Nanomania
DTL>
- Keay Davidson, San Francisco Chronicle Science Writer
October 31, 2005
"Nanomania," one could call it -- the growing excitement and anxiety about super-small gadgets that might transform our world for better or worse.
Two decades ago, techno-visionaries titillated the world with their prophecy of machines so small -- measurable in nanometers, or billionths of a meter -- that they'd be invisible to the naked eye. Nano-robots, they speculated, would patrol your bloodstream and attack viruses, cholesterol and tumors; or they'd clean up oil slicks and toxic spills; or they'd become micro-"spies" for monitoring enemy movements without being seen.
For now, however, those science-fiction-like dreams remain just that -- dreams. Today's nano-visionaries face a less heady dilemma: How to reassure the public, environmental groups, regulatory agencies and lawsuit-fearing insurance companies that nanotechnologies won't become environmental-political-legal nightmares like DDT, thalidomide and asbestos.
Today is the opening day of the five-day International Congress of Nanotechnology 2005 at the San Francisco Airport Marriott in Burlingame. On Thursday, lawyer John C. Monica Jr. of Porter Wright Morris & Arthur in Cleveland is scheduled to deliver a speech -- co-authored with two colleagues -- on "Preparing for Future Health Litigation: The Application of Product Liability Law to Nanotechnology."
In an advance copy of Monica's speech, he calls nanotech "one of the foremost innovations of the 21st century." While nano-robots are still on the drawing boards, far simpler "nanomaterials" and "nanoparticles" are "already being used in such diverse consumer products as machine lubricant, tennis balls, wrinkle-resistant clothing and sunscreen. In the near future, advanced new drug-delivery systems based on nanomaterials are expected to take the biomedical industry by storm."
"However," Monica warns, "no industry -- including the nanotechnology industry -- is beyond the reach of American trial lawyers. Concerns about possible health and safety hazards posed by nanomaterials are being raised among labor unions and environmentalists; trial lawyers cannot be far behind. Some have even begun to compare nanotechnology to asbestos, a material plagued by $70 billion in litigation over the past three decades."
The anxieties have grown since the 1990s, as an increasing number of lab researchers have reported evidence of certain nanomaterials' toxic effects on living organisms. Their findings are generally regarded as preliminary, pending more intensive study. In the meantime, as a precaution, environmentalists and industry leaders alike, along with the leading pro-nanotechnology group, Foresight Nanotech Institute of Palo Alto, have called for more federally bankrolled research into safety and environmental questions about nanotech.
Scholars also are beginning to seek a national and international debate over "nanoethics." Their goal is to encourage intense public discussions of the future of nanotech before that future hits us in the face.
Two decades ago, techno-visionaries titillated the world with their prophecy of machines so small -- measurable in nanometers, or billionths of a meter -- that they'd be invisible to the naked eye. Nano-robots, they speculated, would patrol your bloodstream and attack viruses, cholesterol and tumors; or they'd clean up oil slicks and toxic spills; or they'd become micro-"spies" for monitoring enemy movements without being seen.
For now, however, those science-fiction-like dreams remain just that -- dreams. Today's nano-visionaries face a less heady dilemma: How to reassure the public, environmental groups, regulatory agencies and lawsuit-fearing insurance companies that nanotechnologies won't become environmental-political-legal nightmares like DDT, thalidomide and asbestos.
Today is the opening day of the five-day International Congress of Nanotechnology 2005 at the San Francisco Airport Marriott in Burlingame. On Thursday, lawyer John C. Monica Jr. of Porter Wright Morris & Arthur in Cleveland is scheduled to deliver a speech -- co-authored with two colleagues -- on "Preparing for Future Health Litigation: The Application of Product Liability Law to Nanotechnology."
In an advance copy of Monica's speech, he calls nanotech "one of the foremost innovations of the 21st century." While nano-robots are still on the drawing boards, far simpler "nanomaterials" and "nanoparticles" are "already being used in such diverse consumer products as machine lubricant, tennis balls, wrinkle-resistant clothing and sunscreen. In the near future, advanced new drug-delivery systems based on nanomaterials are expected to take the biomedical industry by storm."
"However," Monica warns, "no industry -- including the nanotechnology industry -- is beyond the reach of American trial lawyers. Concerns about possible health and safety hazards posed by nanomaterials are being raised among labor unions and environmentalists; trial lawyers cannot be far behind. Some have even begun to compare nanotechnology to asbestos, a material plagued by $70 billion in litigation over the past three decades."
The anxieties have grown since the 1990s, as an increasing number of lab researchers have reported evidence of certain nanomaterials' toxic effects on living organisms. Their findings are generally regarded as preliminary, pending more intensive study. In the meantime, as a precaution, environmentalists and industry leaders alike, along with the leading pro-nanotechnology group, Foresight Nanotech Institute of Palo Alto, have called for more federally bankrolled research into safety and environmental questions about nanotech.
Scholars also are beginning to seek a national and international debate over "nanoethics." Their goal is to encourage intense public discussions of the future of nanotech before that future hits us in the face.
Etiquetas: Nanotech
0 Comentarios:
Publicar un comentario
Suscribirse a Comentarios de la entrada [Atom]
<< Página Principal