Abstract
While their strength, electrical, optical, or magnetic properties are expected to contribute a trillion dollars in global commerce before 2015, nanomaterials also appear to pose threats to human health and safety. Nanotoxicology is the study of these threats. Do nanomaterial benefits exceed their risks? Should all nanomaterials be regulated? Currently nanotoxicologists cannot help answer these questions because too little is known about nanomaterials, because their properties differ from those of bulk materials having the same chemical composition, and because they differ so widely in their applications. Instead, this paper answers a preliminary ethical question: What nanotech policies are likely to contribute to society’s ability to give or withhold free informed consent to the potential risks associated with production and use of nanomaterials? This paper argues that at least four current policies appear to jeopardize the risk-disclosure condition that is required for informed consent. These are the funding problem, the conflict-of-interest problem, the labeling problem, and the extrapolation problem. Apart from future decisions on how to ethically make, use, and regulate nanomaterials, this paper argues that, at a minimum, these four policies must be modified. Government must spend greater monies on nanotoxicology; ensure independent nanotoxicology research; label consumer products containing nanomaterials; and avoid assuming that nanotoxicological properties are based merely on mass and chemical composition. Otherwise free informed consent to these new technologies and materials may be jeopardized.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
ABT Associates (ABT) (2000) Particulate-related health benefits of reducing power emissions. ABT Associates, Bethesda, MD, 2000
American Public Health Association (APHA) (2005) Increasing research funds for environmental and occupational health and safety implications of nanotechnology. APHA, Washington, DC (December 14, 2005). Policy number LB-7, available at http://www.apha.org/legislative/policy/policysearch/index.cfm?fuseaction=view&id=1317 and accessed 10 October 2006
American Public Health Association (APHA) (2003) Supporting legislation for independent post-marketing phase IV comparative evaluation of pharmaceuticals. APHA, Washington, DC (November 18, 2003). Policy number 2003, available at http://www.apha.org/legislative/policy/policysearch/index.cfm?fuseaction=view&id=1265 and accessed 10 October 2006
American Public Health Association (APHA) (2002) Preserving right-to-know information and encouraging hazard reduction to reduce the risk of exposure to toxic substances. APHA, Washington, DC (November 13). Policy number 2002-3, available at http://www.apha.org/legislative/policy/policysearch/index.cfm?fuseaction=view&id=279 and accessed 10 October 2006
Arnall AH (2003) Future technologies, today’s choices. Greenpeace Environmental Trust, London. Available online at http://www.greanpeace.org.uk/MultimediaFiles/Live/FullReport/5886.pdf#search-%22Greanpeace%20nanotechnology%22; accessed 9 October 2006
Arison S (2006) Nanotechnology needs nano-scale regulation. Pacific Research Institute, San Francisco. Available at http://www.pacificresearch.org/press/opd/2006/opd_06-01-13sa.html and accessed 9 October 2006
Bailey R (2003) The smaller the better, on reasononline, available at http://www.reason.com/0312/fe.rb.the.shtml and accessed 9 October 2006
Beauchamp TL, Childress JL (1994) Principles of biomedical ethics. Oxford University Press, New York
Beder S (2002) Global spin. Chelsea Green Publishers, White River Junction, VT
Birsch D, Fielder J (1994) The Ford Pinto case. SUNY Press, Albany
Colvin VL (2003) The potential environmental impact of engineered nanomaterials. Nat Biotechnol 21(10):1166–1170 (October)
Cranor C (2006) Toxic torts. Cambridge University Press, New York
Cunningham A (2006) Particular problems. Sci News 169(18):280 (May 2)
Denison RA (2005) Getting nanotechnology right the first time: statement to the National Research Council. Environmental Defense, Washington, DC (25 March)
Donaldson K, Stone V, Tran CL, Kreyling W, Borm PJ (2004) Nanotoxicology. Occup Environ Med 61:727–728
Ehrlich P, Ehrlich A (1996) Betrayal of science and reason. Island, Washington, DC
ETC Group (2006) Nanotech product recall underscores need for nanotech moratorium. ETC Group, Ottowa. Available at http://www.etcgroup.org/upload/publication/14/01nrnanorecallfinal.pdf and accessed 9 October 2006
European Environmental Agency (EEA) (2003) EEA multilingual environmental glossary. Online at http://glossary.eea.eu,int/EEAGlossary/P/precautionary_approach
Faden RR, Beauchamp TL (1987) A history and theory of informed consent. Oxford University Press, New York
Garnett MC, Kallinteri P (2006) Nanomedicines and nanotoxicology. Occup Med 56:307–311
Hart PD (2006) Attitudes toward nanotechnology. Woodrow Wilson International Center, Washington, DC (September)
