Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.
Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.
Afro-Netizen
All Spin Zone
Altercation
Americablog
And, yes, I DO take it personally
Another Iranian Online
August J. Pollak
Baghdad Burning
Barry Lando
Bloggrrrlz Gallery
Blondesense
Bob Geiger
Body and Soul
Boing Boing
Booman Tribune
BOP News
Bush Watch
BUZZFLASH
Carpetbagger
Clean Air Blog
Cool Hunting
Corrente
CrooksandLiars
Cursor
Dahr Jamail
Daily Howler
Daily Kos
DC Media Girl
DemiOrator
Direland
Echidne of the Snakes
Elayne Riggs
Eschaton
Fact-esque
Falafel Sex, and Other Things Best Left Unsaid
Farai Chideya
Feminist Peace Network
Feministe
Feministing
Frameshop
Gristmill
Huffington Post
Hullabaloo
Informed Comment
James Wolcott
Jesus General
Lady Jayne's Blog
Liberal Oasis
Mad Kane
Mahablog
Majikthise
Media Girl
Media is a Plural
MediaCitizen
Metafilter
Michael Berube
MyDD
News Dissector
News For Real
Norbizness
Oliver Willis
Pacific Views
Pandagon
Political Animal
PopPolitics.com
PR Watch
Prometheus 6
Raed in the Middle
RH Reality Check
Robert Greenwald
Roger Ailes
Rox Populi
Sadly, No!
Seeing the Forest
Shakespeares Sister
Sirotablog
Sisyphus Shrugged
skippy the bush kangaroo
Slacktivist
SpeakSpeak
Stay Free!
Steve Gilliard
Talking Points Memo
TalkLeft
TBogg
Thatcoloredfellasweblog
The Bilerico Project
The Hutchinson Political Report
The Republic of T
The Revealer
The Sideshow
The Swift Report
Think Progress
This Modern World
TikvahGirl
Trish Wilson
War and Piece
Waveflux
What She Said!
Whiskey Bar
Working Families Vote 2008
Excuse me, are those nanoparticles in your pants?
Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form
Most people probably don't stop to think about nanotechnology when they purchase a new pair of pants or a bottle of sunscreen. But, more and more, consumer products like this hit the shelves touting a promise of making our lives easier. Who wouldn't want a pair of stain-resistant pants that even the darkest Merlot can't penetrate? Who wouldn't want sunscreen with all of the protection and none of the annoying white spackle?
Beyond offering consumer conveniences, nanotechnology holds the possibility of life-saving medical advances in a world overwhelmed by deadly diseases; it hints at clean energy alternatives that give us hope in the face of melting polar ice caps.
But -- and this is a really large but -- nanotech is a science in its infancy. For all we know, its costs could someday be as significant as its benefits. The fact is, sometimes the experts are wrong. And sometimes they just don't know.
That's not just the case with nanotech, but nanotech is unique because it's the science that governs the ultra small. One nanometer is one billionth of a meter -- small enough to pass the blood-brain barrier. Particles behave differently at such small sizes. There is, no doubt, risk in that. The question is, who's monitoring it?
Unfortunately, hardly anyone. And why should they be? The public isn't making a fuss or even noticing because the public isn't in on the conversation. Until now.
Former NY Times technology columnist Denise Caruso has just finished a new book called Intervention: Confronting the Real Risks of Genetic Engineering and Life on a Biotech Planet, which makes the technical world accessible and understandable to the average non-scientific person. Her book doesn't talk only about nanotech; and it isn't a rant either. Denise isn't telling people what food to eat or what products to buy. She is, however, pointing out a reality.
Already more than half of the planet's biomass has been engineered with recombinant DNA. Living organisms are having their genes manipulated and then reproducing -- all in the near absence of regulations or oversight.
Intervention exposes this serious shortfall in the regulation of new technologies such as genomics and nanotech and offers suggestions about how to improve oversight and make the risk assessment process more democratic and transparent to the public. It acknowledges the risks inherent in technology and innovation, and good thing, because I don't see many other people doing that. The current administration certainly isn't because that could be bad for business. After all, scientific uncertainty and public skepticism tie up capital.
| Also in PEEK | |||
| Breast Flaunting for Jesus The life of a failed California beauty pageant contestant gets even weirder. Post by Thers. November 11, 2009. |
Dobbs to Quit CNN Dobbs, under fire, to seek greener pastures. Post by Staff. November 11, 2009. |
Under Pressure From Tea Party Activists, Charleston GOP Censures Lindsey Graham For Bipartisanship Part of the fury from the right against Graham is being spurred by the oil and coal industry. Post by Lee Fang. November 11, 2009. |
|