Slashdot Mirror
Nanotubes "As Deadly as Asbestos"
Stony Stevenson writes "Certain carbon nanotubes may be as hazardous to humans as asbestos.
A paper to be published in Nature Nanotechnology suggests that inhaling certain types of nanotubes can lead to the formation of mesothelioma, a type of lung cancer commonly caused by exposure to asbestos.
"This is a wakeup call for nanotechnology in general and carbon nanotubes in particular," said Andrew Maynard, co-author of the report and chief science adviser to the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies." I'm really hoping that those medical face masks get popular again. That's a look that should really be cyclic, like bell-bottoms and thongs. Update: 05/21 19:18 GMT by T : See also this page at the Nanotechnology Project, which features a link to video commentary from Andrew Maynard, the researcher mentioned in the above-linked article.
Breathing solids into lungs which are supposed to process gases is a bad thing. More at 11.
frank shoemaker would call this noise
From TFA:
"Short or curly carbon nanotubes did not behave like asbestos and, by knowing the possible dangers of long, thin carbon nanotubes, we can work to control them," he said. "This is good news, as it shows that carbon nanotubes and their products could be made to be safe."
Thank god I can keep up my habit of snorting curly nanotubes.
Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
I'm really hoping that those medical face masks get popular again
uh, where does CmdrTaco live that medical face masks were once a popular fashion item? I certainly don't remember that fad. Bell bottoms, I do unfortunately remember, but not medical face masks...
That's a look that should really be cyclic like bell-bottoms and thongs.
There are some people who should never be seen cycling in thongs.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
I'm really hoping that those medical face masks get popular again. That's a look that should really be cyclic like bell-bottoms and thongs.
You need full Respirator gear if you want to stop nano-tubes from getting in your lungs. Even then, with it being so small, your only chance of stop those tubes is if they are even long enough to get caught in the filter.
Thank GOD people have taken the initiative and developing nanotube filters.
Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
The first thing I thought when companies started selling carbon nanotubes for research was that we had no idea how toxic this stuff could be. The most obvious question was what would it do to your lungs when inhaled. Not a big surprise.
"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
I am jaded enough to think there are lawyers happy to see studies like this. I know some people who worked with asbestos a long time did get legitimately ill, but it was sad to see how false and exaggerated claims of illness were used to make money and ruin businesses. The extent of ploy might be suggested in the tort reform that took place in Texas:
"Why Doctors Are Heading for Texas"
"In sum, these reforms have worked wonders. There are about 85,000 asbestos plaintiffs in Texas. Under the old system, each would be advancing in the courts. But in the four years since the creation of MDLs, only 300 plaintiffs' cases have been certified ready for trial. And in each case the plaintiff is almost certainly sick with mesothelioma or cancer.
No one else claiming "asbestosis" has yet filed a pulmonology report showing diminished lung capacity. This means that only one-third of 1% of all those people who have filed suit claiming they were sick with asbestosis have actually had a qualified and impartial doctor agree that they have an asbestos-caused illness."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121097874071799863.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
It's wise to be careful with nanotube technology of course - and also to be careful with studies that give the legal types excuses to plunder.
Hmm... if they are nano-sized I kinda think that it is not just the shrinking from the cold.
You should probably see a doctor about that.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
I don't know where Commander Taco lives (or Subcommander Taco, either), but I know that those face masks are quite common in many Asian countries for at least two purposes.
:-( I like Beijing other than the smog.
1. to protect others from your cold, etc.
2. to protect yourself from smog in large cities, such as Beijing.
I've been to Beijing, and those masks were quite necessary.
Certain cellulose centitubes may be as hazardous to humans as a rabid badger. A paper to be published in Nature Centitechnology suggests that inhaling certain types of centitubes can lead to hemoptysis and accute asphyxia, a condition commonly caused by exposure to rabid badgers. "This is a wakeup call for centitechnology in general and wooden toothpicks in particular," said Andrew Maynard, co-author of the report and chief science adviser to the Project on Emerging Centitechnologies.
The situation with nanomaterials is the same as the situation with radioactive materials when that field was new. Having worked at Los Alamos National Laboratory, I can say that there used to be practices that were normal that are now regulated to hell, with respect to materials handling, dust generation/cleanliness, etc. Currently, I work somewhere else, and I work with nanomaterials all day long - and when I say nano, I mean powders with individual particles of about 5-20 nm diameter. All the personal protective equipment I usually don is nitrile gloves and safety goggles, and try to work with the material under a fume hood. We try to have safe work practices, but I have the feeling that in 40 years regulations will make you do all your work with them in gloveboxes/cleanrooms/respirators.
Long thin nanotubes, of course, are the ones that have the greatest potential for making superstrong construction materials.
... the dust and debris of worn out nanotech ... as a major theme. Nano-tight plastics and filters, collectively called "nanobar" (which seemed to be a generic term, not a brand name) were all over the place.
Neal Stephenson's Diamond Age had the health hazards of "toner"
Welcome to the Diamond Age, don't forget your respirator.
This is no different than breathing any fiber into the lungs. Everyone harps on asbestos but cotton is just as bad. That was one of the weird things about smoking, in the 70's they found that people smoking non-filters lived 5 years longer than the ones smoking filter cigarettes. Why, the fiberglass filter. The fiber got into the lungs. So they changed to cotton and got the same results. Ever hear of white lung disease? People who worked in cotton gins sure did. Any fiber or particulate in the lungs will cause scaring at best, enough of that is called emphysema.
Be careful what you breath.
Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
Nano-intertubes are lethal because the slow bit rate causes frustration which causes 'net rage among porn customers.
