Tag Archives: FDA regulation

Took a look at nano vitamin webcast

There was an event called Nanotech and Your Daily Vitamins based on a newly released report called A Hard Pill to Swallow January 14, 2009, at the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies (PEN). The event has been posted as a webcast. I watched it a few weeks ago and finally got a chance to review the report today. The most disconcerting thing about the affair is how little information anyone has about nanoscale ingredients in dietary supplements and the speed at which these products are proliferating. From the report’s introduction,

[When we started] there were 11 dietary supplements on the market that claimed to use nanoscale ingredients, such as calcium, magnesium and silver. Now less than two years later, our research has found indications that the number of manufacturer-identified dietary supplementary products claiming to use nanoscale ingredients has more than tripled to over 40 products.

I imagine that not every manufacturer wants to admit that they’re using nanoscale ingredients (so it makes me wonder how many more of these products there are) or even agrees that the ingredients should be considered as something unique. As a matter of fact, in a report of this kind I’d expect to see a definition for what constitutes a nanoscale ingredient. Overall, the report and the webcast where the authors discussed their findings were a disappointment to me. My impression is that the authors did not have a good grasp of the topic. If you’re curious about their findings and their recommendations, you can find the report and the webcast here, just click in the sidebar on the right.

Nano vitamins, honey bee mystery, and a history of risk

The Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies has an event tomorrow, Jan. 14 2009 from 9:30 am to 10:30 am EST (with a 6:30 am PST start time, I think I’ll wait ’til they post the webcast). If you want to see the webcast (Nanotech and Your Daily Vitamins) live or, if you’re planning to attend,  RSVP, go here. This seems more like a press conference than one of their standard events given the time and the planned distribution post webcast of a report on food supplement regulation as per nanotechnology innovations.

Genome BC has a free public forum coming up on January 20, 2009 (next Tuesday). It’s called ‘Why are Bees Disappearing and Could Poplar Trees be the Next Biofuel?’  There are speakers from the University of British Columbia and one from the BC Innovation Council.  Location is: Science World, 1455 Quebec St., Vancouver and the time is: 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. Go here for more details and for pre-registration.

I found an interesting aggregator, Allport, which offers amongst other topics a nanotechnology page listing ‘All the top nanotechnology news’ from various blogs. Go here for a look. Allport describes itself as: a “digital magazine rack of the internet” (from their About Allport page).

After noticing yesterday’s kerfuffle (in Canadian media) about risk, regulation, and nanotechnology, I decided to take another look at that report, ‘Small is different’ from the Council of Canadian Academies’. Here’s what they had to say in their summary,

Although the panel believes that it is not necessary to create new regulatory mechanisms to address the unique challenges presented by nanomaterials, existing regulatory mechanisms could and should be strengthened.  p. 9

(Arguably the regulatory mechanisms should be strengthened regardless of any innovations due to nanotechnology or other emerging technology.) In any event, it’s interesting to contrast the text in the report with the news items which suggest a more strident tone.

Inspiration for a new approach to risk regulation for nanotechnology

I’m getting into the home stretch now regarding the ‘Risk Management Principle for Nanotechnology’ article. After dealing with the ‘classic’ risk principles and the newer precautionary principles, the authors (Marchant, Sylvester, and Abbott) unveil a theory for their proposed ‘new principles’. The theory is based on work by I. Ayres and J. Braithwaite on something they call, ‘Responsive Regulation’. Briefly, they suggest avoiding the regulation/deregulation debate in favour of a flexible regulatory approach where a range of strategies are employed.

With this tool kit [range of strategies] in hand, regulators can play a tit-for-tat strategy: they allow firms to self-regulate so long as the firms reciprocate with responsible action; if instead some firms act opportunistically, regulators respond to the defectors with appropriate penalties and more stringent regulation. p. 52 (Nanoethics, 2008, vol. 2 pp. 43-60

There are some difficulties associated with this approach but that is being saved for my next posting in this series.

The Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies has two events coming up. ‘Synthetic Biology: Is Ethics a Showstopper?’ on Thursday, January 8, 2009 from 12:30 pm – 1:30 pm (EST). For information on location (you have to RSVP) or how to attend via webcast (no RSVP required), check here. The other event is called, ‘Nanotech and Your Daily Vitamins; Barriers to Effective FDA Regulation of Nanotechnology-Based Dietary Supplements’ and will be held on Thursday, January 15 (?) from 9:30 am – 10:30 am (EST). The date listed on their website and in their invitation is January 14, which is incorrect. I imagine they’ll correct either the date or date soon. For more details about the event itself, the physical location (If you’re planning to go, please RSVP), or the webcast directions (RSVP) not required) please check here.