When it comes to nanotechnology, it is difficult to separate science fact from science fiction. Christine Peterson at the Foresight Institute, a non-profit dedicated to the advancement of nanotechnology, tells the story so far and predicts what is to come.
 | Christine Peterson, President Foresight Institute"People need to understand that these systems are more like automobiles that run on gas." (Photo: Foresight Institute) |
What stage of development has nanotechnology reached, and why is it so important?
The term nanotechnology applies to a huge base of technologies that affect virtually every area of our lives. If it is made of physical matter, nanotechnology will have a significant impact. There is no product or physical object that won’t be affected by this field, and that includes medicine and our bodies.
We can divide nanotechnology into three stages: nanomaterials, nanodevices, and nanosystems. Nanometrials are being commercialized, for example, in tiny solar energy cells. Nanodevices are still at the research level, and nanosystems are at the very early stages of research.
What are the most significant practical applications of nanotechnology so far?
We are seeing an impact in solar technology. The big problem with solar technology is the ratio of cost to efficiency and we are seeing nanotechnology making improvements. There is a company making solar energy cells that are hundreds of times thinner than conventional solar cells, and can be made hundreds of times faster. Instead of using silicon crystal, these are “thin film” solar cells that are, in effect, printed.
We are also seeing nanotechnology being used to clean water. The most advanced methods involve building a filter down to the molecular level.
What fields are attracting the most attention? Where is the research and development money going?
There are three big areas for R&D. One is computer chips. Everyone wants the smallest, fastest chips. The next is the energy sector. The third area is medicine. With an aging population, we can’t afford people being ill at a young age.
 | Scientists at the NASA Ames Research Center are conducting research into molecular-sized "nano-gears" with multiple teeth (Image: NASA-HQ-GRIN) |
How will nanotechnology benefit our health?
One is methods of cancer detection and treatment, promising much better results than chemotherapy. In animal trials, we have actually seen the phrase “complete remission in a single dose”. Now we have drugs that work, the problem is getting them to attack the cancerous cells and not hurt healthy cells.
One proposed solution is to take nanoscale valves and coat them first with gold and then molecules that attach themselves to cancer cells. First, you put these into the body. You then shine an infrared light over the body and get an image of the cancer because it is decorated with the gold. Then you crank up the intensity of the infrared, which heats the gold making it hot enough to kill the cancer.
The idea of nanoparticles in our bodies alarms many people, similar to the idea of eating genetically modified foods. Are they safe?
Some nanotechnologies we agree are safe. For example, nutritional items made smaller so they dissolve quicker and deliver the nutrients more efficiently. In other areas, nanotechnology is not obviously a good idea. There is a women’s face cream in England that uses “buckyballs” – spherical shapes made of 60 carbon atoms — as an anti-oxidant. What happens if these buckyballs get into the woman’s body, or if the woman kisses her baby’s face and mouth? This isn’t obviously safe.
Nanoparticles are present already in some products with little public awareness or government regulation. Shouldn’t there be more government oversight?
In most cases, consumers are unaware, and in some cases, they don’t care. They are focusing on the benefits of the products. There is some difference of opinion in the technology community about whether products should be preceding regulation or vice versa.
Some people are saying we need to apply the precautionary principle and stop developing anything that is not approved. I feel that would bring everything to a halt. I don’t think we can say nothing should go on the market before it is proved 100-percent safe. That is not practical.
How real is the threat of self-replicating nanoparticles running out of control and suffocating their environment?
That idea refers to the third stage of nanotechnology – nanosystems – when you have atomic-level precision engineering, or molecular engineering. We have looked at the question of accidents with nanosystems, and we have issued guidelines. Basically, you design the system to be dependent on something you control, particularly the fuel source it needs.
People need to understand that these systems are more like automobiles that run on gas, the supply of which you can control, rather than animals that can eat anything they find.
How can we ensure that beneficial nanotechnology is accessible to everyone?
This question leads us to the issue of intellectual property and patents. In the U.S., when the government funds research at universities, the patents go to the universities. But universities are not very good at commercializing patents, and so the IP may not be benefiting the taxpaying public. This problem needs to be addressed.
You also need humanitarian patent waivers for countries that need, but can’t afford life-saving technologies. For AIDS medicines, the World Trade Organization was supposed to issue waivers, but it took forever as the U.S. government dragged its feet. We don't want a repeat of that.
Another issue is where the research money goes. You can’t expect the private sector to target the third world. If you want nanotechnology to benefit those places, the first thing to do is approach the non-profit foundations and governments.
editor: James Tulloch
publishing date: July 4, 2008
