The major press was all over a study that came out a couple weeks ago observing carbon nanotubes and C60 buckyballs (or fullerenes) to have potential carcinogenic pathologies.
But
this week, a major story was released showing that, although engineered
nanomaterials can be transferred up the lowest levels of the food chain
from single-celled organisms to higher, multicelled ones, the amount
transferred was relatively low, and there was no evidence of the
nanomaterials concentrating in the higher-level organisms. But in the
mainstream media, that coverage was, well, MIA.
Fear and greed
sell, not facts. Once again, it’s the curse of marketing over
science—unless you’re talking about psychology over chemistry, I guess.
My
theory is more people loved to be scared by the unknown than to explore
it and learn from it. Granted, that approach likely has a great deal of
merit when attempting to keep you and your tribe alive. And natural
selection likely gives a nod to the safety seekers over the curious.
But fire wasn’t tamed by the handwringers. And exploring the boundaries of science isn’t for the meek.
I
guess the underlying issue is, most people—especially those who don’t
don lab coats to go to work—don’t like change and find it somewhat
foreboding to have to learn a new skill set and wrap their busy minds
around a whole new concept.
But that’s only if it’s a vague
concept. siRNA inhibitors are boring unless you know they can cure
cancer. Nanotech is weird unless it makes computers faster or makes iPods—or kills you.
I
talked to green builder and local solar power proponent who, when I
mentioned I cover nanotech, said “Oh yeah, I just read that story how
those nanotubes can kill you.” Score one for our nonscience-based media.
First
of all, the study saw more issues with buckyballs than carbon
nanotubes. Second, the study was so preliminary relative to the issues
with which it’s grappling that it’s going to take 20 more studies to
prove or disprove these initial observations.
All it means, even
if it’s really true, is the production facilities need to be monitored
(which is already being done) and the end products may not be able to
have biological applications. But that doesn’t exclude deposition
technologies or other nonbiological applications. Plus, there are
plenty of other nanotubes not fashioned from carbon.
What’s more, this new, underreported and somewhat conflicting study
demonstrates the need to look at this burgeoning field scientifically
and not emotionally. If we decide to let our fears paralyze us from
exploiting the opportunities of nanotechnology in a few decades, we’ll
look like an underdeveloped tribe compared to the expanding knowledge
and stature of countries who are aggressively dealing with the
scientific, ethical and societal challenges that come with such an
enormously transcendent technology as nanotech.
But they’re following the science, not their fears.
Speaking Engagements
My
colleagues at KCI Communications Inc., Neil George, Roger Conrad and
Elliott Gue, will be heading west Aug. 7-10, 2008, to attend the San
Francisco Money Show, where they’ll discuss infrastructure,
partnerships, utilities, resources and energy, and tell you what to buy
and what to sell in 2008.
Click here or call 800-970-4355 and refer to priority code 011470 to attend as their guest.