Slashdot Mirror
Nano Safety Worries Scientists More Than Public
Nanotech Coward writes "The unknown human health and environmental impacts of nanotechnology are a bigger worry for scientists than for the public, according to a new report in the journal Nature Nanotechnology. The new report was based on a national telephone survey of American households and a sampling of 363 leading U.S. nanotechnology scientists and engineers. It reveals that those with the most insight into a technology with enormous potential — and that is already emerging in hundreds of products — are unsure what health and environmental problems might be posed by the technology."
"The public" worries about what the media tells them to worry about. Did you know everyone's children are going to die from Chinese toys with lead in them? The public does.
Scientists worry about science-related things they think are interesting. Hence, asteroids hitting Earth and nanotech are worried about.
This should surprise no one.
Social scientists are probably worried about the disconnect between the publics' and scientists' thinking though.
Disclosure: I do research in the (overly-broad) field of "nanotechnology."
I went to a talk recently discussing the safety issues surrounding nanotechnology (health effects of nanoparticles, in particular). Several possible problems were identified, and there is vigorous ongoing research to determine the full health and environmental implications of this technology.
In short, I get the impression that scientists are trying to "get it right this time." That is, we are all keenly aware that numerous scientific breakthroughs had unintended health side-effects (e.g. the originally unknown effects of radiation, carcinogens, etc.). So the scientific community is determined to identify the safety concerns as quickly as possible, before these technologies become widespread. This is, obviously, a good thing. Though possibly overly-cautious, this strategy should minimize the risk of public health concerns and evironmental damage.
In any case, as you said it's hardly surprising that the people most intimately familiar with the technology are best able to predict its problems/shortcomings. Also worth noting is that the scientists working with these technologies/materials have a vested self-interest in identifying health problems, since they are the ones being exposed to these materials.
so uninformed public overreact/dont overreact to a piece of technology based on just how much dollar is out there instilling or not instilling fear in them (ie, greenpeace).
this is news how? sheeps will be sheeps
After all, and I quote, "It was us who scorched the sky."