Too Little Info on Nano?

OK. I'll up the anty... Suppose a nano device is designed for a specific medical task, say healing damaged tissue or something cool like that. Then, what happens if one finds out that its structure is such that it likes a different tissue better. The next step in the scenario is that while this other tissue is favored by nano-guy, it totally screws up what it was originally intended to do. BOING!!! disease!!! And it likes it so much in your lungs (for instance) that it doesn't want to come out!

An interesting point here is that much (if not all) of organic chemistry is based on geometry, and not chemical elements. Nano stuff is also primarily based on geometry. With a good knowledge of nano-geometry, you could cook up some really nasty nano-chemicals whether on purpose or not. And they could express themselves in the human body for bad or good.

Yes, we all know that asbestos' killing mechanism is based on its geometry. So, how many more killer geometries are just waiting to be discovered?

As for me, create a particle that can pass the blood-brain barrier, lodge in my neurons, and tickle my endorphin output for the rest of my life!!! Woof!!! Now I can really get behind a nano-bot like that!!!

Nanotech - threat, or menace? I'm not sure, but without properly investigating the potential, the cause for concern is NOT overblown. Why? Because we do not know for sure that it IS overblown. Paranoid? Maybe. Paranoid enough? Maybe not...

The mentioned question "Are nano-scale products safe for our health" is so generalised, and has such a wide range of possible consequences, that it's not very much different than asking something like "Are chemical products safe for our health"

Calling something "Nano-scale products" is not unlike calling something "Alkali compound" or "metallic" or "carbon-based compound" - It's just a vast generalisation

Each nano-scale product has it's own chemical range of reactivity, it's own physical characteristics, and just like any other chemical product, not unlike the food and pharmaceutical industries, it's makers must allocate, appropriate the means to research it's short and long-term influence on issues regarding human health, ecology, and such.

This type of question is not without precedent. In the early 1800's when hydrocarbon chemicals were first created from coal tar, the prospect of all of the possible things that could be created for the very first time, might have been a worry to some.

As it turned out, it was wise to use a little caution when linking hydrogen and carbon together (along with other elements) - some compounds were very useful and benign, and others could kill you before you knew you were dead.

There is an even earlier precedent vermin ol' buddy.

once upon a time there was a caveman and he said , how nice would it be if we combined oxygen from the air and all this carbonaceous plant matter lying around to make heat and we could be warm, have light in the darkness, and burn the maggots and jackal spittle off our meat?

The whiners said, Well if the children stepped in the fire, they would get burned, and it makes smoke that hurts our eyes and causes cancer, and the meat tastes funny when it is scorched and if it burns out of control it will destroy the forest and savannah and kill the game and we'll starve. And light in the darkness is unnatural.

So the cave people banished him and did with out fire.

The people in the next valley over said, say, thats a great idea, when we have the fire, we are not sickened by the meat, and we require less skins to stay warm, and we have time to share knowledge of where the meat is as we sit in comfort around the fire. and after three winters they grew stronger and healthier and more of their babies survived and they had more time to make better flint tools.

And they went over to the next valley and kicked the cave people's ass.

But they left one baby girl alive, and her mitochondrial rna can be found in the cells of every luddite and technology averse human alive.

at least, thats what ted nugent told me. HA.

In the end, its all about balancing risk and reward.

And improving quality of life.

milo

I agree, but as the cavemen in your tale to make decisions you need info. Info is gained either through study or experience, sometimes tragically.

Fair enough.

milo

There is not enough research in this area. In Europe, you know there are people who argue about the definition of nano textiles, ridiculous