FDA Sees Nanotech Challenges In Every Product Category 21
An anonymous reader writes "The Food and Drug Administration's Nanotechnology Task Force has passed on its first report into the ever-growing field of nanotech products. As a result, the FDA is implementing changes that will allow it to oversee nanotech products in every category withinin its purview. Nanotech products are 'estimated to grow to $2.6 trillion in manufactured goods globally by 2014. As the Task Force report highlights, nanotechnology impacts every area of FDA responsibility--drugs, drug delivery systems, cosmetics, medical devices, and food products. Overall, the agency regulates products that are worth nearly $1.5 trillion annually and that account for almost 25 percent of US consumer spending.'"
Who's Surprised... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Not http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science/09/01/nanotec h/index.html/ [cnn.com]everyone is willing to take it on faith that nanotech is harmless or should be assumed to be safe. And I'm guessing that when some nano- product turns out to be worse than asbestos, you'll all be screaming for reform at the FDA, how could they have betrayed us? Oh, the
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
FDA might be doing a halfway decent job? (Score:1, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Diagnosis (Score:1)
The possible impact of nanotech on health extends much beyond just food and medical categories. Whenever life comes into contact with engineered nanostructures, there is a risk of unwanted interactions. Act [com.com] now [hazards.org].
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Regulating nanomaterial papertowels (Score:4, Insightful)
The thing is, nanotech enters our biosphere, and our bodies, in novel ways.
Skin doesn't really block it. And once inside us it can even pass the blood/brain barrier. That's not saying all nanotech materials are gonna do that, but I want some assurances that the nifty new coating on my paper towels isn't soaking into me.
Unless the FDA acts and gets this put within their purview then it won't be. Frankly an entire category of new materials, of a scale theyre inherently biologically interactive, being widely distributed into the market, is cause for concern for their impact. To me that justifies a little judicious oversight.
Grey goo [wikipedia.org] isn't so much a fear as industrial poisoning. I'd hate to find out in 2012 that the nano-paint on the 2010 Honda nano-flakes off and then does awful things to lung tissue resulting in asbestos-like problems. Or the nano-polish in my stovetop cleaner aerosolizes (does that apply at this scale?) and polishes corneas - from the inside.
Clearly "Bad things nobody wants to happen".
But, again, without mandates the FDA won't be able to research, perhaps regulate, or eventually react. Even though I think the FDA is a severely compromised agency, often too close to the industries they regulate and constrained by political pressure from the administration ("Coal tar? Good for the sinuses! I sniff some from the great state of _insert_ ev'ry day!") I prefer it over nothing.
Re: (Score:2)
i too don't want poisonous paint (or grey goo!), but it might not need any significant change in how things are run. now, if they could just decrease the amount of corruption... and nanotech isn't only an fda thing either, so they better not be the only agency running tests.
A power-grab from... themselves? (Score:2)
Your argument confounds itself: How can nanotech simultaneously be "...already regulated (nanotechnology is just potentially much more dangerous)" and "... this is more a power grab than anything else."
You're claiming the FDA doing a power-grab from... themselves?.
Either the FDA Has the mandate to regulate nanottech already or it doesn't.
Not to point out the obvious (though apparently it needs to be) but the point of the FDA process in question, the reports and all, is the FDA saying the FDA doesn't ha
Nanotech == Molecular == Already regulated (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Precautionary Principle (Score:2, Interesting)
The first is FDA or whatever Administration who has to approve it in other countries. The FDA in some way set the precedent so thats something you consider when you are testing a product to be approved in your country. "
Oh!! It was approved by FDA!! so it must be good"
As "maggard" said
Even though I think the FDA is a severely compromised agency, often too close to the industries they regulate and constrained by political pressure from the administration
So what happends if your almighty FDA fails? I will asume that guys in the FDA tries to make his best to test and to be sure that the product is not going to cause any h
My doctor wanted me to take psychiatric nanotech (Score:2)
A while back I was taking a fairly high dose of the antipsychotic Risperdal, and it was giving me symptoms of tardive dyskinesia, a form of brain damage which causes repetitive motions. In my case it was involuntary mouth movements, as if I was chewing gum, but at its worst it can put you in a wheelchair.
My doctor wanted me to be the first at the mental health clinic to try