UK Scientists Recommend Caution in Nanotechnology

PizzaFace writes "An independent study of issues posed by nanotechnology has warned that nanoparticles could pose unique risks and should be regulated by government, and generally should be considered hazardous until shown to be safe. Nanoparticles are now being used in some cosmetics, and workers in some industries face exposure on the job. As the report summary notes, 'Concerns have been expressed that the very properties of nanoscale particles being exploited in certain applications (such as high surface reactivity and the ability to cross cell membranes) might also have negative health and environmental impacts.' The year-long study was commissioned by the United Kingdom and done by a joint working group of the Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering. The Washington Post reports that the U.S. government is aware of nanotechnology but is letting industry regulate itself for now."

Comments

Hope they've learn their lesson.

[MindStalker]

Hopefully US companies remember asbestos and the like. And understand that they will get their asses sued into the ground if they arn't sure these product are absolutly safe.

Re:Hope they've learn their lesson.

[MindStalker]

Hopefully my tires won't blow on the way home smashing me into a semi. Yes, our lifes hang on hopefully all the time.

unfortunatly..

[Lord Bitman]

the only thing that will make nanotechnology safe is yet more nanotechnology. So we can't be too cautious :)

Re:Perhaps its just an idea of a layman but...

[cephyn]

evolution doesnt help the little guy. just your great^10 grandchildren.

Re:Caution where it's necessary

[Otter]

You're conflating two utterly different questions -- safety on the one hand and an issue of bioethics on the other. (And botox, which has nothing to do with either.)

You can disagree about how tightly nanoscale particles should be regulated and you can disagree about what stem-cell research should be funded by the government (for the bazillionth time, stem-cell research is not banned, let alone "*banned*") but one has nothing to do with the other.