to be focused on uses for nanocrystalline cellulose (NCC).

(I have covered the topic of NCC several times, most recently in an interview with Mark MacLachlan in an interview about his work at the University of British Columbia in my March 25, 2011 posting and before that in an interview with Dr. Richard Berry of FP Innovations in my August 27, 2010 posting.)

From the news item,

ArboraNano, a member of Canada’s Business-Led Networks of Centres of Excellence program, is pleased to announce the launch of nine new research and development (R&D) projects targeting innovative paper grades, improved foams and nanocomposite developments using forest nanomaterials. Seven of these projects will focus on the use of non-toxic and environmentally-friendly nanocrystalline cellulose (NCC). The projects are to be carried out over the next two years by industrial scientists and engineers from the pulp and paper, automotive, machinery and engineering sectors, as well as researchers from Canadian universities and Canadian research institutes.

ArboraNano’s contribution to these projects totals $3.35 million with matching contributions from industry and provincial organizations.

Here’s a brief overview of the types of projects being supported (from the news item),

Paper and packaging projects

Among the projects recently launched with pulp & paper partners, three will focus on creating “greener” paper grades, paperboards and coatings with performance properties that will compare favorably to existing products. …

Automotive projects

The goal of the two recently launched projects in the automotive industry is to develop performance-enhancing additives used in the manufacture of polyurethane foam and construction products particularly for load building in seat cushion foam. … [NOTE: Researchers in Brazil are working with nanocellulose fibres in pineapples and bananas to reinforce plastics for use in the automotive industry. March 28, 2011 posting]

Nanocomposite and nanofluids projects

The creation of novel nanocomposites is a key area of research for many of ArboraNano’s industrial partners. Two new projects aimed at supporting the development of nanocomposites have been launched. …

You can get a complete list of the new projects along with abstracts and the names of the principal investigators here.

From the bleeding edge to the cutting edge to ubiquitous? The PaperPhone, an innovation case study in progress

This story has it all: military, patents, international competition and cooperation, sex (well, not according to the academics but I think it’s possible), and a bizarre device – the PaperPhone (last mentioned in my May 6, 2011 posting on Human-Computer Interfaces).

“If you want to know what technologies people will be using 10 years in the future, talk to the people who’ve been working on a lab project for 10 years,” said Dr. Roel Vertegaal, Director of the Human Media Lab at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario. By the way, 10 years is roughly the length of time Vertegaal and his team have been working on a flexible/bendable phone/computer and he believes that it will be another five to 10 years before the device is available commercially.

Image from Human Media Lab press kit

As you can see in the image, the prototype device looks like a thin piece of plastic that displays a menu. In real life that black bit to the left of the image is the head of a cable with many wires connecting it to a computer. Here’s a physical description of the device copied from the paper (PaperPhone: Understanding the Use of Bend Gestures in Mobile Devices with Flexible Electronic Paper Displays) written by Byron Lahey, Audrey Girouard, Winslow Burleson and Vertegaal,

PaperPhone consists of an Arizona State University Flexible Display Center 3.7” Bloodhound flexible electrophoretic display, augmented with a layer of 5 Flexpoint 2” bidirectional bend sensors. The prototype is driven by an E Ink Broadsheet AM 300 Kit featuring a Gumstix processor. The prototype has a refresh rate of 780 ms for a typical full screen gray scale image.

An Arduino microcontroller obtains data from the Flexpoint bend sensors at a frequency of 20 Hz. Figure 2 shows the back of the display, with the bend sensor configuration mounted on a flexible printed circuit (FPC) of our own design. We built the FPC by printing its design on DuPont Pyralux flexible circuit material with a solid ink printer, then etching the result to obtain a fully functional flexible circuit substrate. PaperPhone is not fully wireless. This is because of the supporting rigid electronics that are required to drive the display. A single, thin cable bundle connects the AM300 and Arduino hardware to the display and sensors. This design maximizes the flexibility and mobility of the display, while keeping its weight to a minimum. The AM300 and Arduino are connected to a laptop running a Max 5 patch that processes sensor data, performs bend gesture recognition and sends images to the display. p. 3

It may look ungainly but it represents a significant step forward for the technology as this team (composed of researchers from Queen’s University, Arizona State University, and E Ink Corporation) appears to have produced the only working prototype in the world for a personal portable flexible device that will let you make phone calls, play music, read a book, and more by bending it. As they continue to develop the product, the device will become wireless.

