The NanoBiology Imperative
All living things are nanofoundries. Nature has perfected artform
of biological nanotechnology for billions of years. Now, an emerging technology
domain is poised to present a toolkit from which new lifeforms can be crafted, the inner molecular workings of living cells can be directly manipulated, even age can be may be treated not as a disease, but a reversable pathology. The very definition
of life itself is perched at the edge of the next great revolution in medicine:
Nanobiology

See at The NanoBiology Imperative

Commission starts public dialogue on nanotechnologies – tapping economic and environmental potential through safe products

Nanotechnologies have enormous potential benefits for manufacturers, consumers, employees, patients and the environment. They will bring more energy and resource efficient processes, improve computer memories and processors and could usher in a new age of customized pharmaceuticals and medical procedures.

While current EU legislation covers in principle the challenges for health, safety and environment with regards to nanomaterials, there is further need for research and international cooperation.

As more and more products involving nanomaterials are reaching the market, the European Commission will start a consultation with stakeholders and Member States in order to increase knowledge and awareness about the potential of nanotechnologies and to continue to ensure an adequate protection of nature, environment and health.

Tiny technology with massive implications

What is nanotechnology?
Uses of nanotechnology
The dangers of nanotechnology
Friends of the Earth Europe on nanotechnology

Problematic new findings regarding toxicity of silver nanoparticles

(Nanowerk Spotlight) Engineered nanoparticles are rapidly becoming a part of our daily life in the form of cosmetics, food packaging, drug delivery systems, therapeutics, biosensors, etc. A number of commercial products such as wound dressing, detergents or antimicrobial coatings are already in the market. Although little is known about their bio distribution and bio activity, especially silver nanoparticles are extensively used for all kinds of antimicrobial applications. Ultimately, these nanoparticles end up in the environment during waste disposal. Largely due to a scarcity of data on the toxicity, intracellular distribution and fate of silver ions and nanoparticles inside an organism, regulatory bodies so far have not felt the need to regulate the use of such materials in commercial products or disposal of such products.

In a major reversal, although more of a symbolic gesture, earlier last year the U.S. EPA has determined that clothes washing machines that use silver ions as a disinfectant will have to be registered as a pesticide (The first federal restrictions on nanotechnology could be coming soon). The lack of regulation has even led to a dramatic demand from activist groups to completely ban the sale of nanosilver products (Groups file legal action for EPA to stop sale of 200+ nanosilver products).

Carbon Nanotubes That Look Like Asbestos, Behave Like Asbestos

New study shows inhaling long, thin carbon nanotubes may result in asbestos-like health effects

Nanotechnologies: The Promise and the Peril

Explaining How Depleted Uranium Is Killing

Civilians, Soldiers, Land

Nano-particles pinpointed

By Christopher Bollyn

Depleted uranium weapons, and the untold misery they wreak on mankind, are taboo subjects in the mainstream media. This exclusive report should break the media embargo imposed on the American people.

Despite being a grossly under-reported subject in the mainstream, there is intense public interest in depleted uranium (DU) and the damage it inflicts on humankind and the environment.

While American Free Press is actively investigating DU weapons and how they contribute to Gulf War Syndrome, the corporate-controlled press ignores the illegal use of DU and its long-lasting effects on the health of veterans and the public.

In August 2004 American Free Press published a ground-breaking four-part series on DU weapons and the long-term health risks they pose to soldiers and civilians alike. Information provided to AFP by experts and scientists, some of it published for the first time in this paper, has increased public awareness of how exposure to small particles of DU can severely affect human health.

Leuren Moret, a Berkeley-based geo-scientist with expertise in atmospheric dust, corresponds with AFP on DU issues. Recently Moret provided a copy of her letters to a British radiation biologist, Dr. Chris Busby, about how nanometer size particles—less than one-tenth of a micron and smaller—of DU once inhaled or absorbed into the body, can cause long-term damage to one’s health.

Busby is one of the founders of Green Audit, a British organization that monitors companies “whose activities might threaten the environment and health of citizens.”

Moret’s writings were meant to assist Busby in a legal case being heard in the High Court in London where a former defense worker, Richard David, 49, is suing Normal Air Garrett, Ltd., an aircraft parts company now owned by Honeywell Aerospace, claiming exposure to DU on the job has made his life a “living hell.”

David worked as a component fitter on fighter planes and bombers but had to quit due to health problems. He says he developed a cough within weeks of starting work.

Today, David suffers from a variety of symptoms like those known as Gulf War Syndrome, including respiratory and kidney problems, bowel conditions and painful joints. Medical tests reveal mutations to his DNA and damage to his chromosomes, which, he says, could only have been caused by ionizing radiation. He has also been diagnosed with a terminal lung condition.

Honeywell denies DU was ever used at the plant in Yeovil, Somerset, where David worked for 10 years until 1995. David claims that DU’s existence at the plant was denied because it is an official secret.

David has asked the High Court for more time to gather evidence. The hearing is due to resume in April. “I don’t have any legal representation,” David said, “so I am representing myself. It is a real David versus Goliath case.