Giga-intertubes and Tera-intertubes are lethal for a different reason, namely, the sheer weight of adsense spammers compresses the customer's body into the density of a black hole or at least that of a neutron star.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
The problem is when said micro particle are supposed to be indestructible (an attribute shared by both asbestos and nanotubes). You got a constant activity of the immune system, which never manage to actually destroy the intruders. Only white cells die and newer cells come trying to clean up the mess, in an endless cycle.
This inflammation over-activity is what leads to the cancers.
But besides, there's nothing incredible there. If one creates a new material that is supposed to be indestructible, there are bound to be problems - both environmental and health - due to that fact that, yes, indeed, the material can't be destroy / got rid of.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Those buckyballs and nanotubes, what can't they do!? I mean, they don't just fight cancer. They can cause cancer too!
So
.... ... or they could just go outside and breathe some diesel fumes?
* If they are one particular kind of nanotube
* and they are not highly charged (their normal state)
* and they are made airbourne (which they normally arn't)
* and someone breathes this in (unlikely in many applications)
then they may have an increased possibility of lung cancer
Puteulanus fenestra mortis
Not exactly. A carcinogen like benzene works differently than a nanofiber like asbestos or carbon tubes. Benzene's affect is purely chemical. Asbestos (and nanotubes) cause damage through physical damage. One mechanism is when the fibers are longer than about 17 microns and are too long for white blood cells to envelop (frustrated phagocytosis). Because the fibers can work their way into lung tissue these fibers form a constant source of inflammation and scarring. Another is the fibers can spear individual cells and cause them to leak and physically interfere with chromosome function. It is worth being careful.
It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
Small molecules can get in the spaces between cells cause and cancer. That's not new, just ask benzene.
/. insta-pundit who seeks only to find a way to sound smarter than scientists, first considers the possibility of something causing cancer based on their domain knowledge, then tests to see if their hypothesis is true.
Sometimes I wonder if some scientists are so specialized they can't see the forest for the trees.
Oh, so you would have classified carbon nanotubes as a definite carcinogen based on this "forest" view you have? A view that doesn't even understand how cancer is actually caused by these substances?
There's nothing inherently surprising about this. It's how science works. A real scientist, instead of a
Five years ago: Nanotubes may cause cancer.
Today: Research shows nanotubes can cause cancer.
So what's your beef again?
The enemies of Democracy are
The problem is in short carbon nanotubes. If they can finally figure out how to make them longer we won't have the health problems and maybe I can ride a Space Elevator in my lifetime.
I'm certain that free-floating carbon nanotubes inhaled are a problem. They might even be a serious skin irritant, and that should be considered. Comparing it to the hazards of asbestos, however, doesn't really fly, and here's why.
Asbestos is a fiber that is most dangerous when used in insulation or as part of an ablative surface like a brake pad. In the first case, it is specifically being manufactured into a loosely bound form so that it maximizes the number of small air pockets in between. In the second case, it is constantly being worn away by its designed use, resulting in small particles of it completely covering every surface near it.
Carbon nanotubes are being used for their structural strength or conductivity. Their value is derived largely from how tightly it can stay bound to the rest of the structure that it is part of. As a result, there are no imaginable use cases where more than negligible free-floating nanotubes would exist in an environment.
This is not to say that this isn't useful information. Although a USE case for nanotubes doesn't exist, there are definitely cases where conditions do exist for the particles to become airborne. Any time you use a subtractive process (buzz saws, lasers, water cutters, whatever) to shape nanotubes then you'll get particulates that need to be managed. Similarly, we should know better than to use nanotubes to build any type of strike plate. They probably wouldn't handle that kind of stress well anyway. Their MIGHT be a danger in high-vibration environments, but generally a thin coating would deal with that.
In any case, it's useful that a profit-centric organization will be informed that NOT taking precautions can be more expensive than the precautions, and this is always valuable. They can't say "but we didn't know!"
Wake up - the future is arriving faster than you think.
One of the biggest reasons that asbestos has proved to be fertile ground for lawsuits is because the negative health effects have been know for about 100 years now, and corporations still used it in large quantities through the 1970s. That demonstrates a certain recklessness. "We're willing to risk your health for our profits."
I work in the asbestos business, and I can tell you that enforcement of asbestos regulations is REALLY lax. The main item that drives employers to follow OSHA regulations and protect their employees is fear of litigation. The main thing that drives manufacturers to keep asbestos out of their products is fear of litigation. You should be grateful to that fear of lawsuits, it is the only thing that prevents industry from continuing to put asbestos in thousands of building products.
-- QED
Face masks are less effective than tinfoil hats at filtering smog. They are useless for filtering CO, O3, NOx, PM10 particles, or diesel particles, which are the dangerous elements of smog. Facemasks are designed to keep really big dust particles like sawdust out of your lungs. They are also designed to keep spittle from falling into body during surgery. They are NOT gases or fine particles.
-- QED
The choice of asbestos as a comparison is more than an appeal to emotion; it's actually fairly valid. Both substances appear much the same way to a mammalian tissue, both affect the immune systems in a similar way, and both tend to be very long-lived once inside the lungs. True, this does mean we will have to be VERY careful with this stuff. But better to know that now, rather than decades later, after it is too late.
Nonaggression works!
This is true. Nicotine is a potent paralyzing chemical. It paralyzes the cillia which are the tiny hairs that move the mucus lining of the lungs up and out. The cillia and mucus are the lung's system for self cleaning. Nicotine shuts that process down leaving asbestos, and potentially nanotubes, in the lungs longer giving them more chance to cause injury or cancer. Luckily smoking is much less common around here than it used to be.
Jon Q. Nonsmoker-noasbestos chance of getting lung cancer = X
Bill X. Asbestosworker = 5X
Jane Z. Smoker = 10X
Mike V. Smokingasbestosworker = 50X - 90X
-- QED
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.