The PaperPhone and the research about ‘bending’, i.e., the kinds of bending gestures people would find easiest and most intuitive to use when activating the device, were presented in Vancouver in an early session at the CHI 2011 Conference where I got a chance to speak to Dr. Vertegaal and his team.

Amongst other nuggets, I found out the US Department of Defense (not DARPA [Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency] oddly enough) has provided funding for the project. Military interest is focused on the device’s low energy requirements, lowlight screen, and light weight in addition to its potential ability to be folded up and carried like a piece of paper (i. e., it could mould itself to fit a number of tight spaces) as opposed to the rigid, ungiving borders of a standard mobile device. Of course, all of these factors are quite attractive to consumers too.

As is imperative these days, the ‘bends’ that activate the device have been patented and Vertegaal is in the process of developing a startup company that will bring this device and others to market. Queen’s University has an ‘industrial transfer’ office (they probably call it something else) which is assisting him with the startup.

There is international interest in the PaperPhone that is collaborative and competitive. Vertegaal’s team at Queen’s is partnered with a team at Arizona State University led by Dr. Winslow Burleson, professor in the Computer Systems Engineering and the Arts, Media, and Engineering graduate program and with Michael McCreary, Vice President Research & Development of E Ink Corporation representing an industry partner.

On the competitive side of things, the UK’s University of Cambridge and the Finnish Nokia Research Centre have been working on the Morph which as I noted in my May 6, 2011 posting still seems to be more concept than project.

Vertegaal noted that the idea of a flexible screen is not new and that North American companies have gone bankrupt trying to bring the screens to market. These days, you have to go to Taiwan for industrial production of flexible screens such as the PaperPhone’s.

One of my last questions to the team was about pornography. (In the early days of the Internet [which had its origins in military research], there were only two industries that made money online, pornography and gambling. The gambling opportunities seem pretty similar to what we already enjoy.) After an amused response, the consensus was that like gambling it’s highly unlikely a flexible phone could lend itself to anything new in the field of pornography. Personally, I’m not convinced about that one.

So there you have a case study for innovation. Work considered bleeding edge 10 years ago is now cutting edge and, in the next five to 10 years, that work will be become a consumer product. Along the way you have military investment, international collaboration and competition, failure and success, and, possibly, sex.

The Naked Truth on Friday, May 13, 2011

I’m looking forward to being on the Canadian science blogging panel that’s taking place at the Northern Voice Conference, May 13 – 14, 2011 at the University of British Columbia’s Life Sciences Centre. The presentation panel I’m on is slated for Friday, May 13, 2011, from 1:45 pm to 2:30 pm and it’s called: The Naked Truth: Canadian Science Blogging Scene.

The other panelists include:

Beth Snow of The Black Hole. In one of her most recent postings, she tackles a topic most of us don’t think about when we’re talking about careers in science, Academic Couples. Excerpted from the post,

I can think of a few people right now who are in some stage of dealing with this issue [both partners are academics]. In addition to the friend I mentioned above, I know a dual-academic couple who both work at the same university, I know a couple where both partners are former-academics (they did their PhDs at the UBC, found their first postdocs together in another city, came back to UBC for second postdocs each and then both left academics for non-academic jobs) and I know a couple where the academic partner is seriously considering leaving academics because of a variety of reasons, with family being one of the big ones.

Eric Michael Johnson of The Primate Diaries in Exile recently blogged this intriguing piece, The Allure of Gay Cavemen, which was cross posted on the Wired magazine website,

In 1993 the reputable German weekly Der Spiegel reported a rumor that Otzi, the 5,300-year-old frozen mummy discovered in the Otztal Alps two years earlier, contained evidence of the world’s earliest known homosexual act. “In Otzi’s Hintern,” wrote the editors, referring to the Iceman’s hinterland, “Spermien gefunden worden.” (If you require a translation, chances are you didn’t want to know anyway.) The rumor quickly spread on computer bulletin boards as the recently unveiled World Wide Web inaugurated a new age in the free flow of misinformation. The origin of the rumor, as Cecil Adams discovered, turns out to have been an April Fool’s prank published in the Austrian gay magazine Lambda Nachrichten. The joke about our ancient uncle being penetrated deep in the Alps was then picked up by other periodicals, but with a straight face.

