Tag Archives: risks

Nano kerfuffle in Germany; NRC on impact of photonics research in Canada

Thanks to Dexter Johnson who on his IEEE blog, Nanoclast, recently commented on the publication of a German government paper and the resulting international kerfuffle. Apparently a government agency placed a background paper about nanotechnology and its potential risks on their website which was picked up in newspapers that which used alarming headlines (likely to garner readership).  From Johnson’s comments,

The only thing that the UBA [a German government department] has in their favor for covering up their naïve and ill-conceived decision to catalogue a bunch of research that is not even their own on the risk of nanoparticles is that to a large extent the public doesn’t care.

I’m not sure why Johnson is so harsh about the fact that they did not present original research. I expect a background paper to present information that has been previously published and that represents a broad spectrum of opinions and ideas. I would find it disconcerting if original research were to be included.

The whole incident is an interesting example of how anything can take on its own life (something I discussed in my Monday, Oct. 28, 2009 posting discussion of some recent comments by Eric Drexler). You can read one of the English language versions of a ‘kerfuffle’ article here and a ‘damage control’ article here.

According to a news item on Azonano, Canada’s National Research Council (NRC) Canadian Photonics Fabrication Centre has released a report suggesting that over the next five years their client firms will generate about $500M.  You can read more about it all here.

Nanocosmetics, interactive maps, Norway’s nanomaterials reporting initiative, and a little dash of poetry

I found a new nano website this week for a group called the Nanotechnology Citizen Engagement Organization, located in Wisconsin, US. I was directed to their nanocosmetics page by a local (Vancouver, BC-based) hairdresser and salon owner, Urs Eichenberger. He’s found what looks to be an excellent site if you’re interested in researching potential nanomaterials risks. The nanocosmetics page provides an overview which they seem to keep up-to-date. The article they list on zinc oxide particles (found in sun screens and other products) damaging mouse stem cells shows that these particles can pose a danger and more research is needed.

Urs has long followed  the nanocosmetics and beauty products debates in Europe and has adopted a precautionary principle with regard to his own product lines. In short, none of the products that he uses or sells at his Vancouver salon Strands have any nanomaterials. If you’re interested, you can find Strands hair salon website here or you can follow Urs on Twitter here.

Courtesy of Rob Annan, I’ve found an interactive map for Knowledge Infrastructure Projects across Canada. (The map is still being developed by the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada so you may notice a few errors or inconsistencies.)  A visual representation of where the funding has been or is being distributed across Canada, the map is in keeping with this week’s theme about both visualizing information and adopting more multimodal means of conveying it.

The government of Norway has just announced a reporting scheme for companies using nanomaterials. From the media release on Nanowerk News,

The scheme is not strictly mandatory. …
First, it is unclear what should be regarded a nanomaterial. One example is nanoparticles manufactured from natural minerals. A company can then assume that the nanoparticles are equal to the mother substance, and do not reward special attention or a new entry to the Product Register.
A legal commitment to declare a product arises only if a significant risk has been identified. Few nanomaterials will qualify under this criterion in the short term.

This reminds me a little of the Environment Canada initiative which requires a one time only mandatory report from companies. I posted about this initiative Feb.3, 2009 here. The Canadian plan is not about risks per se but seems to be an attempt to establish an inventory of companies and the nanomaterials currently in use. I haven’t heard about the Environment Canada initiative since, has anyone else? Please do let me know. The Norway plan is related to other nanotechnology initiatives taking place in Europe which is discussed further in the media release.

At last, the poetry. Heather Haley (yes if you go to her site, she really is that gorgeous) is going to be featured in a writer’s event on Bowen Island near Vancouver, BC. Details:

AURAL Heather @ the Write On Bowen Festival

AURAL Heather @ the Write On Bowen Festival
AURAL Heather is the new weather, a unique, sublime fusion of song and spoken word by firey iconoclast-poet-vocalist Heather Haley and dazzling guitarist-producer, Roderick Shoolbraid.
Date:
Friday, July 10, 2009
Time:
7:30pm – 11:00pm
Location:
Cates Hill Chapel
City/Town:
Bowen Island, BC
Phone:
778-8614050
Email:
hshaley@emspace.com

Bowen Island has been inspiring writers for almost a century. Maybe it’s the beautiful natural surroundings or maybe it’s the welcoming community that gets the creative juices flowing. Either way (or both!), Bowen Island is the place to be for aspiring and experienced writers on the weekend of July 10 to 12. Come spend the day or the whole weekend! All you need to bring is your notebook and your imagination!

