Nanotechnology

WARNING! Sewage sludge is toxic. Food should not be grown in "biosolids." Join the Food Rights Network.

Nanotechnology comprises technological developments on the nanometer scale, usually 0.1 to 100 nm. (One nanometer equals one thousandth of a micrometre or one millionth of a millimeter.) The term has sometimes been applied to microscopic technology. This article discusses nanotechnology, nanoscience, and molecular nanotechnology. Recent research shows that nanoparticles are being found in sewage sludge.

"Nanotech joins biotech among those promising technologies that hold the potential to change our world radically," Citigate Cunningham vice president Bill Bennett told PR trade publication The Holmes Report in early June 2003. Many in the PR industry are looking to nanotechology as the next big thing. "Such potential will never be without controversy, and already there are pockets of 'gray goo' paranoia springing up. The key here is to show the marketplace that the risks are no different than those attending the advent of the ATM," Bennett said.

While the PR marketers paid to over-hype biotech are preparing to do the same for nanotechnology, public interest activists led by ETC Group are raising precautionary concerns about the downside of the rapidly developing new technology.

Nanotechnology in Your Food?

A 2013 report by As You Sow reports nanoparticles in a number of foods, including Dunkin' Donuts and M&Ms. A UK study reveals that two hundred food manufacturing companies are already working on ways to insert nanotechnology into foods. No more details were given on why this is being done, nor how it would improve the marketability or shelf life of those foods.

In 2004 a report by the Helmut Kaiser Consultancy noted that:

"The nanofood market is expected to surge from 2.6 bn. US dollars today to 7.0 bn. US dollars in 2006 and to 20.4 bn. US dollars in 2010. More than 200 Companies around the world are today active in research and development. USA is the leader followed by Japan and China."

For further details see Nanofood Conference 2005/2006

More recently, in 2006: "The Institute of Food Science and Technology has identified possible deficiencies in current regulations concerning the impact of nanotechology on food and packaging."

In December 2006, Alex Renton reported in The Guardian (UK):

The Woodrow Wilson Center, a Washington research institute, runs a database of nano-tech products that are commercially available, and the list under Food and Beverage is only 29 products long, compared with 201 under Health and Fitness. ... But the list has grown 50 per cent since March, when it was only 19 products long. ...

Only three items on the Woodrow Wilson list are listed as food. One is 'Nanotea', from a Chinese company, that will increase tenfold the amount of selenium absorbed from green tea (that's a good thing), through capsules engineered to bypass the stomach and dissolve in your lower gut. There's Canola Activa Oil, an Israeli invention: nano-capsule-delivered chemicals in rapeseed cooking oil that will stop cholesterol entering the bloodstream - this is exciting technology, utilising nano's ability to suspend or dissolve any substance you like in water or in oil. And finally there's SlimShake chocolate - a powdered drink that uses nanotechnology to cluster the cocoa cells, and thus cut out the need for sugar.

For more information see the article on Nanotechnology in Food

Nanotech Research

The Sacramento Bee reported in August 2006 that while nanotech particles had already been incorporated into "hundreds" of consumer products, "from cosmetics to contraceptives ... those looking into nanotechnology's possible downsides are scrambling to catch up."

"This is a whole new category of substances," said Paul Schulte, who heads a nanotechnology research center for the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, or NIOSH.

"There are so many great properties in the nano scale," Schulte said. Yet the same features that could build tomorrow's marvels "may have potential toxic effects, too."

At the University of California at Davis' Center for Health and the Environment, Kent Pinkerton and colleagues are researching "airborne, contaminant-free suspension[s] that a mouse could inhale," in order to approximate workplace dangers. "In earlier studies, when the nanotubes were suspended in a droplet of liquid and inserted into the lungs of mice, some died and others developed lung damage," reported the Sacramento Bee.