Twenty years later it appears that little has changed.

Rosie Redfileld of RRResearch talks about mutant cells amongst other things in My experiments: might I have a plan?

Classes have been over for a month and I have yet to do an experiment! For shame. But after going over everyone else’s projects I think I have a clear idea of what I should be doing.

1. Measure starvation-induced competence for each of the competence-gene knockouts: This will be replicating measurements done by an undergraduate over the past 6 months. I’ll just do each strain once, provided my results agree with hers. I’ll also freeze some of the competent cells.

2. Assay phage recombination in the competent and non-competent mutant cells: Old experiments using temperature-sensitive mutants of the H. influenzae temperate phage HP1 showed that recombination between the ts loci is more frequent in competent cells and completely dependent on the host RecA pathway (undetectable in a rec1 mutant). Phage recombination is much more efficient in competent cells than in log-phase cells; this is true both when competence is induced by starvation of wildtype cells (in MIV medium) and when it is induced by the presence of the sxy1 hypercompetence mutation (in rich medium).

The panel moderator, Lisa Johnson is a CBC journalist specializing in science and environment stories. She also has her own blog where her Oct. 14, 2009 posting, Squid surveillance, in several ways proves sadly timeless,

I find squid pretty inherently interesting. They’re believed to be smart, and I’d call them beautiful, but they’re also so alien to our terrestrial, vertebrate selves.

Even more interesting, or perhaps alarming, is what’s happening with the Humboldt squid in B.C. waters.

First, why are they here? They’re native to northern Mexico, but in the past ten years have spread northward, first to California, and now all the way to southeast Alaska. That is a big change in such a short time.

Secondly, they’re washing up dead on beaches in large numbers.

Then, there’s me. Maryse de la Giroday, FrogHeart. If you keep scrolling down this page, you’ll probably find something of interest.

We will all be there on Friday and we look forward to discussing science and science blogging in Canada. See ya there.

Nano Risk Management from France

France’s Agency for Food, Environment, Health and Occupational Safety (Anses, agence nationale de sécurité sanitaire de l’alimentation, de l’environnement et du travail) has proposed a new technique for assessing the risks of nano-based materials. From the news article by Rory Harrington on foodqualitynews.com,

The body has proposed using a method known as “control banding”. The tool, originally developed in the pharmaceutical industry, is designed to guide risk management in fields where there is uncertainty about the required data needed. In this case, the uncertainty centres on both the hazards of nanomaterials and exposure levels. It uses both existing information but also makes a number of assumptions, said Anses.

Under the system, new products are allocated ‘bands’ – which have been developed according to the hazard level of known or similar products. It also takes into account exposure in a work environment.

The method derives minimum prevention measures – either for individuals or collectively – by combining qualitative risk assessment with a risk control band.

“The tool thus allows risk managers to apply a graduated response by taking into account both the potential hazards represented by the nanomaterials concerned and the estimated levels of exposure”, said French scientists.

Anses has produced a report about this proposed technique, Development of a specific Control Banding Tool for Nanomaterials. It turns out there’s a Canadian connection, Claude Ostiguy, Director of the Research and Expertise Support Department at the Institut de Recherche Robert-Sauvé en Santé et en Sécurité du Travail (IRSST), Montréal, Canada was a member of the expert panel for this project. His specialties are chemistry, industrial hygiene, and nanomaterials. I have written about Dr. Ostiguy previously in my Sept. 27, 2010 posting on Québec’s then new report on the risks of engineered nanoparticles and in my June 23, 2010 posting about the hearing that Canada’s House of Commons Standing Committee on Health held about nanomaterials.

The report (this version of it) is in English but the translation from the French is a little awkward. As for control banding, that looks a lot like a set of guidelines but with more thought than most guidelines I’ve seen.