Access
This article is part of Nature's premium content.
Published online 25 July 2008 | Nature | doi:10.1038/news.2008.983
News
Clock ticking for US nanotech companies
EPA's voluntary safety scheme undersubscribed as deadline approaches.
Chemical trade bodies are hoping that an eleventh-hour plea for companies to volunteer information about their nanotechnology products will avert the imposition of potentially restrictive regulation.
But time is running out.
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
Comments
Reader comments are usually moderated after posting. If you find something offensive or inappropriate, you can speed this process by clicking 'Report this comment' (or, if that doesn't work for you, email redesign@nature.com). For more controversial topics, we reserve the right to moderate before comments are published.
NANOTECH HUBRIS The nanotechnology industry is operating within the cozy confines of its recently constructed "hubris bubble," with entry into this sanctum sanctorum limited to a small cadre of self-appointed corporate directors and their surrogates in high government and media positions. The industry's reluctance to institute an independent longitudinal testing program is evidence of its utter contempt for the public health and safety and demonstrates the need for development of a well-designed regulatory protocol. Delay is the order of the day. The public has been kept in the dark by a captive corporate media establishment in the U.S. that continues to marginalize public interest NGOs. KUDOS to Andrew Maynard and the Woodrow Wilson Center. Lynn Howard Ehrle, Chair- International Science Oversight Board,a project of Organic Consumers Assoc.
With profits in the range of $35 billion, for 2005, it is clearly understandable why corporations would prefer as little regulation as possible. This article implies that if companies don’t abide by the July 28 deadline the EPA may be pushed to require mandatory regulation. As if the Bush EPA would force any of their corporate buddies in Dow Chemical, Monsanto and close to the 800 other companies or so in the business to spend money to protect the citizenry’s health, or the environment. Basically, the genie is out of the bottle, no matter how much reporting the nano-makers end up having to do. Who knows what the future holds with these particles, a billionth of a meter in size, running through our very cell structures. The nano-brains in the industry's excuses range from the dog ate the homework to grandpa got run over by a reindeer. Simply audacious and quite laughable.
Nanotechnology has entered second generation with the advent of molecular nanotechnology. Nanoscale contradictions can be well managed when the scientific system starts dealing with molecules. Though the fatherly figure of nanotechnology mentioned precision and control in his august lecture that was delivered at Caltech but it was soon forgotten in light of achievements. Nanomaterials are less hazardous in comparison to its hidden affect on DNA and RNA. We know the role of labile hydrogens in nucleotides - it is directly related to our behavior, attitude and sense though yet to be fully established in the laboratory. The tunneling manner in which hydrogen moves from N1 to N3 position in genes would be at stake and this is sure to bring a change that we never expect at the moment for our sincerity and dependency on exact proof based on instruments. Regards