Get here the fast, easy and fun way, on the Bowen Express from Granville Island:
http://www.giwt.ca
Sponsored by the Bowen Island Arts Council, Write on Bowen! kicks off at 7:30pm on Friday, July 10 at Cates Hill Chapel with an intense and exciting evening of readings and performances featuring Bowen’s own Spider Robinson, Pauline LeBel, AURAL Heather (with Heather Haley and Roderick Shoolbraid), Keath Fraser, Susanna Braund, and Nick Faragher.
http://www.heatherhaley.com/aural_heather
Bowen Island Arts Council
http://www.biac.com

Have a nice weekend!

Marketing, safety, and nanotechnology plus there’s another Synthetic Bio event

There’s a new study that suggests that scientists and the general public (in the US) have differing attitudes to nanotechnology. The study conducted by Dietram Scheufele and Elizathe Corley (professors from the University of Wisconsin-Madison and Arizona State University, respectively) shows that scientists are focusing on potential risks and economic values while the public is focusing on potential benefits when asked about regulating nanotechnology. More details about the study and where it’s been published can be found here on Azonano.

This information provides an interesting contrast to a media release about a conference in Brussels (June 10, 2009) where Dr. Andrew Maynard, Chief Science Advisor for the Project on Emerging Nanotechnolgies, expressed concern that companies in Europe are beginning to drop the mention of nanotechnologies on product labels.

“We have seen some companies drop the ‘nano’ claim while continuing to use nanotechnology. This suggests nanotechnology is going underground,” [Maynard]said.

Harald Throne, researcher at the National Institute for Consumer Research in Norway, echoed concerns that companies may be becoming less inclined to highlight nanomaterials.

He searched a website run by a major international cosmetics company, using keywords like ‘nanotechnology’ and ‘nano’, to estimate how many products contain nanotechnology. Throne’s search turned up 29 products in 2007, but when he repeated the same exercise recently, there were zero hits.

This, he said, suggests that companies may now view ‘nano’ as a negative label rather than an added value.

You can read more about it here on the Euractiv website. I couldn’t find the Brussels conference they mention but maybe you’ll have better luck.

These contrasting reports would suggest that attitudes in Europe differ from attitudes in the US where we’re discussing the general public. I make this inference from the fact that companies in Europe are not making the nanotechnology claim and presumably that is because they are concerned about the public’s attitude.  It should be noted that a European industry representative quoted in the media release claims that the problem lies with the difficulty of actually defining a nanomaterial. The representative does have  a point of sorts. Still, I do wonder why companies were able to make the nanotechnology claim in 2007 despite the lack of definitions.

There’s a synthetic biology event coming up this Wednesday, June 24, 2009, 9:30 am. to 10:30 am PST.

When
Wednesday, June 24, 2009, 12:30-1:30 PM (light lunch available at 12 noon)
Who
Erik Parens, Senior Research Scholar, The Hastings Center
Gregory Kaebnick, Research Scholar, The Hastings Center
David Rejeski, Moderator, Director, Synthetic Biology Project
The emerging field of synthetic biology will allow researchers to create biological systems that do not occur naturally as well as to re-engineer existing biological systems to perform novel and beneficial tasks. Synthetic biology promises significant advances in areas such as biofuels, specialty chemicals, agriculture, and medicine but also poses potential risks. As the science and its applications develop, a comprehensive approach to addressing ethical and social issues of emerging technologies as a whole is called for if scarce intellectual resources are to be used optimally, according to a new report authored by Erik Parens, Josephine Johnston, and Jacob Moses of The Hastings Center.
In Ethical Issues in Synthetic Biology: An Overview of the Debates, the authors examine how the ethical issues raised by a variety of emerging technologies are often similar and familiar.  They find that these similarities are abundant enough to justify an effort to develop an ethical framework that cuts across emerging and converging technologies.  Indeed, rather than stovepiping ethical questions into the hyphenated areas of bio-ethics, nano-ethics, neuro-ethics and so on, it is time to begin speaking about the ethics of emerging technologies as a whole.
On June 24, Erik Parens will discuss the report’s findings, exploring the differences between physical and non-physical harms and pro-actionary and pre-cautionary frameworks, in an effort to better define the ethical issues around synthetic biology.  Gregory Kaebnick, also of The Hastings Center, will describe the Center’s new, multi-year project that will examine the ethical issues raised in the report in greater depth.


