Tag Archives: Ronald Sandler

Natural and engineered nanoparticles in an Orion magazine podcast & in a NanoBosc machinima piece

The Jan. 16, 2013 Orion magazine podcast discussion (more about that later) regarding safety and engineered and natural nanoparticles arose from an article (worth reading) by Heather Millar in the magazine’s January/February 2013 issue, Pandora’s Boxes.

For anyone familiar with the term ‘Pandora’s box’, Millar’s and the magazine’s bias is made clear immediately, nanoparticles are small and threatening. From the Pandora’s box Wikipedia essay,

Today, the phrase “to open Pandora’s box” means to perform an action that may seem small or innocuous, but that turns out to have severe and far-reaching consequences. [emphases mine]

Millar’s article is well written and offers some excellent explanations. For example, there’s this from Pandora’s Boxes,

So chemistry and physics work differently if you’re a nanoparticle. You’re not as small as an atom or a molecule, but you’re also not even as big as a cell, so you’re definitely not of the macro world either. You exist in an undiscovered country somewhere between the molecular and the macroscopic. Here, the laws of the very small (quantum mechanics) merge quirkily with the laws of the very large (classical physics). Some say nanomaterials bring a third dimension to chemistry’s periodic table, because at the nano scale, long-established rules and groupings don’t necessarily hold up.

Then, she has some dodgier material,

Yet size seems to be a double-edged sword in the nanoverse. Because nanoparticles are so small, they can slip past the body’s various barriers: skin, the blood-brain barrier, the lining of the gut and airways. Once inside, these tiny particles can bind to many things. They seem to build up over time, especially in the brain. Some cause inflammation and cell damage. Preliminary research shows this can harm the organs of lab animals, though the results of some of these studies are a matter of debate.

Some published research has shown that inhaled nanoparticles actually become more toxic as they get smaller. Nano–titanium dioxide, one of the most commonly used nanoparticles (Pop-Tarts, sunblock), has been shown to damage DNA in animals and prematurely corrode metals. Carbon nanotubes seem to penetrate lungs even more deeply than asbestos. [emphases mine]

I think it’s worth ‘unpacking’ these two paragraphs, so here goes.  Slipping past the body’s barriers is a lot more difficult than Millar suggests in the first paragraph. My July 4, 2012 posting on breakthough research  where they penetrated the skin barrier includes this comment from me,

After all the concerns  about nanosunscreens and nanoparticles penetrating the skin raised by civil society groups, the Friends of the Earth in particular, it’s interesting to note that doctors and scientists consider penetration of the skin barrier to be extremely difficult. Of course, they seem to have solved [as of July 2012] that problem which means the chorus of concerns may rise to new heights.

I had a followup in my Oct.3, 2012 posting titled, Can nanoparticles pass through the skin or not?, suggesting there’s still a lot of confusion about this topic even within the scientific community.

Moving on to the other ‘breaches’. As I recall, there was a recent  (Autumn 2012?) nanomedicine research announcement that the blood-brain barrier was breached by nanoparticles. I haven’t yet encountered any mention of breaching the gut and I mention lungs in my next paragraph where I discuss carbon nanotubes.

As for that second paragraph, it’s an example of scaremongering. ‘Inhaled nanoparticles become more toxic as their size decreases’—ok. Why mention nano-titanium oxide in pop tarts and sunblocks, which are not inhaled, in the followup sentence? As for the reference to DNA damage and corroded metals further on, this is straight out of the Friends of the Earth literature which often cites research in a misleading fashion including those two pieces.  There is research supporting part of Millar’s statement about carbon nanotubes—provided they are long and multiwalled. In fact, as they get shorter, the resemblance to asbestos fibers in the lungs or elsewhere seems to disappear as per my Aug 22, 2012 posting and my Jan. 16, 2013 posting.

You don’t need to read the article before listening to the fascinating Jan. 16, 2013 Orion magazine podcast with Millar (reading portions of her article) and expert guests, Mark Wiesner from Duke University and director of their Center for Environmental Implications of Nano Technology (CEINT was first mentioned in my April 15, 2011 posting), Ronald Sandler from Northeastern University and author of Nanotechnology: The Social And Ethical Issues, and Jaydee Hanson, policy director for the International Center for Technology Assessment.

The discussion between Wiesner, Sandler, and Hanson about engineered and natural nanoparticles is why I’ve called the podcast fascinating. Hearing these experts ‘fence’ with each other highlights the complexities and subtleties inherent in discussions about emerging technologies (nano or other) and risk. Millar did not participate in that aspect of the conversation and I imagine that’s due to the fact that she has only been researching this area for six months while the other speakers all have several years worth experience individually and, I suspect, may have debated each other previously.

At the risk of enthusing too much about naturally occurring nanoparticles, I’m mentioning, again (my Feb. 1, 2013 posting), the recently published book by Nanowiki, Nanoparticles Before Nanotechnology, in the context of the stunning visual images used to illustrate the book. I commented previously about them and Victor Puntes of the Inorganic Nanoparticles Group at the Catalan Institute of Nanotechnology (ICN) and one of the creators of this imagery, kindly directed me to a machinima piece (derived from the NanoBosc Second Life community) which is the source for the imagery. Here it is,

NanoBosc from Per4mance MetaLES ..O.. on Vimeo.