Environmental and Health Risks

According to the Center for Responsible Nanotechnology which describe themselves as "boosters for safe use of nanotechnology" :

Molecular manufacturing allows the cheap creation of incredibly powerful devices and products. How many of these products will we want? What environmental damage will they do? The range of possible damage is vast, from personal low-flying supersonic aircraft injuring large numbers of animals to collection of solar energy on a sufficiently large scale to modify the planet's albedo and directly affect the environment. Stronger materials will allow the creation of much larger machines, capable of excavating or otherwise destroying large areas of the planet at a greatly accelerated pace. It is too early to tell whether there will be economic incentive to do this. However, given the large number of activities and purposes that would damage the environment if taken to extremes, and the ease of taking them to extremes with molecular manufacturing, it seems likely that this problem is worth worrying about. Some forms of damage can result from an aggregate of individual actions, each almost harmless by itself. Such damage is quite hard to prevent by persuasion, and laws frequently don't work either; centralized restriction on the technology itself may be a necessary part of the solution. Finally, the extreme compactness of nanomanufactured machinery will tempt the use of very small products, which can easily turn into nano-litter that will be hard to clean up and may cause health problems . The site list numerous other risks and benefits.

The Project On Emerging Nanotechnologies currently lists 502 products that manufacturers have voluntarily identified that use nanotechnology . No labeling is required by the FDA so that number could be significantly higher.

The ongoing debate over nanofood safety and regulations has slowed the introduction of nanofood products, but research and development continue to thrive - though, interestingly, most of the larger companies are keeping their activities quiet (when you search for the term 'nano' or nanotechnology' on the websites of Kraft, Nestle, Heinz and Altria you get exactly zero results). Although the risks associated with nanotechnology in other areas, such as cosmetics and medicine, are equally blurry, it seems the difference is that the public is far less apt to jump on the nanotechnology bandwagon when it comes to their food supply Nanotechnology food coming to a fridge near you.

Proposed guidelines and regulations

• Environmental Defense and DuPont, "Nano Risk Framework," June 2007.
• Office of Science and Technology Policy, "Third Assessment of the National Nanotechnology Initative," March 2010.
• International Organization for Standardization, "Nanotechnologies – Nanomaterial risk evaluation," ISO/TR 31321:2011, May 2011.
• EPA, "Regulating Pesticides that Use Nanotechnology," Federal Register Notice, June 2011.
• FDA, "Considering Whether an FDA-Regulated Product Involves the Application of Nanotechnology: Guidance for Industry," Guidance document distributed for comment purposes only, June 2011.
• White House Emerging Technologies Interagency Policy Coordination Committee (ETIPC), “U.S. Decision-making Concerning Regulation and Oversight of Nanotechnology and Nanomaterials,” Office of Science and Technology Policy, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, U.S. Trade Representative, June 2011.

Resources and Articles

Related SourceWatch Resources

• National Nanotechnology Initiative
• Nanotechnology PR
• Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies
• Center for Responsible Nanotechnology
• Nano Titanium Dioxide
• Nanosilver
• DuPont and Nanotechnology
• House Science Committee Hearing on the Societal Implications of Nanotechnology
• Environmental Defense Dances With DuPont On Nanotechnology
• ETC Group
• molecular assembler
• Biotechnology

External Resources

• U.S. National Nanotechnology Initiative
• Nanotechnology Overview, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Health and Safety.
• Nanomaterials In Soil: Our Future Food Chain?, Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy report, March 28, 2013.
• Center for Responsible Nanotechnology
• Nanowerk Nanomaterial Database and nanotech news
• Friends of the Earth, "Nanotechnology Project"
• Nanotechnology News, Science Daily
• Nanotechnology, Scientific American

Books

• Geoffrey Hunt and Michael Mehta (eds), Nanotechnology: Risk, Ethics and Law, Earthscan, London, June 2006. ISBN ISBN 1844073580

External Articles

• David Biello, "Doughnuts Dusted with Nanopowder? Blech!," Scientific American, April 15, 2013.
• Dr. Steve Suppan, Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, Nanomaterials In Soil: Our Future Food Chain?, organizational report, March 28, 2013.
• Andrew Laing, "A report on Canadian and American news media coverage of nanotechnology issues", Cormex Research, undated.
• J Macoubrie, "Nanotechnology: Public concerns, reasoning, and trust in government", Public Understanding of Science.
• Heather Millar, "Nanoparticles Are in Our Food, Clothing and Medicine -- And No One Knows for Sure How Dangerous They Might Be," Alternet, February 23, 2013.
• Andrew Behar, Danielle Fugere, and Michael Passoff," Slipping Through the Cracks: An Issue Brief on Nanomaterials in Food," As You Sow.
• "Examination and assessment of consequences for industry, consumers, human health and the environment of possible options for changing the REACH requirements for nanomaterials," European Commission Joint Research Centre, January 14, 2013.
• Lynn L. Bergeson , "NOSB Recommends Prohibiting Engineered Nanomaterials from Certified Organic Products," Nano and Other Emerging Chemical Technologies Blog, November 10, 2010.
• Andrew Schneider, The nanotech gamble aol news, March 24, 2010.
• Richard Thieme, "Mind Wars: Brain Research, Nanotech and the Military", Counterpunch, July 3, 2007.