New international nanotechnology safety study and a Canadian synchrotron conference

There’s a new report on nanotechnology safety studies, the ‘EMERGNANO report‘. The researchers surveyed environment, health, and safety studies internationally, determined which ones fit their criteria, and have  now provided an assessment of the findings. Short story: there are no conclusive findings which is troublesome given the number of nanomaterial-based products that are making their way into the international marketplace. Michael Berger on Nanowerk News offers an excellent assessment of the situation vis a vis technophobic and technophilic approaches to emerging technologies and their attendant safety issues,New technologies are always polarizing society – some only see the inherent dangers, others only see the opportunities. Since these two groups usually are the loudest, everybody else inbetween has a hard time to get their message across and with objective information and facts. Nanotechnologies are no different. The nay-sayers call for a total moratorium everytime scientific research with concerning conclusions is published while opportunistic hypsters are only interested in selling more products or reports and ridicule even the faintest objections and concerns as uninformed panicmongering.

For more, please go here. I notice that Andrew Maynard (mentioned frequently here due to his 2020 Science blog and his position as Chief Science Advisor for the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies) is one of the authors.

There’s a nanotechnology-type conference being held in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada this week (June 17 – 18, 2009). They have a big synchroton facility there and, I believe, it is the only such facility in Canada, which according to their video, is one of the most advanced such facilities in the world. The 12th annual meeting features a public lecture, ‘Science Fiction as a Mirror for Reality‘, by  Robert J. Sawyer, an internationally renowned Canadian science fiction author. For details about the conference,go here. For information about the synchroton in Saskatoon, go here. For information about Robert J. Sawyer, go here. (Media release noting the event can be found on Nanowerk News.)

Paul Corkum wins another award and OECD invitation-only conference on nanotechnology as an environmental benefit

Dr. Paul Corkum, mentioned here in my March 17, 2009 posting when he won the Gerhard Herzberg Canada Gold Medal for Science and Engineering, has won a 2nd award. This one is from the province of Ontario (Canada) and is called the Premier’s Discovery Award for Natural Sciences and Engineering. There’s more about his work in attosecond science both in my previous posting and here.

I keep hearing that nanotechnology could have some positive environmental impacts but this the first conference, OECD Conference on Potential Environmental Benefits of Nanotechnology:  Fostering Safe Innovation-Led Growth, I’ve seen that tackles the question.

The conference will provide an opportunity for governments, academia and industry to consider the state-of-the-art of nanotechnologies, their potential to bring environmental benefits and any potential human health and environmental safety concerns at the same time. In particular, the conference will address sustainability and life cycle aspects in a variety of sectors in which nanotechnology has the potential to give rise to environmental benefits. Thus, the conference will explore the environmental profiles of emerging nanoscale innovation with the goal of encouraging development of technologies that can result in environmental gain while addressing unintended consequences.

As I noted in the headline, it’s invitation-only. For more information about the conference you can go here or here. For anyone who’s not familiar with the abbreviation, OECD =  Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Nano motors in your ears, artificial tendons and public consultation in Europe

Researchers in Utah and Texas have learned that tiny tubes located on the hair cells inside our ears flex and change size to amplify sound. The researchers have coined a phrase for this, ‘flexoelectric motor’. They also compare the process to dancing and using a steering wheel in a car. The metaphors are a little mixed but I think I get the general idea. (From a writing perspective, there’s a tendency to throw a bunch of metaphors together to describe something either because no single metaphor is adequate or the writer got carried away.) For more about the ear discovery, go here.

If your tendons have ever been injured, you know that recovery is difficult and not assured so this news will be welcome. A student at the University of Manchester (UK) has developed an artificial tendon made of nanofibres, which can be grafted into the injured area. As the tendons repair themselves the artificial tendon degrades. Apparently it degrades safely as it’s made of a bio-polymer. I gather this type of polymer is used for other medical devices inserted in the body.  There’s more information here.

The European Commission has scheduled a one-day public nanotechnology consultation for Sept. 10, 2009, focusing on risk issues. The last day to submit comments prior to the meeting is June 19, 2009. They have have gathered information about nanotechnology and its risks in the past and this meeting builds on previous work. For more information, go here.

Synthetic conversation between Rick Weiss and Denise Caruso

The conversation took place under the auspices of the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies (PEN) in November 2008 and thank goodness for webcasting since that means there’s a copy free for the viewing here [ETA Sept. 30, 2011: I have replaced the link as it points to the wrong page with this URL http://www.synbioproject.org/events/archive/synthetic_biology_coming_up_fast/]. The discussion is absorbing and I highly recommend it. However, it’s disturbing. They discuss bio error and bio terror along with mentioning how easy it would be to create synthetic life (this leads to a brief discussion about how we define life).  It’s provocative in a thoughtful way. Weiss was a science reporter who is now a fellow at the Center for American Progress. Caruso (former journalist) is the executive director of the Hybrid Vigor Institute which she founded in 2000.

There is an ethics discussion about synthetic biology tomorrow at PEN 9:30 – 10:30 am PST. Go here to enjoy the live webcast or to view it later.