Happy Weekend!

Universal design: Aug. 21, 2012 online workshop; nano, ethics, and religion; and more from NISE Net

My August 2012 issue of The NanoBite from the Nanoscale Informal Science Education Network (NISE Net) features news of a free, online workshop about designing public programmes with a nanotechnology focus. From the event webpage,

You (or someone from your institution) is invited to attend a free, one-hour online workshop on Universal Design for Public Programs.

The workshop will be Tuesday, August 21st, 1 – 2 pm EDT.

What is the workshop about?
The workshop will focus specifically on the NISE Net’s Universal Design Guide for Public Programs. Workshop facilitators will give a brief introduction to the guide, look at some examples of universal design in programs from the NISE Net catalog, and will have an expert advisor on hand to answer questions. If you are interested in learning more about developing or implementing public programs (such as interpretation carts, stage demonstrations, and science theater) that are inclusive of the wide range of museum visitors, including those with disabilities then please join us. See the attached brief agenda for more detail.

We’re also testing out using the Adobe Connect online platform for short web-based trainings and conversations. This is a bit of an experiment, and we’ll be interested in hearing your take on the system!

What is Universal Design?
Universal Design (UD) is the design of products and environments to be usable by all people, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialized design.

You can find and download the guide online at:
http://www.nisenet.org/catalog/tools_guides/universal_design_guidelines_…

How do I sign up?
Please RSVP using this survey gizmo link if you’re able to attend:
http://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/987616/Universal-Design-Online-Workshop-RSVP

Agenda at a Glance
1:00 – Overview of universal design and universal design for learning in a museum context
1:15 – UD Programs Concept 1 – Repeat and reinforce the main ideas and concepts
1:30 – UD Programs Concept 2 – Make multiple entry points and multiple ways of engagement available.
1:45 – UD Programs Concept 3 – Provide physical and sensory access to all aspects of the program

This universal design concept seems to be related to NISE Net’s Inclusive Audiences initiative mentioned in my Dec. 5, 2011 posting.

The magazine, Covalence, published an issue on science,ethics,  and religion that featured five articles about nano. From the August 2012 issue of NanoBite (the NISE Net newsletter),

Faith, Ethics, and Nanotechnology
A number of NISE Net partners recently contributed articles to Covalence, an online magazine of religion and science, as part of a package of five papers on “faith, ethics, and nanotechnology.” The five articles, Virtue and Vice Among the Molecules by Chris Toumey, The Landscape of Nanoethics by Ronald Sandler, Biomilitarism and Nanomedicine: Evil Metaphors for the Good of Human Health? by Brigitte Nerlich, A Place for Religion in Nanotechnology Debates by Jamey Wetmore, and Nanobots Dancing: Science Fiction and Faith by Steven Lynn can all be found in the collection here: http://www.elca.org/What-We-Believe/Social-Issues/Faith-Science-and-Technology/Covalence/Features.aspx. Thank you to Chris Toumey for letting us know!

NISE Net has  a new partner, which is also a new organization, Informal Science Learning Associates (ISLA), from the Aug. 2012 issue of the NanoBite,

Informal Science Learning Associates (ISLA)
The Informal Science Learning Associates (ISLA)  is a newly-formed nonprofit organization dedicated to improving educational opportunities for all children. A museum without walls, ISLA provides interactive programming in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics to promote life-long learning in the community and surrounding communities of Laredo, Texas. One of ISLA’s first big events was hosting NanoDays at local high schools. For more on ISLA’s NanoDays activities and programs, read this Partner Highlight by Aaron Guerrero of the Children’s Museum of Houston, the regional hub leader for the South region.

And as always, I will end this with the poetry, from the Aug. 2012 issue of the NanoBite,

Nano Haiku

Fantastic voyage
Dendrimer nanospaceship
Drug delivery

After reading the article Nanoparticles Help Researchers Deliver Steroids to the Retina, Wendy Aldwyn, of the North Carolina Museum of Life & Science shared the above haiku.

Social research and nano plus 2 million jobs

There’s a new report on social and ethical issues, as they pertain to nanotechnology, that’s just been issued by the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies. It was written by Ronald Sandler, a philosophy professor at Northeastern University. You can find the report here and you can find articles about it here and here. The articles have a very hopeful tone (due to some recent action in the US Congress) suggesting that there will be money for social research programs. After reading a couple of articles about science and its new found status within the new Obama administration, I’m guessing the euphoria is spreading from the science community to the social science community.

I imagine this news will add even more fuel to the prospective science and social science renaissance. The US National Science Foundation has estimated that the US will need 2 million workers who are nano-tech savvy by 2014. A non-profit group in the US has developed a program to help with this upcoming shortage of workers. The program is being instituted at the University of California at San Diego. I don’t entirely understand how a non-profit group can develop curriculum for a university (as far as I know that can’t be done in Canada). Here are links to two articles about it, one here and one here.