“I am confident I will win. I hope to set a precedent for other cases of people who have suffered from the effects of depleted uranium,” he said.

Moret’s letters on the particle effect of DU is based on research done by Marion Fulk, a nuclear physical chemist and former scientist with the Manhattan Project and the National Laboratory at Livermore, Calif. Fulk, who has developed a “particle theory” about how DU nano-particles affect human DNA, donates his time and expertise to help bring information about DU to the public.

Asked about Fulk’s particle theory, Busby said it is “quite sound.”

“DU is much more dangerous than they say,” Busby added. “I’ve always said that it contributes significantly to Gulf War Syndrome.”

When Moret’s correspondence to Dr. Busby was posted on the Internet over the New Year’s holiday under the title “How Depleted Uranium Weapons Are Killing Our Troops,” some 6,000 people read the letter in the first two days. The following Monday, a producer from BBC’s Panorama program contacted Moret to arrange an interview.

If the BBC follows up with an investigation on the health effects of DU, it may be hard for the U.S. media to maintain their cover-up. More than 500,000 “Gulf War Era” vets currently receive disability compensation, many of them for a variety of symptoms generally referred to as Gulf War Syndrome. Experts blame DU for many of these symptoms.

“The numbers are overwhelming, but the potential horrors only get worse,” Robert C. Koehler of the Chicago-based Tribune Media Services wrote in an article about DU weapons entitled “Silent Genocide.”

“DU dust does more than wreak havoc on the immune systems of those who breathe it or touch it; the substance also alters one’s genetic code,” Koehler wrote. “The Pentagon’s response to such charges is denial, denial, denial. And the American media is its moral co-conspirator.”

U.S. GOVERNMENT KNOWS

The U.S. government has known for at least 20 years that DU weapons produce clouds of poison gas on impact. These clouds of aerosolized DU are laden with billions of toxic sub-micron sized particles. A 1984 Department of Energy conference on nuclear airborne waste reported that tests of DU anti-tank missiles showed that at least 31 percent of the mass of a DU penetrator is converted to nano-particles on impact. In larger bombs the percentage of aerosolized DU increases to nearly 100 percent, Fulk told AFP.

DU is harmful in three ways, according to Fulk: “Chemical toxicity, radiological toxicity and particle toxicity.”

Particles in the nano-meter (one billionth of a meter) range are a “new breed of cat,” Moret wrote. Because the size of the nano-particles allows them to pass freely throughout the organism and into the nucleus of its cells, exposure to nano-particles causes different symptoms than exposure to larger particles of the same substance.

Internalized DU particles, Fulk said, act as “a non-specific catalyst” in both “nuclear and non-nuclear” ways. This means that the uranium particle can affect human DNA and RNA because of both its chemical and radiological properties. This is why internalized DU particles cause “many, many diseases,” Fulk said.

Asked if this is how DU causes severe birth defects, Fulk said, “Yes.”

MILITARY AWARE

The military is aware of DU’s harmful effects on the human genetic code. A 2001 study of DU’s effect on DNA done by Dr. Alexandra C. Miller for the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute in Bethesda, Md., indicates that DU’s chemical instability causes 1 million times more genetic damage than would be expected from its radiation effect alone, Moret wrote.

Dr. Miller requested that questions be sent in writing and copied to a military spokesman. She did tell AFP that it should be noted that her studies showing that DU is “neoplastically transforming and genotoxic” are based on in vitro cellular research.

Studies have shown that inhaled nano-particles are far more toxic than micro-sized particles of the same basic chemical composition. British toxicopathologist Vyvyan Howard has reported that the increased toxicity of the nano-particle is due to its size.

For example, when mice were exposed to virus-size particles of Teflon (0.13 microns) in a University of Rochester study, there were no ill effects. But when mice were exposed to nano-particles of Teflon for 15 minutes, nearly all the mice died within 4 hours.

“Exposure pathways for depleted uranium can be through the skin, by inhalation, and ingestion,” Moret wrote. “Nano-particles have high mobility and can easily enter the body. Inhalation of nano-particles of depleted uranium is the most hazardous exposure, because the particles pass through the lung-blood barrier directly into the blood.

“When inhaled through the nose, nano-particles can cross the olfactory bulb directly into the brain through the blood brain barrier, where they migrate all through the brain,” she wrote. “Many Gulf era soldiers exposed to depleted uranium have been diagnosed with brain tumors, brain damage and impaired thought processes. Uranium can interfere with the mitochondria, which provide energy for the nerve processes, and transmittal of the nerve signal across synapses in the brain.

“Damage to the mitochondria, which provide all energy to the cells and nerves, can cause chronic fatigue syndrome, Lou Gehrig’s disease, Parkinson’s disease and Hodgkin’s disease.”

