Sections
Neighborhoods
Features
Follow Us
NHI Newsletter
Legal Notices
Some Favorite Sites
- 5 Snacks After 10
- Abram Katz
- African independent
- At Risk for HD
- Back To Basics
- barista
- Branford Eagle
- Business NH
- Conn Art Scene
- Cornwall-On-Hudson
- Crosscut
- CT Business Litig
- CT Capitol Report
- CT Energy Blog
- CT Enviro Headlines
- CT Green Scene
- CT Law Tribune
- CT Local Politics
- CT Mirror
- CT News Junkie
- CT Watchdog
- CTV
- Design New Haven
- Gotham Gazette
- Hartford Guardian
- Josiah Brown
- Karman Turn
- La Voz Hispana
- Laurel Club
- Len's Lens
- Magrisso Forte
- Media Attache
- Media Nation
- Medical Intelligence
- Middletown Eye
- MinnPost
- My Left Nutmeg
- NBC Connecticut
- NH Advocate
- NH Register
- NH Review of Books
- NH Youth Map
- Northampton Media
- OneWorld
- Only In Bridgeport
- Oral History Project
- Reddit NH
- Road To Greenness
- Saved By Design
- See Click Fix
- Smartpill Design
- Specials In NH
- St. Louis Beacon
- Taste Of NH
- Tom Ficklin
- Valley Independent Sentinel
- Voice of SD
- VT Digger
- WFSB-TV
- WPKN Today
- WTNH
- Yale Daily News
- YourCT
Government/ Community Links
- Advocate Calendar
- Agency on Aging
- Animal Shelter Volunteers
- Arte Inc.
- Arts Council
- Beth El Keser Israel
- Bike New Haven
- Chamber of Commerce
- Children's Museum
- City of New Haven
- CitySeed
- Citywide Youth
- Community Loan Fund
- Community Mediation
- ConnCAN
- Creative Arts Workshop
- CT BAEO
- CT Tech Council
- Dariba Referrals
- Data Haven
- Elm City Cycling
- Elmseed
- Empower NH
- Friends Of Wooster Sq.
- GAVA
- Habitat For Humanity
- Info New Haven
- IRIS
- Jazz Haven
- Jewish Federation
- Job Finder
- Junta
- Labor History
- LEAP
- Legal Aid Network
- Literacy Coalition
- Magrisso Forte
- Mary Wade
- Music Haven
- New Haven 828
- New Haven Chorale
- New Haven Reads
- New Life Corp.
- NH Bulletin
- NH Land Trust
- NH/Leon Sister City
- NHS
- Orchestra NE
- PAR
- Parents Available to Help
- Pat Dillon
- Peace News
- PechaKucha
- Planned Parenthood
- Police
- Promoting Enduring Peace
- Public Allies CT
- Public Library
- Public Schools
- Public Works
- Rainbow Girls
- Register Calendar
- REX
- ROOF
- SAMA
- SCSU Events
- Share Our Voices
- Shubert
- Solar Youth
- Soul-O-Ettes
- Squash Haven
- United Way
- Urban Design League
- Urban Resources Initiative
- Ward 25 Blog
- Ward 26 Blog
- Westville Chabad
- Westville Renaissance
- Westville Synagogue
- Workforce Alliance
- Yale Events
- Yeshiva NH Shul
- Yeshiva Of NH
- Youth Continuum
How To Innovate While Protecting Public Safety?
by Gwyneth K. Shaw | Jan 26, 2012 8:22 am
Commenting has been closed | E-mail the Author
Posted to: Environment, Nanotech, Science/ Medical
(NHI Nanoblog) Joining a chorus of concern about the long-term implications of products that include super-small particles, an all-star National Academy of Sciences panel is pushing for prioritizing research on the health and environmental effects of nanomaterials.
The report, released Wednesday, echoes much of the anxiety that’s coursing through the community of academics, manufacturers and regulators about these materials.
By leveraging the often-amazing properties of ultra-tiny materials, nanotechnology can make airplane wings stronger and help cancer treatments ruthlessly target the bad cells. But as nano-enabled products proliferate—in everything from sunscreen to humidifiers—there’s a big gap between what’s possible and what’s been tested for safety. The smaller size of these materials can sometimes change the way they interact with the world around them, raising serious questions about their impact on health and the environment.
That’s what the panel focused on. Its recommendations include many that other committees and groups have suggested: conducting “life-cycle” assessments that track what happens from manufacturing to disposal of a product; the need for new tools to measure toxicity and behavior of these particles; and seeking ways to consider risk that might be different from existing mechanisms. The report also recommends spending more money on risk-related research.
Andrew Maynard, director of the University of Michigan’s Risk Science Center and a member of the committee, published a brief take on the report’s highlights here.
The report breaks some new ground toward the end as it discusses the federal government’s oversight role. The committee has some kind words for the National Nanotechnology Initiative, which oversees nano-related policy. The NNI released its own health and safety strategy last fall, which covered much of the same ground as the committee’s report (read about that here).
Because of timing, however, the NNI blueprint wasn’t evaluated by the committee; the NNI has released a comparison of the two documents to highlight the common ground between them (click here to read it).
But the report takes aim at the idea that the same people who are supposed to be promoting innovation in nanotechnology are also charged with overseeing the environmental health and safety, or EHS, angles.
That should change, and soon, the report says.
“The committee concludes that a clear separation in management and budgetary authority and accountability is needed between the functions of developing and promoting applications of nanotechnology and of understanding and assessing its potential health and environmental implications,” the report says. “Such a separation is needed to ensure that progress in implementing an effective EHS-research strategy is not hampered.”
This is interesting, because it gets at a tension that has seemed to stymie efforts to move ahead with rules and regulations on nano-enabled products. How do you protect the public without scaring them, or stifling innovation, particularly in the current environment of economic urgency?
The answer has implications for a host of efforts now under way at federal agencies such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Food and Drug Administration—and for the public.
Post a Comment
Comments
There were no comments