2006:

• Center for Science, Technology & Public Policy at the Humphrey Institute of the University of Minnesota, "The Nanotechnology-Biology Interface: Exploring Models for Oversight, January 2006.
• Rick Weiss, "Stricter Nanotechnology Laws Are Urged: Report Warns Of Risk to Public," Washington Post, January 11, 2006.
• Jon Van, "Nanotech industry faces safety debate: Report questions ability to regulate use of new materials that employ tiny particles," Chicago Tribune, January 13, 2006.
• Charles Q. Choi, "Nano World: New nanotech law called for", Menafn.com, January 17, 2006. (This is a United Press International story).
• Clive Cookson, "Big fears about science of the tiny", Financial Times (UK), January 27, 2006.
• Vivienne Parry, "The nano state is here", Times (UK), February 25, 2006.
• Natural Resources Defense Council, "Nanotechnologies: Tiny particles promise much, but could pose big risk", March 20, 2006.
• Rick Weiss, "FDA Asked to Better Regulate Nanotechnology", Washington Post, May 16, 2006.
• John Hepburn, "Size Matters, Public Opinion Doesn't", Canberra Times, 8 May 2006.
• Carrie Peyton Dahlberg, "Nanotech's tiny revolution raises caution," Sacramento Bee (California), August 19, 2006.
• Rick Weiss, "Nanotechnology Risks Unknown: Insufficient Attention Paid to Potential Dangers, Report Says," Washington Post, September 26, 2006.
• Alex Renton, "Welcome to the world of nano foods," The Guardian (UK), December 17, 2006.
• Project Censored, "Top 25 Censored Stories of 2006: Number 22, Nanotechnology Offers Exciting Possibilities But Health Effects Need Scrutiny", [1], 2006.

2005:

• "Jane Macoubrie, "Informed Public Perceptions of Nanotechnology and Trust in Government", Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies, September 8, 2005. (Pdf file)
• Faber, B., MacKinnon, J., & Petroccione, M., "Media portraits of nanotech in North American written media 1986-2000", Nanotechnology Law and Review, 2(3), 2005.
• "Nanotech advances need more safety screening-study", Reuters, June 14, 2005.
• John Hepburn, "Questioning Nanotechnology", Zmag Commentary, October 16, 2005.
• Keay Davidson, "Big troubles may lurk in super-tiny tech: Nanotechnology experts say legal, ethical issues loom", San Francisco Chronicle, October 31, 2005.
• David Rejeski, "Environmental and Safety Impacts of Nanotechnology – What Research is Needed", Testimony to House Committee on Science on the Environmental and Safety Impacts of Nanotechnology, November 17, 2005.
• New Jersey Institute of Technology, "Study Shows Nanoparticles Could Damage Plant Life", Media Release, November 22, 2005.
• Rick Weiss, "Nanotechnology Regulation Needed, Critics Say", Washington Post, December 5, 2005; A08.
• Jimmy Lee Shreeve, "Nanotechnology: big trouble in the mini-revolution?", Independent, December 7, 2005. ("Nanotechnology could treat cancer or create clean energy. But what happens if nano-particles enter our bodies?")

2004:

• M.D. Cobb & J. Macoubrie, "Public perceptions about nanotechnology: Risks, benefits, and trust", Journal of Nanoparticle Research: An Interdisciplinary Forum for Nanoscale Science and Technology, Volume 6 Number 4, 2004, pages 395-405.
• Richard Monastersky, "The Dark Side of Small", The Chronicle of Higher Education, September 10, 2004.
• "ETC Group releases "Down on the Farm: The Impact of Nano-Scale Technologies on Food and Agriculture," ETC Group, November 23, 2004.

2003:

• "The Next Big Thing in Technology PR Could Be Really, Really Small", The Holmes Report, June 2, 2003, page 4.
• "Nanotech Un-gooed! Is the Grey/Green Goo Brouhaha the Industry's Second Blunder?", ETC Group Communiqué, Issue # 80, July/August 2003.