Synthetic Biology

Some experimenters are now combining nanotechnology with molecular biology in an attempt to create life itself - a practice called "Synthetic Biology" by its proponents and "Extremely Dangerous" by everyone else.

go to OCA to read

Report: "Extreme Genetic Engineering: An Introduction to Synthetic Biology"

Nanotech & Personal Care Products

Currently, Hundreds of Personal Care Products Contain Poorly Studied Nano-Materials

Out of the Laboratory and onto Our Plates

Nanofood in the Grocery Aisles: Miller Light, Cadbury and Other Brands Have Toxic Risks

Untested nanotechnology is being used in more than 100 food products, food packaging and contact materials currently on the shelf, without warning or FDA testing, according to a report released by Friends of the Earth.

The report, Out of the Laboratory and On To Our Plates: Nanotechnology in Food and Agriculture found nanomaterials in popular products and packaging including Miller Light beer, Cadbury Chocolate packaging and ToddlerHealth, a nutritional drink powder for infants sold extensively at health food stores including WholeFoods.

Update: Read coverage of our Report in Scientific American.

Friends of the Earth

Small may not be beautiful

Imagine a low-fat ice-cream that tastes just as creamy as an unhealthier, full-fat version. Or a colourless drink that bursts into the flavour of your choosing at the flick of a microwave switch. Or intelligent food packaging that detects if the contents are beginning to spoil, changes colour to alert you, and then releases a preservative.

These are some of the promises of nanotechnology, a revolutionary area of research at the atomic or molecular scale of matter. Nanotechnology is expected to have a huge impact on many aspects of our lives, including medicine and the environment, with the development of materials and devices that can monitor blood, detect environmental pollutants and store energy better.

But one of its most immediate effects will be on our food. An estimated 200 companies worldwide are conducting research using nanotechnology to develop foods with new tastes and textures, as well as to improve packaging and enhance nutrient absorption.

Some products containing nano-sized particles are already on the market. In America and Europe, nano-sized ingredients have been added to some fruit juices, processed meats, diet milkshakes and baby food.

But consumers would not know, as there are no requirements to label the presence of nanoparticles in food. Concerns are also growing about the possible harmful effects of nano-sized materials on human health and the environment.

In a comprehensive review of the issue, a British researcher, Dr Qasim Chaudhry, and his team conclude there are major gaps in knowledge about the safety of nanoparticles. "The toxicological nature of hazard, likelihood of exposure and risk to consumers from nanotechnology-derived food and food packaging are largely unknown," says Chaudhry, of Britain's Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs' Central Science Laboratory. Their study is published in this month's Food Additives and Contaminants journal.

Evidence that nanoparticles are more chemically reactive than larger particles, and that some are toxic to cells has prompted the environmental group Friends of the Earth, as well as the NSW Greens, to call for a moratorium on the use of nano-sized ingredients in food, food packaging or surfaces that can come into contact with food.

Friends of the Earth spokeswoman, Georgia Miller, says it is possible nano-sized ingredients are already present in Australian food, but without labelling or regulations it is impossible to know. "There is no way for anyone to choose to eat nano-free," says Miller, co-author of a report called Out Of The Laboratory And Onto Our Plate, Nanotechnology In Food And Agriculture.

Food Standards Australia New Zealand says it is not aware of any commercially sold foods in Australia that have been developed using nanotechnology, and says "robust regulatory arrangements to ensure the safety of food" are in place.

Nanotechnology: Big Things from a Tiny World

Nanoparticle Information Library (NIL)

NIOSH Safety and Health Topic

Nanotechnology a 'bigger concern' than GM foods

Opponents to nanotechnology say it is a much scarier prospect than GM food, and while it can make food look better and last longer, there are fears about how it might affect the human body.

The regulator now faces the difficulty of ruling when packaging becomes part of the food.

The CEO of Food Standards Australia New Zealand, Steve McCutcheon, says it is called interactive packaging, where the food takes in chemicals from the packet as it sits on the shelf.

"At the moment, the shelf life of prepacked salad vegetables is fairly short, but with the application of this technology we understand that you could actually package fresh salads, and they would be fresh still after the 30-day period on the shelf," he said.

The development that has given birth to the one-month fresh salad is called nanotechnology - working with particles thousands of times smaller that the width of a human hair.

It is not only for packaging, some companies want to use nanoparticles as ingredients in the food itself.

"We understand that a company in the United States has applied for a patent to cover the use of titanium dioxide and silicone dioxide in chocolate, in nanoparticle form, to give the surface a gloss," he said.

Alert over the march of the 'grey goo' in nanotechnology Frankenfoods

Some critics have talked of the threat of the creation of a "grey goo" of tiny particles with hidden harmful properties.

Prince Charles has said it would be "surprising" if the technology did not "offer similar upsets" to thalidomide - the morning sickness drug that caused children to be born with deformed limbs.

Professor Vicki Stone, Professor of Toxicology at Napier University in Edinburgh, is concerned about unforeseen side effects.

"We know very little about the ability of nanoparticles to move around the body, to accumulate or to be excreted, or their potential to cause toxic effects in organs," she said.

However, nanotech advocates have remarkable claims for the technology. For example, foods are in development that are said to stave off the aging process.

On a more trivial level, they suggest it would be possible to create a fizzy drink that changes flavour according to the number of times the can is shaken.