Sections

Neighborhoods

Features

Follow Us

NHI Newsletter

Some Favorite Sites

Government/ Community Links

Researchers Have Advice On Regulating Microscopic Pesticides

by Gwyneth K. Shaw | Dec 17, 2010 2:12 am

(1) Comment | Commenting has been closed | E-mail the Author

Posted to: Health Care, Nanotech, Science/ Medical

(NHI Nanoblog) As we wait on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to decide what to do about nanosilver—a popular new anti-stink ingredient in your gym socks—American and European researchers have outlined several suggestions for making nanotechnology-based pesticides safer.

In a paper published in a recent issue of the International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health, scientists at Oregon State University and the Centre for BioNano Interactions say that more information from manufacturers about what’s in their products is a big part of regulating nanopesticides.

Nanotechnology, which uses super-small particles with hugely useful properties, is already in items like bike frames, skin creams and cancer treatments. Some nano-sized metal particles, especially nanosilver, are prized for their anti-bacterial properties, and are turning up in workout gear. Studies show that nanosilver turns up in the water we use to wash our smelly gym clothes—and sewage sludge.

The EPA wants to regulate anti-bacterial nanosilver as a pesticide. And, according to the paper, other nano-based pesticides are in development, such as a product that coats biodegradable plant-based fibers with a pesticide. The fibers are then buried in the soil.

But, the paper points out, some nanoparticles can be inhaled, while others can be absorbed through the skin. That means knowing whether these materials are in a pesticide is important when setting up guidelines for handling and usage of the product.

The authors lay out six recommendations:

• Manufacturers should disclose any nanoparticles—and their behavior—in a compound, so that regulators can assess the risks associated with them. This includes materials that might be used in processing or delivering the pesticide, not just the main ingredients.

• Operate using an “uncertainty factor” about nanoparticles, until more is known about what they do, both in the short and long term. That means manufacturers should be testing these ingredients and sharing that information, although this might make the registration process with the EPA longer.

• Use a “route-specific” approach to determining health hazards. For example, inhaling nanoparticles might be more dangerous to people than taking them in through the skin. It’s important, the researchers write, to understand those differences and address them.

• Regulators should require that pesticides containing nanomaterials be tested in their final form, not just as components. That way, they’ll have a better handle on what the entire product does, and how it interacts with people and the environment.

• Manufacturers should have to start a “health surveillance” program when they introduce new pesticides, so that they can track any health issues surrounding making the stuff and applying it, as well as what happens to air, water and soil.

* Since the possibility of a public outcry over nano-based pesticides is “high,” regulators and manufacturers should invest in education programs to inform the public about what’s in these compounds, and how to use them safely.

Share this story with others.

Share |

Post a Comment

Comment

posted by: Don Hoernschemeyer on December 17, 2010  7:32pm

Nanoparticles are new materials, made from several types of chemicals (e.g., carbon and silver) and they have unique properties because of their high ratio of surface to volume. It is known that particle smaller than a few microns can be very damaging when inhaled.
I believe the government should apply the Precautionary Principle, which was developed in 1998 at The Wingspread Conference.

It states that when an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically

The burden of proof for no damaging effects rests upon the advocates and producers.

Without proof of no effect, I certainly would not use a product on or in my body that contains nanoparticles.
http://toxicfreehealth.net

get ANDI

Events Calendar

loading…

SeeClickFix »

no street sign, broken barrier & fence
May 25, 2012 11:55 am
Address: Front And Lombard Streets New Haven, CT 06513, USA
Rating: 2

There is a very dangerous situation that needs to be fixed at the...

more »
Utility Pole #3206
May 25, 2012 11:20 am
Address: Lock & Ashmun St. New Haven, CT 06519, USA
Rating: 3

Utility pole on corner of Lock St. and Ashmun St. has dangling wires wrapped loosely...

more »

Flyerboard

Sponsors

N.H.I. Site Design & Development

smartpill design