I solicited comments (on the proposed bill or interview) from a number of individuals on the Canadian nanotechnology scene representing business, science, and non-governmental organizations on the heels of last week’s interview with Peter Julian, the Canadian MP, who has tabled a private member’s bill for nanotechnology legislation. The first to respond was,
Gilbert Walker
Interim Board Member, Nano Ontario
Professor, University of TorontoBrief Bio: Professor Walker is the Canada Research Chair Professor for Molecular Microscopy and Nanophotonic Devices at the University of Toronto and Director of its Nanotechnology Network. He is the Scientific Director of BiopSys, the NSERC Strategic Network for Bioplasmonic Systems, which is developing nanotechnology based diagnostics for lung cancer and leukemia. See http://www.biopsys.ca/English/ Walker serves the National Institutes of Health of the United States by reviewing their proposed activities in nanomedicine. He is a founding member of Nano Ontario and has served provincial and federal advisory groups on nanotechnology.
With regard to the details of what is being proposed in Bill C-494, I have not had a chance to examine the Bill in detail so I will have to reserve Judgment on that. However, nanotechnology will impact nearly all elements of industry and society; and Canada clearly needs a strategy for investment and development – a part of which involves a regulatory framework. Nano Ontario is deeply supportive of both Canadian and international efforts to develop standards and appropriate, scientifically informed regulation in nanotechnology. A number of Nano Ontario’s members are involved in standards and, through Health Canada and Environment Canada, efforts to amend the Canadian Environmental Protection Act to provide an evidence-based regulatory framework for nanotechnology. A clear regulatory framework is a critical condition for serious investment and development in nano science and technology.
Thank you Professor Walker for your comments. As other comments arrive I will be posting them here.
Peter Julian interview Part 1,Part 2, Part 3, Comments: nanoAlberta
UK government responds to House of Lords report on nanotechnologies and food
Julian mentioned in part 2 of the interview that he and his team had reviewed and used some ideas from the select report into nanotechnologies and food from the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee. By coincidence, the UK government responded to the report’s recommendations here on March 25, 2010.
I’ve quickly skimmed the response and the government indicates that the first four recommendations (commercialization of the technology in the food industries) have already been dealt with through a number of initiatives.
The recommendations for filling knowledge gaps were a mixed bag with the government accepting a number of them. There was some hesitation about insisting that food companies report about their nanomaterials research even though the committee recommended that the information be kept in a confidential database so companies don’t lose their competitive advantages. While the government agreed with the recommendation in principle it was felt that implementation is problematic and they are attempting to address the issue by other means. (Given that Julian’s proposed legislation includes a nanomaterials reporting plan, I wonder how it will be implemented in light of the difficulties expressed by the UK government.)
Recommendations for definitions achieved a much higher rate of acceptance than previous sections. Other recommendations in very brief sections are highly specific to the UK situation but the ones on regulatory frameworks were interesting as the UK is cooperating with the European Union efforts. The report reveals some of the complications arising from regulation when you have to take into account evolving international agreements.
The final section focuses on recommendations for communication and public engagement. At the time I commented on the report, I felt that these were the weakest recommendations. The government agreed with most of these recommendations or noted that they are addressed in the UK National Nanotechnologies Strategy.
Skinput?
The body as a user interface is not an especially new concept but this seems like a very engaging approach to the idea. From the news item on Nanowerk,
Certainly not nanotechnology (yet) but you can clearly see where this could be going with nanoelectronic devices and sensors…
Skinput is a novel, non-invasive technology that appropriates the human body for acoustic transmission and allows the skin to be used as an input surface. Research findings on this always available, naturally portable, on-body finger input system will be presented at the next ACM Computer-Human Interaction (CHI) conference, CHI 2010.
Nanowerk also has a ‘skinput’ video with someone demonstrating what this could look like. The CHI conference will take place, April 10-15, 2010 in Atlanta, Georgia.
Twisted Poets
On the local (Vancouver) poetry scene, Pandora’s Collective is presenting an evening of the stuff on April 1, 2010. I wonder if they’re going to have an April fool theme?
TWISTED POETS LITERARY SALON
Thursday, April 1, 2010
7:00pm – 9:00pm
Cambie Bakery & Cafe
312 Cambie St (north of Hastings)
Vancouver, BCIn the spirit of Vancouver all poets are welcome. Come out and bring your best, favourite, newest, oldest poems, and share in an evening of literary surprises.
Hosts: Bonnie Nish and Sita Carboni
Whether hosting the poetry slams at the Café Deux Soleils, hosting the radio show “Wax Poetic” on Coop Radio 102.7, Wednesday afternoons or performing as part of Vancouver’s Slam Poetry team, R.C. Weslowski has worked hard to advance and promote the art of spoken word in our city.
Poet, author, musician and media artist Heather Susan Haley has been published in numerous journals and anthologies, her poetry collections Sideways (Anvil Press) and Three Blocks West of Wonderland (Ekstasis Editions) described as “supple and unusual,” “brawny and uncompromising.”