Jennings B, Kahn J, Mastroianni A, Parker L (eds) (2003) Ethics and public health. Association of Schools of Public Health, Washington, DC
Krimsky S (2003) Science in the private interest. Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham, MD
Maynard AD (2006) Nanotechnology: a research strategy for addressing risk. Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington, DC
McCullach D (2002) Report calls for nanotech Laissez-Faire. CNET News.com. (21 November); online at http://www.news.com.com/2100-1023-966766.html accessed 9 October 2006
Mnyusiwalla A, Daar A, Singer PA (2003) Mind the gap: science and ethics and nanotechnology. Nanotechnology 14:R9–R13
Monastersky R (2004) The dark side of small. Chron High Educ 51(3):A12–A15 (September 10)
Nel A, Xia T, Maumlder L, Li N (2006) Toxic potential of material and the nanolevel. Science 311:622–627
Oberdorster G, Oberdorster E, Oberdorster J (2005) Nanotoxicology: an emerging discipline evolving from studies of ultrafine particles. Environ Health Perspect 113(7):823–839 (July)
Oberdorster E (2004) Manufactured nanomaterials (Fullerenes, C60) induce oxidative stress in brain of juvenile largemouth bass. Environ Health Perspect 112:1058–1062
Parr D (2005) Will nanotechnology make the world a better place? Trends Biotechnol 23(8):395–398
Pope A (2003) Cardiovascular mortality and long-term exposure to particulate air pollution. Circulation 109(6):71–77 (Jan 2003)
Pope A, Burnett RT, Thun NT, Calle EE, Krewski D, Ito K, Thurston GD (2002) Lung cancer, cardiopulmonary mortality, and long-term exposure to fine particulate air pollution. JAMA 287(9):1132–1141
Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) (2001) Trade secrets: a Moyers report. Public Affairs Television, New York. Available at http://www.pbs.org/tradesecrets/transcript.html and accessed 10 October, 2006
Rampton S, Stauber J (2001) Trust us, we’re experts. Tarcher-Putnam, New York
Rejeski D (2006) FDA-regulated products containing nanotechnology materials. Woodrow Wilson International Center, Project on Emerging Nanotechologies, Washington, DC (October 5). Available at http://nanotechproject.or/consumerproducts and accessed 10 October 2006
Reynolds GH (2002) Forward to the future: nanotechnology and regulatory policy. Pactific Research Institute, San Francisco. Available at http://www.pacificresearch.org/pub/sab/technoi/forward_to_nanotech.pdf#search=%22Reynolds%20Pactific%20Research%20Institute%20nano%22 and accessed 9 October 2006
The Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering (RS) (2004) Nanoscience and nanotechnologies: opportunities and uncertainties. The Royal Society, London. Available at http://www.nanotec.org.uk/finalReport.htm and accessed 10 October 2006
Science Advisory Board, US Environmental Protection Agency (SAB-EPA) (2000) Comments on the use of data from the testing of human subjects, EPA-SAB-EC-00-017. US EPA, Washington, DC
Seaton A, Donaldson K (2005) Nanoscience, nanotoxicology, and the need to think small. Lancet 365:923–924 (March 12)
Service RF (2005) Calls rise for more research on toxicology of nanomaterials. Science 310:1609–1610
Service RF (2004) Nanotechnology grows up. Science 304(5678):1732–1734
Shrader-Frechette K (2007) Taking action, saving lives: our duties to promote environmental and public health. Oxford University Press, New York
Shrader-Frechette K (2002) Environmental justice: creating equality, reclaiming democracy. Oxford University Press, New York
Shrader-Frechette K (1991) Risk and rationality. University of California Press, Berkeley
Shvedova A, Kisin ER, Mercer R, Murray AR, Johnson VJ, Potapovich AI, Tyurina YY, Gorelik O, Arepalli S, Schwegler-Berry D, Hubbs AF, Antonini J, Evans DE, Ku BK, Ramsey D, Maynard A, Kagan VE, Castranova V, Baron P (2005) Unusual inflammatory and fibrogenic pulmonary responses to single-walled carbon nanotubes in mice. Am J Physiol 289(5):L698–L708 (November)
US Congress (2004) Implementation of the new air quality standards for particulate matter and ozone, S. HRG. 108–502. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC
Valent F, Little DA, Bertollini R, Nemer LE, Barbonc G, Tamburlini G (2004) Burden of disease attributable to selected environmental factors and injury among children and adolescents in Europe. Lancet 363:2032–2039
Wargo J (1997) Our children’s toxic legacy. Yale, New Haven
Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars (WWIC) (2006) A nanotechnology consumer products inventory. Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington, DC. Available at http://www.nanotechproject.org/index.php?id=44 and accessed 9 October 2006
World Health Organization (WHO) (2005) Effects of air pollution on children’s health. WHO, Bonn
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Shrader-Frechette, K. Nanotoxicology and Ethical Conditions for Informed Consent. Nanoethics 1, 47–56 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-007-0003-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-007-0003-x