FDA Sees Nanotech Challenges In Every Product Category

An anonymous reader writes "The Food and Drug Administration's Nanotechnology Task Force has passed on its first report into the ever-growing field of nanotech products. As a result, the FDA is implementing changes that will allow it to oversee nanotech products in every category withinin its purview. Nanotech products are 'estimated to grow to $2.6 trillion in manufactured goods globally by 2014. As the Task Force report highlights, nanotechnology impacts every area of FDA responsibility--drugs, drug delivery systems, cosmetics, medical devices, and food products. Overall, the agency regulates products that are worth nearly $1.5 trillion annually and that account for almost 25 percent of US consumer spending.'"

Comments

Re:Who's Surprised...

[StealthyRoid]

Of course I have sympathy for these companies that cheat stockholders by backdating stocks options, cashing in stock options based on insider information and in general treating stockholder property as personal disposal income. Not to mention research and development product that are perfectly willing to engage in mass murder for profits. A terrorist kills a few thousand people, we go to war. A corporation kills a few tens of thousand of people we let them continue to do the same thing another day. I mean corporate balance sheets are so much more a justification for the death of humans than a desire for political change.

Ooo, an anti-corporatism rant. How original. Yes, that's exactly right. Every company cheats stockholders, jacks them based on insider information, and totally screws their investors. You've nailed it! We should clearly just get rid of private enterprise and allow the government to run everything, because it's comprised of completely altruistic individuals who would never play fast and loose with taxpayer money, engage in corrupt financial dealings, and would probably give us all kisses on the cheek before we went to bed.

Look, of _course_ you'll have individual instances of corruption in ANY sector. Managing a company doesn't change someone's core proclivities any more than getting a job with Uncle Sam does. The point here is that private organizations are far less distasteful than large federal bureaucracies. For one, you can _choose_ to invest in a company, whereas you don't have a choice when it comes to investing in Uncle Sam. He's gonna take his 25% no matter what you do. Also, if a company screws up, they get punished. If the government screws up, what happens? Nothing. There's no effective feedback for the government, and don't say elections, because that's a change of, at most, a couple thousand elected officials and political appointees. There's at least _some_ check on private agencies.

If you'd really rather descend into hysteria and claim that corporations are mass murdering assholes who've killed BILLIONS of people, OK, fine. You just don't have the evidence to back that shit up. Again, yes, corporations can behave badly, but the _overwhelming_ majority of them do not, and provide valuable services to the economy via job creation and the sale of their products and services. Also, what you ignore is how many people the FDA has killed through dragging its feet on approving medical and pharm. technology, how many people either couldn't get the drugs that would save their lives, or simply couldn't afford them because insurance companies frown upon "experimental" drugs. The FDA has FAR more blood on its hands than any company does.

Perhaps the FDA exists to give products official government credibility. Perhaps it works closely with private firms, including the emerging nanotech industry, to create a set of rules that creates a sufficient sense of safety such that consumer can spend more time purchasing products than evaluating products, which in turn allows money to have sufficient velocity to grow the economy.

Cool, so, basically, you're willing to be an ignorant sheep and let Daddy Government step in and make all those difficult decisions for you? Yeah man, when I decide whether or not something is safe for me to consume, I look for the FDA stamp of approval instead of, I dunno, investigating the matter myself, doing some damn reading on the subject, and forming my own conclusions. That's really smart. I mean, if the government says it's OK, it must be, right? Because they're the government, and they know WAY more about everything than the people who actually work on these products.

But, assume you're right for a moment, that the economy does need some kind of paternalistic organization to verify what's good to eat and what isn't. Why couldn't this duty be performed by any number of private organizations? Why get the government involved? If you had priva